How to Erase Quantum Monogamy?

Mardari, Ghenadie N.

doi:10.3390/quantum3010004

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Under the influence of real details from loophole-free experiments, an earlier proposal was to consider possible correlations between simultaneous random events, modulo the probability of coincidence [21]. Intuitively, single events are more probable than double events, which are more likely than triple events, and so on.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maximal Bell Violations with Predetermined Observables

Mardari

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alice and Bob make independent measurements for non-identical properties. If every Alice (or Bob) event is fixed for any choice of measurement by Bob (or Alice), can they violate a Bell-type inequality? In theory, the answer is negative if all the properties are measured at the same time. However, the answer is positive if only one pair of events is recorded in each iteration. This fact is not widely acknowledged, though often discussed at specialized conferences, because it does not seem to make sense. The overlooked nuance is that staggered events allow for pairwise combinations that are not possible for simultaneous coincidences. This can be illustrated with two synchronized “wheel-of-fortune” tables, while focusing on the patterns of coincidence between consecutive (rather than simultaneous) events.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maximal Bell Violations with Predetermined Observables

Mardari

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It would not work to solve just one and hope to patch the other later. Under the influence of real details from loophole-free experiments, an earlier proposal was to consider possible correlations between simultaneous random events, modulo the probability of coincidence [18]. Intuitively, single events are more probable than double events, which are more likely than triple events, and so on.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this case, Bell violations are no longer possible. Therefore, "quantum monogamy" [18] is also an ordinary classical phenomenon.…”

Section: (A) (B)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Proposed Solution to the Quantum Randi Challenge

Mardari¹

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quantum Randi challenge is an invitation to violate Bell’s inequality with a programmable (transparent and reproducible) sequence of local events. This is widely perceived as impossible, given Bell’s Theorem. However, mathematical proofs can be correct without universal validity, as seen in the case of Euclidean geometry. Is Bell’s Locality Criterion inclusive enough to account for all the local phenomena? It is well known that Bell-type inequalities apply to jointly distributed variables, meaning that they hold for events that can be recorded at the same time. Yet, some physical qualities are mutually exclusive. They only become observable at different times. Accordingly, pairwise detections in a narrow window of coincidence – but not at the same exact time – allow for maximal Bell violations (S=4 for the CHSH inequality), without room for doubt about the local nature of the process.

show abstract

“…Bell experiments are more subtle in this regard because they test for indirect effects (coefficients of correlation). However, these settings would also allow for superluminal messaging when scaled up to systems with 3 or more entangled quanta [30]. So, how can it be that an experiment designed to verify the predictions of quantum theory ended up with a result that both confirms and falsifies it?…”

Section: Fair Sampling and Bell Experimentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Quantum Theory Falsified By Loophole-free Bell Experiments?

Mardari¹

2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantum theory predicts a whole class of non-local phenomena, observable via coincident detection of EPR-type systems. An important feature of these observations is their non-signaling character. Technically, non-local phenomena should only be observable for post-selected sub-ensembles, rather than for complete projections. Otherwise, superluminal telegraphy becomes possible. Yet, a couple of recent Bell experiments reported the observation of quantum non-locality for 100% of the detected events. Does it follow that signaling non-locality is possible? If so, was quantum theory falsified? This puzzle is solved by revisiting the interpretation of the spin projection operator, with special focus on its dual nature (combining spectral decomposition with spectral transformation). “Component switching” is not a loophole, but rather a requirement of quantum mechanics in this context, because sharp spin projections are partial (as well as partially overlapping). Surprisingly, it is possible to pre-select incompatible statistical sub-ensembles with heralded detection and to reveal the same behavior as in post-selected observations. Therefore, Bell experiments confirm the predictions of quantum theory without violating the non-signaling principle.

show abstract

How to Erase Quantum Monogamy?

Cited by 4 publications

References 49 publications

Maximal Bell Violations with Predetermined Observables

Maximal Bell Violations with Predetermined Observables

Proposed Solution to the Quantum Randi Challenge

Is Quantum Theory Falsified By Loophole-free Bell Experiments?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About