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

Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields

Extension of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox and Bell's theorem

J. D. Franson

Published Aug 15, 1982• 6 citations
Publisher

Abstract

In their original paper, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) questioned the probabilistic nature of the quantum theory using an argument based on the quantum-mechanical correlations between two distant particles which had once interacted. Bell later proved that the quantum theory and any local theory differ significantly in their predictions for these experimentally measurable correlations. It is shown that the arguments of EPR can be extended to apply equally well to certain properties of a single particle or system and that, in analogy with Bell's theorem, the predictions of the quantum theory for certain single-particle experiments are in disagreement with the predictions of any local theory. For example, based on either the quantum theory or existing experimental observations, it is possible to arrange for a photon to have a negligible probability of not being absorbed by some system of finite dimensions, such as one of a large number of atoms, within a finite time interval. It is shown that any local theory which satisfies this requirement must also require that negligible interference effects occur in an optical interferometer at sufficiently low intensities from an incoherent source in combination with sufficiently large separation $L$ between the two optical paths. Time-reversal invariance is used to estimate the requirement $L\ensuremath{\gg}\frac{3{\ensuremath{\lambda}}^{2}}{4{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{2}{r}_{c}}$, where $\ensuremath{\lambda}$ is the wavelength of the light and ${r}_{c}$ is the classical radius of the electron; at optical wavelengths this distance is on the order of 10 m. The same separation should also be required between the photon detectors in any optical experiment based on Bell's theorem. A review of the literature indicates that no existing experimental data, either from optical interferometers or experiments based on Bell's theorem, can be used to distinguish between the local and quantum theories. An investigation of low-intensity optical interference at large path separations is proposed for this purpose.

DOI
10.1103/physrevd.26.787

Related papers

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox and Entanglement 1: Signatures of EPR correlations for continuous variables

M. D. Reid

A generalization of the 1935 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) argument for measurements with continuous variable outcomes is presented to establish criteria for the demonstration of the EPR paradox, for situations where the correlation between spatially separated subsystems is not perfect. Two types of criteria for EPR correlations are determined. The first type are based on measurements of the variances of conditional probability distributions and are necessary to reflect directly the situation of the original EPR paradox. The second weaker set of EPR criteria are based on the proven failure of (Bell-type) local realistic theories which could be consistent with a local quantum description for each subsystem. The relationship with criteria sufficient to prove entanglement is established, to show that any demonstration of EPR correlations will also signify entanglement. It is also shown how a demonstration of entanglement between two spatially separated subsystems, if not able to interpreted as a violation of a Bell-type inequality, may be interpreted as a demonstration of the EPR correlations. In particular it is explained how the experimental observation of two-mode squeezing using spatially separated detectors will signify not only entanglement but EPR correlations defined in a general sense.

arXiv:quant-ph/0112038•Dec 7, 2001•2 citations

Bell's theorem and the problem of decidability between the views of Einstein and Bohr

K. Hess, Walter Philipp

Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) have designed a gedanken experiment that suggested a theory that was more complete than quantum mechanics. The EPR design was later realized in various forms, with experimental results close to the quantum mechanical prediction. The experimental results by themselves have no bearing on the EPR claim that quantum mechanics must be incomplete nor on the existence of hidden parameters. However, the well known inequalities of Bell are based on the assumption that local hidden parameters exist and, when combined with conflicting experimental results, do appear to prove that local hidden parameters cannot exist. This fact leaves only instantaneous actions at a distance (called "spooky" by Einstein) to explain the experiments. The Bell inequalities are based on a mathematical model of the EPR experiments. They have no experimental confirmation, because they contradict the results of all EPR experiments. In addition to the assumption that hidden parameters exist, Bell tacitly makes a variety of other assumptions; for instance, he assumes that the hidden parameters are governed by a single probability measure independent of the analyzer settings. We argue that the mathematical model of Bell excludes a large set of local hidden variables and a large variety of probability densities. Our set of local hidden variables includes time-like correlated parameters and a generalized probability density. We prove that our extended space of local hidden variables does permit derivation of the quantum result and is consistent with all known experiments.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences•Nov 27, 2001•59 citations

Bell's theorem and its optical tests

J. C. Garrison, R. Y. Chiao

This chapter begins with a review of the ideas of locality and realism which provide the basis for the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox. The general conditions defining a local, realistic theory are stated, and then used to prove Bell's theorem, which yields — for any local, realistic theory — an inequality satisfied by certain linear combinations of correlations. It is shown that this inequality is violated by quantum theory and by experiment. The chapter ends with a discussion of possible experimental loopholes and the alternative Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger (GHZ) state, which would, in principle, make the use of statistical correlations unnecessary.

