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

Open Physics

The photon identification loophole in EPRB experiments: computer models with single-wing selection

Hans A. De Raedt, Kristel F. L. Michielsen, K. Hess

Published Jan 1, 2017• 28 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract Recent Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments [M. Giustinaet al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250401 (2015); L. K. Shalmet al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250402 (2015)] that claim to be loophole free are scrutinized. The combination of a digital computer and discrete-event simulation is used to construct a minimal but faithful model of the most perfected realization of these laboratory experiments. In contrast to prior simulations, all photon selections are strictly made, as they are in the actual experiments, at the local station and no other “post-selection” is involved. The simulation results demonstrate that a manifestly non-quantum model that identifies photons in the same local manner as in these experiments can produce correlations that are in excellent agreement with those of the quantum theoretical description of the corresponding thought experiment, in conflict with Bell’s theorem which states that this is impossible. The failure of Bell’s theorem is possible because of our recognition of the photon identification loophole. Such identification measurement-procedures are necessarily included in all actual experiments but are not included in the theory of Bell and his followers.

DOI
10.1515/phys-2017-0085

Related papers

The photon identification loophole in EPRB experiments: computer models with single-wing selection

Hans A. De Raedt, Kristel F. L. Michielsen, K. Hess

Recent Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments [M. Giustina et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250401 (2015); L. K. Shalm et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250402 (2015)] that claim to be loophole free are scrutinized and are shown to suffer a photon identification loophole. The combination of a digital computer and discrete-event simulation is used to construct a minimal but faithful model of the most perfected realization of these laboratory experiments. In contrast to prior simulations, all photon selections are strictly made, as they are in the actual experiments, at the local station and no other "post-selection" is involved. The simulation results demonstrate that a manifestly non-quantum model that identifies photons in the same local manner as in these experiments can produce correlations that are in excellent agreement with those of the quantum theoretical description of the corresponding thought experiment, in conflict with Bell's theorem. The failure of Bell's theorem is possible because of our recognition of the photon identification loophole. Such identification measurement-procedures are necessarily included in all actual experiments but are not included in the theory of Bell and his followers.

arXiv:1707.08307•Jul 26, 2017•0 citations

The digital computer as a metaphor for the perfect laboratory experiment: Loophole-free Bell experiments

Hans A. De Raedt, Kristel F. L. Michielsen, K. Hess

Using Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments as an example, we demonstrate that the combination of a digital computer and algorithms, as a metaphor for a perfect laboratory experiment, provides solutions to problems of the foundations of physics. Employing discrete-event simulation, we present a counterexample to John Bell’s remarkable “proof” that any theory of physics, which is both Einstein-local and “realistic” (counterfactually definite), results in a strong upper bound to the correlations that are being measured in Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments. Our counterexample, which is free of the so-called detection-, coincidence-, memory-, and contextuality loophole, violates this upper bound and fully agrees with the predictions of quantum theory for Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments.

arXiv:1605.05237•Computer Physics Communications•Aug 22, 2016•15 citations

Comment on "The photon identification loophole in EPRB experiments: computer models with single-wing selection"

Mateus Araújo, Philippe Grangier, Jan-Åke Larsson

Contrary to the claims made in Ref. [1], the recent Bell tests by Giustina et al. and Shalm et al. do not suffer from a "photon identification loophole". The model discussed in Ref. [1] is exploiting the well-known detection loophole, that is precisely what was closed in the recent experiments.

arXiv:1807.04999•Jul 13, 2018•1 citation

Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments: Data analysis and simulation

Hans A. De Raedt, Kristel F. L. Michielsen, Fengping Jin

Data produced by laboratory Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments is tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is given by quantum theory of this thought experiment. Statistical evidence is presented that the experimental data, while violating Bell inequalities, does not support this hypothesis. It is shown that an event-based simulation model, providing a cause-and-effect description of real EPRB experiments at a level of detail which is not covered by quantum theory, reproduces the results of quantum theory of this thought experiment, indicating that there is no fundamental obstacle for a real EPRB experiment to produce data that can be described by quantum theory.

arXiv:1112.2629•AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2012•30 citations

Data analysis of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments

Hans A. De Raedt, Fengping Jin, Kristel F. L. Michielsen

Data sets produced by three different Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments are tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is described by quantum theory. Although these experiments generate data that violate Bell inequalities for suitable choices of the time-coincidence window, the analysis shows that it is highly unlikely that these data sets are compatible with the quantum theoretical description of the EPRB experiment, suggesting that the popular statements that EPRB experiments agree with quantum theory lack a solid scientific basis and that more precise experiments are called for.

