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

Locality, Lorentz invariance and the Bohm model

Hossein Movahhedian

Published Jan 1, 1998• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

Non-local forces exist in nature for two reasons. First that the recent experiments on locality are supposed to be accurate enough. Second that there is no local theory that can reproduce all the predictions of orthodox quantum theory which, almost for about a century, have been proved to be correct experimentally again and again. This thesis concerns both of these. A brief discussion of the measurement in quantum theory is followed by two comments which show that the quantum description is frame dependent and that the collapse of the wave-function of a system may occur without the relevant measurement being performed. After this the Bohm model and a modified version of the Bohm model are described. Next we introduce a new method for obtaining the Bell-type inequalities which can be used for testing locality. We derive more inequalities by this method than obtained by other existing procedures. Using Projection Valued(PV) and Positive Operator Valued Measures(POVM) measurements we have designed experiments which violates one of the Bell inequalities by a larger factor than existing violations which in turn could increase the accuracy of experiments to test for non-locality. This is our first result. After discussing the non-locality and non-Lorentz invariant features of the Bohm model, its retarded version, namely Squires' model - which is local and Lorentz invariant - is introduced. A problem with this model, that is the ambiguity in the cases where the wave-function depends on time, is removed by using the multiple-time wave-function. Finally, we apply the model to one of the experiments of locality and prove that it is in good agreement with the orthodox quantum theory.

Related papers

Nonlocality, violation of Lorentz invariance, and wave-particle duality in quantum theory

Lucién Hardy

This thesis addresses some of the consequences of giving quantum mechanics a realist interpretation. We consider three main topics: wave-particle duality, locality, and Lorentz invariance. First we show that classical particles alone or classical waves alone cannot explain all single particle quantum phenomena. Then we consider the possibility that a quantum particle is composed of a particle and a wave, both being taken to exist objectively. We are able to demonstrate the reality of empty waves (that is, waves without a particle) if we make three realist motivated assumptions. The main part of this thesis concerns locality. In 1964 Bell demonstrated that a local realist interpretation of quantum mechanics is not possible by deriving a set of inequalities that apply to two particle systems. More recently Greenberger, Home, and Zeilinger have demonstrated this for systems with more than two particles without the need for inequalities. We present a new way to derive Bell inequalities for two particles and show how this can be extended to systems with more than two particles. A number of proposals for experiments to test local realism are put forward. In particular, we show how it is possible to demonstrate the nonlocality of a single photon. A new demonstration of Bell's theorem is presented for two particles but without inequalities. A realizable quantum optical version is proposed and inequalities are proposed which would be required in a non-ideal experiment. Finally, the question of Lorentz invariance is considered. We define a condition for the existence of elements of reality and a condition for the Lorentz invariance of these elements of reality. Then we show that, by considering a particular gedanken experiment, we obtain a contradiction demonstrating that Lorentz-invariant realistic interpretations of quantum theory are not possible.

•Jan 1, 1992•2 citations

Lorentzinvariance in modal interpretations

Rob Clifton

Abstract Although Bell’s theorem tells us that any interpretation of quantum mechanics must fail to satisfy Bell’s locality condition, the question of Lorentz­invariance is apparently left open by Bell’s theorem. In­ deed, it has been argued by many that nonlocality is compatible with Lorentz­invariance, given certain interpretations of the latter, or of the former. Some give a ‘weak’ interpretation of Lorentz­ invariance, compatible with a ‘strong’ violation of locality. For example, Bohm’s (1952) theory violates locality in a way that requires a preferred frame; but empirical Lorentz­invariance is preserved in the Bohm theory ­ there is no experiment that could determine the preferred frame. (See, for example, Valentini (199la,b), Bohm and Hiley (1993), and Cushing (1994).) On the other hand, ‘orthodox’ interpretations of special relativity maintain a notion of ‘fundamental

•Sep 23, 2009•0 citations

Bell's Theorem: a new Derivation that Preserves Heisenberg and Locality

M. R. Clover

By implicitly assuming that all measurements occur simultaneously, Bell's Theorem only applied to local theories that violated Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. By explicitly introducing time into our derivation of Bell's theorem, an extra term related to the time-ordering of actual measurements is found to augment (i.e. weaken) the upper bound of the inequality. Since the same locality assumptions hold for this rederivation as for the original, we conclude that only {\em classical} measurement-order independent local hidden variable theories are constrained by Bell's inequality; time dependent, non-classical local theories (i.e. theories respecting Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) can satisfy this new bound while exceeding Bell's limit. Unconditional nonlocality is only expected to occur with Bell parameters between $2\sqrt{2}$ and 4. This weakening of Bell's inequality is seen for the quantum Bell operator (squared) as an extra term involving the commutators of {\em local} measurement operators. We note that a factorizable second-quantized wavefunction can reproduce experimental measurements; because such wavefunctions allow local de Broglie-Bohm hidden variable modelling, we have another indication that violation of {\em Bell's} inequality does not require an acceptance of non-locality.

