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

Some Topological Paradoxes of Relativity (Epr). (English Version)

V.A. Kasimov

Published May 1, 2018• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

In the footsteps of the article by A. Aspect BELL'S THEOREM: the naive view of an experimentalist. As in equation (23) has detected an error (or typo), I took the trouble to verify calculations from 1 to 5 sections of the article. Are some clarifying points that are important for understanding the essence. Given an elementary conclusion of formulas (3), which is omitted in the article. The Bell's inequality, derived on the basis of the general model for a dichotomous variable, disturbed the quantum mechanical model for a pair of entangled photons. In Bell's article it is clearly (though not very detailed) shown. No artificial gadgets is not able to resolve this contradiction. The only thing that causes confusion is the procedure of creating a mixed state of two photons and the essence conceptual view of mathematics experiment. Theoretically, this procedure can be represented as a symmetrization of the wave function of the pair. However, how does the transfer of this idea to the technical essence of the experiment is unclear.

Related papers

Some Topological Paradoxes of Relativity (Epr)

V.A. Kasimov

To refer again to the article A. Aspect bell's THEOREM: the view of the experimenter we were forced by some publications. However, we have again seen the conceptual correctness of the statement of the problem of in the Aspect's article. In conceptual terms, in the naive presentation of EPR from the Aspect of no splices probabilistic measures of different spaces is not required. The presentation of the Aspect is logically closed and complete. The existence of a problem related to the violation of bell inequality is shown conceptually (by simple examples). The real possibility of solving this problem today is, in our opinion, only a relational interpretation of quantum mechanics [3], [4], since the relational interpretation of quantum mechanics Rovelli puts out the brackets local causality in the paradox, replacing it with the concept of the integrity of the relations of the observed systems and, thereby, abandoning the concept of velocity, doubtful from the point of view of quantum mechanics as a derivative in the TMK-topology of space-time relations. And this is, apparently, what physics is pregnant for a long time! But the difficulty of resolution of the dilemma of completeness and the local causality associated with the absence of the notion of speed in the form of spatio-temporal derivative in the scalar form. And this is a common problem of quantum mechanics, which the relational concept intends to solve . In the proposed article there are all logical ties, for each of which it would be possible to object and say - it is not so

•Apr 1, 2018•0 citations

Conceptual Problems in Bell’s Inequality and Quantum Entanglement

Ying-Qiu Gu

The description of the microscopic world in quantum mechanics is very different from that in classical physics, and there are some points of view that are contrary to intuition and logic. The first is the loss of reality, the behavior of micro particles shows randomness and hopping. The second is the loss of certainty, the conjugate physical variables of a system cannot be determined synchronously, they satisfy the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The third is the non-local correlation. The measurement of one particle in the quantum entanglement pair will change the state of the other entangled particle simultaneously. In this paper, some concepts related to quantum entanglement, such as EPR correlation, quantum entanglement correlation function, Bell's inequality and so on, are analyzed in detail. Analysis shows that the mystery and confusion in quantum theory may be caused by the logical problems in its basic framework. Bell's inequality is only a mathematical theorem, but its physical meaning is actually unclear. The Bell state of quantum entangled pair may not satisfy the dynamic equation of quantum theory, so it cannot describe the true state of microscopic particles. In this paper, the correct correlation functions of spin entanglement pair and photonic entanglement pair are strictly derived according to normal logic. Quantum theory is a more fundamental theory than classical mechanics, and they are not parallel relation in logic. However, there are still some unreasonable contents in the framework of quantum theory, which need to be improved. In order to disclose the real relationship between quantum theory and classical mechanics, we propose some experiments which show the wave-particle duality simultaneously and provide intuitionistic teaching materials for the new interpretation of quantum theory.

Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics•Jan 1, 2022•4 citations

Closer Look at EPR Paradox and Bell’s Inequality

Vladimir K. Ignatovich

The EPR paradox is shown to be a result of the wrong definitions in quantum mechanics of such physical quantities as momentum and position. The corrected definitions show that momentum and position of particles can be precisely defined simultaneously and uncertainty relations do not prevent it. Therefore, with correct definition of physical quantities in quantum mechanics, the paradox disappears. The Bohm Aharonov version of the EPR paradox is illustrated by the example of measuring the polarization of photon pairs. The common view of the two photon state radiated by a source is presented. The common Bell’s inequality is discussed and the simplest version of it for a specific hidden variable is derived. A possibility of an experimental study of whether a photon and its polarization are preexistent before measurements is considered.

American Journal of Modern Physics•Apr 17, 2015•1 citation

On Purported Physical Realizations of So-called Quantum Information Technologies

Guang-Liang Li

Bell’s inequality is derived by resorting to a hidden-variable theory devised for resolving the Einstein-Bohr debate on the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics. The legitimacy of quantum superposition for describing the physical world is the essence of the debate. Einstein argued against the legitimacy of quantum superposition. Testing Bell’s inequality by experiment with the experimental result explained by Bell’s theorem opened the door to so-called quantum information technologies. In quantum information theory, “quantum bit” (or “qubit” for short) in a form of quantum superposition is supposed to carry quantum information. Although most physicists believe that Einstein’s vision of the physical world contradicts the experimental result of testing Bell’s inequality, actually neither the experimental result nor Bell’s theorem is relevant to Einstein’s viewpoint. In the present paper, a new principle, the general principle of measurements, is proved as a mathematical theorem. Based on this principle, the experiment for testing Bell’s inequality and so-called experimental evidence for physically realizable “qubit” are scrutinized. The findings are as follows. The experimental result of testing Bell’s inequality and the measurement outcomes of experiments involving “qubit” are all erroneously explained. Bell’s inequality failed to capture the essence of the Einstein-Bohr debate, and Bell’s theorem is irrelevant to Einstein’s vision of the physical world. Quantum mechanics can be completed by using disjunction (“or”) as the logical relation between the orthonormal vectors that span an arbitrarily given Hilbert space without resorting to any hidden-variable theory, while the mathematical setting will remain essentially unchanged. All kinds of “qubit” violate the general principle of measurements and can only describe imaginary objects that do not exist in the physical world. The findings inevitably lead to a very regrettable conclusion: Quantum information has no physical carers and all quantum information technologies are not physically realizable.

Qeios•Aug 28, 2024•0 citations

The "Quantum Game Show": a Very Simple Explanation of Bell's Theorem in Quantum Mechanics

Braeden Welsch, Christopher Thron

In this article give a very simple presentation of Bell's inequality by comparing it to a ``quantum game show'', followed by a simple description of Aspect's 1985 experiment involving entangled photons which confirms the inequality. The entire article is non-technical and requires no mathematical background other than high school mathematics and an understanding of basic concepts in probability. The physics involved in Aspect's experiment is also explained.

•Nov 1, 2021•0 citations

On Purported Physical Realizations of So-called Quantum Information Technologies

Guang-Liang Li

Bell’s inequality is derived by resorting to a hidden-variable theory devised for resolving the Einstein-Bohr debate on the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics. The legitimacy of quantum superposition for describing the physical world is the essence of the debate. Einstein argued against the legitimacy of quantum superposition. Testing Bell’s inequality by experiments with the experimental results explained by Bell’s theorem opened the door to so-called quantum information technologies. In quantum information theory, “quantum bit” (or “qubit” for short) in a form of quantum superposition is supposed to represent quantum information. In the present paper, a new principle, the general principle of measurements, is introduced and proved as a mathematical theorem. Based on this principle, the experiments for testing Bell’s inequality and so-called experimental evidence for physically realizable “qubit” are scrutinized. The findings are as follows. Although most physicists believe that Einstein’s vision of the physical world contradicts the experimental results of testing Bell’s inequality, actually Einstein’s viewpoint is irrelevant to Bell’s theorem. Bell’s inequality failed to capture the essence of the Einstein-Bohr debate. The experimental results of testing Bell’s inequality and the measurement outcomes of various experiments involving “qubit” are all erroneously explained. Without involving hidden variables, quantum mechanics can be completed based on the general principle of measurements by using disjunction (“or”) as the logical relation between the orthonormal vectors that span an arbitrarily given Hilbert space, and the mathematical setting can remain essentially unchanged. All kinds of “qubit” violate the general principle of measurements and can only describe imaginary objects that do not exist in the real world. A very regrettable conclusion from the above findings is inevitable: Quantum information has no physical carriers, and all quantum information technologies are not physically realizable.

