Physical Review A

Reply to “Comment on ‘Relevance of Bell’s theorem as a signature of nonlocality: Case of classical angular momentum distributions’ ”

A. Matzkin

Published Apr 10, 2009• 0 citations

Abstract

In this Reply, we show that the main argument of the criticism given in the preceding Comment is inconsistent with the assumption lying at the basis of the model introduced in the original paper [A. Matzkin, Phys. Rev. A 77, 062110 (2008)]. We further clarify some issues concerning the interplay between noncommuting measurements and conservation laws in order to reply to the additional criticism contained in the comment.

DOI: 10.1103/physreva.79.046102

Related papers

Comment on “Relevance of Bell’s theorem as a signature of nonlocality: Case of classical angular momentum distributions”

Ten Yong Tung

We give some comments on the paper of Matzkin [Phys. Rev. A 77, 062110 (2008)]. It is argued here that, if the assumption of locality is properly taken into account, Matzkin's model cannot reproduce the quantum-mechanical correlations.

Physical Review AApr 10, 20091 citation

Reply to “Comment on ‘Nonlocality counterfactuals, and quantum mechanics’ ”

William George Unruh

Stapp [preceding Comment, Phys. Rev. A 60, 2595 (1999)] has argued that my criticism of his nonlocality proof is wrong. I point out that counterfactual arguments are fraught with dangers, and that any such claim should use them in a conservative manner. A reanalysis of his claims continues to lead me to the conclusion that the nonlocality of quantum mechanics remains unproven.

Physical Review ASep 1, 19992 citations

Relevance of Bell's theorem as a signature of nonlocality: Case of classical angular momentum distributions

A. Matzkin

For a system composed of two particles, Bell's theorem asserts that averages of physical quantities determined from local variables must conform to a family of inequalities. In this work we show that a classical model containing a local probabilistic interaction in the measurement process can lead to a violation of the Bell inequalities. We first introduce two-particle phase-space distributions in classical mechanics constructed to be the analogs of quantum-mechanical angular momentum eigenstates. These distributions are then employed in four schemes characterized by different types of detectors measuring the angular momenta. When the model includes an interaction between the detector and the measured particle leading to ensemble dependencies, the relevant Bell inequalities are violated if the total angular momentum is required to be conserved. The violation is explained by identifying assumptions made in the derivation of Bell's theorem that are not fulfilled by the model, in particular noncommutativity of single-particle measurements. We discuss to what extent a violation of these assumptions is a faithful marker of nonlocality.

arXiv:0709.2114Physical Review AJun 20, 20087 citations

Reply to “Comment on ‘Nonlocality claims are inconsistent with Hilbert-space quantum mechanics’ ”

Robert B. Griffiths

In Phys. Rev. A 101, 022117 (2020), it was argued that Bell inequalities are based on classical not quantum physics, and, hence, their violation in experiments provides no support for the claimed existence of peculiar nonlocal and superluminal influences in the real (quantum) world. This Reply to Lambare's Comment, Phys. Rev. A 104, 066201 (2021), on that paper seeks to clarify some issues related to the correct use of Hilbert space quantum mechanics for identifying the microscopic causes of later macroscopic measurement outcomes, a matter not properly addressed by Bell, who used classical hidden variables in place of the Hilbert subspaces (equivalently, their projectors) employed by von Neumann in Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics.

arXiv:2106.09824Physical Review ADec 20, 202111 citations

Comment on Chiribella et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 (2024) 190201, arXiv:2301.10885

Robert B. Griffiths

The article `Bell Nonlocality in Classical Systems Coexisting with Other System Types' by Chiribella et al. defines `classical' in a quantum context in a way that ignores noncommuting quantum projectors, and is hence inconsistent with Hilbert-space quantum theory.

arXiv:2406.04363May 29, 20240 citations

Reply to ‘‘Comment on ‘Density-matrix formulation ofab initiomethods of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics’ ’’

Antonio Redondo

A missing paragraph from the original work [A. Redondo, Phys. Rev. A 39, 4366 (1989] that is being commented upon [preceding paper, Cioslowski and Levy, Phys. Rev. A 40, 6727 (1989)] is included. The relationship between this work and a theorem by Lieb [E. Lieb, Phys. Rev. Lett. 46, 457 (1981); 47, 69 (1981)] is also noted.

Physical Review ADec 1, 19892 citations