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

If God Plays Dice, Must We do the Same? Quantum Entanglement as a Deterministic Phenomenon

Ramzi Suleiman

Published May 1, 2015• 4 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

Entanglement between separate, distant systems, be it pairs of photon, atoms, or molecules, is a well-documented phenomenon. It is the basis for emerging quantum information technologies, including cryptographic secure keys, quantum teleportation and quantum computing. The current consensus among physicists is that the violation of non-locality, prescribed by quantum mechanics, should be accepted as a fact of how nature behaves, even if it conflicts with human reasoning and intuition, including the reasoning and intuitions of Albert Einstein and John Bell. In the present paper, I describe a new relativity theory, termed Information Relativity, and show that it can account, both qualitatively and quantitatively, for entanglement in a bipartite preparation like the one described in the EPR paper. The theory rests on two axioms: The relativity axiom of Special Relativity, plus an axiom designating light as the information carrier. The theory is deterministic, local, and complete, in the sense that each element in the theory is in a one-to-one correspondence with reality. The fact that the theory, with no hidden variables, can make precise predictions of entanglement is in itself sufficient for casting serious doubts on the nonlocality condition imposed by Bell's inequality. More importantly, the theory results demonstrate that entanglement is in fact, a local phenomenon, and that communicating information between entangled systems occurs by local causality, even at long distances. These conclusions imply that quantum theory is incomplete, that entanglement is not spooky, and that the reasoning and worries of Einstein and Bell are intact. The results also demonstrate that although God might be playing dice, we can do otherwise.

Related papers

God Does Not Play Dice: Matter-Wave Duality, Quantum Phase Transition and Bose-Einstein Condensate as Deterministic and Local Phenomena

Ramzi Suleiman

The non-locality of quantum mechanics continues to be an unexplainable phenomenon. In a previous paper [1] I utilized a recently proposed relativity theory, termed Information Relativity (IR) to account, both qualitatively and quantitatively for the entanglement in an EPR type experiment. IR rests on two well accepted propositions: The relativity axiom, plus an axiom specifying the information carrier and its velocity. The theory is deterministic and local. It is also complete, in the sense that each element in the theory is in a one-to-one correspondence with reality. Contrary to special relativity which predicts that an object's length will always contract along the direction of its relative motion with respect to an observer, IR predicts length contraction for approaching bodies and length stretching for departing bodies. In the present paper I demonstrate that IR is also successful in explaining and predicting de Broglie's matter-wave duality, quantum phase transition, quantum criticality, and the formation of the Bose-Einstein condensate. Quite strikingly, I found that the critical stretch associated with a particle's wave phase transition is equal to the critical value of de Broglie wave length ζ(3/2) ≈ 2.612, where ζ(x) is the Riemann zeta function. This result enables to calculate the Planck's constant, the corner stone of all quantum mechanics, based on a completely deterministic and local theory. The unavoidable conclusion of the present analysis is that Einstein's intuition that God does not play dice is correct.

•Jun 1, 2015•1 citation

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:1604.08529•Apr 28, 2016•3 citations

What can be hidden in a pair of photons?

Alastair I. M. Rae

Albert Einstein's comment that ‘God does not play dice’ sums up the way many people react when they first encounter the ideas discussed in the previous chapters. How can it be that some future events are not completely determined by the way things are at present? How can a cause have two or more possible effects? If the choice of future events is not determined by natural laws does it mean that some supernatural force (God?) is involved wherever a quantum event occurs? Questions of this kind trouble many students of physics, though most get used to the conceptual problems, say ‘Nature is just like that’ and apply the ideas of quantum physics to their study or research without worrying about their fundamental truth or falsity. Some, however, never get used to the, at least apparent, contradictions. Others believe that the fundamental processes underlying the basic physics of the universe must be describable in deterministic, or at least realistic, terms and are therefore attracted by hidden-variable theories. Einstein was one of those. He stood out obstinately against the growing consensus of opinion in the 1920s and 30s that was prepared to accept indeterminism and the lack of objective realism as a price to be paid for a theory that was proving so successful in a wide variety of practical situations. Ironically, however, Einstein's greatest contribution to the field was not some subtle explanation of the underlying structure of quantum physics but the exposure of yet another surprising consequence of quantum theory.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Mar 26, 2012•0 citations

What can be hidden in a pair of photons?

