Why quantum correlations are shocking

IF 2.9 2区 物理与天体物理 Q2 Physics and Astronomy Physical Review A Pub Date : 2024-08-06 DOI:10.1103/physreva.110.022209
Michael J. W. Hall
{"title":"Why quantum correlations are shocking","authors":"Michael J. W. Hall","doi":"10.1103/physreva.110.022209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A simple minimalist argument is given for why some correlations between quantum systems boggle our classical intuition. The argument relies on two elementary physical assumptions, and recovers the standard experimentally testable Bell inequality in a form that applies equally well to correlations between six-sided dice and between photon polarizations. The first assumption, that measurement selection in a first laboratory leaves the measurement statistics in a remote laboratory invariant (no signaling), has been empirically verified, and is shown to be equivalent to the existence of a corresponding joint probability distribution for quantities measured in the first laboratory. The observed violation of the Bell inequality is then equivalent to the failure of a second assumption, that measurement selection in the remote laboratory leaves such a joint distribution invariant. Indeed, the degree of violation lower-bounds the variation of the joint distribution. It directly follows there are just three possible physical mechanisms underlying such violations—action at a distance (superluminality), unavoidable common factors linking measurement choice and distant properties (conspiracy), and intrinsically incompatible physical quantities (complementarity). The argument extends to all Bell inequalities, and is briefly compared with other derivations.","PeriodicalId":20146,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review A","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Review A","FirstCategoryId":"101","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.110.022209","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Physics and Astronomy","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A simple minimalist argument is given for why some correlations between quantum systems boggle our classical intuition. The argument relies on two elementary physical assumptions, and recovers the standard experimentally testable Bell inequality in a form that applies equally well to correlations between six-sided dice and between photon polarizations. The first assumption, that measurement selection in a first laboratory leaves the measurement statistics in a remote laboratory invariant (no signaling), has been empirically verified, and is shown to be equivalent to the existence of a corresponding joint probability distribution for quantities measured in the first laboratory. The observed violation of the Bell inequality is then equivalent to the failure of a second assumption, that measurement selection in the remote laboratory leaves such a joint distribution invariant. Indeed, the degree of violation lower-bounds the variation of the joint distribution. It directly follows there are just three possible physical mechanisms underlying such violations—action at a distance (superluminality), unavoidable common factors linking measurement choice and distant properties (conspiracy), and intrinsically incompatible physical quantities (complementarity). The argument extends to all Bell inequalities, and is briefly compared with other derivations.

Abstract Image

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
量子相关性为何令人震惊
对于量子系统之间的某些相关性为什么会让我们的经典直觉感到困惑,我们给出了一个简单的简约论证。该论证依赖于两个基本物理假设,并以同样适用于六面骰子之间和光子偏振之间相关性的形式,恢复了标准的可实验检验的贝尔不等式。第一个假设是,在第一个实验室进行测量选择时,远端实验室的测量统计数据保持不变(无信号),这一假设已得到经验验证,并被证明等同于在第一个实验室测量的量存在相应的联合概率分布。因此,观察到的对贝尔不等式的违反等同于第二个假设的失败,即远程实验室的测量选择使这种联合分布不变。事实上,违反的程度会降低联合分布的变化范围。由此直接推论,这种违反的物理机制可能只有三种--远距离作用(超光性)、测量选择与远距离属性之间不可避免的共同因素(共谋),以及本质上不相容的物理量(互补性)。该论证扩展到所有贝尔不等式,并与其他推导进行了简要比较。
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
Physical Review A
Physical Review A 物理-光学
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
24.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
2.2 months
期刊介绍: Physical Review A (PRA) publishes important developments in the rapidly evolving areas of atomic, molecular, and optical (AMO) physics, quantum information, and related fundamental concepts. PRA covers atomic, molecular, and optical physics, foundations of quantum mechanics, and quantum information, including: -Fundamental concepts -Quantum information -Atomic and molecular structure and dynamics; high-precision measurement -Atomic and molecular collisions and interactions -Atomic and molecular processes in external fields, including interactions with strong fields and short pulses -Matter waves and collective properties of cold atoms and molecules -Quantum optics, physics of lasers, nonlinear optics, and classical optics
期刊最新文献
Relativistic and recoil corrections to vacuum polarization in muonic systems: Three-photon exchange, gauge invariance, and numerical values Combined microwave and optical spectroscopy for hyperfine structure analysis in thulium atoms Spectral evidence of vibronic Rabi oscillations in the resonance-enhanced photodissociation of MgH+ Universality and two-body losses: Lessons from the effective non-Hermitian dynamics of two particles Reliable quantum memories with unreliable components
×
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