The entanglement phenomenon challenges our human way of thinking. As of today, while quantum statistical mathematics predicts correctly the behaviours of entangled particles non-statistical mathematics fails to concur with experiments. This paper overcomes this challenge. A new non-statistical equation is introduced, replacing the one that fails; this non-statistical equation is justified by physical experiments just as quantum statistical mathematics is. The valid non-statistical equation proposed here describes each individual particle’s specific behavior and subsequent measurement, a feature missing in quantum statistical mechanics. And for perplexed scientists, it is shown how this valid non-statistical mathematics metamorphoses Bell’s inequalities into equalities.
The entanglement phenomenon challenges our human way of thinking. As of today, while quantum statistical mathematics predicts correctly the behaviours of entangled particles non-statistical mathematics fails to concur with experiments. This paper overcomes this challenge. A new non-statistical equation is introduced, replacing the one that fails; this non-statistical equation is justified by physical experiments just as quantum statistical mathematics is. The valid non-statistical equation proposed here describes each individual particle’s specific behavior and subsequent measurement, a feature missing in quantum statistical mechanics. And for perplexed scientists, it is shown how this valid non-statistical mathematics metamorphoses Bell’s inequalities into equalities.
This short article concentrates on the conceptual aspects of the violation of Bell inequalities, and acts as a map to the 265 cited references. The article outlines (a) relevant characteristics of quantum mechanics, such as statistical balance and entanglement, (b) the thinking that led to the derivation of the original Bell inequality, and (c) the range of claimed implications, including realism, locality and others which attract less attention. The main conclusion is that violation of Bell inequalities appears to have some implications for the nature of physical reality, but that none of these are definite. The violations constrain possible prequantum (underlying) theories, but do not rule out the possibility that such theories might reconcile at least one understanding of locality and realism to quantum mechanical predictions. Violation might reflect, at least partly, failure to acknowledge the contextuality of quantum mechanics, or that data from different probability spaces have been inappropriately combined. Many claims that there are definite implications reflect one or more of (i) imprecise non-mathematical language, (ii) assumptions inappropriate in quantum mechanics, (iii) inadequate treatment of measurement statistics and (iv) underlying philosophical assumptions.
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.
The algebraic derivation of the numerical limits of Bell inequalities in either three or four random variables is independent of the assumption of randomness. The limits of the inequalities follow as mathematical consequences of their created algebraic structures independently of application to random or deterministic variables. The inequalities should be called identity-inequalities. A final correlation re-uses data from the previous correlations and thus leads to the inequality limits. It generally has a different functional form from the previous correlations, whether derived as a counterfactual mathematical result, or in a way enabling comparison with experiment. These algebraic facts and their consequences are central to understanding the inequalities’ use, but have not been widely recognized. Logically consistent application of the inequalities to Bell experiments is challenging, given that the number of mathematically assumed random variables is greater than the number of physical variables produced per experimental realization. Given Bell’s rejection of the use of sequential, alternative paths, three experimental runs are here considered to enable acquisition of data to be rearranged for computation of statistical cross-correlations. Predicted quantum mechanical correlations then satisfy the inequality. Since mathematically inconsistent use is sufficient to cause inequality violation, the conclusion that violation implies the nonexistence of underlying variables in the entanglement process does not follow.
The insight due to John Bell that the joint behavior of individually measured entangled quantum systems cannot be explained by shared information remains a mystery to this day. We describe an experiment, and its analysis, displaying non-locality of entangled qutrit pairs. The non-locality of such systems, as compared to qubit pairs, is of particular interest since it potentially opens the door for tests of bipartite non-local behavior independent of probabilistic Bell inequalities, but of deterministic nature. This article is part of a special issue of Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical devoted to '50 years of Bell's theorem'.
Lying at the heart of quantum mechanics, the notion of quantum superposition causes enormous difficulty in understanding the problem of quantum measurement, which concerns the Einstein-Bohr debate on the conceptual foundations of the quantum theory. According to Bell’s theorem, Einstein’s viewpoint in his debate with Bohr seems to be wrong. In the present paper, a new principle (referred to as the general principle of measurements) is introduced and proved as a mathematical theorem. Based on this principle, various forms of quantum superposition (including quantum entanglement) and the corresponding experiments are scrutinized. The main findings are as follows. (a) Einstein’s viewpoint is correct and Bell’s theorem is problematic. (b) Measurement outcomes of any actual experiment with individual microscopic objects described in a form of quantum superposition, in particular, the experimental results of testing Bell inequalities, are all erroneously explained. (c) Bell inequalities failed to capture the essence of the Einstein-Bohr debate, i.e., whether quantum superposition is legitimate for describing individual microscopic objects. (d) All kinds of quantum superposition violate the general principle of measurements and hence are illegitimate. (e) Quantum mechanics can be completed by using disjunction (“or”) as the logical relation between the orthonormal vectors that span an arbitrarily given Hilbert space for describing a single microscopic object, and the mathematical setting will remain essentially unchanged; hidden-variable theories are irrelevant to the real world. (f) After completing quantum mechanics as above, the difficulty in understanding the problem of quantum measurement disappears naturally. Implications of the findings are also discussed.
Extensive experimental tests of the Bell inequality have been conducted over time and the test results are viewed as a testimony to quantum mechanics. In considering the close tie between quantum mechanics and statistical theory, this paper identifies the mistake in previous statistical explanation and uses an elegant statistical approach to derive general formulas for two-particle Bell tests, without invoking any wavefunctions. The results show that, for the special case where the spins/polarizations are in the same, opposite, or perpendicular directions, the general formulas derived in this paper convert to quantum predictions, which are confirmed by numerous experiments. The paper also investigates the linkages between the statistical and quantum predictions and finds that vector decomposition and probability law are at the heart of both approaches. Based on this finding, the paper explains statistically why the local hidden variable theory fails the Bell tests. The paper has important implications for quantum computing, quantum theory in general, and the role of randomism and realism in physics.