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

The alternative perspective on Bell inequalities

Інна Юхимівна Ковтонюк, Вадим Сергійович Ковтонюк, Vadym Kovtoniuk

Published Feb 26, 2021• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

1. Einstein A. Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? / A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, N. Rosen // Phys. Rev. 47 — 1935 — 777. 2. Bell J.S. On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox / Bell J.S. // Physics (Long Island City, N.Y.) 1 — 1964 — 195. 3. Brunner N. Bell nonlocality / N. Brunner, D. Cavalcanti, S. Pironio, V. Scarani, S. Wehner // Rev. Mod. Phys. 86 — 2014 — 419. 4. Fine. A Hidden variables, joint probability, and the Bell inequalities / A. Fine // Phys. Rev. Lett 48 — 1982 — 291. 5. Abramsky S. The sheaf-theoretic structure of non-locality and contextuality / S. Abramsky, A. Brandenburger // New J. Phys. 13 — 2011 — 113036. 6. Farkas G. Theorie der Einfachen Ungleichungen / G. Farkas // Journal für die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik 124 — 1902 — с. 1-27.

Related papers

The Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen Paradox, Bell’s Theorem and Nonlocality

Douglas L. Hemmick, Asif M. Shakur

SpringerBriefs in physics•Sep 30, 2011•0 citations

Photon uncertainty solves the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox

Daniele Tommasini

Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen pointed out that the quantum-mechanical description of “physical reality” implies an unphysical, instantaneous action between distant measurements. To avoid such an action at a distance, these three concluded that quantum mechanics had to be incomplete. However, its extensions involving additional “hidden variables,” allowing for the recovery of determinism and locality, have been disproved experimentally (Bell’s theorem). In this paper, an opposite solution of the paradox is presented, based on the greater indeterminism of the modern quantum field theory (QFT) description of particle physics, which prevents the preparation of any state having a definite number of particles. The resulting uncertainty in photon radiation has interesting consequences in quantum information theory (e.g., cryptography and teleportation). Moreover, since it allows for fewer elements of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) physical reality than the old non-relativistic quantum mechanics, QFT satisfies the EPR condition of completeness without the need for hidden variables. The residual physical reality never violates locality; thus, the unique objective proof of “quantum nonlocality” is removed in an interpretation-independent way. At the same time, the supposed nonlocality of the EPR correlations turns out to be a problem in interpretation of the measurement process. If we do not rely on hidden variables or new physics beyond QFT, the viable interpretation is a minimal statistical one, which preserves locality and Lorentz symmetry.

arXiv:quant-ph/0206137•Optics and Spectroscopy•May 1, 2003•3 citations

Nonlocality of the original Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen state

Oliver Cohen

We examine the properties and behavior of the original Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) wave function [Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935)] and related Gaussian-correlated wave functions. We assess the degree of entanglement of these wave functions and consider an argument of Bell [Ann. (N.Y.) Acad. Sci. 480, 263 (1986)] based on the Wigner phase-space distribution [Phys. Rev. 40, 749 (1932)], which implies that the original EPR correlations can accommodate a local hidden-variable description. We extend Bell's analysis to the related Gaussian wave functions. We then show that it is possible to identify definite nonlocal aspects for the original EPR state and related states. We describe possible experiments that would demonstrate these nonlocal features through violations of Bell inequalities. The implications of our results, and in particular their relevance for the causal interpretation of quantum mechanics, are considered.

Physical Review A•Nov 1, 1997•24 citations

Do Experimental Violations of Bell Inequalities Require a Nonlocal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics? II: Analysis à la Bell

Edward S. Fry, Xinmei Qu, Marlan O. Scully

The Western Ontario series in philosophy of science•Jan 1, 2009•0 citations

Energy-time entanglement, elements of reality, and local realism

Jonathan Jogenfors, Jan-Åke Larsson

The Franson interferometer, proposed in 1989 (Franson 1989 Phys. Rev. Lett. 6 2 2205–08 ), beautifully shows the counter-intuitive nature of light. The quantum description predicts sinusoidal interference for specific outcomes of the experiment, and these predictions can be verified in experiment. In the spirit of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen it is possible to ask if the quantum-mechanical description (of this setup) can be considered complete. This question will be answered in detail in this paper, by delineating the quite complicated relation between energy-time entanglement experiments and Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) elements of reality. The mentioned sinusoidal interference pattern is the same as that giving a violation in the usual Bell experiment. Even so, depending on the precise requirements made on the local realist model, this can imply (a) no violation, (b) smaller violation than usual, or (c) full violation of the appropriate statistical bound. Alternatives include (a) using only the measurement outcomes as EPR elements of reality, (b) using the emission time as EPR element of reality, (c) using path realism, or (d) using a modified setup. This paper discusses the nature of these alternatives and how to choose between them. The subtleties of this discussion needs to be taken into account when designing and setting up experiments intended to test local realism. Furthermore, these considerations are also important for quantum communication, for example in Bell-inequality-based quantum cryptography, especially when aiming for device independence. This article is part of a special issue of Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical devoted to '50 years of Bell's theorem'.

