Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T11:14:10.173Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Jarrett Completeness and Superluminal Signals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2023

Frederick M. Kronz
Frederick M. Kronz*
Affiliation:
University of Texas—Austin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Bell (1964) demonstrated that if two restrictions are imposed on the hypothetical hidden variables supposed to underlie quantum mechanical states, then it is possible to derive an inequality that is violated by certain predictions of QM (Quantum Mechanics); the predictions concern pairs of systems whose states are strongly correlated. The two restrictions are denoted herein as SL (Strong Locality) and HA (Hidden Autonomy)1, and the inequality as BI (the Bell Inequality). Since SL and HA together entail BI, and QM violates BI, it follows that any HVT (Hidden-Variables Theory) for QM must violate either SL or HA.

It is well known that a condition known as PA (Perfect Anti-correlation) was also used by Bell to derive the inequality. PA says that parallel experiments (experiments with parallel spin-analyzer orientations) never yield the same results.

Type
Part IV. Quantum Theory
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1990 , Issue 1: Volume One: Contributed Papers 1990 , 1990 , pp. 227 - 239
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aspect, A., and Granger, P. (1983), “Experiments on Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Type Correlations with Pairs of Visible Photons”, Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Tokyo.Google Scholar
Belinfante, F.J. (1973), A Survey of Hidden-Variables Theories. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Bell, J.S. (1966), “On the Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics”, Reviews of Modern Physics 38: 447–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, J.S. (1964), “On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox”, Physics 1: 195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilaniuk, O.M.P., and Sudarshan, E.C.G. (1969), “Particles Beyond the Light Barrier”, Physics Today 5: 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clauser, J.F., and Horne, M.A. (1974), “Experimental Consequences of Objective Local Theories”, Physical Review D 10: 526-35.Google Scholar
Clauser, J.F.; Horne, M.A. Shimony, A.; and Holt, R.A. (1969), “Proposed Experiment to Test Local Hidden-Variable Theories”, Physical Review Letters 23: 880–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, A. (1982), “Some Local Models for Correlation Experiments”, Synthese 50: 279–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarrett, J.P. (1984), “On the Physical Significance of the Locality Conditions in the Bell Arguments”, Nous 18: 569–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kochen, S., and Specker, E.P. (1967), “The Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics”, in Hooker, C.A. (ed.), The Logico-Algebraic Approach to Quantum Mechanics. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Kronz, F.M. (forthcoming), “Hidden Locality, Conspiracy and Superluminal Signals”, Philosophy of Science.Google Scholar
Mermin, N.D. (1986), “The EPR Experiment—Thoughts about the ‘Loophole’”, New Techniques and Ideas in Quantum Measurement Theory. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 480: 422–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mermin, N.D. (1979), “Quantum Mechanics vs Local Realism Near the Classical Limit: A Bell Inequality for Spin s”, Physical Review D22: 356–361.Google Scholar
Redhead, M. (1983), “Nonlocality and Peaceful Coexistence”, in Swinburne, R. (ed.), Space, Time and Causality. Dordrecht: D. Riedel Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Schumacher, B. (forthcoming), “Information and Quantum Nonseparability”, Physical Review A.Google Scholar
Shimony, A. (1986), “Events and Processes in the Quantum World”, in Penrose, R. and Isham, C.J. (eds.), Quantum Concepts in Space and Time. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shimony, A. (1983), “Controllable and Uncontrollable Non-Locality”, Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Tokyo.Google Scholar
Shimony, A., Clauser, J.F. and Home, M.A. (1976), “Comment on ‘The Theory of Local Beables’”, Epistemological Letters 13: 1–8.Google Scholar
Van Fraassen, (1982), “The Charybdis of Realism: Epistemological Implications of Bell’s Inequality”, Synthese 52: 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wooters, W.K. (1980), “The Acquisition of Information from Quantum Measurements”, (Ph.D. Thesis, University of Texas, unpublished).Google Scholar