Relational causality and classical probability: Grounding quantum phenomenology in a superclassical theory

Grössing, Gerhard; Fussy, Siegfried; Pascasio, Johannes Mesa; Schwabl, Herbert

doi:10.1088/1742-6596/504/1/012006

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly the failure of SHVM to explain quantum correlations seems to indicate that quantum probabilities are not irreducible and they may emerge from some more detailed description of quantum phenomena. There are several efforts to find such more detailed description let us cite here for example [95,96] where other references may be found.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Einsteinian no-signalling violated in Bell tests?

Kupczyński

2017

Open Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relativistic invariance is a physical law verified in several domains of physics. The impossibility of faster than light influences is not questioned by quantum theory. In quantum electrodynamics, in quantum field theory and in the standard model relativistic invariance is incorporated by construction. Quantum mechanics predicts strong long range correlations between outcomes of spin projection measurements performed in distant laboratories. In spite of these strong correlations marginal probability distributions should not depend on what was measured in the other laboratory what is called shortly: nonsignalling. In several experiments, performed to test various Bell-type inequalities, some unexplained dependence of empirical marginal probability distributions on distant settings was observed . In this paper we demonstrate how a particular identification and selection procedure of paired distant outcomes is the most probable cause for this apparent violation of no-signalling principle. Thus this unexpected setting dependence does not prove the existence of superluminal influences and Einsteinian no-signalling principle has to be tested differently in dedicated experiments. We propose a detailed protocol telling how such experiments should be designed in order to be conclusive. We also explain how magical quantum correlations may be explained in a locally causal way.Keywords: EPR paradox and Bell inequalities, parameter independence and non-signalling, new unambiguous tests of Einsteinian no-signalling, quantum nonlocality demystified, causally local explanation of quantum correlations

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Einsteinian no-signalling violated in Bell tests?

Kupczyński

2017

Open Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several attempts are made to provide more detailed description of various quantum phenomena see for example [84][85][86].…”

Section: The Bohr -Einstein Quantum Debate Is More Fundamental Does Q...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can we close the Bohr–Einstein quantum debate?

Kupczyński¹

2017

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent experiments allow one to conclude that Bell-type inequalities are indeed violated; thus, it is important to understand what this means and how we can explain the existence of strong correlations between outcomes of distant measurements. Do we have to announce that Einstein was wrong, Nature is non-local and non-local correlations are produced due to 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 proved. We construct a simple probabilistic model allowing these correlations to be explained in a locally causal way. In our model, measurement outcomes are neither predetermined nor produced in an irreducibly random way. We explain why, contrary to the general belief, the introduction of setting-dependent parameters does not restrict experimenters' freedom of choice. Since the violation of Bell-type inequalities does not allow the conclusion that Nature is non-local and that quantum theory is complete, the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate may not be closed. The continuation of this debate is important not only for a better understanding of Nature but also for various practical applications of quantum phenomena.This article is part of the themed issue 'Second quantum revolution: foundational questions'.

show abstract

“…We have previously shown [ 19 , 24 ] how one can derive the Bohmian guidance formula from our two-momentum approach. Introducing classical wave amplitudes

and generalized velocity field vectors

, which represent either a forward velocity

or an osmotic velocity

in the direction transversal to

, we calculate the phase-dependent amplitude contributions of the total system’s wave field projected on one channel’s amplitude

at the point

in the following way.…”

Section: Derivation Of the De Broglie–bohm Guiding Equation For mentioning

confidence: 99%

Vacuum Landscaping: Cause of Nonlocal Influences without Signaling

Groessing

Fussy

Pascasio

et al. 2018

Entropy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the quest for an understanding of nonlocality with respect to an appropriate ontology, we propose a "cosmological solution". We assume that from the beginning of the universe each point in space has been the location of a scalar field representing a zero-point vacuum energy that nonlocally vibrates at a vast range of different frequencies across the whole universe. A quantum, then, is a nonequilibrium steady state in the form of a "bouncer" coupled resonantly to one of those (particle type dependent) frequencies, in remote analogy to the bouncing oil drops on an oscillating oil bath as in Couder's experiments. A major difference to the latter analogy is given by the nonlocal nature of the vacuum oscillations.We show with the examples of double-and n-slit interference that the assumed nonlocality of the distribution functions alone suffices to derive the de˜Broglie--Bohm guiding equation for N particles with otherwise purely classical means. In our model, no influences from configuration space are required, as everything can be described in 3-space. Importantly, the setting up of an experimental arrangement limits and shapes the forward and osmotic contributions and is described as vacuum landscaping. * Corresponding author: ains@chello.at; http://www.nonlinearstudies.at arXiv:1806.05466v2 [quant-ph]

show abstract

Relational causality and classical probability: Grounding quantum phenomenology in a superclassical theory

Cited by 6 publications

References 33 publications

Is Einsteinian no-signalling violated in Bell tests?

Is Einsteinian no-signalling violated in Bell tests?

Can we close the Bohr–Einstein quantum debate?

Vacuum Landscaping: Cause of Nonlocal Influences without Signaling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About