The 1964 paper of John Bell
Ujjwal Sen
本文对 John Bell 1964 年的著名论文进行评论，指出该论文排除了量子力学中所有定域隐变量理论。
我们对 John Bell 著名的 1964 年论文进行评论，该论文排除了量子力学中所有定域隐变量理论。
We present a commentary on the famous 1964 paper of John Bell that rules out the entire class of underlying hidden variable theories for quantum mechanics that are local.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
继续探索
Marian Kupczynski(MK)is the author of a controversial paper published (2020) in the journal Frontiers in Physics. The work is built around a mathematical claim by MK which is actually false, and MK's logical reasoning around his claim is also incorrect. The same claim was made by him in several other recent papers published in other journals. A proof that the claimed result is false is the main content of our present "Comment". It is purely a mathematical counter-example to a mathematical claim in a number of MK's papers.
The renewed interest in the foundations of quantum statistical mechanics in recent years has led us to study John von Neumann's 1929 article on the quantum ergodic theorem. We have found this almost forgotten article, which until now has been available only in German, to be a treasure chest, and to be much misunderstood. In it, von Neumann studied the long-time behavior of macroscopic quantum systems. While one of the two theorems announced in his title, the one he calls the "quantum H-theorem", is actually a much weaker statement than Boltzmann's classical H-theorem, the other theorem, which …
This is a review of the book Quantum [Un]speakables: From Bell to Quantum Information. Reinhold A. Bertlmann and Anton Zeilinger (editors).
`Philosophy' was speakable for John Bell but is not for many physicists. The border between philosophy and physics is here illustrated through Brownian motion and Bell experiments. `Measurement', however, was unspeakable for Bell. His insistence that the physics of quantum measurement should not be confined to the laboratory and that physics is concerned with the big world outside leads us to examples from zoology, meteorology and cosmology.
We reject unjustified criticism of our published article [2209.07992] by Gill and Lambare [arXiv:2211.02481, arXiv:2208.09930]. They completely misinterpret the content and conclusions of this article. They construct a counterfactual probabilistic model in which random variables representing outcomes of four experiments performed using incompatible experimental settings are jointly distributed. Thus, CHSH inequalities trivially hold for all finite samples generated by their model. Their model defines a probabilistic coupling for our model describing only the raw data from Bell tests. The exist…
In a old paper by G. Lochak, it is claimed that the Bell definition of a hidden variable is in conflict with the formalism of quantum mechanics. This result implies that it is not necessary to invoke non locality to explain the violation of the Bell inequality. A careful analysis of the concept of probability for hidden variables, as defined differently by Bell and Lochak, show that the reasoning and main conclusions of are not correct.
I am a Quantum Engineer, but on Sundays I have principles, John Bell opened his "underground colloquium" in March 1983, words which I will never forget! What! John Bell, the great John Bell, presented himself as an engineer!?! one of those people who make things work without even understanding how they function?!? whereas I thought of John Bell as one of the greatest theoretician.
This three-part paper comprises: (i) a critique by Halvorson of Bell's (1973) paper "Subject and Object"; (ii) a comment by Butterfield; (iii) a reply by Halvorson. An Appendix gives the passage from Bell that is the focus of Halvorson's critique.
I present my encounter with John Bell at CERN, our collaboration and joint work in particle physics. I also will recall our quantum debates and give my personal view on Bell's fundamental work on quantum theory, in particular, on contextuality and nonlocality of quantum physics. Some mathematical and geometric aspects of entanglement are discussed as influence of Bell's Theorem. Finally, I make some historical comments on the experimental side of Bell inequalities.
John Bell's investigations in foundations of quantum mechanics, particle physics, and quantum field theory are recalled.
I outline Bell's vision of the "great enterprise" of science, and his view that conventional teachings about quantum mechanics constituted a betrayal of this enterprise. I describe a proposal of his to put the theory on a more satisfactory footing, and review the subsequent uses that have been made of one element of this proposal, namely Bell's transition probabilities regarded as fundamental physical processes.
I present the background of the Bohm approach that led John Bell to a study of quantum non-locality from which his famous inequalities emerged. I recall the early experiments done at Birkbeck with an aim to explore the possibility of `spontaneous collapse', a way suggested by Schrödinger to avoid the conclusion that quantum mechanics was grossly non-local. I also review some of the work that John did which directly impinged on my own investigations into the foundations of quantum mechanics and report some new investigations towards a more fundamental theory.