arXiv:quant-ph/0409058•Sep 10, 2004•8 citations

Non-Locality and Quantum Theory: New Experimental Evidence

Luigi Accardi, Massimo Regoli

Starting from the late 60’s many experiments have been performed to verify the violation Bell’s inequality by Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) type correlations. The idea of these experiments being that: (i) Bell’s inequality is a consequence of locality, hence its experimental violation is an indication of non locality; (ii) this violation is a typical quantum phenomenon because any classical system making local choices (either deterministic or random) will produce correlations satisfying this inequality. Both statements (i) and (ii) have been criticized by quantum probability on theoretical grounds (not discussed in the present paper) and the experiment discussed below has been devised to support these theoretical arguments. We emphasize that the goal of our experiment is not to reproduce classically the EPR correlations but to prove that there exist perfectly local classical dynamical systems violating Bell’s inequality. The conclusions of the present experiment are: no contradiction between quantum theory and locality can be deduced from the violation of Bell’s inequality. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory becomes quite reasonable and not metaphyisic if interpreted at the light of the chameleon effect. One can realize quantum entanglement by classical computers. In section (7) we prove that our experiment also provides a classical analogue of the type of logical (i.e. independent of statistics) incompatibilities pointed out by Greenberger, Home and Zeilinger. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Kluwer Academic Publishers eBooks•Feb 24, 2006•13 citations

Probability and non-locality

W. Michael Dickson

Review and preview In chapters 6 and 7, I described some links between locality and the treatment of probabilities in models of the EPR–Bohm experiment. From chapter 6, the main lesson was that, given the strict correlations of quantum mechanics, factorizability of the two-time probabilities is equivalent to two-time determinism. I also noted there that an adequate factorizable theory – one that avoids Bell's theorem – is possible only if λ-independence fails. In chapter 7, I argued that weak symmetry, local determination, and independent evolution together entail deterministic results and weak deterministic transitions. In chapter 8, I discussed the relationships among the locality conditions of chapter 6 and 7, Lorentz-invariance, and ‘metaphysical’ locality, especially local causality. I have by no means tried to give general answers to the questions raised there. Indeed, part of my thesis is that there is no general answer to be had. Nonetheless, one can use the results of chapters 6 and 7 to investigate the status of various interpretations. Most obviously, they can be used to evaluate whether a given theory is local: if a theory can be shown to violate one or more of the types of determinism entailed by the locality conditions of chapters 6 and 7, then that theory must be non-local in some sense.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Apr 2, 1998•6 citations

Some Thoughts on Quantum Nonlocality and Its Apparent Incompatibility with Relativity