Alastair I. M. Rae

Albert Einstein's comment that ‘God does not play dice’ sums up the way many people react when they first encounter the ideas discussed in the previous chapters. How can it be that some future events are not completely determined by the way things are at present? How can a cause have two or more possible effects? If the choice of future events is not determined by natural laws does it mean that some supernatural force (God?) is involved wherever a quantum event occurs? Questions of this kind trouble many students of physics, though most get used to the conceptual problems, say ‘Nature is just like that’ and apply the ideas of quantum physics to their study or research without worrying about their fundamental truth or falsity. Some, however, never get used to the, at least apparent, contradictions. Others believe that the fundamental processes underlying the basic physics of the universe must be describable in deterministic, or at least realistic, terms and are therefore attracted by hidden-variable theories. Einstein was one of those. He stood out obstinately against the growing consensus of opinion in the 1920s and 30s that was prepared to accept indeterminism and the lack of objective realism as a price to be paid for a theory that was proving so successful in a wide variety of practical situations. Ironically, however, Einstein's greatest contribution to the field was not some subtle explanation of the underlying structure of quantum physics but the exposure of yet another surprising consequence of quantum theory.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Oct 7, 2004•0 citations

Quantum Entanglement: Foundations, Implications, and Future Directions

PAULO SÉRGIO DE ANDRADE

Quantum entanglement represents one of the most profound and counterintuitive phenomena in modern physics, fundamentally challenging classical notions of locality, causality, and separability. This comprehensive review examines the theoretical foundations of quantum entanglement, tracing its conceptual development from Einstein's critique of quantum mechanics through Bell's theorem to contemporary experimental verification. The paper synthesizes current understanding of entanglement's mathematical formalism, its role in violating Bell inequalities, and the resolution of the EPR paradox. Extensive discussion is devoted to landmark experiments that have conclusively demonstrated non-local correlations, including photon polarization studies, satellite-based quantum communication, and loophole-free Bell tests. The work further explores emerging technological applications in quantum cryptography, quantum computing, and quantum teleportation, while addressing fundamental questions regarding the nature of reality, information, and the relationship between quantum mechanics and general relativity. Finally, the paper examines open questions and speculative frameworks suggesting that entanglement may represent a foundational principle underlying spacetime geometry itself. Video documentation of this analysis is available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDGKuXYRPpI.

•Dec 25, 2025•0 citations

On Purported Physical Realizations of So-called Quantum Information Technologies

Guang-Liang Li

Considered by Einstein as “the fundamental dice-game”, the quantum-mechanical description of quantum objects in the real world is controversial. According to Einstein’s understanding of the physical world, the quantum-mechanical description is incomplete, but rendering quantum mechanics complete might be possible. Derived by resorting to a hidden-variable theory, Bell inequalities attempted to render quantum mechanics complete somehow. Unfortunately, the attempts all failed. More unfortunately, the failure and the widely accepted but erroneous interpretation of the failure resulted in giving up either or both of locality and realism, the two fundamental hypotheses for scientific research, and hence opened the door to so-called quantum information technologies. Consequently, quantum information technologies all stem from “the fundamental dice-game”. Based on an important mathematical fact irrelevant to any issue about measurement instruments or accuracies of measurement outcomes, namely, precise space and time coordinates are practically unattainable by measurements, which reflects a general principle regarding the nature of measurements (henceforth principle of measurements), this paper reports the following findings: (a) Einstein’s understanding of the physical world is correct. (b) Without resorting to any hidden-variable theory, rendering quantum mechanics complete is possible while keeping the mathematical setting for quantum mechanics (i.e., Hilbert space) essentially unchanged; therefore, eligible applications of quantum mechanics, which are all irrelevant to “the fundamental dice-game”, will also remain unchanged. (c) As fictitious results in “the fundamental dice-game” based on the problematic postulate of quantum superposition in current quantum theory, quantum information technologies are all physically unrealizable. A very regrettable conclusion then follows inevitably from the above findings: An extremely huge amount of time, effort, funding, and investment in realizing physically unrealizable quantum information technologies has been wasted because of “the fundamental dice-game”, which has seriously damaged science!