Oxford University Press eBooks•Jun 5, 2008•0 citations

Quantum mechanics versus local realism : the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox

F. Selleri

1 History of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox.- 2 Are Faster-Than-Light Influences Necessary?.- 3 All the Inequalities of Einstein Locality.- 4 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Experiments Using the Decays of ?c or J/? into ??? ? ?-?p?+p?.- Chapter5 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox for the K0-K?0 and B0-B?0 Systems.- 6 Even Local Probabilities Lead to the Paradox.- 7 The Experimental Investigation of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Question and Bell's Inequality.- 8 Rapisarda's Experiment: Testing Quantum Mechanics versus Local Hidden-Variable Theories with Dichotomic Analyzers.- 9 Nonlocality and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Experiment as Understood through the Quantum-Potential Approach.- 10 Interpretation of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Effect in Terms of a Generalized Causality.- 11 Quantum Action-at-a-Distance: The Mystery of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Correlations.- 12 Particle Trajectories and Quantum Correlations.- 13 Bell's Inequality and the Nonergodic Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.- 14 An Extended-Probability Response to the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Argument.- 15 The Search for Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics.- 16 Variable Detection Probability Models for Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Type Experiments.- 17 Stochastic Electrodynamics and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Argument.- 18 Explicit Calculations with a Hidden-Variable Spin Model.- 19 Symmetric and Asymmetric Models for Atomic Cascade Experiments.

Plenum Press eBooks•Jan 1, 1988•64 citations

New Slant on the EPR-Bell Experiment

P. W. Evans, Huw Price, K. B. Wharton

The best case for thinking that quantum mechanics is nonlocal rests on Bell's Theorem, and later results of the same kind. However, the correlations characteristic of Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR)–Bell (EPRB) experiments also arise in familiar cases elsewhere in quantum mechanics (QM), where the two measurements involved are timelike rather than spacelike separated; and in which the correlations are usually assumed to have a local causal explanation, requiring no action-at-a-distance (AAD). It is interesting to ask how this is possible, in the light of Bell's Theorem. We investigate this question, and present two options. Either (i) the new cases are nonlocal too, in which case AAD is more widespread in QM than has previously been appreciated (and does not depend on entanglement, as usually construed); or (ii) the means of avoiding AAD in the new cases extends in a natural way to EPRB, removing AAD in these cases too. There is a third option, viz., that the new cases are strongly disanalogous to EPRB. But this option requires an argument, so far missing, that the physical world breaks the symmetries which otherwise support the analogy. In the absence of such an argument, the orthodox combination of views—action-at-a-distance in EPRB, but local causality in its timelike analogue—is less well established than it is usually assumed to be. 1 Introduction 1.1 Background 1.2 Outline of the argument2 The Experiments 2.1 Standard EPRB 2.2 Sideways EPRB 2.3 Comparing the experiments 2.4 The need for beables3 The Symmetry Considerations 3.1 The action symmetry 3.2 Time-symmetry in SEPRB4 The Basic Trilemma 4.1 An intuitive defence of Option III?5 Avoiding the Trilemma?6 The Classical Objection7 Defending Option III 7.1 The free will argument 7.2 Independence and consistency8 Entanglement and Epistemic Perspective

arXiv:1001.5057•The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science•Jun 14, 2012•39 citations

Bell theorem without inequalities for two spinless particles

Herbert Joseph Bernstein, Daniel M. Greenberger, Michael Horne +1 more

We use the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger [in Bell's Theorem, Quantum Theory,and Conceptions of the Universe, edited by M. Kafatos (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1989)] approach to present three demonstrations of the failure of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) [Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935)] local realism for the case of two spinless particles in a two-particle interferometer. The original EPR assumptions of locality and reality do not suffice for this. First, we use the EPR assumptions of locality and reality to establish that in a two-particle interferometer, the path taken by each particle is an element of reality. Second, we supplement the EPR premises by the postulate that when the path taken by a particle is an element of reality, all paths not taken are empty. We emphasize that our approach is not applicable to a single-particle interferometer because there the path taken by the particle cannot be established as an element of reality. We point out that there are real conceptual differences between single-particle, two-particle, and multiparticle interferometry.