arXiv:1103.6131•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Oct 9, 2014•24 citations

4.3 Bell’s Theorem and Einstein’s Local Realism

William Demopoulos

Harvard University Press eBooks•Feb 9, 2022•0 citations
  1. Einstein A. Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? / A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, N. Rosen // Phys. Rev. 47 — 1935 — 777. 2. Bell J.S. On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox / Bell J.S. // Physics (Long Island City, N.Y.) 1 — 1964 — 195. 3. Brunner N. Bell nonlocality / N. Brunner, D. Cavalcanti, S. Pironio, V. Scarani, S. Wehner // Rev. Mod. Phys. 86 — 2014 — 419. 4. Fine. A Hidden variables, joint probability, and the Bell inequalities / A. Fine // Phys. Rev. Lett 48 — 1982 — 291. 5. Abramsky S. The sheaf-theoretic structure of non-locality and contextuality / S. Abramsky, A. Brandenburger // New J. Phys. 13 — 2011 — 113036. 6. Farkas G. Theorie der Einfachen Ungleichungen / G. Farkas // Journal für die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik 124 — 1902 — с. 1-27.
Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen pointed out that the quantum-mechanical description of “physical reality” implies an unphysical, instantaneous action between distant measurements. To avoid such an action at a distance, these three concluded that quantum mechanics had to be incomplete. However, its extensions involving additional “hidden variables,” allowing for the recovery of determinism and locality, have been disproved experimentally (Bell’s theorem). In this paper, an opposite solution of the paradox is presented, based on the greater indeterminism of the modern quantum field theory (QFT) description of particle physics, which prevents the preparation of any state having a definite number of particles. The resulting uncertainty in photon radiation has interesting consequences in quantum information theory (e.g., cryptography and teleportation). Moreover, since it allows for fewer elements of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) physical reality than the old non-relativistic quantum mechanics, QFT satisfies the EPR condition of completeness without the need for hidden variables. The residual physical reality never violates locality; thus, the unique objective proof of “quantum nonlocality” is removed in an interpretation-independent way. At the same time, the supposed nonlocality of the EPR correlations turns out to be a problem in interpretation of the measurement process. If we do not rely on hidden variables or new physics beyond QFT, the viable interpretation is a minimal statistical one, which preserves locality and Lorentz symmetry.
We examine the properties and behavior of the original Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) wave function [Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935)] and related Gaussian-correlated wave functions. We assess the degree of entanglement of these wave functions and consider an argument of Bell [Ann. (N.Y.) Acad. Sci. 480, 263 (1986)] based on the Wigner phase-space distribution [Phys. Rev. 40, 749 (1932)], which implies that the original EPR correlations can accommodate a local hidden-variable description. We extend Bell's analysis to the related Gaussian wave functions. We then show that it is possible to identify definite nonlocal aspects for the original EPR state and related states. We describe possible experiments that would demonstrate these nonlocal features through violations of Bell inequalities. The implications of our results, and in particular their relevance for the causal interpretation of quantum mechanics, are considered.
The Franson interferometer, proposed in 1989 (Franson 1989 Phys. Rev. Lett. 6 2 2205–08 ), beautifully shows the counter-intuitive nature of light. The quantum description predicts sinusoidal interference for specific outcomes of the experiment, and these predictions can be verified in experiment. In the spirit of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen it is possible to ask if the quantum-mechanical description (of this setup) can be considered complete. This question will be answered in detail in this paper, by delineating the quite complicated relation between energy-time entanglement experiments and Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) elements of reality. The mentioned sinusoidal interference pattern is the same as that giving a violation in the usual Bell experiment. Even so, depending on the precise requirements made on the local realist model, this can imply (a) no violation, (b) smaller violation than usual, or (c) full violation of the appropriate statistical bound. Alternatives include (a) using only the measurement outcomes as EPR elements of reality, (b) using the emission time as EPR element of reality, (c) using path realism, or (d) using a modified setup. This paper discusses the nature of these alternatives and how to choose between them. The subtleties of this discussion needs to be taken into account when designing and setting up experiments intended to test local realism. Furthermore, these considerations are also important for quantum communication, for example in Bell-inequality-based quantum cryptography, especially when aiming for device independence. This article is part of a special issue of Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical devoted to '50 years of Bell's theorem'.