Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Physics Letters A

Testing bell's inequalities with periodic switching

Anton Zeilinger

Published Sep 1, 1986• 49 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1016/0375-9601(86)90520-7

Related papers

Bell inequality and the locality loophole: Active versus passive switches

Gisin, Nicolas, Hugo Zbinden

All experimental tests of the violation of Bell's inequality suffer from some loopholes. We show that the locality loophole is not independent of the detection loophole: in experiments using low efficient detectors, the locality loophole can be closed equivalently using active or passive switches.

•Jan 1, 1999•22 citations

Tests of Bell inequalities

Lev Vaidman A

arXiv:quant-ph/0107057•Physics Letters A•Jul 1, 2001•33 citations

Experimental Test of Bell's Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers

Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard, Gérard Roger

Correlations of linear polarizations of pairs of photons have been measured with time-varying analyzers. The analyzer in each leg of the apparatus is an acousto-optical switch followed by two linear polarizers. The switches operate at incommensurate frequencies near 50 MHz. Each analyzer amounts to a polarizer which jumps between two orientations in a time short compared with the photon transit time. The results are in good agreement with quantum mechanical predictions but violate Bell's inequalities by 5 standard deviations.

Physical Review Letters•Dec 20, 1982•3,939 citations

Experimental Tests of Bell’s Inequalities

Alain Aspect, Philippe Grangier

NATO ASI series. Series B : Physics•Jan 1, 1995•2 citations

Reality or Locality? Proposed Test to Decide How Nature Breaks Bell's Inequality

Johan Hansson

Bell's theorem, and its experimental tests, has shown that the two premises for Bell's inequality—locality and objective reality—cannot both hold in nature, as Bell's inequality is broken. A simple test is proposed, which for the first time may decide which alternative nature actually prefers on the fundamental, quantum level. If each microscopic event is truly random (e.g., as assumed in orthodox quantum mechanics) objective reality is not valid whereas if each event is described by an unknown but deterministic mechanism (“hidden variables”) locality is not valid. This may be analyzed and decided by the well-known reconstruction method of Ruelle and Takens; in the former case no structure should be discerned, in the latter a reconstructed structure should be visible. This could in principle be tested by comparing individual “hits” in a double-slit experiment, but in practice a single fluorescent atom, and its (seemingly random) temporal switching between active/inactive states would possibly be better/more practical, easier to set up, observe, and analyze. However, only imagination limits the list of possible experimental setups.

arXiv:1104.1963•Physics Research International•Jan 29, 2012•0 citations

Experimental tests of Bell's inequalities

Alain Aspect

Springer eBooks•Apr 6, 2008•10 citations
Correlations of linear polarizations of pairs of photons have been measured with time-varying analyzers. The analyzer in each leg of the apparatus is an acousto-optical switch followed by two linear polarizers. The switches operate at incommensurate frequencies near 50 MHz. Each analyzer amounts to a polarizer which jumps between two orientations in a time short compared with the photon transit time. The results are in good agreement with quantum mechanical predictions but violate Bell's inequalities by 5 standard deviations.
Bell's theorem, and its experimental tests, has shown that the two premises for Bell's inequality—locality and objective reality—cannot both hold in nature, as Bell's inequality is broken. A simple test is proposed, which for the first time may decide which alternative nature actually prefers on the fundamental, quantum level. If each microscopic event is truly random (e.g., as assumed in orthodox quantum mechanics) objective reality is not valid whereas if each event is described by an unknown but deterministic mechanism (“hidden variables”) locality is not valid. This may be analyzed and decided by the well-known reconstruction method of Ruelle and Takens; in the former case no structure should be discerned, in the latter a reconstructed structure should be visible. This could in principle be tested by comparing individual “hits” in a double-slit experiment, but in practice a single fluorescent atom, and its (seemingly random) temporal switching between active/inactive states would possibly be better/more practical, easier to set up, observe, and analyze. However, only imagination limits the list of possible experimental setups.