The origin and elaboration of our fundamental theories like quantum theory, the theory of relativity and the quantum field theories can be traced to the study of light and its properties. While developing these theories, several notions on the behaviour of light have been hypothesized as well as asserted, sometimes without any direct or compelling empirical evidence. In the context of quantum physics, there is a widespread belief that experiments on quantum correlations establish nonlocality as an essential aspect of nature. Another unshakable belief without direct empirical support is the absolute constancy of the speed of light relative to moving observers. In this paper, I argue that no experiment on quantum correlations of spatially separated photons necessitates the concept of nonlocality, and that there is no direct empirical proof of nonlocality. I also comment on the need to modify established notions on quantum light, in the context of a clear conflict between cosmology and the zero point energy of quantum electrodynamics. Then I describe the first experiments on the measurement of the true one-way speed light relative to a reference platform that is in inertial motion. The results are at variance with the belief that the speed of light is independent of the velocity of the observer.
The origin and elaboration of our fundamental theories like quantum theory, the theory of relativity and the quantum field theories can be traced to the study of light and its properties. While developing these theories, several notions on the behaviour of light have been hypothesized as well as asserted, sometimes without any direct or compelling empirical evidence. In the context of quantum physics, there is a widespread belief that experiments on quantum correlations establish nonlocality as an essential aspect of nature. Another unshakable belief without direct empirical support is the absolute constancy of the speed of light relative to moving observers. In this paper, I argue that no experiment on quantum correlations of spatially separated photons necessitates the concept of nonlocality, and that there is no direct empirical proof of nonlocality. I also comment on the need to modify established notions on quantum light, in the context of a clear conflict between cosmology and the zero point energy of quantum electrodynamics. Then I describe the first experiments on the measurement of the true one-way speed light relative to a reference platform that is in inertial motion. The results are at variance with the belief that the speed of light is independent of the velocity of the observer.
The speed of light, c, is the best-confirmed constant in physics. Within Special Relativity, it defines the causal structure of spacetime and no experiment has ever recorded an object exceeding it. This paper does not dispute any of that. What this paper argues is that quantum entanglement constitutes direct experimental evidence that the extrapolation of c to a universal limit across all layers of physical reality is not justified by the data. c is the fundamental limit of relativistic spacetime. Whether it is also the limit of whatever substrate gives rise to that spacetime is a question the experiments force us to take seriously—and that current physics leaves genuinely open. Bell-test experiments, confirmed from Aspect (1982) to the Large Hadron Collider (2023), show that entangled correlations cannot be explained by any local model. Something produces those correlations without any mechanism that respects c. The no-communication theorem shows that this cannot be exploited for signalling today, within the current framework. It does not show that c governs the mechanism that produces the correlations. Those are different claims, and conflating them has allowed a mathematical result about signal statistics to carry unwarranted ontological weight. This is a conceptual and philosophical analysis grounded in experimental results. It does not propose a new theory. It argues that the evidence we already have is sufficient to challenge the extrapolation that treats c as an absolute limit across all layers of physical reality. That extrapolation is not forced by the data. It is a theoretical choice and a contestable one.
It has been over 150 years since light was first considered a form of electromagnetic radiation. There is substantial evidence that the current well-established theory, that light quanta (photons) are a form of electromagnetic radiation, is incorrect. This is largely because the theory was first introduced based on assumptions not evidence. The experimental evidence, and the requirements of quantum mechanics, are largely incompatible with the existing theory and the conceptual models regarding the nature of light quanta. Several inconsistencies associated with the current belief and the associated conceptual model are identified. An entirely new and radically different conceptual model is proposed. A conceptual model that embraces what is currently known about light quanta, from both a classical and quantum-mechanical perspective. The proposed conceptual model strongly supports the Information Interpretation of quantum mechanics; a growing belief that information is a fundamental aspect of nature. Several examples of common phenomena, such as the double-slit experiment, are discussed to show how the proposed model of light quanta provides a simpler and more consistent explanation of experimental results and removes many of the apparent mysteries.
