Demonstrations of quantum entanglement (QE), which confirm the violation of Bell’s inequality, indicate that under certain conditions action at a distance is possible. This consequence seems to contradict the relativistic principle of causality, which asserts that an effect never precedes its cause, in any reference frame. By analyzing a numerical example of Bell’s experiment with entangled pairs of photons, we show how observers in two inertial reference frames can disagree about the causality relation between two events. One observer claims that event 1 is the cause of event 2, while the other claims that event 1 is the result of event 2. The solution we suggest to the paradox is that in entangled systems, one can find pairs of “entangled events” which have symmetrical causality relations. Each of the events can serve as a cause or as an effect, depending on the frame of reference in which they are observed.
Demonstrations of quantum entanglement (QE), which confirm the violation of Bell’s inequality, indicate that under certain conditions action at a distance is possible. This consequence seems to contradict the relativistic principle of causality, which asserts that an effect never precedes its cause, in any reference frame. By analyzing a numerical example of Bell’s experiment with entangled pairs of photons, we show how observers in two inertial reference frames can disagree about the causality relation between two events. One observer claims that event 1 is the cause of event 2, while the other claims that event 1 is the result of event 2. The solution we suggest to the paradox is that in entangled systems, one can find pairs of “entangled events” which have symmetrical causality relations. Each of the events can serve as a cause or as an effect, depending on the frame of reference in which they are observed.
Demonstrations of quantum entanglement which confirm the violation of Bell's inequality indicate that under certain conditions action at a distance is possible. This consequence seems to contradict the relativistic principle of causality, which asserts that an effect never precedes its cause, in any reference frame. By analyzing a numerical example of Bell's experiment with entangled pairs of photons, we show how observers in two inertial reference frames can disagree about the causality relation between two events. One observer claims that event 1 is the cause of event 2, while the other claims that event 1 is the result of event 2. The solution we suggest to the paradox is that in entangled systems, one can find pairs of "entangled events" which have symmetrical causality relations. Each of the events can serve as a cause or as an effect, depending on the frame of reference in which they are observed.
By moving to the context of relativistic space-time structure, this chapter completes the argument of Chapter 4 that we can use quantum theory locally to explain correlations that violate Bell inequalities with no instantaneous action at a distance. Chance here must be relativized not just to time but to a space-time point, so that an event may have more than one chance at the same time—it may even be certain relative to one space-time point but ‘at the same time’ completely uncertain relative to another. This renders Bell’s principle of Local Causality either inapplicable or intuitively unmotivated. Counterfactual dependence between the outcomes of measurements on systems assigned an entangled state is not causal since neither outcome is subject to intervention: but it may still be appealed to in a non-causal explanation of one in terms of the other.
One of the most fundamental phenomena of quantum physics is entanglement. It describes an inseparable connection between quantum systems, and properties thereof. In a quantum mechanical description even systems far apart from each other can share a common state. This entanglement of the subsystems, although arising from mathematical principles, is no mere abstract concept, but can be tested in experiment, and be utilized in modern quantum information theory procedures, such as quantum teleportation. In particular, entangled states play a crucial role in testing our understanding of reality, by violating Bell inequalities. While the role of entanglement is well studied in the realm of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics, its significance in a relativistic quantum theory is a relatively new field of interest. In this work the consequences of a relativistic description of quantum entanglement are discussed. We analyze the representations of the symmetry groups of special relativity, i.e. of the Lorentz group, and the Poincaré group, on the Hilbert space of states. We describe how unitary, irreducible representations of the Poincaré group for massive spin 1/2 particles are constructed from representations of Wigner's little group. We then proceed to investigate the role of the Wigner rotations in the transformation of quantum states under a change of inertial reference frame. Considering different partitions of the Hilbert space of 2 particles, we find that the entanglement of the quantum states appears different in different inertial frames, depending on the form of the states, the chosen inertial frames, and the particular choice of partition. It is explained, how, despite of this, the maximally possible violation of Bell inequalities is frame independent, when using appropriate spin observables, which are related to the Pauli-Ljubanski vector, a Casimir operator of the Poincaré group.
Special relativity demands a locality principle (no instantaneous action at a distance); locality implies Bell’s theorem; quantum mechanics violates Bell’s inequality, therefore, quantum mechanics contradicts relativity! Or so it would seem. It is shown, however, that the locality principle needed for Bell’s theorem is stronger than the simple locality that is needed to satisfy the demands of relativity and that quantum mechanics satisfies the latter. The stronger locality principle is equivalent to the conjunction of simple locality and predictive completeness, and it is the latter principle that fails. The notion of predictive completeness is weaker than, and is implied by, the completeness criterion of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen. But the quantum mechanical state description is not only incomplete but incompletable, for any local complete state description would satisfy Bell’s inequality and disagree with experiment.
In the normal presentation of the EPR problem a comparison is made between the (weak) Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics which seems to suggest that at times action at a distance may take place, and the hidden parameter interpretation which must satisfy Bell's inequality, in contradiction to the predictions of quantum mechanics. In this paper, we consider a relativistic approach to the paradox. However, the frame of reference under consideration is not the usual Lorenz frame but rather the spin frame of reference which is invariant with respect to the SU(2) group.
*Special Relativity places severe constraints on any possibility for faster-than-light (FTL) phenomenon. There are four hopes for FTL; warp drive via General Relativity Theory (GRT), wormholes via GRT, tachyons, and quantum mechanics. This talk focuses on why quantum mechanics makes the list. The nonlocal nature of matter demonstrates correlations between distant events that cannot be explained by current concepts of causality. For two classical events to be correlated, either one causes the other, or both possess a common cause in their past light cones. Neither kind of causality can explain the correlations observed in entangled quantum systems. Reality seems to support a third mysterious type of causality, with an essential spacelike nature, but direct spacelike causality should be impossible as it would lead to temporal paradox. The two concepts of classical causality, timelike causes and common cause, are presented along with a review of the EPR experiment showing that something like spacelike causality exists between the distant parts of an entangled quantum system. Bell’s Inequality shows that the EPR correlations cannot be attributed to common causes. Gisin’s EPR-Relativity experiment shows that timelike causes cannot explain the EPR correlations either. The metaphor of Quantum Tic-Tac-Toe is used to show a third type of causality applicable only to quantum situations. This third type of causality is an indirect spacelike cause acting through multiple classical realities, permitting FTL but prohibiting temporal paradox. I. Introduction HIS paper considers the issue of causality in entangled quantum systems. The Background section reviews the two classical notions of causality, EPR type entanglements, and Special Relativity. The Common Cause section reviews Bell’s Inequality theorem and shows how this type of causality cannot explain the correlations seen in entangled systems. The Einsteinian Causality section reviews Gisin’s experiment demonstrating that time-like causality cannot explain these correlations either. Gisin’s conclusion is that quantum systems support a new mysterious 3 rd type of causality. The Quantum Causality section introduces a situation in Quantum Tic-Tac-Toe that exhibits this same kind of causality