Invalidity of the Standard Locality Condition for Hidden-Variable Models of EPR-Bohm Experiments

James L. Beck

Published Oct 1, 2019• 1 citation

Abstract

John Bell and others used a locality condition to establish inequalities that they believe must be satisfied by any local hidden-variable model for the spin probability distribution for two entangled particles in a Bohm-EPR experiment. We show that this condition is invalid because it contradicts the product rule of probability theory for any model that exhibits the expected property of perfect correlation. This breaks the connection between Bell inequalities and the existence of any local hidden-variable model of interest. As already known, these inequalities give necessary conditions for the existence of third/fourth-order joint probability distributions for the spin outcomes from three/four separate Bohm-EPR experimental set-ups that are consistent with the second-order joint spin distributions for each experiment after marginalization. If a Bell inequality is violated, as quantum mechanics theory predicts and experiments show can happen, then at least one third-order joint probability is negative. However, this does not imply anything about the existence of local hidden-variable models for the second-order joint probability distributions for the spin outcomes of a single experiment. The locality condition does seem reasonable under the widely-applied frequentist interpretation of the spin probability distributions that views them as real properties of a random process that are manifested through their relative frequency of occurrence, which gives conditioning in the probabilities for the spin outcomes a causal role. In contrast, under the Bayesian interpretation of probability, probabilistic conditioning on one particle's spin outcome in the product rule is viewed as information to make probabilistic predictions of the other particle's spin outcome. There is nothing causal and so no reason to develop a locality condition.

Related papers

Contrasting Implications of the Frequentist and Bayesian Interpretations of Probability when Applied to Quantum Mechanics Theory

James L. Beck

An examination is made of the differing implications from applying the two mainstream interpretations of probability, frequentist and Bayesian, to QM (quantum mechanics) theory for the Bohm-EPR experiment. The joint probability distribution for the possible spin outcomes for two particles with coupled spins is examined. Contrasting conclusions are made: (i) Under the frequentist interpretation, the QM spin distribution implies a widely-discussed non-locality because probabilistic conditioning on a spin measurement is viewed as corresponding to a causal influence. Under the Bayesian interpretation, this conditioning is viewed as providing information relevant to the spin probabilities and the argument for non-locality loses its force. (ii) The frequentist interpretation leads to the locality condition used by John Bell in 1964 to establish conditions for the existence of hidden variables behind the spin probability distribution but this condition is not consistent with the product (Bayes) rule of probability theory. Under the Bayesian interpretation, there is no motivation for this locality condition and a new stochastic hidden-variable model is given that reproduces the spin distribution. (iii) Bell's original 1964 inequality provides a necessary condition for the existence of a third-order joint probability distribution for three spin variables that is compatible through marginalization with the second-order joint distributions for the three possible spin pairs. Bell's inequality is logically equivalent to the 1969 CHSH inequality that involves expectations of four pairs of four spin variables; the CHSH inequality must be satisfied in order for a fourth-order joint probability distribution for the four spin variables to exist. When any of these inequalities are violated, a joint probability distribution for three spin outcomes fails to be valid because some probabilities are negative.

arXiv:1804.02106Apr 6, 20181 citation

The EPR-B Paradox Resolution. Bell inequalities revisited.

Jaykov Foukzon, Менькова Елена Романовна, Alexander A Potapov

Abstract One of the Bell’s assumptions in the original derivation of his inequalities was the hypothesis of locality, i.e., the absence of the influence of two remote measuring instruments on one another. That is why violations of these inequalities observed in experiments are often interpreted as a manifestation of the nonlocal nature of quantum mechanics, or a refutation of a local realism. It is well known that the Bell’s inequality was derived in its traditional form, without resorting to the hypothesis of locality and without the introduction of hidden variables, the only assumption being that the probability distributions are nonnegative. This can therefore be regarded as a rigorous proof that the hypothesis of locality and the hypothesis of existence of the hidden variables not relevant to violations of Bell’s inequalities. The physical meaning of the obtained results is examined. Physical nature of the violation of the Bell inequalities is explained under new EPR-B nonlocality postulate. We show that the correlations of the observables involved in the Bohm–Bell type experiments can be expressed as correlations of classical random variables. The revisited Bell type inequality in canonical notatons reads 〈AB〉 + 〈A’B〉 + 〈AB’〉 − 〈A’B’〉 ⩽ 6.

