A.Einstein and others,who demonstrated by EPR proof revealed inherent quantum mechanics allow Superluminal exist—which is contradiction with the theory of relativity,as opposed to N.Bohr explanation which is the representative of the Copenhagen School that is quantum mechanics comprehensive.But for several years,after a series of test around Bell's inequality experiments show that microscopic particles do exist Superluminal related phenomena,which leads to the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics incompatible.On the debate on the issue and later inspired a generation of scientists,philosophers,encouraging them to the physical concept of the past for deep thinking,it also reflects the development of science is a relative truth to the absolute truth process.
A.Einstein and others,who demonstrated by EPR proof revealed inherent quantum mechanics allow Superluminal exist—which is contradiction with the theory of relativity,as opposed to N.Bohr explanation which is the representative of the Copenhagen School that is quantum mechanics comprehensive.But for several years,after a series of test around Bell's inequality experiments show that microscopic particles do exist Superluminal related phenomena,which leads to the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics incompatible.On the debate on the issue and later inspired a generation of scientists,philosophers,encouraging them to the physical concept of the past for deep thinking,it also reflects the development of science is a relative truth to the absolute truth process.
A.Einstein held an opposite attitude towards Quantum Mechanics(QM),which first appeared in 1926 and reached the top in 1935 when he,together with B.Podolsky,N.Rosen published the EPR thesis and it promotes science development in an opposite side.The EPR thesis is based on Special Relativity(SR).Both SR and EPR deny the possibility of faster-than-light.But QM allows the existence of faster-than-light,agreeing to non-locality of QM is the premise of researching in faster-than light.In 1965,during the interview John Bell confided that his unequality was the outcome of EPR thinking,which denied ultra-space effect under EPR thesis,conditions resulted in quite peculiar correlations that QM predicted.The results of Aspect’s experiments were within expectation that QM has never been wrong now and will not in the future despite of strict requirements.Undoubtedly,the experiments proved that Einstein’s ideas didn’t hold water.In Bell’s opinion,to get rid of the difficulties after the announcement of the Aspect’s experiments,it intends to go back to Lorentz and Poincare,and assume that ether existed as a referential system in which matters went faster than light.Bell repeatedly pointed out that be wanted to go back to ether because EPR had predicted there was something faster than light in the background.…… Since 1992,it is reported that there have been many successful faster than light experiments.Some of them are based on quantum tunneling effect;some are based on classic physical phenomena such as evanescent waves,anomalous dispersion.And in 2008,D.Salart et.al.performed a experiment using entangled photons between two villages separated by 18km.In conclusion,the speed of the influence of quantum entanglement would have to exceed than of light by at least four orders of magnitude,i.e.10 4 c ～ 10 7 c.Anyway,this experiment was the summation of discussions about the EPR thesis for a long time.For the past 25 years Quantum Superluminality was one subject of my chief study.In 1985,we proposed the model of quantum potential barrier equivalent circuit.In 1991,we first indicated that there could be the wave velocity v p 0 and v g 0 in the evanescent waves mode of the waveguide below cut off and the book An Introduction to the Theory of waveguide Below Cut-off made me get the First National Scientific and Technology Book Award of China.Moreover,in 2003 we through an experiment in the coaxial photonic crystal,a superluminal group velocity of(1.5 ～ 2.4) c are observed in the stop-band of frequency.In 2005,we suggested the term of General Information Velocity(GIV);and in 2010,we suggested the term of Quantum Superluminality(QS),and also suggested remodel the existing accelerator to discover the superluminal strange electron.Now,this paper discusses some problems of Quantum Superluminality profoundly,such as the velocity definition of the microscopic particles,the relation between the EPR thinking and the faster-than-light research,the interaction speed of the quantum entangle-state,superluminality of the quantum tunneling,the negative wave velocity,QS of the Casimir effect.We show that the unite of Quantum Optics(QO) and classical physical sujects are becoming more important.Since 2000,the negative group velocity experiments are always employing some atomic metal(such as Cs、Ka、Rb) vapor for tests.It make full use of the latest achievement in laser science and technology,then it was modern physical experiment in QO,not the classical physical experiment.The negative group velocity not only the special situation of faster-than-light,but also has the features: the exiting pulse’s peak can appear to exit the medium before the peak of the input pulse enters.So it was different that of classical causality.Although that knowledges and discovers of QS are widen and lively,then it greatly inspired us;but it is not the immediate conclusion that answers some questions about the possibility of material,energy and information according to faster-than-light propagation.To design the ingenious and convincing superluminal experiments are also basic task of scientists.
The first round of the Einstein–Bohr debates took place when Einstein challenged Bohr’s principle of complementarity at the Solvay conference in 1927 and Bohr successfully defended it. The most serious challenge, however, came in 1935 when a paper by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) argued that quantum mechanics was incomplete through a gedanken experiment motivating an approach based on hidden variables. In this chapter, EPR’s arguments about the incompleteness of quantum mechanics and Bohr’s reply to them are presented. The ultimate answer came almost 30 years later, almost ten years after Einstein’s death, and was nothing that Einstein would have expected. Bell’s inequality and the subsequent Bell-CHSH inequality, that are satisfied by all theories based on the “self-evident truths” of reality and locality are discussed. The startling results that quantum mechanics violates Bell’s inequality and the experimental results are in agreement with the prediction of quantum mechanics are presented.