Qeios•May 11, 2024•0 citations
Entanglement between separate, distant systems, be it pairs of photon, atoms, or molecules, is a well-documented phenomenon. It is the basis for emerging quantum information technologies, including cryptographic secure keys, quantum teleportation and quantum computing. The current consensus among physicists is that the violation of non-locality, prescribed by quantum mechanics, should be accepted as a fact of how nature behaves, even if it conflicts with human reasoning and intuition, including the reasoning and intuitions of Albert Einstein and John Bell. In the present paper, I describe a new relativity theory, termed Information Relativity, and show that it can account, both qualitatively and quantitatively, for entanglement in a bipartite preparation like the one described in the EPR paper. The theory rests on two axioms: The relativity axiom of Special Relativity, plus an axiom designating light as the information carrier. The theory is deterministic, local, and complete, in the sense that each element in the theory is in a one-to-one correspondence with reality. The fact that the theory, with no hidden variables, can make precise predictions of entanglement is in itself sufficient for casting serious doubts on the nonlocality condition imposed by Bell's inequality. More importantly, the theory results demonstrate that entanglement is in fact, a local phenomenon, and that communicating information between entangled systems occurs by local causality, even at long distances. These conclusions imply that quantum theory is incomplete, that entanglement is not spooky, and that the reasoning and worries of Einstein and Bell are intact. The results also demonstrate that although God might be playing dice, we can do otherwise.
The non-locality of quantum mechanics continues to be an unexplainable phenomenon. In a previous paper [1] I utilized a recently proposed relativity theory, termed Information Relativity (IR) to account, both qualitatively and quantitatively for the entanglement in an EPR type experiment. IR rests on two well accepted propositions: The relativity axiom, plus an axiom specifying the information carrier and its velocity. The theory is deterministic and local. It is also complete, in the sense that each element in the theory is in a one-to-one correspondence with reality. Contrary to special relativity which predicts that an object's length will always contract along the direction of its relative motion with respect to an observer, IR predicts length contraction for approaching bodies and length stretching for departing bodies. In the present paper I demonstrate that IR is also successful in explaining and predicting de Broglie's matter-wave duality, quantum phase transition, quantum criticality, and the formation of the Bose-Einstein condensate. Quite strikingly, I found that the critical stretch associated with a particle's wave phase transition is equal to the critical value of de Broglie wave length ζ(3/2) ≈ 2.612, where ζ(x) is the Riemann zeta function. This result enables to calculate the Planck's constant, the corner stone of all quantum mechanics, based on a completely deterministic and local theory. The unavoidable conclusion of the present analysis is that Einstein's intuition that God does not play dice is correct.
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.
Albert Einstein's comment that ‘God does not play dice’ sums up the way many people react when they first encounter the ideas discussed in the previous chapters. How can it be that some future events are not completely determined by the way things are at present? How can a cause have two or more possible effects? If the choice of future events is not determined by natural laws does it mean that some supernatural force (God?) is involved wherever a quantum event occurs? Questions of this kind trouble many students of physics, though most get used to the conceptual problems, say ‘Nature is just like that’ and apply the ideas of quantum physics to their study or research without worrying about their fundamental truth or falsity. Some, however, never get used to the, at least apparent, contradictions. Others believe that the fundamental processes underlying the basic physics of the universe must be describable in deterministic, or at least realistic, terms and are therefore attracted by hidden-variable theories. Einstein was one of those. He stood out obstinately against the growing consensus of opinion in the 1920s and 30s that was prepared to accept indeterminism and the lack of objective realism as a price to be paid for a theory that was proving so successful in a wide variety of practical situations. Ironically, however, Einstein's greatest contribution to the field was not some subtle explanation of the underlying structure of quantum physics but the exposure of yet another surprising consequence of quantum theory.