Journal of Physics Conference SeriesNov 1, 20190 citations

A Probability Model for the Bell Experiment

Kees van Hee, Kees van Berkel, J. de Graaf

The Bell inequality constrains the outcomes of measurements on pairs of distant entangled particles. The Bell contradiction states that the Bell inequality is inconsistent with the calculated outcomes of these quantum experiments. This contradiction led many to question the underlying assumptions, viz. so-called realism and locality. The probability model underlying the Bell inequality is generally left implicit. We propose an explicit probability model for the CHSH version of the Bell experiment. This model has only two simultaneously observable detector settings per measurement, and therefore does not assume realism. The quantum expectation now becomes a conditional expectation, given the two detector settings. This probability model is in full agreement with both quantum mechanics and experiments. As a result, the model satisfies the Bell inequality; there are no so-called violations. We extend this model to include a hidden variable. This extended model is not Bell-separable. This non-separability implies that the model is non-deterministic or non-local (or both).

arXiv:2302.05174Quantum ReportsFeb 14, 20260 citations

EPR paradox, quantum nonlocality and physical reality

Marian Kupczyński

Eighty years ago Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen demonstrated that instantaneous reduction of wave function, believed to describe completely a pair of entangled physical systems, led to EPR paradox. The paradox disappears in statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics (QM) according to which a wave function describes only an ensemble of identically prepared physical systems. QM predicts strong correlations between outcomes of measurements performed on different members of EPR pairs in far-away locations. Searching for an intuitive explanation of these correlations John Bell analysed so called local realistic hidden variable models and proved that correlations consistent with these models satisfy Bell inequalities which are violated by some predictions of QM and by experimental data. Several different local models were constructed and inequalities proven. Some eminent physicists concluded that Nature is definitely nonlocal and that it is acting according to a law of nonlocal randomness. According to these law perfectly random, but strongly correlated events, can be produced at the same time in far away locations and a local and causal explanation of their occurrence cannot be given. We strongly disagree with this conclusion and we prove the contrary by analysing in detail some influential finite sample proofs of Bell and CHSH inequalities and so called Quantum Randi Challenges. We also show how one can win so called Bell's game without violating locality of Nature. Nonlocal randomness is inconsistent with local quantum field theory, with standard model in elementary particle physics and with causal laws and adaptive dynamics prevailing in the surrounding us world. The experimental violation of Bell-type inequalities does not prove the nonlocality of Nature but it only confirms a contextual character of quantum observables and gives a strong argument against counterfactual definiteness and against a point of view according to which experimental outcomes are produced in irreducible random way.

arXiv:1602.02959Journal of Physics Conference SeriesMar 1, 201627 citations

The CGLMP Bell Inequalities and Quantum Theory

Bryan J. Dalton

Quantum non-locality tests have been of interest since the original EPR paper. The present paper discusses whether the CGLMP (Bell) inequalities obtained by Collins et al are possible tests for showing that quantum theory is not underpinned by local hidden variable theory (LHVT). It is found by applying Fine's theorem that the CGLMP approach involves a LHVT for the probabilities associated with measurements on two observables (each from one of the two sub-subsystems), even though the underlying probabilities for measurements of all four observables involve a hidden variable theory which is not required to be local. Although the CGLMP inequalities involve probabilities for measurements of one observable per sub-system and are compatible with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, there is no unambiguous quantum measurement process linked to the probabilities in the CGLMP inequalities. Quantum measurements corresponding to the different classical measurements that give the same CGLMP probability are found to yield different CGLMP probabilities. However, violation of a CGLMP inequality based on any one of the possible quantum measurement sequences is sufficient to show that the Collins et al LHVT does not predict the same results as quantum theory. This is found to occur for a state considered in their paper - though for observables whose physical interpretation is unclear. In spite of the problems of comparing the HVT inequalities with quantum expressions, it is concluded that the CGLMP inequalities are indeed suitable for ruling out local hidden variable theories. The state involved could apply to a macroscopic system, so the CGLMP Bell inequalities are important for finding cases of macroscopic violations of Bell locality. Possible experiments in double-well Bose condensates involving atoms with two hyperfine components are discussed.

arXiv:1812.09651Dec 23, 20181 citation

On Quantum Entanglement and Nonlocality

Uddin, Mafiz

EPR showed that two particles emitted from a source can be entangled by a shared wavefunction where two non-commuting observables (position, momentum) can be simultaneously real, leading to a contradiction with quantum mechanics (two non-commuting variables can not be simultaneously real). John Bell derived an inequality where any local hidden variables prediction is bounded and quantum mechanics can violate the inequality. Bell tests on correlated photon pairs showed a clear violation of the Bell inequality and agreement with quantum mechanics. This study revealed that the Bell inequality holds at any individual instances in a given system but it does not hold over the entire population. The Bell inequality is not an incompatibility criterion for local hidden variables vs quantum mechanics rather it is a criterion for an individual nature vs population dynamics. The nonlocality prediction given by wavefunction is a system approximation and local causality (photon polarization) provides a complete description of the Bell tests. The paper concludes with great satisfaction that the measurement of two correlated photons at a distance was a local cause (photon-filter interaction did not violate the special theory of relativity).

arXiv:2506.00366May 31, 20250 citations