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

EPR in B physics and elsewhere

Harry J. Lipkin

Published Sep 1, 1997• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

The application of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations in {Upsilon}(4s) {yields} B{anti B} decays to research in CP violation is the first and probably only use of EPR as a technique for research in new physics. Elsewhere highly sophisticated EPR projects question EPR and test its predictions to look for violations of quantum mechanics, hidden variables, Bell`s inequalities, etc.

Related papers

EPR in B physics and elsewhere

Harry J. Lipkin

The application of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations in Υ(4s)→BB̄ decays to research in CP violation is the first and probably only use of EPR as a technique for research in new physics. Elsewhere highly sophisticated EPR projects question EPR and test its predictions to look for violations of quantum mechanics, bidden variables, Bell’s inequalities, etc.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 1998•0 citations

CP Violation and Quantum Mechanics in the B System

Boris J. Kayser

We discuss the testing of the Standard Model of CP violation, and the search for CP-violating effects from beyond the Standard Model, in $B$ decays. We then focus on the quantum mechanics of the experiments on CP violation to be performed at $B$ factories. These experiments will involve very pretty Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations. We show that the physics of these experiments can be understood without invoking the ``collapse of the wave function," and without the mysteries that sometimes accompany discussions of EPR effects. (To appear in the Proceedings of the Moriond Workshop on Electroweak Interactions and Unified Theories, Les Arcs, France, March 1995)

arXiv:hep-ph/9509386•Sep 26, 1995•3 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

Measurement of EPR-type flavour entanglement in U(4S) →

A. Bay

The neutral B-meson pair produced at the U(4S) should ex- hibit a non-local correlation of the type discussed by Einstein, Podol- ski, and Rosen. The time-dependent flavour asymmetry of the B mesons decaying into flavour eigenstates is used to test such a cor- relation. The asymmetry obtained from semileptonic B 0 decays is in agreement with the prediction from quantum mechanics and far away from the predictions of the local realistic models tested. The observation of partial decoherence in EPR systems could be a sig- nal for New Physics: we have tested for such effects, and found our results are consistent with no decoherence.

•Jan 1, 2007•0 citations

On Bell Experiments and Quantum Entanglement

Guang-Liang Li

Bell inequalities are intended to formulate mathematically the argument of the thought-experiment proposed by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (EPR) in the Einstein-Bohr Debate. Devised to test Bell inequalities against quantum mechanics for resolving the Einstein-Bohr debate, Bell experiments are purportedly modern versions of the EPR experiment. However, there exists a fatal logical flaw in Bell experiments. Because of the logical flaw, Bell experiments differ essentially from the EPR experiment, and quantum correlation in the EPR experiment is not "quantum entanglement" in Bell experiments; the latter is not physically meaningful. In addition to the logical flaw in Bell experiments, a physical constraint imposed on measuring individual quantum objects is violated by all Bell inequalities, which makes Bell inequalities physically meaningless. Unlike Bell experiments, the EPR experiment will not violate any physical constraint, and the EPR argument has no logical flaw. Consequently, the experimental invalidation of Bell inequalities is not evidence for falsifying the two fundamental hypotheses for scientific research, i.e., locality and realism, underlying the EPR experiment, and by no means can Bell experiments resolve the Einstein-Bohr debate. Stemming from abandoning either locality or realism or both, the so-called new applications of quantum mechanics, including various quantum information technologies, are all ineligible and doomed to failure, for they attempt to exploit physically meaningless "quantum superposition" or "quantum entanglement", treating them as physical resources "out there" in the real world.

Qeios•Sep 4, 2023•3 citations

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
The application of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations in {Upsilon}(4s) {yields} B{anti B} decays to research in CP violation is the first and probably only use of EPR as a technique for research in new physics. Elsewhere highly sophisticated EPR projects question EPR and test its predictions to look for violations of quantum mechanics, hidden variables, Bell`s inequalities, etc.
We discuss the testing of the Standard Model of CP violation, and the search for CP-violating effects from beyond the Standard Model, in BBB decays. We then focus on the quantum mechanics of the experiments on CP violation to be performed at BBB factories. These experiments will involve very pretty Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations. We show that the physics of these experiments can be understood without invoking the ``collapse of the wave function," and without the mysteries that sometimes accompany discussions of EPR effects. (To appear in the Proceedings of the Moriond Workshop on Electroweak Interactions and Unified Theories, Les Arcs, France, March 1995)
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 neutral B-meson pair produced at the U(4S) should ex- hibit a non-local correlation of the type discussed by Einstein, Podol- ski, and Rosen. The time-dependent flavour asymmetry of the B mesons decaying into flavour eigenstates is used to test such a cor- relation. The asymmetry obtained from semileptonic B 0 decays is in agreement with the prediction from quantum mechanics and far away from the predictions of the local realistic models tested. The observation of partial decoherence in EPR systems could be a sig- nal for New Physics: we have tested for such effects, and found our results are consistent with no decoherence.
Bell inequalities are intended to formulate mathematically the argument of the thought-experiment proposed by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (EPR) in the Einstein-Bohr Debate. Devised to test Bell inequalities against quantum mechanics for resolving the Einstein-Bohr debate, Bell experiments are purportedly modern versions of the EPR experiment. However, there exists a fatal logical flaw in Bell experiments. Because of the logical flaw, Bell experiments differ essentially from the EPR experiment, and quantum correlation in the EPR experiment is not "quantum entanglement" in Bell experiments; the latter is not physically meaningful. In addition to the logical flaw in Bell experiments, a physical constraint imposed on measuring individual quantum objects is violated by all Bell inequalities, which makes Bell inequalities physically meaningless. Unlike Bell experiments, the EPR experiment will not violate any physical constraint, and the EPR argument has no logical flaw. Consequently, the experimental invalidation of Bell inequalities is not evidence for falsifying the two fundamental hypotheses for scientific research, i.e., locality and realism, underlying the EPR experiment, and by no means can Bell experiments resolve the Einstein-Bohr debate. Stemming from abandoning either locality or realism or both, the so-called new applications of quantum mechanics, including various quantum information technologies, are all ineligible and doomed to failure, for they attempt to exploit physically meaningless "quantum superposition" or "quantum entanglement", treating them as physical resources "out there" in the real world.
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.