The most prominent version of Bell’s theorem consists of the Bell-CHSH inequality and a quantum-mechanical example that violates it. The inequality is shown to rest on the non-trivial presupposition that the values of elementary spin quantities are scalars, and not, e.g., vectors. In the version considered, the theorem’s argument succeeds for scalars and fails for vectors. However, the reference to vector values can be motivated by the physics of spin. Hence, recognizing the presupposition suggests a critical reassessment of the theorem.
The most prominent version of Bell’s theorem consists of the Bell-CHSH inequality and a quantum-mechanical example that violates it. The inequality is shown to rest on the non-trivial presupposition that the values of elementary spin quantities are scalars, and not, e.g., vectors. In the version considered, the theorem’s argument succeeds for scalars and fails for vectors. However, the reference to vector values can be motivated by the physics of spin. Hence, recognizing the presupposition suggests a critical reassessment of the theorem.
While it is widely agreed that Bell's theorem is an important result in the foundations of quantum physics, there is much disagreement about what exactly Bell's theorem shows. It is agreed that Bell derived a contradiction with experimental facts from some list of assumptions, thus showing that at least one of the assumptions must be wrong; but there is disagreement about what the assumptions were that went into the argument. In this paper, I make a few points in order to help clarify the situation. Introduction Different authors have expressed very different views about what Bell's theorem shows about physics. The disagreement concerns particularly the question of which assumptions go into the argument. Since we have to give up one of the assumptions leading to the empirically violated Bell inequality, knowing what the assumptions were is crucial. For example, if author X believes that the argument requires only one assumption, A 1 , while author Y believes that it requires two, A 1 and A 2 , then X will conclude that A 1 ¬ must be abandoned, while Y will conclude that either A 1 or A 2 must abandoned, so A 1 may well be true in our world if A 2 is false. In this paper, I consider several assumptions that have been mentioned in connection with Bell's theorem, and I look into their roles in the proof of Bell's theorem. While I do not say anything here that has never been said before, I hope that my remarks can nevertheless be helpful to some readers. For the sake of definiteness, the version of the relevant experiment that I will consider involves two spin-1\2 particles, initially in the singlet spin state ψ = 2 −1/2 (|↑↓ ⟩ − |↓↑ ⟩). Two widely separated experimenters, Alice and Bob, have one particle transported to each of them. At spacelike separation, they each choose a direction in space, represented by the unit vectors a and b , and carry out a quantum measurement of the spin observable in this direction on their particle, ( a · σ ) ⊗ I and I ⊗ ( b · σ ), with I the 2 × 2 unit matrix and σ the triple of Paulimatrices. The possible outcomes, A and B , are±1 on each side. Bell's theorem is the statement that under the assumptions we are about to discuss, Bell's inequality holds; quantum theory predicts violations of Bell's inequality, and experiments have confirmed these predictions.
Today, quantum-mechanical concepts i.e. such as non-locality refer to some mathematical foundations, especially to Bell’s inequality and the Chsh inequality. Experimental data, analyzed while using Bell’s inequality or the Chsh inequality, favor a quantum mechanical description of nature over local hidden variable theories (often referred to as local realism). In general, the use of mathematically inconsistent methods can imply a waste of money, time and effort on this account. Under some certain conditions (the assumption of independence) Bell’s theorem and the Chsh inequality are already refuted. The purpose of this publication is to explore the terra incognita, the interior logic that may lie beyond Bell’s original theorem and the Chsh inequality and to refute both Bell’s original theorem and the Chsh inequality under any circumstances by the proof that we can derive a logical contradiction out of Bell’s inequalities. Thus far, if you accept Bell’s theorem or the Chsh inequality as correct, then you must accept too that +0 = +1, which is a logical contradiction. Bell’s theorem and the Chsh inequality are refuted in general. In this insight, it appears to be necessary to revisit the very foundations of quantum theory and of physics as such.
Bell's theorem is an important milestone in the development of quantum mechanics. It draws a line between concepts such as realism and locality on the one hand and quantum mechanics on the other. Experimentally veried violations of Bell inequalities can yield important information about what assumptions can be made about physical reality. Experiments have been conducted for over 40 years, but have left loopholes open in their executions. It is of great interest to close these loopholes, and in order to do so, further experiments are needed. The objective of this project is to investigate the underlying, previous work in the eld and to formulate a proposal for a new experiment. To do this, the derivations of the original Bell inequality and the CHSH inequality are presented along with previously conducted experiments. Also presented is the EPR paradox from which sprung the original Bell inequality.