Shan Gao

It may well be that a relativistic version of the theory, while Lorentz invariant and local at the observational level, may be necessarily non-local and with a preferred frame (or aether) at the fundamental level. – John Bell [1] Introduction Bell's theorem establishes a contradiction between locality (and a few other assumptions) and certain predictions of quantum mechanics [2]. There have been two main issues surrounding the deep implications of this celebrated theorem. The first issue is basic, and it concerns whether the theorem really establishes that nonlocality is a necessary feature of any empirically viable theory and hence a feature of nature itself. One aspect of the issue concerns exactly what the underlying assumptions of Bell's theorem are. For example, some argue that these assumptions include the assumption of counterfactual definiteness [3–5], while others disagree [6–8]. The other aspect of the issue concerns which assumption should be dropped due to the resulting contradiction. Some believe that standard quantum mechanics may avoid nonlocality by denying counterfactual definiteness [3–5]. The second issue is much deeper, and it concerns how to make sense of the strange nonlocality when assuming that Bell's theorem establishes that our world is nonlocal. In particular, it has yet to be determined whether such quantum nonlocality is compatible with the theory of relativity, e.g., whether the nonlocality requires the existence of a preferred Lorentz frame [7, 9, 10]. It seems that “there is a preferred frame of reference, and in this preferred frame of reference things do go faster than light … Behind the apparent Lorentz invariance of the phenomena, there is a deeper level which is not Lorentz invariant” [11]. But it also seems possible that the existence of a preferred Lorentz frame is an illusion, since it cannot be detected according to standard quantum mechanics. A more subtle issue is whether quantum nonlocality permits superluminal signaling. It is widely thought that the answers to these questions will lead to a deeper understanding of Bell's theorem and quantum nonlocality. In this paper, we will present a new analysis of quantum nonlocality and its apparent incompatibility with relativity.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Aug 31, 2016•1 citation
Non-local forces exist in nature for two reasons. First that the recent experiments on locality are supposed to be accurate enough. Second that there is no local theory that can reproduce all the predictions of orthodox quantum theory which, almost for about a century, have been proved to be correct experimentally again and again. This thesis concerns both of these. A brief discussion of the measurement in quantum theory is followed by two comments which show that the quantum description is frame dependent and that the collapse of the wave-function of a system may occur without the relevant measurement being performed. After this the Bohm model and a modified version of the Bohm model are described. Next we introduce a new method for obtaining the Bell-type inequalities which can be used for testing locality. We derive more inequalities by this method than obtained by other existing procedures. Using Projection Valued(PV) and Positive Operator Valued Measures(POVM) measurements we have designed experiments which violates one of the Bell inequalities by a larger factor than existing violations which in turn could increase the accuracy of experiments to test for non-locality. This is our first result. After discussing the non-locality and non-Lorentz invariant features of the Bohm model, its retarded version, namely Squires' model - which is local and Lorentz invariant - is introduced. A problem with this model, that is the ambiguity in the cases where the wave-function depends on time, is removed by using the multiple-time wave-function. Finally, we apply the model to one of the experiments of locality and prove that it is in good agreement with the orthodox quantum theory.
This thesis addresses some of the consequences of giving quantum mechanics a realist interpretation. We consider three main topics: wave-particle duality, locality, and Lorentz invariance. First we show that classical particles alone or classical waves alone cannot explain all single particle quantum phenomena. Then we consider the possibility that a quantum particle is composed of a particle and a wave, both being taken to exist objectively. We are able to demonstrate the reality of empty waves (that is, waves without a particle) if we make three realist motivated assumptions. The main part of this thesis concerns locality. In 1964 Bell demonstrated that a local realist interpretation of quantum mechanics is not possible by deriving a set of inequalities that apply to two particle systems. More recently Greenberger, Home, and Zeilinger have demonstrated this for systems with more than two particles without the need for inequalities. We present a new way to derive Bell inequalities for two particles and show how this can be extended to systems with more than two particles. A number of proposals for experiments to test local realism are put forward. In particular, we show how it is possible to demonstrate the nonlocality of a single photon. A new demonstration of Bell's theorem is presented for two particles but without inequalities. A realizable quantum optical version is proposed and inequalities are proposed which would be required in a non-ideal experiment. Finally, the question of Lorentz invariance is considered. We define a condition for the existence of elements of reality and a condition for the Lorentz invariance of these elements of reality. Then we show that, by considering a particular gedanken experiment, we obtain a contradiction demonstrating that Lorentz-invariant realistic interpretations of quantum theory are not possible.
Abstract Although Bell’s theorem tells us that any interpretation of quantum mechanics must fail to satisfy Bell’s locality condition, the question of Lorentz­invariance is apparently left open by Bell’s theorem. In­ deed, it has been argued by many that nonlocality is compatible with Lorentz­invariance, given certain interpretations of the latter, or of the former. Some give a ‘weak’ interpretation of Lorentz­ invariance, compatible with a ‘strong’ violation of locality. For example, Bohm’s (1952) theory violates locality in a way that requires a preferred frame; but empirical Lorentz­invariance is preserved in the Bohm theory ­ there is no experiment that could determine the preferred frame. (See, for example, Valentini (199la,b), Bohm and Hiley (1993), and Cushing (1994).) On the other hand, ‘orthodox’ interpretations of special relativity maintain a notion of ‘fundamental