Qeios•Sep 30, 2024•0 citations
In the footsteps of the article by A. Aspect BELL'S THEOREM: the naive view of an experimentalist. As in equation (23) has detected an error (or typo), I took the trouble to verify calculations from 1 to 5 sections of the article. Are some clarifying points that are important for understanding the essence. Given an elementary conclusion of formulas (3), which is omitted in the article. The Bell's inequality, derived on the basis of the general model for a dichotomous variable, disturbed the quantum mechanical model for a pair of entangled photons. In Bell's article it is clearly (though not very detailed) shown. No artificial gadgets is not able to resolve this contradiction. The only thing that causes confusion is the procedure of creating a mixed state of two photons and the essence conceptual view of mathematics experiment. Theoretically, this procedure can be represented as a symmetrization of the wave function of the pair. However, how does the transfer of this idea to the technical essence of the experiment is unclear.
To refer again to the article A. Aspect bell's THEOREM: the view of the experimenter we were forced by some publications. However, we have again seen the conceptual correctness of the statement of the problem of in the Aspect's article. In conceptual terms, in the naive presentation of EPR from the Aspect of no splices probabilistic measures of different spaces is not required. The presentation of the Aspect is logically closed and complete. The existence of a problem related to the violation of bell inequality is shown conceptually (by simple examples). The real possibility of solving this problem today is, in our opinion, only a relational interpretation of quantum mechanics [3], [4], since the relational interpretation of quantum mechanics Rovelli puts out the brackets local causality in the paradox, replacing it with the concept of the integrity of the relations of the observed systems and, thereby, abandoning the concept of velocity, doubtful from the point of view of quantum mechanics as a derivative in the TMK-topology of space-time relations. And this is, apparently, what physics is pregnant for a long time! But the difficulty of resolution of the dilemma of completeness and the local causality associated with the absence of the notion of speed in the form of spatio-temporal derivative in the scalar form. And this is a common problem of quantum mechanics, which the relational concept intends to solve . In the proposed article there are all logical ties, for each of which it would be possible to object and say - it is not so
The description of the microscopic world in quantum mechanics is very different from that in classical physics, and there are some points of view that are contrary to intuition and logic. The first is the loss of reality, the behavior of micro particles shows randomness and hopping. The second is the loss of certainty, the conjugate physical variables of a system cannot be determined synchronously, they satisfy the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The third is the non-local correlation. The measurement of one particle in the quantum entanglement pair will change the state of the other entangled particle simultaneously. In this paper, some concepts related to quantum entanglement, such as EPR correlation, quantum entanglement correlation function, Bell's inequality and so on, are analyzed in detail. Analysis shows that the mystery and confusion in quantum theory may be caused by the logical problems in its basic framework. Bell's inequality is only a mathematical theorem, but its physical meaning is actually unclear. The Bell state of quantum entangled pair may not satisfy the dynamic equation of quantum theory, so it cannot describe the true state of microscopic particles. In this paper, the correct correlation functions of spin entanglement pair and photonic entanglement pair are strictly derived according to normal logic. Quantum theory is a more fundamental theory than classical mechanics, and they are not parallel relation in logic. However, there are still some unreasonable contents in the framework of quantum theory, which need to be improved. In order to disclose the real relationship between quantum theory and classical mechanics, we propose some experiments which show the wave-particle duality simultaneously and provide intuitionistic teaching materials for the new interpretation of quantum theory.