It is well recognized that two of the foundational theories of modern physics, relativity and quantum mechanics, are inconsistent. Efforts to overcome this through intensive pursuit of unifying theoretical frameworks or improvements in experimental precision as pursued by Robertson-Mansouri-Sexl and Standard-Model-Extension test theory protocols, have so far proven unsuccessful. Nonetheless, empirical evidence deriving from investigations inspired by the twentieth-century 'EPR' polemic, can now claim to have identified 'locality' and 'separability' as notions integral to special relativity theory inconsistent with quantum mechanics and experimental evidence supporting it. Following intimations of J.S. Bell, L. Smolin, Maudlin and others, the history and philosophy of science are engaged as research tools to uncover the origins of the assumptions underlying such incompatibility. In particular, known but prevalent fallacies and the deprecation of processes as described by Whitehead, together with recent insights into the functional distinctions between representative models and explanatory theories, are engaged. Analysis of the evolution of optical and electromagnetic theorizing is then suggested to demonstrate that the choice of a mechanically compatible model of electromagnetic radiation, as has conventionally underwritten development of the light-speed postulate of special relativity, is inappropriate. Pursuing options made available within a multiple models idealization of optical and electromagnetic phenomena, replacement of the sponsoring model by a nonlocal and non-separable wavefront process of radiation of the form advanced by Fresnel and Kirchhoff on the basis of Huygens' principle, suggests the possibility of reformulation of relativity theory without incurring such conflicts. However, choice of a wavefront electrodynamic model including the extinction theorem of Ewald and Oseen, equally suggests possible theory reformulation without necessitating a four-dimensional construct of space and time or postulating an absolute constancy of light-speed in vacuum. Such a constancy can in turn be considered as demonstrating an innate limitation on empirical observation resulting from the loss of relative velocity information during electromagnetic transmission due to the memorylessness of the Markov propagation process of refraction together with information flow discontinuity resulting from dielectric boundary extinction events. Such characteristics are shown to be applicable to electromagnetic radiation of all frequencies. Further, from a wavefront reformulated hypothesis of inertial relative motion, it appears possible to demonstrate that the Galilean principle of relativity can be preserved. However, Lorentz invariance would then require reinterpretation wherein the Lorentz transform group would be deemed to quantify the degree of information distortion inherently experienced by any empirical enquiry into electrodynamics involving relative motion.
This article develops an expanded critical–propositional analysis of Daniel Salart, Augustin Baas, Cyril Branciard, Nicolas Gisin, and Hugo Zbinden’s 2008 experiment, “Testing the Speed of ‘Spooky Action at a Distance’,” published in Nature, in systematic dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity (TO) developed by Vidamor Cabannas and Denivaldo Silva. Salart et al. performed an energy–time entanglement experiment between two receiving stations separated by approximately 18 km in the Geneva region and used the rotation of the Earth to constrain hypothetical finite-speed influences that might be invoked to reproduce quantum correlations in a privileged reference frame. Under a representative assumption concerning the Earth’s velocity relative to such a frame, their analysis produced lower bounds exceeding 104 c, with a reported bound of approximately 54,000c in a particular geometrical configuration. These quantities are not measurements of an actually detected superluminal signal; they are conditional lower bounds applying to hypothetical hidden influences. The present study asks whether this experimental structure can be placed in meaningful dialogue with the modal axioms of the Theory of Objectivity, especially the First Absolute Truth concerning primordial Nothingness as a logical, mathematical, and eternal essence; the Second Absolute Truth concerning an element-specific individualiz- ing field; the TO treatment of infinity; and, most importantly, the Fifth Absolute Truth, according to which an element acquires logical existence through elementary relational observation involving at least two other elements. In this framework, “observation” does not signify human consciousness but an objective relation among physical elements. The article argues that Salart et al. provide no direct empirical test of the First or Second Absolute Truths and no direct confirmation of TO’s cosmogonic theorem or cosmological eras. The strongest dialogue concerns relational ontology, the Fifth Absolute Truth, and the TO concept of the transcendent element as knowledge or information produced through atomic relations and associated, within TO, with atomic radiation. Nevertheless, quantum information in a Bell experiment cannot simply be identified with a controllable signal propagating between distant systems. This distinction becomes theoretically decisive. If the TO transcendent element is construed as an ordinary finite-speed physical carrier responsible for Bell correlations, strong conceptual difficulties arise. If, instead, it is formulated as relationally constituted information whose manifestation cannot be reduced to classical signal propagation, the dialogue with quantum nonlocality becomes substantially stronger. The article further examines criticisms of the 2008 Franson-type implementation, subsequent loophole-reduced and loophole-free Bell experiments, and theoretical results showing difficulties for finite-speed hidden-influence models. It concludes that Salart et al. may be treated as an indirect empirical bridge for developing TO’s relational propositions, but not as a unique experimental confirmation of TO. A scientifically decisive future program requires the Theory of Objectivity to derive an observable probability distribution or correlation function that differs quantitatively from the predictions of standard quantum mechanics. An appendix formulates such a research program in a TO-style modal–empirical structure. Keywords: Theory of Objectivity; quantum nonlocality; Bell inequalities; Salart exper- iment; entanglement; relational ontology; modal necessity; information; transcendent element; quantum foundations; empirical corroboration; cosmology.
