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

Avoiding Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) Paradox: Towards a More Physically Adequate Description of a Quantum State

Joseph Bernal, Olga M. Kosheleva, Владик Крейнович

Published Jan 1, 2019• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

The famous EPR paradox shows that if we describe quantum particles in the usual way -- by their wave functions -- then we get the following seeming contradiction. If we entangle the states of the two particles, then move them far away from each other, and measure the state of the first particle, then the state of the second particle immediately changes -- which contradicts to special relativity, according to which such immediate-action-at-a-distance is not possible. It is known that, from the physical viewpoint, this is not a real paradox: if we measure any property of the second particle, the results will not change whether we perform the measurement on the first particle or not. What the above argument shows is that the usual wave function description of a quantum state does not always adequately describe the corresponding physics. In this paper, we propose a new, more physically adequate description of a quantum state, a description in which there is no EPR paradox: measurements performed at the first particle does not change the state of the remote second one.

Related papers

A predictive solution of the EPR paradox

Henryk Gzyl

In this work, we examine the paradox proposed by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR). They argued that since one may know the exact momentum of a particle without measurement and subsequently measure its position, a contradiction with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle arises. We demonstrate that there is no paradox by two equivalent approaches: first, by computing the quantum conditional expectation to make predictions after a measurement; and second, using the von Neumann post-measurement state. We establish the equivalence between these two methods. In both cases the predictor is an operator valued function of the observables being measured. This ensures that no violation of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle occurs.

arXiv:2508.20788•Aug 28, 2025•0 citations

A Steering Paradox for Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Argument and its Extended Inequality

Tianfeng Feng, Changliang Ren, Qin Feng +4 more

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox is one of the milestones in quantum foundations, arising from the lack of local realistic description of quantum mechanics. The EPR paradox has stimulated an important concept of "quantum nonlocality", which manifests itself by three different types: quantum entanglement, quantum steering, and Bell nonlocality. Although Bell nonlocality is more often used to show the "quantum nonlocality", the original EPR paradox is essentially a steering paradox. In this work, we formulate the original EPR steering paradox into a contradiction equality,thus making it amenable to an experimental verification. We perform an experimental test of the steering paradox in a two-qubit scenario. Furthermore, by starting from the steering paradox, we generate a generalized linear steering inequality and transform this inequality into a mathematically equivalent form, which is more friendly for experimental implementation, i.e., one may only measure the observables in $x$-, $y$-, or $z$-axis of the Bloch sphere, rather than other arbitrary directions. We also perform experiments to demonstrate this scheme. Within the experimental errors, the experimental results coincide with the theoretical predictions. Our results deepen the understanding of quantum foundations and provide an efficient way to detect the steerability of quantum states.

arXiv:2004.04352•Apr 9, 2020•0 citations

On Wavefunction Collapse, the Einstein-Poldolsky-Rosen Paradox and Measurement in Quantum Mechanics and Field Theory

Stuart Samuel

We first consider the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox for the system of two particles with spin 1/2 with entangled spins in first-quantized quantum mechanics (QM). If measurement is governed by wavefunction collapse, then gedanken experiments show that a number of fundamental principles including conservation of angular momentum and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle can be violated. We conclude that the collapse of the spin part of the wavefunction cannot happen and therefore an EPR paradox does not arise for this system. QM unitarity alone is sufficient to rule out "spooky" action at a distance. The absence of spin wavefunction collapse leads to several interesting conclusions about how measurement works in QM: When wavefunction collapse does not happen, (i) a signal from a macroscopic measuring device indicating that a system is in a state S does not necessarily mean that it is or was in S and (ii) the uncertainty in QM at the microscopic level is transmitted to uncertainty in signals for the macroscopic measuring device. We derive two general results on how quantum measurement works and illustrate them in a spin-1/2 measurement. In contrast to first-quantized QM, in quantum field theory we are unable to fully rule out the possibility of wavefunction collapse. However, when we insist on unitarity (thereby excluding the possibility of wavefunction collapse) and additionally take into account in the wavefunction all degrees of freedom involved in the measurement (including those of the equipment, experimentalists, etc.), a consistant acceptable understanding of the Bell-inequality-type experiments involving entangled photon polarizations emerges including the absence of an EPR paradox. The ability of an experimentalist to be aware of his perceptions but unable to be conscious of other components of a generalized Schrodinger Cat plays a role in resolving the Measurement Problem.

arXiv:1910.11134•Oct 22, 2019•1 citation

Steering paradox for Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen argument and its extended inequality

