We present a detailed analysis of the set theoretical proof of Wigner for Bell type inequalities with the following result. Wigner introduced a crucial assumption that is not related to Einstein’s local realism, but instead, without justification, to the existence of certain joint probability measures for possible and actual measurement outcomes of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) experiments. His conclusions about Einstein’s local realism are, therefore, not applicable to EPR experiments and the contradiction of the experimental outcomes to Wigner’s results has no bearing on the validity of Einstein’s local realism.We present a detailed analysis of the set theoretical proof of Wigner for Bell type inequalities with the following result. Wigner introduced a crucial assumption that is not related to Einstein’s local realism, but instead, without justification, to the existence of certain joint probability measures for possible and actual measurement outcomes of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) experiments. His conclusions about Einstein’s local realism are, therefore, not applicable to EPR experiments and the contradiction of the experimental outcomes to Wigner’s results has no bearing on the validity of Einstein’s local realism.

arXiv:1612.03606Journal of Modern PhysicsJan 1, 201710 citations

Local realism and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. On concrete new tests

Lawrence S. Bartell

Bohm's spin polarization modification of the paradox of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen has served as the basis for numerous analyses of the roles of hidden variables and Einstein locality in quantum mechanics. The present note points out how corresponding analyses can be carried out on the original formulation of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) in terms of observations of position and momentum. Concrete conceptual experiments are proposed to furnish tangible illustrations of EPR tests of reality, and a position-momentum variant of Bell's inequality is formulated. Implications regarding joint measurements of position and momentum, delayed choice experiments, and superluminal communication are discussed briefly.Bohm's spin polarization modification of the paradox of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen has served as the basis for numerous analyses of the roles of hidden variables and Einstein locality in quantum mechanics. The present note points out how corresponding analyses can be carried out on the original formulation of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) in terms of observations of position and momentum. Concrete conceptual experiments are proposed to furnish tangible illustrations of EPR tests of reality, and a position-momentum variant of Bell's inequality is formulated. Implications regarding joint measurements of position and momentum, delayed choice experiments, and superluminal communication are discussed briefly.

Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fieldsSep 15, 19808 citations

Local deterministic description of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiments

F. Selleri, Anton Zeilinger

Foundations of PhysicsDec 1, 198822 citations

An Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen argument based on weak forms of local realism not falsifiable by GHZ or Bell experiments

Fulton, Jesse, Run Yan Teh, M. D. Reid

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox gives an argument for the incompleteness of quantum mechanics based on the premises of local realism. A general view is that the argument is compromised, because EPR's premises are falsified by Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) and Bell experiments. In this paper, we present an EPR argument based on premises not falsifiable by these experiments. We propose macroscopic EPR and GHZ experiments using spins $S_θ$ defined by two macroscopically distinct states. The analyzers that realize the unitary operations $U_θ$ determining the measurement settings $θ$ are devices that create macroscopic superposition states. For a system with two macroscopically distinct states available, macroscopic realism (MR) posits a predetermined outcome for a measurement $S_θ$ distinguishing between the states. Deterministic macroscopic realism (dMR) posits MR for the system prior to the interaction $U_θ$ . Weak macroscopic realism (wMR) posits MR for the system after $U_θ$ , at the time $t_f$ (when the system is prepared for a final "pointer" measurement), the outcome of $S_θ$ not being changed by interactions that might occur at a remote system $B$ . The premise also posits that if the outcome for $S_θ^A$ of a system $A$ can be predicted by a pointer measurement on a system $B$ defined after the interaction fixing the setting at $B$ , then the outcome for $S_θ^A$ is determined at this time. The GHZ predictions negate dMR but are consistent with wMR. Yet, an EPR paradox arises based on wMR for the set-up proposed by Schrödinger, where one measures two complementary spins simultaneously, "one by direct, the other by indirect" measurement. We revisit the original EPR paradox and find similarly that an EPR argument can be based on a weak form of local realism not falsifiable by GHZ or Bell tests.The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox gives an argument for the incompleteness of quantum mechanics based on the premises of local realism. A general view is that the argument is compromised, because EPR's premises are falsified by Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) and Bell experiments. In this paper, we present an EPR argument based on premises not falsifiable by these experiments. We propose macroscopic EPR and GHZ experiments using spins $S_θ$ defined by two macroscopically distinct states. The analyzers that realize the unitary operations $U_θ$ determining the measurement settings $θ$ are devices that create macroscopic superposition states. For a system with two macroscopically distinct states available, macroscopic realism (MR) posits a predetermined outcome for a measurement $S_θ$ distinguishing between the states. Deterministic macroscopic realism (dMR) posits MR for the system prior to the interaction $U_θ$. Weak macroscopic realism (wMR) posits MR for the system after $U_θ$, at the time $t_f$ (when the system is prepared for a final "pointer" measurement), the outcome of $S_θ$ not being changed by interactions that might occur at a remote system $B$. The premise also posits that if the outcome for $S_θ^A$ of a system $A$ can be predicted by a pointer measurement on a system $B$ defined after the interaction fixing the setting at $B$, then the outcome for $S_θ^A$ is determined at this time. The GHZ predictions negate dMR but are consistent with wMR. Yet, an EPR paradox arises based on wMR for the set-up proposed by Schrödinger, where one measures two complementary spins simultaneously, "one by direct, the other by indirect" measurement. We revisit the original EPR paradox and find similarly that an EPR argument can be based on a weak form of local realism not falsifiable by GHZ or Bell tests.

arXiv:2208.01225Aug 2, 20220 citations

S_θ

defined by two macroscopically distinct states. The analyzers that realize the unitary operations

U_θ

determining the measurement settings

θ

are devices that create macroscopic superposition states. For a system with two macroscopically distinct states available, macroscopic realism (MR) posits a predetermined outcome for a measurement

S_θ

distinguishing between the states. Deterministic macroscopic realism (dMR) posits MR for the system prior to the interaction

U_θ

. Weak macroscopic realism (wMR) posits MR for the system after

U_θ

, at the time

t_f

(when the system is prepared for a final "pointer" measurement), the outcome of

S_θ

not being changed by interactions that might occur at a remote system

B

. The premise also posits that if the outcome for

S_θ^A

of a system

A

can be predicted by a pointer measurement on a system

B

defined after the interaction fixing the setting at

B

, then the outcome for

S_θ^A

is determined at this time. The GHZ predictions negate dMR but are consistent with wMR. Yet, an EPR paradox arises based on wMR for the set-up proposed by Schrödinger, where one measures two complementary spins simultaneously, "one by direct, the other by indirect" measurement. We revisit the original EPR paradox and find similarly that an EPR argument can be based on a weak form of local realism not falsifiable by GHZ or Bell tests.