The quantum physics of light is a most fascinating field. Here I present a very personal viewpoint, focusing on my own path to quantum entanglement and then on to applications. I have been fascinated by quantum physics ever since I heard about it for the first time in school. The theory struck me immediately for two reasons: (1) its immense mathematical beauty, and (2) the unparalleled precision to which its predictions have been verified again and again. Particularly fascinating for me were the predictions of quantum mechanics for individual particles, individual quantum systems. Surprisingly, the experimental realization of many of these fundamental phenomena has led to novel ideas for applications. Starting from my early experiments with neutrons, I later became interested in quantum entanglement, initially focusing on multi-particle entanglement like GHZ states. This work opened the experimental possibility to do quantum teleportation and quantum hyper-dense coding. The latter became the first entanglement-based quantum experiment breaking a classical limitation. One of the most fascinating phenomena is entanglement swapping, the teleportation of an entangled state. This phenomenon is fundamentally interesting because it can entangle two pairs of particles which do not share any common past. Surprisingly, it also became an important ingredient in a number of applications, including quantum repeaters which will connect future quantum computers with each other. Another application is entanglement-based quantum cryptography where I present some recent long-distance experiments. Entanglement swapping has also been applied in very recent so-called loophole-free tests of Bell's theorem. Within the physics community such loophole-free experiments are perceived as providing nearly definitive proof that local realism is untenable. While, out of principle, local realism can never be excluded entirely, the 2015 achievements narrow down the remaining possibilities for local realistic explanations of the quantum phenomenon of entanglement in a significant way. These experiments may go down in the history books of science. Future experiments will address particularly the freedom-of-choice loophole using cosmic sources of randomness. Such experiments confirm that unconditionally secure quantum cryptography is possible, since quantum cryptography based on Bell's theorem can provide unconditional security. The fact that the experiments were loophole-free proves that an eavesdropper cannot avoid detection in an experiment that correctly follows the protocol. I finally discuss some recent experiments with single- and entangled-photon states in higher dimensions. Such experiments realized quantum entanglement between two photons, each with quantum numbers beyond 10 000 and also simultaneous entanglement of two photons where each carries more than 100 dimensions. Thus they offer the possibility of quantum communication with more than one bit or qubit per photon. The paper concludes discussing Einstein's contributions and viewpoints of quantum mechanics. Even if some of his positions are not supported by recent experiments, he has to be given credit for the fact that his analysis of fundamental issues gave rise to developments which led to a new information technology. Finally, I reflect on some of the lessons learned by the fact that nature cannot be local, that objective randomness exists and about the emergence of a classical world. It is suggestive that information plays a fundamental role also in the foundations of quantum physics.
In the double-slit interference experiment with light, once one of the slits is instantaneously closed, the point H on the screen directly opposite the other slit will experience a change in the intensity of light at that point. Moreover, the time it takes for the intensity of light at point H to change after the slit is closed is shorter than the time it takes for light from the slit to reach point H. This indicates that information is transmitted from the slit to point H on the screen at a speed faster than the speed of light c. This does not violate Relativity, as it does not conflict with the Principle of Constancy of Light Velocity. Information is transmitted at varying speeds within the wave packet. In the direction parallel to the propagation of the photons, the speed of information transmission matches c. However, in other directions, the speed of information transmission can exceed c. And according to the inference, it appears that causality is not an immutable law of nature. Causality is not easily overturned at the macro level, while it is not so at the quantum level. The law of causality varies under different inertial or non-inertial reference frames. In one reference frame, the cause leads to the result; in another reference frame, the result may leads back to the cause. Cause and result are mutually causal in different reference frames.