We discuss the problem of hidden variables and the motivation for introducting them in quantum mechanics. These include determinism, and the problem of meassurement and incompleteness. We first discuss Von-Neumann's imposisbility proof and then analyse it's weakness in terms of Bell's explicit hidden variable model of spin one-half particles. We next discuss Gleason's theorem and Kochen-Specker theorem and bring out the troublems with non contextual hidden variable theories. An important role is played by Einstein locality in the discussion of hidden variable theories as was first brought out by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen. We elaborate it's various implications such as Bell's theorem in terms of Bell's inequalities as well as later work in which Bell's theorem follows without using inequalities.
We discuss the problem of hidden variables and the motivation for introducting them in quantum mechanics. These include determinism, and the problem of meassurement and incompleteness. We first discuss Von-Neumann's imposisbility proof and then analyse it's weakness in terms of Bell's explicit hidden variable model of spin one-half particles. We next discuss Gleason's theorem and Kochen-Specker theorem and bring out the troublems with non contextual hidden variable theories. An important role is played by Einstein locality in the discussion of hidden variable theories as was first brought out by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen. We elaborate it's various implications such as Bell's theorem in terms of Bell's inequalities as well as later work in which Bell's theorem follows without using inequalities.
Abstract In chapter 12 we give an overview of the historical development of hidden-variable theories aiming to attribute ‘hidden’ definite outcomes to any potential measurement on a quantum system. We start with a discussion of von Neumann’s assumption on hidden-variable models, which was later realized not to hold by Hermann, Kochen, Specker, and Bell, going into detail on Bell’s refutation of von Neumann’s arguments. We then turn to the notion of contextuality, which severely restricts hidden-variable models: we discuss Gleason’s theorem before stating and proving the famous Kochen-Specker theorem, as well as the simpler versions of Peres’ nonet and Mermin’s pentagram. These results show that quantum mechanics is not compatible with the assignment of definite measurement outcomes to all possible measurements, and such assignments can hence only be made once a restricted set of observables, a context, is selected
In this paper, we show that Erwin Schroedinger's generalization of the Einstein Podolsky Rosen argument can be connected to certain mathematical theorems - Gleason's and also Kochen and Specker's - in a manner analogous to the relation of EPR itself with Bell's theorem. In both cases, the conclusion is quantum nonlocality, as we discuss. The "Schroedinger nonlocality" proofs share some features with the Greenberger, Horne, and Zeilinger quantum-nonlocality work, yet also differ in significant ways. For clarity and completeness, we begin with a detailed discussion of the topic of hidden variable theorems. We argue, in agreement with John S. Bell, that 'impossibility' does not follow.
In 1935, Albert Einstein and two colleagues, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen (EPR) developed a thought experiment to demonstrate what they felt was a lack of completeness in quantum mechanics (QM). EPR also postulated the existence of more fundamental theory where physical reality of any system would be completely described by the variables/states of that fundamental theory. This variable is commonly called hidden variable and the theory is called hidden variable theory (HVT). In 1964, John Bell proposed an empirically verifiable criterion to test for the existence of these HVTs. He derived an inequality, which must be satisfied by any theory that fulfill the conditions of locality and reality. He also showed that QM, as it violates this inequality, is incompatible with any local-realistic theory. Later it has been shown that Bell’s inequality (BI) can be derived from different set of assumptions and it also find applications in useful information theoretic protocols. In this review, we will discuss various foundational as well as information theoretic implications of BI. We will also discuss about some restricted nonlocal feature of quantum nonlocality and elaborate the role of Uncertainty principle and Complementarity principle in explaining this feature.
This paper examines no-hidden-variables theorems in quantum mechanics from the point of view of statistical mechanics. It presents a general analysis of the measurement process in the Boltzmannian framework that leads to a characterization of (in)compatible measurements and reproduces several features of quantum probabilities often described as “non-classical”. The analysis is applied to versions of the Kochen–Specker and Bell theorems to shed more light on their implications. It is shown how, once the measurement device and the active role of the measurement process are taken into account, contextuality appears as a natural feature of random variables. This corroborates Bell’s criticism that no-go results of the Kochen–Specker type are based on gratuitous assumptions. In contrast, Bell-type theorems are much more profound, but should be understood as nonlocality theorems rather than no-hidden-variables theorems. Finally, the paper addresses misunderstandings and misleading terminology that have confused the debate about hidden variables in quantum mechanics.
In this talk I present a simple derivation of an old result of Kochen and Specker, which is apparently unrelated to the famous work of Bell on hidden variables, but is presumably equally important. Kochen and Specker showed in 1967 that quantum mechanics cannot be embedded into a classical stochastic theory, provided the quantum theoretical probability distributions are reproduced and one additional highly desirable property is satisfied. This showed in a striking manner what were the difficulties in implementing the Einstein programme of a `complete' version of quantum mechanics.
Abstract Quantum theory has accounted for a wide range of physical effects in systems ranging from microscopic to macroscopic. However, it is associated with various paradoxes—such as the well-known EPR example. Einstein’s suggestion that the theory was incomplete has led to numerous attempts to underpin quantum theory by a hidden variable theory, including the Bell approach. This approach was originally based on certain assumptions: (i) realism (ii) locality and (iii) non-contextuality. In its developed form, the theory involved only probabilities for outcome values of system observables. For systems involving two sub-systems, the hidden variable theory predicted that correlations between measurement outcomes of observable pairs of from different sub-systems would satisfy certain—such as the CHSH Bell inequality. The inequality was inconsistent with quantum theory predictions and with experiment. Hence, the question arose: Which of the three assumptions was invalid? A widely held view is that a non-local theory is needed—another is that hidden variable theory should be contextual. In this article, derivations of the CHSH Bell inequality based on various combinations of locality/non-locality and non-contextuality/contextuality assumptions are outlined, leading to the conclusion that for a hidden variable theory to underpin quantum theory, it must be both non-local and contextual. Non-locality or contextuality alone is insufficient. However, it is also concluded that the realism assumption is questionable. At present an alternative approach of augmenting quantum theory by adding additional features—such as the deterministic trajectories of Bohmian mechanics (also a non-local theory) may be a better route for completeness.