Physical Review A•Jan 1, 1993•62 citations
In their original paper, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) questioned the probabilistic nature of the quantum theory using an argument based on the quantum-mechanical correlations between two distant particles which had once interacted. Bell later proved that the quantum theory and any local theory differ significantly in their predictions for these experimentally measurable correlations. It is shown that the arguments of EPR can be extended to apply equally well to certain properties of a single particle or system and that, in analogy with Bell's theorem, the predictions of the quantum theory for certain single-particle experiments are in disagreement with the predictions of any local theory. For example, based on either the quantum theory or existing experimental observations, it is possible to arrange for a photon to have a negligible probability of not being absorbed by some system of finite dimensions, such as one of a large number of atoms, within a finite time interval. It is shown that any local theory which satisfies this requirement must also require that negligible interference effects occur in an optical interferometer at sufficiently low intensities from an incoherent source in combination with sufficiently large separation LLL between the two optical paths. Time-reversal invariance is used to estimate the requirement L\ensuremath≫3\ensuremathλ24\ensuremathπ2rcL\ensuremath{\gg}\frac{3{\ensuremath{\lambda}}^{2}}{4{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{2}{r}_{c}}L\ensuremath≫4\ensuremathπ2rc​3\ensuremathλ2​, where \ensuremathλ\ensuremath{\lambda}\ensuremathλ is the wavelength of the light and rc{r}_{c}rc​ is the classical radius of the electron; at optical wavelengths this distance is on the order of 10 m. The same separation should also be required between the photon detectors in any optical experiment based on Bell's theorem. A review of the literature indicates that no existing experimental data, either from optical interferometers or experiments based on Bell's theorem, can be used to distinguish between the local and quantum theories. An investigation of low-intensity optical interference at large path separations is proposed for this purpose.
A generalization of the 1935 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) argument for measurements with continuous variable outcomes is presented to establish criteria for the demonstration of the EPR paradox, for situations where the correlation between spatially separated subsystems is not perfect. Two types of criteria for EPR correlations are determined. The first type are based on measurements of the variances of conditional probability distributions and are necessary to reflect directly the situation of the original EPR paradox. The second weaker set of EPR criteria are based on the proven failure of (Bell-type) local realistic theories which could be consistent with a local quantum description for each subsystem. The relationship with criteria sufficient to prove entanglement is established, to show that any demonstration of EPR correlations will also signify entanglement. It is also shown how a demonstration of entanglement between two spatially separated subsystems, if not able to interpreted as a violation of a Bell-type inequality, may be interpreted as a demonstration of the EPR correlations. In particular it is explained how the experimental observation of two-mode squeezing using spatially separated detectors will signify not only entanglement but EPR correlations defined in a general sense.
Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) have designed a gedanken experiment that suggested a theory that was more complete than quantum mechanics. The EPR design was later realized in various forms, with experimental results close to the quantum mechanical prediction. The experimental results by themselves have no bearing on the EPR claim that quantum mechanics must be incomplete nor on the existence of hidden parameters. However, the well known inequalities of Bell are based on the assumption that local hidden parameters exist and, when combined with conflicting experimental results, do appear to prove that local hidden parameters cannot exist. This fact leaves only instantaneous actions at a distance (called "spooky" by Einstein) to explain the experiments. The Bell inequalities are based on a mathematical model of the EPR experiments. They have no experimental confirmation, because they contradict the results of all EPR experiments. In addition to the assumption that hidden parameters exist, Bell tacitly makes a variety of other assumptions; for instance, he assumes that the hidden parameters are governed by a single probability measure independent of the analyzer settings. We argue that the mathematical model of Bell excludes a large set of local hidden variables and a large variety of probability densities. Our set of local hidden variables includes time-like correlated parameters and a generalized probability density. We prove that our extended space of local hidden variables does permit derivation of the quantum result and is consistent with all known experiments.
