Journal of Modern Physics

Categories of Nonlocality in EPR Theories and the Validity of Einstein’s Separation Principle as Well as Bell’s Theorem

K. Hess

Published Jan 1, 2019• 8 citations

Abstract

Work on quantum entanglement is currently emphasizing the nonlocal nature of theories that attempt to explain spatially separated Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) correlation experiments. It is frequently claimed that nonlocal instantaneous influences, or equivalently a breakdown of Einstein’s separation principle, are a signature property of (quantum) entanglement. This paper presents a categorization of the various forms of nonlocality in physical theories. It is shown that, even for Einstein’s theory of relativity, correlations of spatially separated measurements cannot be explained without the involvement of some nonlocal or global knowledge and facts. Instantaneous Influences at a distance are, however, in a special category of nonlocality and, as is well known, Einstein called them spooky. Following a separation of nonlocalities into four distinctly different categories 0, 1, 2, 3, with number 3 corresponding to theories containing instantaneous influences at a distance, I show that any theory of EPR experiments must be at least in category 1 or 2 and does not need to be in category 3. In particular, the Bell theorem, valid for category 0 theories, may be violated for categories 1 and 2 and does not require category 3 theories. Category 0 enforces Bell’s theorem. However, it does not apply to relativistic theories of space like separated measurements.

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2019.1010080

Related papers

A Modest View of Bell's Theorem

S. P. Boughn

In the 80 years since the seminal Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) paper, physicists and philosophers have mused about the `spooky action at a distance' aspect of quantum mechanics that so bothered Einstein. In his formal analysis of EPR-type entangled quantum states, Bell (1964) concluded that any hidden variable theory designed to reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics must necessarily be nonlocal and allow superluminal interactions. This doesn't immediately imply that nonlocality is a characteristic feature of quantum mechanics let alone a fundamental property of nature; however, many physicists and philosophers of science do harbor this belief. Experts in the field often use the term `nonlocality' to designate particular non-classical aspects of quantum entanglement and do not confuse the term with superluminal interactions. However, many physicists seem to take the term more literally. I endeavor to disabuse the latter of this notion by emphasizing that the correlations of Bell-type entanglement are a result of ordinary quantum superposition with no need to introduce nonlocality. The conclusion of the EPR paper wasn't that quantum mechanics is nonlocal but rather that it is an incomplete description of reality. For different reasons, many physicists, including me, agree with Einstein that quantum mechanics is necessarily an incomplete description of reality.

arXiv:1604.08529Apr 28, 20163 citations

Local Measurements, Nonlocal Correlations, and Determinism

Souvik Karjee

This work presents a conceptual and semi-formal analysis of quantum entanglement, locality, and determinism, motivated by a thought experiment involving double-slit measurements performed on entangled particles at spacelike separation. While quantum correlations appear instantaneous, the paper demonstrates that no superluminal information transfer or causal influence is required to explain observed outcomes.Building upon the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen framework and Bell’s theorem, the study distinguishes between local dynamical processes and nonlocal informational correlations encoded in the global quantum state. It argues that measurement outcomes are locally realized yet globally constrained, leading to an effectively deterministic universal description while preserving epistemic uncertainty for observers.The paper reframes quantum nonlocality as a manifestation of global consistency rather than physical influence, offering insights into the relationship between realism, free will, and relativistic causality. The discussion is interpretational in nature and does not introduce new experimental claims, aiming instead to clarify foundational assumptions underlying quantum theory.This work is intended for researchers and students interested in quantum foundations, the philosophy of physics, and the conceptual structure of modern physical theories.

Dec 24, 20250 citations

Lessons of Bell's Theorem: Nonlocality, Yes; Action at a Distance, Not Necessarily

