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

arXiv:quant-ph/9810058

Bell's theorem, quantum mechanical non-locality and atomic cascade photons

M. Ardehali

Published Oct 19, 1998• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Bell's theorem of 1965 is a proof that all realistic interpretations of quantum mechanics must be non-local. Bell's theorem consists of two parts: first a correlation inequality is derived that must be satisfied by all local realistic theories; second it is demonstrated that quantum mechanical probabilities violate this inequality in certain cases. In the case of ideal experiments, Bell's theorem has been proven. However, in the case of real experiments where polarizers and detectors are non-ideal, the theorem has not yet been proven since the proof always requires some arbitrary and {\em ad hoc} supplementary assumptions. In this paper, we state a new and rather weak supplementary assumption for the ensemble of photons that emerge from the polarizers, and we show that the conjunction of Einstein's locality with this assumption leads to validity of an inequality that is violated by a factor as large as 1.5 in the case of real experiments. Moreover, the present supplementary assumption is considerably weaker and more general than Clauser, Horne, Shimony, Holt supplementary assumption.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9810058

Related papers

Maximal violation of Bell's inequality and atomic cascade photons

M. Ardehali

A correlation inequality is derived from local realism and a supplementary assumption. This inequality is violated by a factor of 1.5 in the case of real experiments, whereas previous inequalities such as Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality of 1969 and Clauser-Horne inequality of 1974 are violated by a factor of $\sqrt 2$. Thus the magnitude of violation of this inequality is approximately 20.7% larger than the magnitude of violation of previous inequalities. Moreover, the present inequality can be used to test locality very simply because it requires the measurements of only two detection probabilities. In contrast, Clauser-Horne inequality requires the measurements of five detection probabilities.

arXiv:quant-ph/9805034•May 12, 1998•0 citations

Maximal violation of Bell's inequality in the case of real experiments

M. Ardehali

Einstein's locality is invoked to derive a correlation inequality. In the case of ideal experiments, this inequality is equivalent to Bell's original inequality of 1965 which, as is well known, is violated by a maximum factor of 1.5. The crucial point is that even in the case of real experiments where polarizers and detectors are non-ideal, the present inequality is violated by a factor of 1.5, whereas previous inequalities such as Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality of 1969 and Clauser-Horne inequality of 1974 are violated by a factor of $\sqrt 2$. The larger magnitude of violation can be of importance for the experimental test of locality. Moreover, the supplementary assumption used to derive this inequality is weaker than Garuccio-Rapisarda assumption. Thus an experiment based on this inequality refutes a larger family of hidden variable theories than an experiment based on Garuccio-Rapisarda inequality.

arXiv:quant-ph/9810010•Oct 4, 1998•0 citations

Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt correlation and Clauser-Horne correlation do not lead to the largest violations of Bell’s inequality

M. Ardehali

An inequality is deduced from Einstein's locality and a supplementary assumption. This inequality defines an experiment that can actually be performed with present technology to test local realism. Quantum mechanics violates this inequality a factor of 1.5. In contrast, quantum mechanics violates previous inequalities [for example, those of J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969); S. J. Freedman and I. F. Clauser ibid. 28, 938 (1972); and J. F. Clauser and M. A. Horne, Phys. Rev. D 10, 526 (1974)] by a factor of $\sqrt{2}.$ Thus the magnitude of violation of the inequality derived in this paper is approximately 20.7% larger than the magnitude of violation of previous inequalities. This result can be particularly important for the experimental test of locality.

arXiv:quant-ph/9701032•Physical Review A•Jan 1, 1998•5 citations

Collapse of Bell’s Theorem

Guangye Chen

Bell’s theorem founded on Bell’s inequalities asserts that no local realistic theories can reproduce all quantum mechanical predictions for spin correlation of particle pairs. It is pointed out that the assumption of setting-independent probability makes Bell’s inequalities not impose constraint on all local realistic models and thus constitutes a theoretical loophole of Bell’s theorem. A counterexample is presented by showing that a local realistic model with appropriate probability density reproduces all quantum mechanical predictions. It becomes clear that experiments violate Bell’s inequalities because the real correlation functions are not constrained by these inequalities. It is also exposed that, rigorous logical reasoning of counter factual deduction does not permit to exclude any premises of Bell’s inequalities by a certain amount of experimental violations of these inequalities.

Journal of Modern Physics•Jan 1, 2019•4 citations

Experimental consequences of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm-Bell gedanken experiment

M. Ardehali

It is demonstrated that the conjunction of the premises of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper with a supplementary assumption lead to validity of an inequality that is sometimes grossly violated by the quantum-mechanical probabilities in the case of real experiments. The supplementary assumption is as follows: For every photon in the state \ensuremath{\lambda}, the sum of the detection probabilities in the ordinary and in the extraordinary beams emerging from a two-way polarizer is less than or equal to the detection probability with the polarizer removed. This assumption, which always holds for an ensemble of photons, is weaker and more general than the assumption of Garuccio and Rapisarda [Nuovo Cimento A 65, 269 (1981)] and the assumption of Clauser and Horne [Phys. Rev. D 10, 526 (1974)]. Hence an experiment based on this assumption refutes a larger family of hidden-variable series than an experiment based on the assumption of Garuccio and Rapisardo or on the assumption of Clauser and Horne.

