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

Towards an Einsteinian Quantum Mechanics

Alireza Jamali

Published Mar 1, 2021• 2 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

A rational approach to understanding quantum mechanics is presented in which one is able to account for the observation that two spinning particles, irrespective of their space-time separation, can be correlated in EPR-like experiments.

Related papers

Toward a Causal Interpretation of the Relativistic Quantum Mechanics of a Spinning Particle

Nicola Cufaro Petroni

NATO ASI series. Series B : Physics•Jan 1, 1987•0 citations

Bertlmann's socks and the nature of reality

James S. Bell

Introduction The philosopher in the street, who has not suffered a course in quantum mechanics, is quite unimpressed by Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen correlations. He can point to many examples of similar correlations in everyday life. The case of Bertlmann's socks is often cited. Dr. Bertlmann likes to wear two socks of different colours. Which colour he will have on a given foot on a given day is quite unpredictable. But when you see (Fig. 1) that the first sock is pink you can be already sure that the second sock will not be pink. Observation of the first, and experience of Bertlmann, gives immediate information about the second. There is no accounting for tastes, but apart from that there is no mystery here. And is not the EPR business just the same? Consider for example the particular EPR gedanken experiment of Bohm (Fig. 2). Two suitable particles, suitably prepared (in the ‘singlet spin state’), are directed from a common source towards two widely separated magnets followed by detecting screens. Each time the experiment is performed each of the two particles is deflected either up or down at the corresponding magnet. Whether either particle separately goes up or down on a given occasion is quite unpredictable. But when one particle goes up the other always goes down and vice-versa. After a little experience it is enough to look at one side to know also about the other.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Jun 3, 2004•90 citations

On two conflicting physical interpretations of the breaking of restricted relativistic einsteinian causality by quantum mechanics

Nicola Cufaro Petroni, Jean Pierre Vigier

Lettere al nuovo cimento della societa italiana di fisica/Lettere al nuovo cimento•Jun 1, 1979•14 citations

Space-Time Structure as Hidden Variable

Bart Jongejan

EPR correlations exist and can be observed independently of any a priori given frame of reference. We can even construct a frame of reference that is based on these correlations. This observation-based frame of reference is equivalent to the customary a priori given frame of reference of the laboratory when describing real EPR experiments. J.S. Bell has argued that local hidden parameter theories that reproduce the predictions of Quantum Mechanics cannot exist, but the counterfactual reasoning leading to Bell's conclusion is physically meaningless if the frame of reference that is based on EPR-correlations is accepted as the backdrop for EPR-type experiments. The refutal of Bell's proof opens up for the construction of a viable hidden parameter theory. A model of a spin h/2 particle in terms of a non-flat metric of space-time is shown to be able to reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics in the Bohm-Aharonov version of the EPR experiment, without introducing non-locality.

arXiv:quant-ph/0007010•Jul 5, 2000•0 citations

On the relativistic quantum mechanics of two interacting spinless particles

V. A. Rizov

Annals of Physics•Oct 1, 1985•4 citations

Epr, Dual Slit and “back from the Future” Observations

Gene H. Barbee

Observations regarding unexpected connections in quantum mechanically entangled systems are revealing a new understanding of our position in the universe. Experiments known by the initials EPR (Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen) show a statistical correlation between separated particle properties. If two particles are produced with opposite spins and move in different directions, it is observed that changes induced in one particle cause immediate changes in its partner. The classic “dual slit experiment” demonstrates that quantum photons can either produce a spot pattern or an interference pattern depending on whether an observer can “measure” which of two slits the photon travels through. More recently, a Discovery Magazine article by Zeeva Merali (Aug 26, 2010) indicates that an entangled particle responds to future changes in its partner (called “back from the future” observations by Jack Sarfatti of Cornell University). The author discusses the implications of taking this data at face value. Three FQXi contest essays [5][6][9]lead up to what I believe to be the explanation for EPR results and back from the future observations.

•May 1, 2015•0 citations
Introduction The philosopher in the street, who has not suffered a course in quantum mechanics, is quite unimpressed by Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen correlations. He can point to many examples of similar correlations in everyday life. The case of Bertlmann's socks is often cited. Dr. Bertlmann likes to wear two socks of different colours. Which colour he will have on a given foot on a given day is quite unpredictable. But when you see (Fig. 1) that the first sock is pink you can be already sure that the second sock will not be pink. Observation of the first, and experience of Bertlmann, gives immediate information about the second. There is no accounting for tastes, but apart from that there is no mystery here. And is not the EPR business just the same? Consider for example the particular EPR gedanken experiment of Bohm (Fig. 2). Two suitable particles, suitably prepared (in the ‘singlet spin state’), are directed from a common source towards two widely separated magnets followed by detecting screens. Each time the experiment is performed each of the two particles is deflected either up or down at the corresponding magnet. Whether either particle separately goes up or down on a given occasion is quite unpredictable. But when one particle goes up the other always goes down and vice-versa. After a little experience it is enough to look at one side to know also about the other.
EPR correlations exist and can be observed independently of any a priori given frame of reference. We can even construct a frame of reference that is based on these correlations. This observation-based frame of reference is equivalent to the customary a priori given frame of reference of the laboratory when describing real EPR experiments. J.S. Bell has argued that local hidden parameter theories that reproduce the predictions of Quantum Mechanics cannot exist, but the counterfactual reasoning leading to Bell's conclusion is physically meaningless if the frame of reference that is based on EPR-correlations is accepted as the backdrop for EPR-type experiments. The refutal of Bell's proof opens up for the construction of a viable hidden parameter theory. A model of a spin h/2 particle in terms of a non-flat metric of space-time is shown to be able to reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics in the Bohm-Aharonov version of the EPR experiment, without introducing non-locality.
Observations regarding unexpected connections in quantum mechanically entangled systems are revealing a new understanding of our position in the universe. Experiments known by the initials EPR (Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen) show a statistical correlation between separated particle properties. If two particles are produced with opposite spins and move in different directions, it is observed that changes induced in one particle cause immediate changes in its partner. The classic “dual slit experiment” demonstrates that quantum photons can either produce a spot pattern or an interference pattern depending on whether an observer can “measure” which of two slits the photon travels through. More recently, a Discovery Magazine article by Zeeva Merali (Aug 26, 2010) indicates that an entangled particle responds to future changes in its partner (called “back from the future” observations by Jack Sarfatti of Cornell University). The author discusses the implications of taking this data at face value. Three FQXi contest essays [5][6][9]lead up to what I believe to be the explanation for EPR results and back from the future observations.