It has been debated whether quantum mechanics and special relativity are incompatible and whether there is a preferred Lorentz frame if they are incompatible. Bell's theorem is an important cornerstone, but it does not give us a definite positive answer due to the existence of supplementary assumptions or theoretical loopholes; there are unitary quantum theories which evade Bell's theorem and claim that they are compatible with special relativity. In this paper, I address the important issue of whether unitary quantum theories are compatible with special relativity. I propose a new Gedankenexperiment, a variant of the EPR-Bohm experiment with a superobserver who can undo a measurement. In this experiment, there is a stronger correlation (between the results of two spacelike separated measurements) than the correlation investigated in Bell's theorem. Based on an analysis of the correlations in different Lorentz frames, I prove that unitary single-world theories are incompatible with special relativity, and in order to avoid the incompatibility, there must exist a preferred Lorentz frame in these theories. Moreover, I argue that the incompatibility proof also applies to a proper version of the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. This closes the major theoretical loopholes of Bell's theorem, including relationalism, retrocausality, and superdeterminism. Finally, I argue that the stronger correlation found in the Gedankenexperiment cannot be explained by retrocausal processes or even the common causes in the past, but only be explained by nonlocal processes or actions at a distance. This provides a test of unitary quantum theories, as well as a further support for the new incompatibility proof beyond Bell's theorem.
The assumptions added by Bohr and concerning the Hilbert space (formed by all solutions of Schroedinger equation) changed fundamentally the original physical interpretation of these solutions proposed earlier by Schroedinger. This new alternative was refused by Einstein on the basis of the EPR Gedankenexperiment, but accepted fully for microscopic reality by scientific community. Both the quantum alternatives were discussed, however, again later. Bell tried to find a possibility how to decide between them; he generalized Einstein's Gedankenexperiment assuming that also spins of two detected particles would be measured. He derived then some inequality for a special combination of four coincidence probabilities, and it was commonly assumed that his inequality held for the original Schroedinger interpretation but not in Bohr's Copenhagen quantum mechanics; without any actual proof having been given. Corresponding experiments were proposed and finished in 1982. The violation of Bell's inequality was then interpreted as decisive victory of Bohr's theory. However, it will be shown that Bell's inequality has been interpreted mistakenly. It has been based always on some assumption that does not hold in any probabilistic theory (i.e., in the given spin experiment) but only in deterministic classical theory. There is not any argument for preferring the Copenhagen quantum mechanics and against Einstein's critical standpoint. Some other consequences will be mentioned, too.
Abstract The first round of the Einstein–Bohr debates took place when Einstein challenged Bohr’s principle of complementarity at the Solvay conference in 1927 and Bohr successfully defended it. The most serious challenge, however, came in 1935 through a paper by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) when they argued about the incompleteness of quantum mechanics through a gedanken experiment motivating an approach based on hidden variables. In this chapter, the EPR argument about the incompleteness of quantum mechanics and Bohr’s reply to it, are presented. The ultimate answer came almost 30 years later, almost ten years after Einstein’s death, and the answer was nothing what Einstein would have expected. Bell’s inequality and the subsequent Bell–CHSH inequality, that are satisfied by all theories based on the “self-evident truths” of reality and locality are discussed. The startling result that quantum mechanics violates Bell’s inequality and that the experimental results are in agreement with the prediction of quantum mechanics is presented.
For over nine decades, quantum mechanics has profoundly shaped our understanding of nature, offering explanations for the stability of atoms, the formation of mole cules, the properties of materials, and phenomena such as light or radioactivity. It is essential to modern technologies—from microchips to lasers—and underpins the physics of elementary particles. Yet, despite its successes, it remains a deeply mysterious theory, confronting a central enigma: why does the quantum world behave so differently from everyday reality? Elements such as superposition and quantum entanglement—which allow particles to exist simultaneously in multiple states or remain interconnected regardless of distance—contradict classical world intuitions. This gap between microscopic and macroscopic behavior has given rise to what is known as the “measurement problem,” raising fundamental questions about the nature of reality. Diverging interpretations have led to two major schools of thought: anti-realism, promoted by Niels Bohr, which holds that reality depends on the observer and their interaction with measurement instruments; and realism, supported by Albert Einstein, which argues that quantum mechanics is incomplete and that eality exists independently of observation. Bohr’s complementary philosophy and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle were central to the formulation of the “Copenhagen interpretation,” which became dominant in the 20th century. However, the persistent opposition of scientists like Einstein and Schrödinger inspired generations of physicists to seek a unification between quantum mechanics and relativity, culminating in new theories such as loop quantum gravity and string theory. Thus, the debate between realism and anti-realism remains alive, and philosophy continues to play a crucial role in exploring the new foundations of physics.