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

Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) Correlations and Superluminal Signaling

Luiz Carlos Ryff

Published Jun 24, 2015• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

The possible connection between EPR correlations and superluminal signaling is discussed using simple and intuitive arguments. We elaborate on ideas that were presented independently in three previous articles (arXiv: 0510101[quant-ph]; arXiv: 0903.1076 [quant-ph]; arXiv: 1005.5092 [quant-ph]), showing how they are interconnected.

Related papers

Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) Correlations and Superluminal Interactions

Luiz Carlos Ryff

The possible connection between EPR correlations and superluminal interactions, as suggested by Bell and Bohm, is discussed using simple and palpable arguments: (a) It is shown how an experiment based on time-like events can allow us to answer the question "Can a measurement performed on one of the photons of an entangled pair change the state of the other?" (b) The theorem on superluminal finite-speed causal influences and superluminal signaling, introduced by Scarani and Gisin, is reexamined. (c) It is shown how faster-than-light interactions and Lorentz transformations might peacefully coexist.

arXiv:1506.07383•Jun 24, 2015•2 citations

No-cloning and superluminal signaling

S. J. van Enk

The argument given by M.D. Westmoreland and B. Schumacher in quant-ph/9801014 leading to the purported conclusion that superluminal signaling violates the no-cloning theorem is shown to be incorrect.

•Mar 13, 1998•3 citations

No-cloning and superluminal signaling

S. J. van Enk

The argument given by M.D. Westmoreland and B. Schumacher in quant-ph/9801014 leading to the purported conclusion that superluminal signaling violates the no-cloning theorem is shown to be incorrect.

arXiv:quant-ph/9803030•Mar 13, 1998•1 citation

Reply to the Comment on ‘Quantum principle of relativity’

Andrzej Dragan, ARTUR K. EKERT

Abstract We discuss critical remarks raised by Horodecki (2023 arXiv: 2301.07802 [quant-ph]) toward our work on the connection between superluminal extension of special relativity and fundamental aspects of quantum theory.

New Journal of Physics•Nov 27, 2023•4 citations

Comment on arXiv:2604.09826: Discovery of the Solution to the "Einstein--Podolsky--Rosen Paradox"

Mikołaj Sienicki, Krzysztof Sienicki

Roman Schnabel's article argues that the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox can be resolved by identifying a flaw in what the author calls the "EPR implication" and by using radioactive alpha decay as an example showing that predictability does not exclude genuine randomness. The paper is clearly written and addresses an important foundational question. In our view, however, its main conclusion does not follow. The article narrows the original EPR argument, attributes too much to Bell-inequality violations, and replaces the central EPR structure - which involves incompatible observables and locality-based reasoning - with a simpler case of correlated random events. The result is an interesting interpretive remark, but not, we think, a satisfactory scientific resolution of the EPR problem.

quant-pharXiv:2604.13135•Apr 15, 2026•0 citations

Improved lower bound on superluminal quantum communication

Bruno Cocciaro, S. Faetti, Leone Fronzoni

As shown by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (the EPR paradox) [A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935)], quantum mechanics is a nonlocal theory contrarily to what happens for any other modern physical theory. Alternative local theories based on superluminal communications have been also proposed in the literature. So far, no evidence for these superluminal communications has been obtained and only lower bounds for the superluminal velocities have been established. In this paper we describe an improved experiment that increases by about two orders of magnitude the maximum detectable superluminal velocities. The locality, the freedom of choice, and the detection loopholes are not addressed here. No evidence for superluminal communications has been found and a higher lower bound for their velocities has been established.

arXiv:1802.00423•Physical Review A•May 23, 2018•9 citations
The possible connection between EPR correlations and superluminal interactions, as suggested by Bell and Bohm, is discussed using simple and palpable arguments: (a) It is shown how an experiment based on time-like events can allow us to answer the question "Can a measurement performed on one of the photons of an entangled pair change the state of the other?" (b) The theorem on superluminal finite-speed causal influences and superluminal signaling, introduced by Scarani and Gisin, is reexamined. (c) It is shown how faster-than-light interactions and Lorentz transformations might peacefully coexist.
Roman Schnabel's article argues that the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox can be resolved by identifying a flaw in what the author calls the "EPR implication" and by using radioactive alpha decay as an example showing that predictability does not exclude genuine randomness. The paper is clearly written and addresses an important foundational question. In our view, however, its main conclusion does not follow. The article narrows the original EPR argument, attributes too much to Bell-inequality violations, and replaces the central EPR structure - which involves incompatible observables and locality-based reasoning - with a simpler case of correlated random events. The result is an interesting interpretive remark, but not, we think, a satisfactory scientific resolution of the EPR problem.
As shown by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (the EPR paradox) [A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935)], quantum mechanics is a nonlocal theory contrarily to what happens for any other modern physical theory. Alternative local theories based on superluminal communications have been also proposed in the literature. So far, no evidence for these superluminal communications has been obtained and only lower bounds for the superluminal velocities have been established. In this paper we describe an improved experiment that increases by about two orders of magnitude the maximum detectable superluminal velocities. The locality, the freedom of choice, and the detection loopholes are not addressed here. No evidence for superluminal communications has been found and a higher lower bound for their velocities has been established.