Can we close the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate?

DOI10.1098/RSTA.2016.0392MaRDI QIDQ4560693zbMATHOpenAlexWikidataFDO

Authors M. Kupczynski

Publication date 12 December 2018

Published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.00266

zbMATH Keywords

EPR paradox and physical realityexperimental protocols and contextualityfree will and measurement setting independencequantum non-locality demystifiedtesting completeness of quantum mechanicsviolation of Bell inequalities

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

General and philosophical questions in quantum theory (81P05)

Abstract: Recent experiments allowed concluding that Bell-type inequalities are indeed violated thus it is important to understand what it means and how can we explain the existence of strong correlations between outcomes of distant measurements. Do we have to announce that: Einstein was wrong, Nature is nonlocal and nonlocal correlations are produced due to the quantum magic and emerge, somehow, from outside space time? Fortunately such conclusions are unfounded because if supplementary parameters describing measuring instruments are correctly incorporated in a theoretical model then Bell-type inequalities may not be proven .We construct a simple probabilistic model explaining these correlations in a locally causal way. In our model measurement outcomes are neither predetermined nor produced in irreducibly random way. We explain in detail why, contrary to the general belief; an introduction of setting dependent parameters does not restrict experimenters' freedom of choice. Since the violation of Bell-type inequalities does not allow concluding that Nature is nonlocal and that quantum theory is complete thus the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate may not be closed. The continuation of this debate is not only important for a better understanding of Nature but also for various practical applications of quantum phenomena.

Recommendations

• Bell's theorem and the problem of decidability between the views of Einstein and Bohr
• Bell locality and the nonlocal character of nature
• Einstein Was Right!
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 4072005
• Bell's inequalities and EPR-B experiments: are they disjoint?

Cites work

• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 5873087 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 5873100 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 5873120 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 5012832 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 5132401 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1233803 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1418766 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3209023 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3057862 (Why is no real title available?)
• A sub-ensemble theory of ideal quantum measurement processes
• Bell inequalities, experimental protocols and contextuality
• Bell's theorem: critique of proofs with and without inequalities
• Born's rule as signature of a superclassical current algebra
• CHSH inequality: quantum probabilities as classical conditional probabilities
• Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?
• Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete?
• Contextual approach to quantum formalism
• Is the contextuality loophole fatal for the derivation of Bell inequalities?
• Nonlocality as well as rejection of realism are only sufficient (but non-necessary!) conditions for violation of Bell's inequality
• Operational approach to entanglement and how to certify it
• Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories
• Quantum chance. Nonlocality, teleportation and other quantum marvels. Translated from the French by Stephen Lyle
• Quantum non-locality -- it ain't necessarily so\dots
• Speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics. With an introduction by Alain Aspect
• The contextuality loophole is fatal for the derivation of Bell inequalities: Reply to a comment by I. Schmelzer
• Ubiquitous Quantum Structure
• Understanding quantum measurement from the solution of dynamical models
• Violation of Bell's Inequality under Strict Einstein Locality Conditions
• Violation of Bell's inequality and non-Kolmogorovness
• Violation of local realism with freedom of choice
• Where Bell went wrong
• Why I am not a QBist
• Why should we interpret quantum mechanics?

Cited in

(8)

• On the spin projection operator and the probabilistic meaning of the bipartite correlation function
• Can a Bohmian be a Rovellian for all practical purposes?
• The present situation in quantum theory and its merging with general relativity
• Can foreign exchange rates violate Bell inequalities?
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 5132401 (Why is no real title available?)
• Can elementary quantum mechanics explain the Aharonov–Bohm effect?
• Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments: a discrete data driven approach
• A quantum similarity discussion about Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox in Gaussian enfolded spaces

This page was built for publication: Can we close the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate?

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q4560693)