Delayed-choice entanglement swapping experiments: No evidence for timelike entanglement

IF 1.4 2区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Pub Date : 2024-05-22 DOI:10.1016/j.shpsa.2024.04.001
Jørn Kløvfjell Mjelva
{"title":"Delayed-choice entanglement swapping experiments: No evidence for timelike entanglement","authors":"Jørn Kløvfjell Mjelva","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2024.04.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the possibility of temporal nonlocality, mirroring the spatial nonlocality supposedly evidenced by the Bell correlations. In this context, Glick (2019) has argued that timelike entanglement and temporal nonlocality is demonstrated in delayed-choice entanglement swapping (DCES) experiments, like that of Ma et al. (2012), Megidish et al. (2013) and Hensen et al. (2015). I will argue that a careful analysis of these experiments shows that they in fact display nothing more than “ordinary” spacelike entanglement, and that any purported timelike entanglement is an artefact of selection bias. Regardless any other reason one may have for challenging the assumption of temporal locality, timelike entanglement as evidenced by these experiments is not among them. I conclude by discussing what lessons on the nature of entanglement might be drawn from an examination of DCES experiments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"105 ","pages":"Pages 138-148"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039368124000542/pdfft?md5=18ae0fc226c8b1c807b9ac07caf00759&pid=1-s2.0-S0039368124000542-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039368124000542","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the possibility of temporal nonlocality, mirroring the spatial nonlocality supposedly evidenced by the Bell correlations. In this context, Glick (2019) has argued that timelike entanglement and temporal nonlocality is demonstrated in delayed-choice entanglement swapping (DCES) experiments, like that of Ma et al. (2012), Megidish et al. (2013) and Hensen et al. (2015). I will argue that a careful analysis of these experiments shows that they in fact display nothing more than “ordinary” spacelike entanglement, and that any purported timelike entanglement is an artefact of selection bias. Regardless any other reason one may have for challenging the assumption of temporal locality, timelike entanglement as evidenced by these experiments is not among them. I conclude by discussing what lessons on the nature of entanglement might be drawn from an examination of DCES experiments.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
延迟选择纠缠交换实验:没有证据表明存在时间纠缠
近年来,人们对时间非局域性的可能性越来越感兴趣,这与贝尔相关性所证明的空间非局域性如出一辙。在这方面,Glick(2019)认为,延迟选择纠缠交换(DCES)实验证明了类时间纠缠和时间非位置性,如Ma等人(2012)、Megidish等人(2013)和Hensen等人(2015)的实验。我将论证,对这些实验的仔细分析表明,它们实际上显示的不过是 "普通的 "时空纠缠,任何所谓的时空纠缠都是选择偏差的产物。无论人们有什么其他理由质疑时间位置性假设,这些实验所证明的时间纠缠都不在其中。最后,我将讨论从对 DCES 实验的研究中可以汲取哪些关于纠缠本质的教训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
166
审稿时长
6.6 weeks
期刊介绍: Studies in History and Philosophy of Science is devoted to the integrated study of the history, philosophy and sociology of the sciences. The editors encourage contributions both in the long-established areas of the history of the sciences and the philosophy of the sciences and in the topical areas of historiography of the sciences, the sciences in relation to gender, culture and society and the sciences in relation to arts. The Journal is international in scope and content and publishes papers from a wide range of countries and cultural traditions.
期刊最新文献
Soft control: Furthering the case for Modified Interventionist Theory Explanatory circles Modus Darwin redux The philosophical coming of age of science. Euler’s role in Cassirer’s early philosophy of space and time Freud, bullshit, and pseudoscience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1