This chapter begins with a review of the ideas of locality and realism which provide the basis for the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox. The general conditions defining a local, realistic theory are stated, and then used to prove Bell's theorem, which yields — for any local, realistic theory — an inequality satisfied by certain linear combinations of correlations. It is shown that this inequality is violated by quantum theory and by experiment. The chapter ends with a discussion of possible experimental loopholes and the alternative Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger (GHZ) state, which would, in principle, make the use of statistical correlations unnecessary.
1 History of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox.- 2 Are Faster-Than-Light Influences Necessary?.- 3 All the Inequalities of Einstein Locality.- 4 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Experiments Using the Decays of ?c or J/? into ??? ? ?-?p?+p?.- Chapter5 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox for the K0-K?0 and B0-B?0 Systems.- 6 Even Local Probabilities Lead to the Paradox.- 7 The Experimental Investigation of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Question and Bell's Inequality.- 8 Rapisarda's Experiment: Testing Quantum Mechanics versus Local Hidden-Variable Theories with Dichotomic Analyzers.- 9 Nonlocality and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Experiment as Understood through the Quantum-Potential Approach.- 10 Interpretation of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Effect in Terms of a Generalized Causality.- 11 Quantum Action-at-a-Distance: The Mystery of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Correlations.- 12 Particle Trajectories and Quantum Correlations.- 13 Bell's Inequality and the Nonergodic Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.- 14 An Extended-Probability Response to the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Argument.- 15 The Search for Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics.- 16 Variable Detection Probability Models for Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Type Experiments.- 17 Stochastic Electrodynamics and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Argument.- 18 Explicit Calculations with a Hidden-Variable Spin Model.- 19 Symmetric and Asymmetric Models for Atomic Cascade Experiments.
The best case for thinking that quantum mechanics is nonlocal rests on Bell's Theorem, and later results of the same kind. However, the correlations characteristic of Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR)–Bell (EPRB) experiments also arise in familiar cases elsewhere in quantum mechanics (QM), where the two measurements involved are timelike rather than spacelike separated; and in which the correlations are usually assumed to have a local causal explanation, requiring no action-at-a-distance (AAD). It is interesting to ask how this is possible, in the light of Bell's Theorem. We investigate this question, and present two options. Either (i) the new cases are nonlocal too, in which case AAD is more widespread in QM than has previously been appreciated (and does not depend on entanglement, as usually construed); or (ii) the means of avoiding AAD in the new cases extends in a natural way to EPRB, removing AAD in these cases too. There is a third option, viz., that the new cases are strongly disanalogous to EPRB. But this option requires an argument, so far missing, that the physical world breaks the symmetries which otherwise support the analogy. In the absence of such an argument, the orthodox combination of views—action-at-a-distance in EPRB, but local causality in its timelike analogue—is less well established than it is usually assumed to be. 1 Introduction 1.1 Background 1.2 Outline of the argument2 The Experiments 2.1 Standard EPRB 2.2 Sideways EPRB 2.3 Comparing the experiments 2.4 The need for beables3 The Symmetry Considerations 3.1 The action symmetry 3.2 Time-symmetry in SEPRB4 The Basic Trilemma 4.1 An intuitive defence of Option III?5 Avoiding the Trilemma?6 The Classical Objection7 Defending Option III 7.1 The free will argument 7.2 Independence and consistency8 Entanglement and Epistemic Perspective
We use the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger [in Bell's Theorem, Quantum Theory,and Conceptions of the Universe, edited by M. Kafatos (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1989)] approach to present three demonstrations of the failure of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) [Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935)] local realism for the case of two spinless particles in a two-particle interferometer. The original EPR assumptions of locality and reality do not suffice for this. First, we use the EPR assumptions of locality and reality to establish that in a two-particle interferometer, the path taken by each particle is an element of reality. Second, we supplement the EPR premises by the postulate that when the path taken by a particle is an element of reality, all paths not taken are empty. We emphasize that our approach is not applicable to a single-particle interferometer because there the path taken by the particle cannot be established as an element of reality. We point out that there are real conceptual differences between single-particle, two-particle, and multiparticle interferometry.