By implicitly assuming that all measurements occur simultaneously, Bell's Theorem only applied to local theories that violated Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. By explicitly introducing time into our derivation of Bell's theorem, an extra term related to the time-ordering of actual measurements is found to augment (i.e. weaken) the upper bound of the inequality. Since the same locality assumptions hold for this rederivation as for the original, we conclude that only {\em classical} measurement-order independent local hidden variable theories are constrained by Bell's inequality; time dependent, non-classical local theories (i.e. theories respecting Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) can satisfy this new bound while exceeding Bell's limit. Unconditional nonlocality is only expected to occur with Bell parameters between 222\sqrt{2}22​ and 4. This weakening of Bell's inequality is seen for the quantum Bell operator (squared) as an extra term involving the commutators of {\em local} measurement operators. We note that a factorizable second-quantized wavefunction can reproduce experimental measurements; because such wavefunctions allow local de Broglie-Bohm hidden variable modelling, we have another indication that violation of {\em Bell's} inequality does not require an acceptance of non-locality.
Starting from the late 60’s many experiments have been performed to verify the violation Bell’s inequality by Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) type correlations. The idea of these experiments being that: (i) Bell’s inequality is a consequence of locality, hence its experimental violation is an indication of non locality; (ii) this violation is a typical quantum phenomenon because any classical system making local choices (either deterministic or random) will produce correlations satisfying this inequality. Both statements (i) and (ii) have been criticized by quantum probability on theoretical grounds (not discussed in the present paper) and the experiment discussed below has been devised to support these theoretical arguments. We emphasize that the goal of our experiment is not to reproduce classically the EPR correlations but to prove that there exist perfectly local classical dynamical systems violating Bell’s inequality. The conclusions of the present experiment are: no contradiction between quantum theory and locality can be deduced from the violation of Bell’s inequality. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory becomes quite reasonable and not metaphyisic if interpreted at the light of the chameleon effect. One can realize quantum entanglement by classical computers. In section (7) we prove that our experiment also provides a classical analogue of the type of logical (i.e. independent of statistics) incompatibilities pointed out by Greenberger, Home and Zeilinger. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Review and preview In chapters 6 and 7, I described some links between locality and the treatment of probabilities in models of the EPR–Bohm experiment. From chapter 6, the main lesson was that, given the strict correlations of quantum mechanics, factorizability of the two-time probabilities is equivalent to two-time determinism. I also noted there that an adequate factorizable theory – one that avoids Bell's theorem – is possible only if λ-independence fails. In chapter 7, I argued that weak symmetry, local determination, and independent evolution together entail deterministic results and weak deterministic transitions. In chapter 8, I discussed the relationships among the locality conditions of chapter 6 and 7, Lorentz-invariance, and ‘metaphysical’ locality, especially local causality. I have by no means tried to give general answers to the questions raised there. Indeed, part of my thesis is that there is no general answer to be had. Nonetheless, one can use the results of chapters 6 and 7 to investigate the status of various interpretations. Most obviously, they can be used to evaluate whether a given theory is local: if a theory can be shown to violate one or more of the types of determinism entailed by the locality conditions of chapters 6 and 7, then that theory must be non-local in some sense.
It may well be that a relativistic version of the theory, while Lorentz invariant and local at the observational level, may be necessarily non-local and with a preferred frame (or aether) at the fundamental level. – John Bell [1] Introduction Bell's theorem establishes a contradiction between locality (and a few other assumptions) and certain predictions of quantum mechanics [2]. There have been two main issues surrounding the deep implications of this celebrated theorem. The first issue is basic, and it concerns whether the theorem really establishes that nonlocality is a necessary feature of any empirically viable theory and hence a feature of nature itself. One aspect of the issue concerns exactly what the underlying assumptions of Bell's theorem are. For example, some argue that these assumptions include the assumption of counterfactual definiteness [3–5], while others disagree [6–8]. The other aspect of the issue concerns which assumption should be dropped due to the resulting contradiction. Some believe that standard quantum mechanics may avoid nonlocality by denying counterfactual definiteness [3–5]. The second issue is much deeper, and it concerns how to make sense of the strange nonlocality when assuming that Bell's theorem establishes that our world is nonlocal. In particular, it has yet to be determined whether such quantum nonlocality is compatible with the theory of relativity, e.g., whether the nonlocality requires the existence of a preferred Lorentz frame [7, 9, 10]. It seems that “there is a preferred frame of reference, and in this preferred frame of reference things do go faster than light … Behind the apparent Lorentz invariance of the phenomena, there is a deeper level which is not Lorentz invariant” [11]. But it also seems possible that the existence of a preferred Lorentz frame is an illusion, since it cannot be detected according to standard quantum mechanics. A more subtle issue is whether quantum nonlocality permits superluminal signaling. It is widely thought that the answers to these questions will lead to a deeper understanding of Bell's theorem and quantum nonlocality. In this paper, we will present a new analysis of quantum nonlocality and its apparent incompatibility with relativity.