1.The key or origin of EPR paradox lies in the fact that there is something with the background knowledge which is accepted as correct.Through ideal experiment and EPR argument,Einstein and others have found that the metatheoretical non-local hypothesis behind quantum mechanics seems to conflict with the theory of relativity.2.Experiment test of Bell's inequality is a kind of crucial experiment.3.The metaphors of Neurath's repairing the ship during voyage and Popper's swamp have given a vivid explanation that scientific theories may have a relatively reliable base of experience.Accordingly,the background knowledge that could be wrong is qualified to be the relatively reliable logic base of crucial experiment.4.Einstein is not in defending realism and non-act-a-distance.However,the holism of quantum mechanics and long-range correlation cannot be ignored,for they will have profound implication which calls for further study.
1.The key or origin of EPR paradox lies in the fact that there is something with the background knowledge which is accepted as correct.Through ideal experiment and EPR argument,Einstein and others have found that the metatheoretical non-local hypothesis behind quantum mechanics seems to conflict with the theory of relativity.2.Experiment test of Bell's inequality is a kind of crucial experiment.3.The metaphors of Neurath's repairing the ship during voyage and Popper's swamp have given a vivid explanation that scientific theories may have a relatively reliable base of experience.Accordingly,the background knowledge that could be wrong is qualified to be the relatively reliable logic base of crucial experiment.4.Einstein is not in defending realism and non-act-a-distance.However,the holism of quantum mechanics and long-range correlation cannot be ignored,for they will have profound implication which calls for further study.
This paper presents the following viewpoints: First,the key point or the root of a paradox lies in that the background knowledge is defective,but accepted as correct.Secondly,EPR paradox is a famous theory in the domain of quantum mechanics.Einstein and others unearthed a unique non-local hypothesis in meta-theoretical level which is latent in quantum mechanics by means of ideal experiment and EPR argument.Apparently,it seems to violate the requirements of the Theory of Relativity.Thirdly,it is true that Einstein wants to defend realism and non-action-at-a-distance,but globalism in quantum mechanics or long-range correlation should not be ignored,which will indicate that they have profound implications to be further explored.Finally,the alliance of analytical reason and dialectical reason is a powerful thought instrument of resolving paradoxes in science.
Most physicists agree that the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bell paradox exemplifies much of the strange behavior of quantum mechanics, but argument persists about what assumptions underlie the paradox. To clarify what the debate is about, we employ a simple and well-known thought experiment involving two correlated photons to help us focus on the logical assumptions needed to construct the EPR and Bell arguments. The view presented in this paper is that the minimal assumptions behind Bell’s inequality are locality and counterfactual definiteness but not scientific realism, determinism, or hidden variables as are often suggested. We further examine the resulting constraints on physical theory with an illustration from the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics—an interpretation that we argue is deterministic, local, and realist but that nonetheless violates the Bell inequality.
Eighty years ago Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen demonstrated that instantaneous reduction of wave function, believed to describe completely a pair of entangled physical systems, led to EPR paradox. The paradox disappears in statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics (QM) according to which a wave function describes only an ensemble of identically prepared physical systems. QM predicts strong correlations between outcomes of measurements performed on different members of EPR pairs in far-away locations. Searching for an intuitive explanation of these correlations John Bell analysed so called local realistic hidden variable models and proved that correlations consistent with these models satisfy Bell inequalities which are violated by some predictions of QM and by experimental data. Several different local models were constructed and inequalities proven. Some eminent physicists concluded that Nature is definitely nonlocal and that it is acting according to a law of nonlocal randomness. According to these law perfectly random, but strongly correlated events, can be produced at the same time in far away locations and a local and causal explanation of their occurrence cannot be given. We strongly disagree with this conclusion and we prove the contrary by analysing in detail some influential finite sample proofs of Bell and CHSH inequalities and so called Quantum Randi Challenges. We also show how one can win so called Bell's game without violating locality of Nature. Nonlocal randomness is inconsistent with local quantum field theory, with standard model in elementary particle physics and with causal laws and adaptive dynamics prevailing in the surrounding us world. The experimental violation of Bell-type inequalities does not prove the nonlocality of Nature but it only confirms a contextual character of quantum observables and gives a strong argument against counterfactual definiteness and against a point of view according to which experimental outcomes are produced in irreducible random way.
This paper starts with the observation that the combination of the so-calld EPR argument and Bell's theorem reveals one of the most paradoxical features of quantum reality, i.e. the no-separability of two contingent events. If we accept the conclusion of the revised EPR argument together with Bell's theorem, we are necessarily led to the denial of local causality which was presupposed by the original version of Einstein's criticism against quantum physics.. As the concept of local causality is a cornerstone of Einstein's theory of relativity, we next consider the problem of compatibility between the theory of relativity and quantum physics. Popper's proposal of going back to Lorentz's theory is examined and rejected because the quantum correlation of EPR is not to be interpreted as “an action at a distance” which we can control and use as the operational definition of absolute simultaneity. An inquiry into something like aether as hidden reality behind the theory of relativity is considered as retrogressive as the so-called hidden variable theory of quantum physics. Accepting the non-separability of local elements of reality as the undeniable fact, we discuss the possibility of a realistic interpretation of quantum physics which transcends scientific materialism and classical determinism. As an example of such projects, Stapp's theory is examined with respect to a Whiteheadean process philosophy which provides the meta-physical background for his realistic interpretation of quantum physics. Finally, we present another version of quantum meta-physics based on “the philosophy of organism” which is broad enough to include observer and observed, local causality and non-local correlation, space and time, and potentiality and actuality in the inseparable unity of physical reality.
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.
Local realism has been knocked down by the experiments with entangled pairs of particles based on Bell's theorem(J. S. Bell, Physics (Long Island City, N.Y.) 1, 195 (1964)). However, there has been continuing debate on whether locality or realism is the problem. In this work, we analyzed the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen thought experiment of Bohm's version using information theory and thermodynamics. The inference of non-locality from EPR experiments will be against the principle of non-realism of quantum mechanics. Therefore, the experiments about quantum entanglement cannot provide any proof to accuse locality.