Bell tests explained classically without quantum entanglement

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 340-340
Author(s):  
Dean L. Mamas

Bell test experimental results can be classically explained as simply a trivial geometric effect, without any need to evoke any quantum phenomena such as entanglement. There is no instantaneous action-at-a-distance.

Author(s):  
Richard Healey

Quantum entanglement is popularly believed to give rise to spooky action at a distance of a kind that Einstein decisively rejected. Indeed, important recent experiments on systems assigned entangled states have been claimed to refute Einstein by exhibiting such spooky action. After reviewing two considerations in favor of this view I argue that quantum theory can be used to explain puzzling correlations correctly predicted by assignment of entangled quantum states with no such instantaneous action at a distance. We owe both considerations in favor of the view to arguments of John Bell. I present simplified forms of these arguments as well as a game that provides insight into the situation. The argument I give in response turns on a prescriptive view of quantum states that differs both from Dirac’s (as stated in Chapter 2) and Einstein’s.


Quanta ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 111
Author(s):  
Mani L. Bhaumik

The enigmatic nonlocal quantum correlation that was famously derided by Einstein as "spooky action at a distance" has now been experimentally demonstrated to be authentic. The quantum entanglement and nonlocal correlations emerged as inevitable consequences of John Bell's epochal paper on Bell's inequality. However, in spite of some extraordinary applications as well as attempts to explain the reason for quantum nonlocality, a satisfactory account of how Nature accomplishes this astounding phenomenon is yet to emerge. A cogent mechanism for the occurrence of this incredible event is presented in terms of a plausible quantum mechanical Einstein–Rosen bridge.Quanta 2018; 7: 111–117.


Quanta ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Stan Gudder

Quantum entanglement is an important resource in quantum information technologies. Here, we study and characterize in a precise mathematical language some of the weird and nonintuitive features of quantum entanglement. We begin by illustrating why entanglement implies action at a distance. We then introduce a simple criterion for determining when a pure quantum state is entangled. Finally, we present a measure for the amount of entanglement for a pure state.Quanta 2020; 9: 1–6.


Author(s):  
Bengt Nordén

AbstractEinstein was wrong with his 1927 Solvay Conference claim that quantum mechanics is incomplete and incapable of describing diffraction of single particles. However, the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox of entangled pairs of particles remains lurking with its ‘spooky action at a distance’. In molecules quantum entanglement can be viewed as basis of both chemical bonding and excitonic states. The latter are important in many biophysical contexts and involve coupling between subsystems in which virtual excitations lead to eigenstates of the total Hamiltonian, but not for the separate subsystems. The author questions whether atomic or photonic systems may be probed to prove that particles or photons may stay entangled over large distances and display the immediate communication with each other that so concerned Einstein. A dissociating hydrogen molecule is taken as a model of a zero-spin entangled system whose angular momenta are in principle possible to probe for this purpose. In practice, however, spins randomize as a result of interactions with surrounding fields and matter. Similarly, no experiment seems yet to provide unambiguous evidence of remaining entanglement between single photons at large separations in absence of mutual interaction, or about immediate (superluminal) communication. This forces us to reflect again on what Einstein really had in mind with the paradox, viz. a probabilistic interpretation of a wave function for an ensemble of identically prepared states, rather than as a statement about single particles. Such a prepared state of many particles would lack properties of quantum entanglement that make it so special, including the uncertainty upon which safe quantum communication is assumed to rest. An example is Zewail's experiment showing visible resonance in the dissociation of a coherently vibrating ensemble of NaI molecules apparently violating the uncertainty principle. Einstein was wrong about diffracting single photons where space-like anti-bunching observations have proven recently their non-local character and how observation in one point can remotely affect the outcome in other points. By contrast, long range photon entanglement with immediate, superluminal response is still an elusive, possibly partly misunderstood issue. The author proposes that photons may entangle over large distances only if some interaction exists via fields that cannot propagate faster than the speed of light. An experiment to settle this ‘interaction hypothesis’ is suggested.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (18) ◽  
pp. 1850105
Author(s):  
J. T. Wang ◽  
J. D. Fan