Albert Einstein's comment that ‘God does not play dice’ sums up the way many people react when they first encounter the ideas discussed in the previous chapters. How can it be that some future events are not completely determined by the way things are at present? How can a cause have two or more possible effects? If the choice of future events is not determined by natural laws does it mean that some supernatural force (God?) is involved wherever a quantum event occurs? Questions of this kind trouble many students of physics, though most get used to the conceptual problems, say ‘Nature is just like that’ and apply the ideas of quantum physics to their study or research without worrying about their fundamental truth or falsity. Some, however, never get used to the, at least apparent, contradictions. Others believe that the fundamental processes underlying the basic physics of the universe must be describable in deterministic, or at least realistic, terms and are therefore attracted by hidden-variable theories. Einstein was one of those. He stood out obstinately against the growing consensus of opinion in the 1920s and 30s that was prepared to accept indeterminism and the lack of objective realism as a price to be paid for a theory that was proving so successful in a wide variety of practical situations. Ironically, however, Einstein's greatest contribution to the field was not some subtle explanation of the underlying structure of quantum physics but the exposure of yet another surprising consequence of quantum theory.
Quantum entanglement represents one of the most profound and counterintuitive phenomena in modern physics, fundamentally challenging classical notions of locality, causality, and separability. This comprehensive review examines the theoretical foundations of quantum entanglement, tracing its conceptual development from Einstein's critique of quantum mechanics through Bell's theorem to contemporary experimental verification. The paper synthesizes current understanding of entanglement's mathematical formalism, its role in violating Bell inequalities, and the resolution of the EPR paradox. Extensive discussion is devoted to landmark experiments that have conclusively demonstrated non-local correlations, including photon polarization studies, satellite-based quantum communication, and loophole-free Bell tests. The work further explores emerging technological applications in quantum cryptography, quantum computing, and quantum teleportation, while addressing fundamental questions regarding the nature of reality, information, and the relationship between quantum mechanics and general relativity. Finally, the paper examines open questions and speculative frameworks suggesting that entanglement may represent a foundational principle underlying spacetime geometry itself. Video documentation of this analysis is available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDGKuXYRPpI.
Considered by Einstein as “the fundamental dice-game”, the quantum-mechanical description of quantum objects in the real world is controversial. According to Einstein’s understanding of the physical world, the quantum-mechanical description is incomplete, but rendering quantum mechanics complete might be possible. Derived by resorting to a hidden-variable theory, Bell inequalities attempted to render quantum mechanics complete somehow. Unfortunately, the attempts all failed. More unfortunately, the failure and the widely accepted but erroneous interpretation of the failure resulted in giving up either or both of locality and realism, the two fundamental hypotheses for scientific research, and hence opened the door to so-called quantum information technologies. Consequently, quantum information technologies all stem from “the fundamental dice-game”. Based on an important mathematical fact irrelevant to any issue about measurement instruments or accuracies of measurement outcomes, namely, precise space and time coordinates are practically unattainable by measurements, which reflects a general principle regarding the nature of measurements (henceforth principle of measurements), this paper reports the following findings: (a) Einstein’s understanding of the physical world is correct. (b) Without resorting to any hidden-variable theory, rendering quantum mechanics complete is possible while keeping the mathematical setting for quantum mechanics (i.e., Hilbert space) essentially unchanged; therefore, eligible applications of quantum mechanics, which are all irrelevant to “the fundamental dice-game”, will also remain unchanged. (c) As fictitious results in “the fundamental dice-game” based on the problematic postulate of quantum superposition in current quantum theory, quantum information technologies are all physically unrealizable. A very regrettable conclusion then follows inevitably from the above findings: An extremely huge amount of time, effort, funding, and investment in realizing physically unrealizable quantum information technologies has been wasted because of “the fundamental dice-game”, which has seriously damaged science!