Various interpretations of quantum mechanics, favored (or neglected) by John Bell in the context of his non-locality theorem, are compared and discussed.
Although skeptical of the prohibitive power of no-hidden-variables theorems, John Bell was himself responsible for the two most important ones. I describe some recent versions of the lesser known of the two (familar to experts as the "Kochen-Specker theorem") which have transparently simple proofs. One of the new versions can be converted without additional analysis into a powerful form of the very much better known "Bell's Theorem", thereby clarifying the conceptual link between these two results of Bell.
Christopher Fuchs and Rüdiger Schack have developed a way of understanding science, which, among other things, resolves many of the conceptual puzzles of quantum mechanics that have vexed people for the past nine decades. They call it QBism. I speculate on how John Bell might have reacted to QBism, and I explain the many ways in which QBism differs importantly from the orthodox ways of thinking about quantum mechanics associated with the term "Copenhagen interpretation."
I want to give an impression of the time I spent together with John S. Bell, of the atmosphere of our collaboration and friendship. I briefly review our work, the methods of nonrelativistic approximations to quantum field theory for calculating the properties of heavy quark-antiquark bound states.
Following ideas given by John Bell in a paper entitled \textit{Beables for quantum field theory}, we show that it is possible to obtain a realistic and deterministic interpretation of any quantum field-theoretic model involving Fermi fields.
In my commentary, I will argue that the conclusions drawn in the paper "Noncommutative causality in algebraic quantum field" theory by Gábor Hofer-Szabó (and similar publications) are incorrect. As proven by J.S. Bell, a local common causal explanation of correlations violating the Bell inequality is impossible.
"Bell's theorem" can refer to two different theorems that John Bell proved, the first in 1964 and the second in 1976. His 1964 theorem is the incompatibility of quantum phenomena with the joint assumptions of Locality and Predetermination. His 1976 theorem is their incompatibility with the single property of Local Causality. This is contrary to Bell's own later assertions, that his 1964 theorem began with the assumption of Local Causality, even if not by that name. Although the two Bell's theorems are logically equivalent, their assumptions are not. Hence, the earlier and later theorems sugges…
This is an essay-review on a recently re-issued book of John Bell "Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics". The discussion concentrates around the Bell Theorem, its assumptions, consequences and frequent overinterpretations.
An account of some of the life and work of John Bell
Many of the heated arguments about the meaning of "Bell's theorem" arise because this phrase can refer to two different theorems that John Bell proved, the first in 1964 and the second in 1976. His 1964 theorem is the incompatibility of quantum phenomena with the dual assumptions of locality and determinism. His 1976 theorem is the incompatibility of quantum phenomena with the unitary property of local causality. This is contrary to Bell's own later assertions, that his 1964 theorem began with that single, and indivisible, assumption of local causality (even if not by that name). While there a…
My discussions of quantum foundations with John Stewart Bell
本文回顾了作者与John Bell关于量子基础的讨论，指出BI-CHSH不等式的违反未证明量子力学完备性或非局域性，强调应谨慎对待其哲学结论。
This is a collection of my responses to the criticisms of my argument against the impossibility proof of John Bell, which aims to undermine any conceivable local realistic completion of quantum mechanics. I plan to periodically update this preprint instead of creating a new one for each response.
John Bell showed that a big class of local hidden-variable models stands in conflict with quantum mechanics and experiment. Recently, there were suggestions that empirical adequate hidden-variable models might exist, which presuppose a weaker notion of local causality. We will show that a Bell-type inequality can be derived also from these weaker assumptions.