Tianfeng Feng, Changliang Ren, Qin Feng +4 more

The Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paradox is one of the milestones in quantum foundations, arising from the lack of a local realistic description of quantum mechanics. The EPR paradox has stimulated an important concept of “quantum nonlocality,” which manifests itself in three types: quantum entanglement, quantum steering, and Bell’s nonlocality. Although Bell’s nonlocality is more often used to show “quantum nonlocality,” the original EPR paradox is essentially a steering paradox. In this work, we formulate the original EPR steering paradox into a contradiction equality, thus making it amenable to experimental verification. We perform an experimental test of the steering paradox in a two-qubit scenario. Furthermore, by starting from the steering paradox, we generate a generalized linear steering inequality and transform this inequality into a mathematically equivalent form, which is friendlier for experimental implementation, i.e., one may measure the observables only in the x , y , or z axis of the Bloch sphere, rather than other arbitrary directions. We also perform experiments to demonstrate this scheme. Within the experimental errors, the experimental results coincide with theoretical predictions. Our results deepen the understanding of quantum foundations and provide an efficient way to detect the steerability of quantum states.

Photonics Research•Mar 19, 2021•4 citations

Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen steering paradox “2=1” for N qubits

Zhi-Jie Liu, Jie Zhou, Hui-Xian Meng +4 more

Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paradox highlights the absence of a local realistic explanation for quantum mechanics, and shows the incompatibility of the local-hidden-state models with quantum theory. For N-qubit states, or more importantly, the N-qubit mixed states, we present the EPR steering paradox in the form of the contradictory equality “[Formula: see text]”. We show that the contradiction holds for any N-qubit state as long as both “the pure state requirement” and “the measurement requirement” are satisfied. This also indicates that the EPR steering paradox exists in more general cases. Finally, we give specific examples to demonstrate and analyze our arguments.

arXiv:2406.17247•Modern Physics Letters A•Mar 21, 2024•3 citations

Experimental Test of the EPR Paradox and its Corresponding Steering Inequality

Tianfeng Feng, Changliang Ren, Qin Feng +4 more

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox is one of the earliest paradoxes, arising from the lack of local realistic description of mechanics. The EPR paradox leads to the important concept of quantum which manifests itself by three different phenomena: entanglement, steering, and Bell's nonlocality. Two well-known paradoxes related to Bell's nonlocality, i.e. the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger paradox and the Hardy paradox, have been widely studied and also experimentally confirmed. However, an experimental test of the EPR paradox is still lacking. The EPR paradox is essentially a steering paradox, and recently it has been mathematically formulated as a contradiction equality $k=1$, thus making it amenable to an experimental verification. Moreover, based on the EPR paradox we also derive a generalized linear steering inequality. In this work, we perform the first experimental test of the EPR paradox in a two-qubit scenario, and also verify the corresponding generalized steering inequality, which has an advantage over the usual one by detecting more steerability of states. Experimental results confirm the theoretical predictions within the experimental errors, and provide a deeper understanding of foundation.