Abstract. For unit vectors a, b, entanglement requires that spin measurements satisfy those just given for a≠b. Bell’s hidden variable quantum mechanical local particle with a=b cannot provide the values for a≠b and, hence, the values for an entangled particle system. The perception that any hidden variable quantum mechanical description of an entangled system of particles is non-local depends on Bell’s inappropriate definition of locality, which excludes entanglement for a distant particle, and the condition that a=b, which does not give the values for a≠b as required to give the quantum mechanical expectation values, when entanglement occurs for systems that are close, not distant, and ignores that entanglement is a local phenomenon. Expecting the condition a=b and a local particle analysis with no distant entangled particle to give the quantum mechanical result is absurd. Any disentanglement of once entangled particles moving apart sets the spin measurements at those given for a≠b if a≠b and those given for a=b if a=b. Any subsequent measurement of the set values agrees with those for a≠b if a≠b and those given for a=b if a=b just as if the particles are entangled still. In examples where Bell’s inequality is supposedly violated, the conditions for which the inequality is true are not met. There is no contradiction.
Unitary operators are employed to investigate the violation of the Bell-CHSH inequality. The ensuing modifications affecting both classical and quantum bounds are elucidated. The relevance of a particular class of unitary operators whose expectation values are real is pointed out. For these operators, the classical and quantum bounds remain unaltered, being given, respectively, by 2 and 2 2 . As examples, we discuss the explicit realization of phase space Bell-CHSH inequality violation and the Weyl unitary operators for a real scalar field in relativistic Quantum Field Theory.
In this work we look for novel classes of Bell's inequalities and methods to produce them. We also find their quantum violations including, if possible, the maximum one. The Jordan bases method that we explain in Chapter 2 is about using a pair of certain type of orthonormal bases whose spans are subspaces related to measurement outcomes of incompatible quantities on the same physical system. Jordan vectors are the briefest way of expressing the relative orientation of any two subspaces. This feature helps us to reduce the dimensionality of the parameter space on which we do searches for optimization. The work is published in [24]. In Chapter 3, we attempt to find a connection between group theory and Bell's theorem. We devise a way of generating terms of a Bell's inequality that are related to elements of an algebraic group. The same group generates both the terms of the Bell's inequality and the observables that are used to calculate the quantum value of the Bell expression. Our results are published in [25][26]. In brief, Bell's theorem is the main tool of a research program that was started by Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen [19] and Bohr [8] in the early days of quantum mechanics in their discussions about the core nature of physical systems. These debates were about a novel type of physical states called superposition states, which are introduced by quantum mechanics and manifested in the apparent inevitable randomness in measurement outcomes of identically prepared systems. Bell's huge contribution was to find a means of quantifying the problem and hence of opening the way to experimental verification by rephrasing the questions as limits on certain combinations of correlations between measurement results of spatially separate systems [7]. Thanks to Bell, the fundamental questions related to the nature of quantum mechanical systems became quantifiable [6]. According to Bell's theorem, some correlations between quantum entangled systems that involve incompatible quantities are not allowed by classical mechanics, a feature that is called as "quantum nonlocality". An experimental observation of those correlations, in other words, a violation of the limits imposed by classical physics, implies the correctness of quantum description and invalidates the classical, local realistic models. The first Bell experiments were proposed by Clauser, Horne, Shimony, and Holt, who invented the most famous Bell's inequality [13]. Later, the Aspect experiments were satisfactory enough for the physics community to be conclusive about the validation of quantum mechanics [1][3][4][2]. Ekert's work on applications of quantum nonlocality to communication resulted in the new field of quantum communication and cryptography, and turned the research program into a practical one [20]. Pitowsky showed a method to find all expressions of limitations due to local realism, all Bell's inequalities, for a given physical scenario. He also proved that the problem is, unfortunately, NP-complete and hence as the scenarios get more complex, they also become computationally intractable [33][34]. Therefore, different methods for the solution of special cases of the problem are necessary. Inequalities found for those special cases can be called classes of Bell's inequalities. For example, Werner and Wolf [41] and Collins, Gisin, Linden, Massar, and Popescu [16] found classes that cover a wide range of scenarios. Our work is a similar kind of effort to produce and study new types of Bell's inequalities.