A violation of Bell-CHSH inequalities does not justify speculations about quantum non-locality, conspiracy and retro-causation. Such speculations are rooted in a belief that setting dependence of hidden variables in a probabilistic model, called a violation of measurement independence, would mean a violation of experimenters freedom of choice. This belief is unfounded because it is based on a questionable use of Bayes Theorem and on incorrect causal interpretation of conditional probabilities. In Bell-local realistic model, hidden variables describe only photonic beams created by a source, thu…
This contribution to the book in honour of J.S. Bell will probably differ from the remaining ones, in particular since only a part of it will be devoted to specific technical arguments. In fact I have considered appropriate to share with the community of physicists interested in the foundational problems of our best theory the repeated interactions I had with him in the last four years of his life, the deep discussions in which we have been involved in particular in connection with the elaboration of collapse theories and their interpretation, the contributions he gave to the development of th…
John S. Bell is well known for the result now referred to simply as "Bell's theorem," which removed from serious consideration by physics of local hidden-variable theories. Under these circumstances, if quantum theory is to serve as a truly {\em fundamental} theory, conceptual precision in its interpretation is not only even more desirable but paramount. John Bell was accordingly concerned about what he viewed as conceptual imprecision, from the physical point of view, in the standard approaches to the theory. He saw this as most acute in the case of their treatment of {\em measurement at the …
On the Fidelity Robustness of CHSH--Bell Inequality via Filtered Random States
本文研究随机混合态下两量子比特系统的非局域性，并通过CHSH-贝尔不等式分析接近高非经典态的态在固定实验装置下违反局域实在论的鲁棒性。
We review the famous no-hidden-variables theorem in John von Neumann's 1932 book on the mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics. We describe the notorious gap in von Neumann's argument, pointed out by Grete Hermann in 1935 and, more famously, by John Bell in 1966. We disagree with recent papers claiming that Hermann and Bell failed to understand what von Neumann was actually doing.
According to the theory of cosmic inflation, the large scale structures observed in our Universe (galaxies, clusters of galaxies, Cosmic Background Microwave - CMB - anisotropy ...) are of quantum mechanical origin. They are nothing but vacuum fluctuations, stretched to cosmological scales by the cosmic expansion and amplified by gravitational instability. At the end of inflation, these perturbations are placed in a two-mode squeezed state with the strongest squeezing ever produced in Nature (much larger than anything that can be made in the laboratory on Earth). This article studies whether a…
We show that it is possible to obtain a realistic and deterministic model, based on a previous work of John Bell, which reproduces the experimental predictions of the orthodox interpretation of quantum electrodynamics.
In the spirit and style of John S. Bell's well known paper on How to Teach Special Relativity it is argued, that a ``Bohmian pedagogy''provides a very useful tool to illustrate the relation between classical and quantum physics and illuminates the peculiar features of the latter.
John Bell is generally credited to have accomplished the remarkable "proof" that any theory of physics, which is both Einstein-local and "realistic" (counterfactually definite), results in a strong upper bound to the correlations that are measured in space and time. He thus predicts that Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiments cannot violate Bell- type inequalities. We present a counterexample to this claim, based on discrete-event computer simulations. Our model-results fully agree with the predictions of quantum theory for Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments and are free of the detection- o…
The role of measurement in quantum computation is examined in the light of John Bell's critique of the how the term ``measurement'' is used in quantum mechanics. I argue that within the field of quantum computer science the concept of measurement is precisely defined, unproblematic, amd forms the foundation of the entire subject.
The goal of this paper is to explain how the views of Albert Einstein, John Bell and others, about nonlocality and the conceptual issues raised by quantum mechanics, have been rather systematically misunderstood by the majority of physicists.
John Bell proposed an ontology for the GRW modification of quantum mechanics in terms of flashes occurring at space-time points. The paper spells out the motivation for this ontology, enquires into the status of the wave-function in it, critically examines the claim of its being Lorentz-invariant and considers whether it is a parsimonious, but nevertheless physically adequate ontology.
John Bell once argued that one ought to select, out of the 'observables' of quantum theory, some subset of 'beables' that can be consistently ascribed determinate values. Moreover, this subset should be selected so as to guarantee (among other things) that we can dispense with the orthodox interpretation's loose talk about 'measurement values': "...the probability of a beable being a particular value would be calculated just as was formerly calculated the probability of observing that value". Working in the framework of C*-algebras (in particular, Segal algebras), I propose an algebraic charac…
Can the Infamous Boundary Be Found in Macromolecules? Also, von Neumann vs. Schroedinger ensembles, and `Hund's Paradox' in quantum chemistry
本文探讨经典-量子分界（臭名昭著的边界）是否可能位于 macromolecules 层级，并将其与热力学系综选择和量子化学中的 Hund 佯谬联系起来，进而提出一个可在不对称 macromolecules 中揭示该边界的实验方案。
扫码添加微信好友，提出您的宝贵建议 👇
💡 备注请填写：网站反馈
发表机构由 AI 从论文文本抽取，如发现错误，欢迎反馈修正建议。