•Jan 1, 2013•23 citations

Data analysis of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments

Hans A. De Raedt, F. Jin, K. Michielsen

Data sets produced by three different Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments are tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is described by quantum theory. Although these experiments generate data that violate Bell inequalities for suitable choices of the time-coincidence window, the analysis shows that it is highly unlikely that these data sets are compatible with the quantum theoretical description of the EPRB experiment, suggesting that the popular statements that EPRB experiments agree with quantum theory lack a solid scientific basis and that more precise experiments are called for.

arXiv:1312.6361•Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE•Oct 1, 2013•21 citations
Abstract Recent Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments [M. Giustinaet al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250401 (2015); L. K. Shalmet al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250402 (2015)] that claim to be loophole free are scrutinized. The combination of a digital computer and discrete-event simulation is used to construct a minimal but faithful model of the most perfected realization of these laboratory experiments. In contrast to prior simulations, all photon selections are strictly made, as they are in the actual experiments, at the local station and no other “post-selection” is involved. The simulation results demonstrate that a manifestly non-quantum model that identifies photons in the same local manner as in these experiments can produce correlations that are in excellent agreement with those of the quantum theoretical description of the corresponding thought experiment, in conflict with Bell’s theorem which states that this is impossible. The failure of Bell’s theorem is possible because of our recognition of the photon identification loophole. Such identification measurement-procedures are necessarily included in all actual experiments but are not included in the theory of Bell and his followers.
Recent Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments [M. Giustina et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250401 (2015); L. K. Shalm et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250402 (2015)] that claim to be loophole free are scrutinized and are shown to suffer a photon identification loophole. The combination of a digital computer and discrete-event simulation is used to construct a minimal but faithful model of the most perfected realization of these laboratory experiments. In contrast to prior simulations, all photon selections are strictly made, as they are in the actual experiments, at the local station and no other "post-selection" is involved. The simulation results demonstrate that a manifestly non-quantum model that identifies photons in the same local manner as in these experiments can produce correlations that are in excellent agreement with those of the quantum theoretical description of the corresponding thought experiment, in conflict with Bell's theorem. The failure of Bell's theorem is possible because of our recognition of the photon identification loophole. Such identification measurement-procedures are necessarily included in all actual experiments but are not included in the theory of Bell and his followers.
Using Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments as an example, we demonstrate that the combination of a digital computer and algorithms, as a metaphor for a perfect laboratory experiment, provides solutions to problems of the foundations of physics. Employing discrete-event simulation, we present a counterexample to John Bell’s remarkable “proof” that any theory of physics, which is both Einstein-local and “realistic” (counterfactually definite), results in a strong upper bound to the correlations that are being measured in Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments. Our counterexample, which is free of the so-called detection-, coincidence-, memory-, and contextuality loophole, violates this upper bound and fully agrees with the predictions of quantum theory for Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments.
Data produced by laboratory Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments is tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is given by quantum theory of this thought experiment. Statistical evidence is presented that the experimental data, while violating Bell inequalities, does not support this hypothesis. It is shown that an event-based simulation model, providing a cause-and-effect description of real EPRB experiments at a level of detail which is not covered by quantum theory, reproduces the results of quantum theory of this thought experiment, indicating that there is no fundamental obstacle for a real EPRB experiment to produce data that can be described by quantum theory.
Data sets produced by three different Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments are tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is described by quantum theory. Although these experiments generate data that violate Bell inequalities for suitable choices of the time-coincidence window, the analysis shows that it is highly unlikely that these data sets are compatible with the quantum theoretical description of the EPRB experiment, suggesting that the popular statements that EPRB experiments agree with quantum theory lack a solid scientific basis and that more precise experiments are called for.
Data sets produced by three different Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments are tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is described by quantum theory. Although these experiments generate data that violate Bell inequalities for suitable choices of the time-coincidence window, the analysis shows that it is highly unlikely that these data sets are compatible with the quantum theoretical description of the EPRB experiment, suggesting that the popular statements that EPRB experiments agree with quantum theory lack a solid scientific basis and that more precise experiments are called for.