The EPR paradox is shown to be a result of the wrong definitions in quantum mechanics of such physical quantities as momentum and position. The corrected definitions show that momentum and position of particles can be precisely defined simultaneously and uncertainty relations do not prevent it. Therefore, with correct definition of physical quantities in quantum mechanics, the paradox disappears. The Bohm Aharonov version of the EPR paradox is illustrated by the example of measuring the polarization of photon pairs. The common view of the two photon state radiated by a source is presented. The common Bell’s inequality is discussed and the simplest version of it for a specific hidden variable is derived. A possibility of an experimental study of whether a photon and its polarization are preexistent before measurements is considered.
Bell’s inequality is derived by resorting to a hidden-variable theory devised for resolving the Einstein-Bohr debate on the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics. The legitimacy of quantum superposition for describing the physical world is the essence of the debate. Einstein argued against the legitimacy of quantum superposition. Testing Bell’s inequality by experiment with the experimental result explained by Bell’s theorem opened the door to so-called quantum information technologies. In quantum information theory, “quantum bit” (or “qubit” for short) in a form of quantum superposition is supposed to carry quantum information. Although most physicists believe that Einstein’s vision of the physical world contradicts the experimental result of testing Bell’s inequality, actually neither the experimental result nor Bell’s theorem is relevant to Einstein’s viewpoint. In the present paper, a new principle, the general principle of measurements, is proved as a mathematical theorem. Based on this principle, the experiment for testing Bell’s inequality and so-called experimental evidence for physically realizable “qubit” are scrutinized. The findings are as follows. The experimental result of testing Bell’s inequality and the measurement outcomes of experiments involving “qubit” are all erroneously explained. Bell’s inequality failed to capture the essence of the Einstein-Bohr debate, and Bell’s theorem is irrelevant to Einstein’s vision of the physical world. Quantum mechanics can be completed by using disjunction (“or”) as the logical relation between the orthonormal vectors that span an arbitrarily given Hilbert space without resorting to any hidden-variable theory, while the mathematical setting will remain essentially unchanged. All kinds of “qubit” violate the general principle of measurements and can only describe imaginary objects that do not exist in the physical world. The findings inevitably lead to a very regrettable conclusion: Quantum information has no physical carers and all quantum information technologies are not physically realizable.
Bell’s inequality is derived by resorting to a hidden-variable theory devised for resolving the Einstein-Bohr debate on the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics. The legitimacy of quantum superposition for describing the physical world is the essence of the debate. Einstein argued against the legitimacy of quantum superposition. Testing Bell’s inequality by experiments with the experimental results explained by Bell’s theorem opened the door to so-called quantum information technologies. In quantum information theory, “quantum bit” (or “qubit” for short) in a form of quantum superposition is supposed to represent quantum information. In the present paper, a new principle, the general principle of measurements, is introduced and proved as a mathematical theorem. Based on this principle, the experiments for testing Bell’s inequality and so-called experimental evidence for physically realizable “qubit” are scrutinized. The findings are as follows. Although most physicists believe that Einstein’s vision of the physical world contradicts the experimental results of testing Bell’s inequality, actually Einstein’s viewpoint is irrelevant to Bell’s theorem. Bell’s inequality failed to capture the essence of the Einstein-Bohr debate. The experimental results of testing Bell’s inequality and the measurement outcomes of various experiments involving “qubit” are all erroneously explained. Without involving hidden variables, quantum mechanics can be completed based on the general principle of measurements by using disjunction (“or”) as the logical relation between the orthonormal vectors that span an arbitrarily given Hilbert space, and the mathematical setting can remain essentially unchanged. All kinds of “qubit” violate the general principle of measurements and can only describe imaginary objects that do not exist in the real world. A very regrettable conclusion from the above findings is inevitable: Quantum information has no physical carriers, and all quantum information technologies are not physically realizable.