It is well known that an electron has either spin-up or spin-down state and a photon has two possible polarizations called spin [Formula: see text] or spin [Formula: see text]. But when two particles are created, the two particles can have 50% of one state and 50% in the other. This is called the two particles in quantum entanglement. The spooky thing is that an event at one point in the universe can instantaneously affect the event that is arbitrarily far away between these two particles. a The entanglement of the two particles can be electron or photon. We believe, in order to study this phenomenon we have to study further than the previously established principles of quantum mechanics, that is, to study how an electron creates a photon and how it interacts with the photon emitted. a Quantum entanglement simplified-video results — Quantum entanglement and spooky action at a distance, youtube.com, two years ago.


Author(s):  
Steven French

Action at a distance is typically characterized in terms of some cause producing a spatially separated effect in the absence of any medium by which the causal interaction is transmitted. Historically it has been viewed with suspicion; Leibniz famously accused Newton of introducing ‘occult’ forces because according to his theory, gravity appeared to act at a distance. However, the grounds for ruling it out are not always so clear. One might insist that all forces are ‘contact forces’, but why should this be so? Alternatively, it could be argued that if action at a distance is accepted, then certain ‘facts’ about physical interactions would be left unexplained: the nature of Newton’s law of gravitation might be explicable if some underlying medium is presupposed, but otherwise it simply has to be accepted as a brute feature. But this assumes that the ‘nature’ of physical laws requires this sort of explanation. Finally, if it is acknowledged that such action at a distance cannot be instantaneous, on pain of violating Special Relativity, then it turns out that there are problems satisfying conservation of energy. Again, even this consequence can be side-stepped if one were to adopt an anti-realist view of energy. With the development of field theories and Einstein’s liberation of physics from the grip of the ether, it appeared that action at a distance had been pushed out of the picture by the beginning of the twentieth century. However, the non-local nature of quantum entanglement appears to have allowed it back in. Of course the form of this putative quantum action at a distance is very different from the classical kind: for one thing, it cannot be used instantaneously to send information and so there is still ‘peaceful co-existence’ with Special Relativity. Again, however, its acceptance depends on certain assumptions – on how one understands quantum entanglement, for example. Shifting the focus to violation of a form of ‘separability’ between systems, rather than locality, may allow us to accept quantum holism without having to swallow action at distance as well.


Author(s):  
Richard Healey

Quantum theory does not describe the world and so contributes little to natural philosophy: it implies neither that a particle can be in two places at once, that a cat can be neither dead nor alive, that there is instantaneous action at a distance, nor that our observations create the world they reveal. Quantum entanglement does not say that the world is radically holist or non-separable, that the world is indeterministic or deterministic, that mind influences matter, or that consciousness plays a special role in the natural world. But the theory does have lessons to teach about how philosophy should approach topics including causation, probability, laws, composition, and ontology that traditionally fall within metaphysics. Here the quantum revolution reinforces the pragmatist lesson that such topics are best approached by asking why agents like us should have developed the concepts we have when physically situated in a world like this.


2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bin Liang

<p class="1Body">This paper analyses the nature of quantum entanglement, proves the quantum entanglement is not action at a distance, proposes a scheme to realize quantum entanglement, explains that the quantum entanglement is not action at a distance and the non-cloning theorem of quantum state ensure the quantum mechanics is consistent with relativity and make the superluminal communication could not happened.</p>


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 33
Author(s):  
Elio B. Porcelli ◽  
Omar R. Alves ◽  
Victo S. Filho

In this work, we measured the magnitude of forces raised from the operation of symmetrical capacitor devices working in high electric potentials. Our experimental measurements were realized with basis on an improved setup which aimed significant reduction of ionic wind by means of an efficient shield. We observed small variations of the device inertia within an accurate range and we confirmed with good accuracy that the experimental results can be explained by a generalized quantum entanglement hypothesis which provides us a theoretical model for a macroscopic dipole force raised by the myriad of microscopic dipoles constituting the capacitor. The new results corroborated the positive results of previous experiments and also indicate the validity of our theoretical forecast.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document