Physical Review A•Mar 1, 1993•6 citations

Bell's theorem without the hypothesis of locality

Aleksandr V. Belinskii

One of the Bell's assumptions in the original derivation of his inequalities was the hypothesis of locality, i.e., of the absence of the influence of two remote measuring instruments on one another. That is why violations of these inequalities observed in experiments are often interpreted as a manifestation of the nonlocal nature of quantum mechanics, or a refutation of local realism. In this paper, Bell's inequality is derived in its traditional form, without resorting to the hypothesis of locality, the only assumption being that the probability distributions are nonnegative. These probability distributions are calculated, for a specific optical experiment, in the framework of quantum theory and it is shown that they can take on negative values. This can therefore be regarded as a rigorous proof that the hypothesis of locality is not relevant to violations of Bell's inequalities. The physical meaning of the obtained results is examined.

Physics-Uspekhi•Feb 28, 1994•12 citations
Bell's theorem of 1965 is a proof that all realistic interpretations of quantum mechanics must be non-local. Bell's theorem consists of two parts: first a correlation inequality is derived that must be satisfied by all local realistic theories; second it is demonstrated that quantum mechanical probabilities violate this inequality in certain cases. In the case of ideal experiments, Bell's theorem has been proven. However, in the case of real experiments where polarizers and detectors are non-ideal, the theorem has not yet been proven since the proof always requires some arbitrary and {\em ad hoc} supplementary assumptions. In this paper, we state a new and rather weak supplementary assumption for the ensemble of photons that emerge from the polarizers, and we show that the conjunction of Einstein's locality with this assumption leads to validity of an inequality that is violated by a factor as large as 1.5 in the case of real experiments. Moreover, the present supplementary assumption is considerably weaker and more general than Clauser, Horne, Shimony, Holt supplementary assumption.
A correlation inequality is derived from local realism and a supplementary assumption. This inequality is violated by a factor of 1.5 in the case of real experiments, whereas previous inequalities such as Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality of 1969 and Clauser-Horne inequality of 1974 are violated by a factor of 2\sqrt 22​. Thus the magnitude of violation of this inequality is approximately 20.7% larger than the magnitude of violation of previous inequalities. Moreover, the present inequality can be used to test locality very simply because it requires the measurements of only two detection probabilities. In contrast, Clauser-Horne inequality requires the measurements of five detection probabilities.
Einstein's locality is invoked to derive a correlation inequality. In the case of ideal experiments, this inequality is equivalent to Bell's original inequality of 1965 which, as is well known, is violated by a maximum factor of 1.5. The crucial point is that even in the case of real experiments where polarizers and detectors are non-ideal, the present inequality is violated by a factor of 1.5, whereas previous inequalities such as Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality of 1969 and Clauser-Horne inequality of 1974 are violated by a factor of 2\sqrt 22​. The larger magnitude of violation can be of importance for the experimental test of locality. Moreover, the supplementary assumption used to derive this inequality is weaker than Garuccio-Rapisarda assumption. Thus an experiment based on this inequality refutes a larger family of hidden variable theories than an experiment based on Garuccio-Rapisarda inequality.
An inequality is deduced from Einstein's locality and a supplementary assumption. This inequality defines an experiment that can actually be performed with present technology to test local realism. Quantum mechanics violates this inequality a factor of 1.5. In contrast, quantum mechanics violates previous inequalities [for example, those of J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969); S. J. Freedman and I. F. Clauser ibid. 28, 938 (1972); and J. F. Clauser and M. A. Horne, Phys. Rev. D 10, 526 (1974)] by a factor of 2.\sqrt{2}.2​. Thus the magnitude of violation of the inequality derived in this paper is approximately 20.7% larger than the magnitude of violation of previous inequalities. This result can be particularly important for the experimental test of locality.
Bell’s theorem founded on Bell’s inequalities asserts that no local realistic theories can reproduce all quantum mechanical predictions for spin correlation of particle pairs. It is pointed out that the assumption of setting-independent probability makes Bell’s inequalities not impose constraint on all local realistic models and thus constitutes a theoretical loophole of Bell’s theorem. A counterexample is presented by showing that a local realistic model with appropriate probability density reproduces all quantum mechanical predictions. It becomes clear that experiments violate Bell’s inequalities because the real correlation functions are not constrained by these inequalities. It is also exposed that, rigorous logical reasoning of counter factual deduction does not permit to exclude any premises of Bell’s inequalities by a certain amount of experimental violations of these inequalities.
It is demonstrated that the conjunction of the premises of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper with a supplementary assumption lead to validity of an inequality that is sometimes grossly violated by the quantum-mechanical probabilities in the case of real experiments. The supplementary assumption is as follows: For every photon in the state \ensuremath{\lambda}, the sum of the detection probabilities in the ordinary and in the extraordinary beams emerging from a two-way polarizer is less than or equal to the detection probability with the polarizer removed. This assumption, which always holds for an ensemble of photons, is weaker and more general than the assumption of Garuccio and Rapisarda [Nuovo Cimento A 65, 269 (1981)] and the assumption of Clauser and Horne [Phys. Rev. D 10, 526 (1974)]. Hence an experiment based on this assumption refutes a larger family of hidden-variable series than an experiment based on the assumption of Garuccio and Rapisardo or on the assumption of Clauser and Horne.
One of the Bell's assumptions in the original derivation of his inequalities was the hypothesis of locality, i.e., of the absence of the influence of two remote measuring instruments on one another. That is why violations of these inequalities observed in experiments are often interpreted as a manifestation of the nonlocal nature of quantum mechanics, or a refutation of local realism. In this paper, Bell's inequality is derived in its traditional form, without resorting to the hypothesis of locality, the only assumption being that the probability distributions are nonnegative. These probability distributions are calculated, for a specific optical experiment, in the framework of quantum theory and it is shown that they can take on negative values. This can therefore be regarded as a rigorous proof that the hypothesis of locality is not relevant to violations of Bell's inequalities. The physical meaning of the obtained results is examined.