The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox gives an argument for the incompleteness of quantum mechanics based on the premises of local realism. A general view is that the argument is compromised, because EPR's premises are falsified by Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) and Bell experiments. In this paper, we present an EPR argument based on premises not falsifiable by these experiments. We propose macroscopic EPR and GHZ experiments using spins
Sθ defined by two macroscopically distinct states. The analyzers that realize the unitary operations
Uθ determining the measurement settings
θ are devices that create macroscopic superposition states. For a system with two macroscopically distinct states available, macroscopic realism (MR) posits a predetermined outcome for a measurement
Sθ distinguishing between the states. Deterministic macroscopic realism (dMR) posits MR for the system prior to the interaction
Uθ. Weak macroscopic realism (wMR) posits MR for the system after
Uθ, at the time
tf (when the system is prepared for a final "pointer" measurement), the outcome of
Sθ not being changed by interactions that might occur at a remote system
B. The premise also posits that if the outcome for
SθA of a system
A can be predicted by a pointer measurement on a system
B defined after the interaction fixing the setting at
B, then the outcome for
SθA is determined at this time. The GHZ predictions negate dMR but are consistent with wMR. Yet, an EPR paradox arises based on wMR for the set-up proposed by Schrödinger, where one measures two complementary spins simultaneously, "one by direct, the other by indirect" measurement. We revisit the original EPR paradox and find similarly that an EPR argument can be based on a weak form of local realism not falsifiable by GHZ or Bell tests.
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox gives an argument for the incompleteness of quantum mechanics based on a plausible criterion for reality, as well as the assumption of locality. A general view is that the argument is compromised, because EPR's premises are falsified by Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) and Bell experiments. In this paper, we present an EPR argument based on premises not falsified by these experiments. First, we consider macroscopic EPR-Bohm, Bell, and GHZ experiments using spins ${\stackrel{\ifmmode \hat{}\else \^{}\fi{}}{S}}_{\ensuremath{\theta}}$ defined by two macroscopically distinct states. The analyzers that realize the unitary operations ${U}_{\ensuremath{\theta}}$ determining the measurement settings $\ensuremath{\theta}$ are nonlinear devices creating macroscopic superposition states. We note two definitions of macroscopic realism (MR). For a system with two macroscopically distinct states available to it, MR posits a predetermined outcome for the measurement ${\stackrel{\ifmmode \hat{}\else \^{}\fi{}}{S}}_{\ensuremath{\theta}}$ distinguishing between the states. Deterministic macroscopic realism assumes MR for the system defined prior to the interaction ${U}_{\ensuremath{\theta}}$ being carried out but is falsifiable by the macroscopic Bell and GHZ proposals. Motivated by arguments to uphold MR (without resorting to decoherence), as well as no-signaling and the properties of a meter, we define a set of premises referred to as weak macroscopic realism (wMR). Weak macroscopic realism (wMR) posits MR for the system after ${U}_{\ensuremath{\theta}}$, at the time
tf---when the system is prepared with respect to the measurement basis, ready for a ``pointer'' measurement and readout. For this system, wMR posits that the outcome of ${\stackrel{\ifmmode \hat{}\else \^{}\fi{}}{S}}_{\ensuremath{\theta}}$ is determined and not changed by interactions that might subsequently occur at a remote system
B. The premise wMR also posits a weaker version of EPR's criterion for reality. Importantly, we show that the GHZ and Bell predictions are consistent with wMR. Yet, an EPR paradox arises for a macroscopic EPR-Bohm state, based on wMR. As considered by Schr\"odinger, it is possible to measure two complementary spins of system
A simultaneously, ``one by direct, the other by indirect measurement'': If we assume wMR, then once both settings are fixed, the outcomes of the two spins are both determined. We revisit the original EPR paradox and find a similar result: An EPR argument can be based on a set of premises, weak local realism, which we show are not falsifiable by GHZ or Bell experiments.
Experiments have reported the entanglement of two spatially separated macroscopic atomic ensembles at room temperature (Krauter et al 2011 Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 080503; Julsgaard et al 2001 Nature 413 400). We show how an Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paradox is realizable with this experiment. Our proposed test involves violation of an inferred Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which is a sufficient condition for an EPR paradox. This is a stronger test of nonlocality than entanglement. Our proposal would enable the first definitive confirmation of quantum EPR paradox correlations between two macroscopic objects at room temperature. This is a necessary intermediate step towards a nonlocal experiment with causal measurement separations. As well as having fundamental significance, the realization of an atomic EPR paradox could provide a resource for novel applications in quantum technology.
We consider a new version of the Einstein - Podolsky - Rosen (EPR) paradox in which the measurements have limited accuracy, so that a photon number is specified only to plus or minus a macroscopic number of photons. In our example the minimum quantum uncertainty product for the two relevant conjugate quantities is itself a macroscopic photon number. This new version of the EPR situation is stronger than the original microscopic versions, which were based on the validity, now disproved by Bell experiments, of `local realism' at a microscopic level. The new version is based on the validity of `macroscopic local realism', which has to date not been questioned.