Wayne C. Myrvold

Introduction Fifty years after the publication of Bell's theorem, there remains some controversy regarding what the theorem is telling us about quantum mechanics, and what the experimental violations of Bell inequalities are telling us about the world. This chapter represents my best attempt to be clear about what I think the lessons are. In brief: There is some sort of nonlocality inherent in any quantum theory, and, moreover, in any theory that reproduces, even approximately, the quantum probabilities for the outcomes of experiments. But not all forms of nonlocality are the same; there is a distinction to be made between action at a distance and other forms of nonlocality, and I will argue that the nonlocality needed to violate the Bell inequalities need not involve action at a distance. Furthermore, the distinction between forms of nonlocality makes a difference when it comes to compatibility with relativistic causal structure. The Bell locality condition is a condition which, if satisfied, renders possible a completely local account of the correlations between outcomes of spatially separated experiments. Bell's theorem tells us that the probabilities that we compute from quantum mechanics do not admit of such an account. Modulo auxiliary assumptions that, in my opinion, should be noncontroversial, this yields the conclusion that there must be something nonlocal about any theory that yields the quantum mechanical probabilities or anything close to them. One way to violate the Bell locality condition – and this is the way that any deterministic theory must do it – is via straightforward action at a distance. However, we should also consider the possibility of a stochastic theorywith probabilistic laws that involve irreducible correlations. The sort of nonlocality inherent in such a theory involves relations between events that are significantly different from causal relations as usually conceived. Perhaps surprisingly, such a theory, unlike its deterministic cousins, need not invoke a distinguished relation of distant simultaneity. This makes a difference for the situation of the two sorts of theories vis-a-vis relativity. Though a deterministic theory can achieve the appearance of being relativistic, at the level of observable phenomena, it can do so only by introducing a preferred foliation and with it a causal structure at odds with relativistic causal structures. Things are otherwise with dynamical collapse theories.

Cambridge University Press eBooksAug 31, 201615 citations

Nonlocality in Bohmian mechanics

Zati Amalina binti Mohd Abdul Ghafar, Shahidan Radiman, Ch’ng Han Siong

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox demonstrates that entangled particles can interact in such a way that it is possible to measure both their position and momentum instantaneously. The position or momentum of one particle can be determined by measuring another identical particle that exists in another space. This instantaneous action is actually called nonlocality. The nonlocality has been proved by Bell’s theorem that states that all quantum theories must be nonlocal. The Bell’s theorem gives a strong support to the hidden variable theory, i.e. Bohmian mechanics. Using nonlocality, we present that the velocity field of one particle can be obtained by measuring the velocity of other particles. The trajectory of these particles is perhaps surrealistic trajectory due to the nonlocality.

AIP conference proceedingsJan 1, 20180 citations

Kolmogorov’s Probability Spaces for “Entangled” Data-Subsets of EPRB Experiments: No Violation of Einstein’s Separation Principle

K. Hess

It is demonstrated that the use of Kolmogorov’s probability theory to describe results of quantum probability for EPRB (Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm) experiments requires extreme care when different subsets of measurement outcomes are considered. J. S. Bell and his followers have committed critical inaccuracies related to spin-gauge and probability measures of such subsets, because they use exclusively a single probability space for all data sets and sub-sets of data. It is also shown that Bell and followers use far too stringent epistemological requirements for the consequences of space-like separation. Their requirements reach way beyond Einstein’s separation principle and cannot be met by the major existing physical theories including relativity and even classical mechanics. For example, the independent free will does not empower the experimenters to choose multiple independent spin-gauges in the two EPRB wings. It is demonstrated that the suggestion of instantaneous influences at a distance (supposedly “derived” from experiments with entangled quantum entities) is a consequence of said inaccuracies and takes back rank as soon as the Kolmogorov probability measures are related to a consistent global spin-gauge and permitted to be different for different data subsets: Using statistical interpretations and different probability spaces for certain subsets of outcomes instead of probability amplitudes related to single quantum entities, permits physical explanations without a violation of Einstein’s separation principle.

Journal of Modern PhysicsJan 1, 20205 citations

The EPR Paradox in the Spacetime-Quantum Unified-Field Theory: Entanglement as Global Coherence of a Discrete Spacetime Substrate

Wendi Xiao

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox challenges the completeness of quantum mechanics under the assumptions of separability and locality, while Bell's theorem and its loophole-free experimental confirmations rule out local hidden variables and establish that entangled correlations are nonlocal yet no-signaling. This paper formulates, within the spacetime-quantum unified-field theory, a self-contained resolution of the paradox. Starting from the six axioms of the theory, we model the entangled pair as two local excitations of the single global spacetime-quantum field, a coherent superposition of discrete spacetime quanta (Axiom 1). We show that the EPR elements of reality are not attributes of the separated subsystems but properties of the global coherent configuration established within the common past light cone, so that EPR's tacit separability premise fails in this ontology (Axioms 1 and 5). Measurement is identified as a strictly local energy exchange (Axioms 2 and 5) whose influence propagates at most at the speed of light by the local hyperbolic master equation (Axiom 3), and we prove, by the invariance of the reduced density matrix, that no signaling is possible. The Bell correlations are reproduced as a consistency condition inherited from the standard-model sector (Axiom 4), with the Tsirelson bound 2√2 following from the no-signaling structure. Complete derivations of the correlation function, the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality and its violation, the no-signaling theorem, the local measurement model, and the coherence-entanglement relation are provided in the appendices.

Sep 7, 20260 citations