•Apr 9, 2020•0 citations
The famous EPR paradox shows that if we describe quantum particles in the usual way -- by their wave functions -- then we get the following seeming contradiction. If we entangle the states of the two particles, then move them far away from each other, and measure the state of the first particle, then the state of the second particle immediately changes -- which contradicts to special relativity, according to which such immediate-action-at-a-distance is not possible. It is known that, from the physical viewpoint, this is not a real paradox: if we measure any property of the second particle, the results will not change whether we perform the measurement on the first particle or not. What the above argument shows is that the usual wave function description of a quantum state does not always adequately describe the corresponding physics. In this paper, we propose a new, more physically adequate description of a quantum state, a description in which there is no EPR paradox: measurements performed at the first particle does not change the state of the remote second one.
In this work, we examine the paradox proposed by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR). They argued that since one may know the exact momentum of a particle without measurement and subsequently measure its position, a contradiction with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle arises. We demonstrate that there is no paradox by two equivalent approaches: first, by computing the quantum conditional expectation to make predictions after a measurement; and second, using the von Neumann post-measurement state. We establish the equivalence between these two methods. In both cases the predictor is an operator valued function of the observables being measured. This ensures that no violation of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle occurs.
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox is one of the milestones in quantum foundations, arising from the lack of local realistic description of quantum mechanics. The EPR paradox has stimulated an important concept of "quantum nonlocality", which manifests itself by three different types: quantum entanglement, quantum steering, and Bell nonlocality. Although Bell nonlocality is more often used to show the "quantum nonlocality", the original EPR paradox is essentially a steering paradox. In this work, we formulate the original EPR steering paradox into a contradiction equality,thus making it amenable to an experimental verification. We perform an experimental test of the steering paradox in a two-qubit scenario. Furthermore, by starting from the steering paradox, we generate a generalized linear steering inequality and transform this inequality into a mathematically equivalent form, which is more friendly for experimental implementation, i.e., one may only measure the observables in xxx-, yyy-, or zzz-axis of the Bloch sphere, rather than other arbitrary directions. We also perform experiments to demonstrate this scheme. Within the experimental errors, the experimental results coincide with the theoretical predictions. Our results deepen the understanding of quantum foundations and provide an efficient way to detect the steerability of quantum states.
We first consider the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox for the system of two particles with spin 1/2 with entangled spins in first-quantized quantum mechanics (QM). If measurement is governed by wavefunction collapse, then gedanken experiments show that a number of fundamental principles including conservation of angular momentum and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle can be violated. We conclude that the collapse of the spin part of the wavefunction cannot happen and therefore an EPR paradox does not arise for this system. QM unitarity alone is sufficient to rule out "spooky" action at a distance. The absence of spin wavefunction collapse leads to several interesting conclusions about how measurement works in QM: When wavefunction collapse does not happen, (i) a signal from a macroscopic measuring device indicating that a system is in a state S does not necessarily mean that it is or was in S and (ii) the uncertainty in QM at the microscopic level is transmitted to uncertainty in signals for the macroscopic measuring device. We derive two general results on how quantum measurement works and illustrate them in a spin-1/2 measurement. In contrast to first-quantized QM, in quantum field theory we are unable to fully rule out the possibility of wavefunction collapse. However, when we insist on unitarity (thereby excluding the possibility of wavefunction collapse) and additionally take into account in the wavefunction all degrees of freedom involved in the measurement (including those of the equipment, experimentalists, etc.), a consistant acceptable understanding of the Bell-inequality-type experiments involving entangled photon polarizations emerges including the absence of an EPR paradox. The ability of an experimentalist to be aware of his perceptions but unable to be conscious of other components of a generalized Schrodinger Cat plays a role in resolving the Measurement Problem.
The Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paradox is one of the milestones in quantum foundations, arising from the lack of a local realistic description of quantum mechanics. The EPR paradox has stimulated an important concept of “quantum nonlocality,” which manifests itself in three types: quantum entanglement, quantum steering, and Bell’s nonlocality. Although Bell’s nonlocality is more often used to show “quantum nonlocality,” the original EPR paradox is essentially a steering paradox. In this work, we formulate the original EPR steering paradox into a contradiction equality, thus making it amenable to experimental verification. We perform an experimental test of the steering paradox in a two-qubit scenario. Furthermore, by starting from the steering paradox, we generate a generalized linear steering inequality and transform this inequality into a mathematically equivalent form, which is friendlier for experimental implementation, i.e., one may measure the observables only in the x , y , or z axis of the Bloch sphere, rather than other arbitrary directions. We also perform experiments to demonstrate this scheme. Within the experimental errors, the experimental results coincide with theoretical predictions. Our results deepen the understanding of quantum foundations and provide an efficient way to detect the steerability of quantum states.
Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paradox highlights the absence of a local realistic explanation for quantum mechanics, and shows the incompatibility of the local-hidden-state models with quantum theory. For N-qubit states, or more importantly, the N-qubit mixed states, we present the EPR steering paradox in the form of the contradictory equality “[Formula: see text]”. We show that the contradiction holds for any N-qubit state as long as both “the pure state requirement” and “the measurement requirement” are satisfied. This also indicates that the EPR steering paradox exists in more general cases. Finally, we give specific examples to demonstrate and analyze our arguments.
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox is one of the earliest paradoxes, arising from the lack of local realistic description of mechanics. The EPR paradox leads to the important concept of quantum which manifests itself by three different phenomena: entanglement, steering, and Bell's nonlocality. Two well-known paradoxes related to Bell's nonlocality, i.e. the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger paradox and the Hardy paradox, have been widely studied and also experimentally confirmed. However, an experimental test of the EPR paradox is still lacking. The EPR paradox is essentially a steering paradox, and recently it has been mathematically formulated as a contradiction equality k=1k=1k=1, thus making it amenable to an experimental verification. Moreover, based on the EPR paradox we also derive a generalized linear steering inequality. In this work, we perform the first experimental test of the EPR paradox in a two-qubit scenario, and also verify the corresponding generalized steering inequality, which has an advantage over the usual one by detecting more steerability of states. Experimental results confirm the theoretical predictions within the experimental errors, and provide a deeper understanding of foundation.