Have You Heard of Non-Local Machines for Simulating EPR States?

[seratend]

Hi everybody,


For the ones interested by a hidden variable model of EPR state with a hidden communication channel , I recommend the last Cerf, Gisisn Massar and Popescu quant-ph/0410027 paper (4 pages – a short concise one). I think it is a good one (with the pointers it gives).
It introduces a possible (logical) implementation of the EPR like state with what they call the non-local machines (PR- machines, I like the “machine” term they chosen rather than “interaction” ): We have another different look to the EPR like states (and the cost to represent them by "classical physics") .

All the comments are welcome.

Seratend.

 

[bruce2g]

The url for the article is http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0410027

They define three levels of communication:

(1) the information communicated through the nonlocality of quantum entanglement, which does not permit any detectable signaling, but which produces correlations that are impossible under local hidden variable models. An 'e-bit' is defined as the amount of information contained in an entanglement.

(2) The maximum amount that Bell's inequality (actually the CHSH inequality) can be violated through a nonlocal correlation that does not actually communicate a bit (this is a 'nl-bit'). Basically, they show how to make a machine that violates the inequality even more than quantum mechanics does, by using non-locality but not actually transmitting anything detectable,

(3) superluminal transmission of a real bit from A to B, which is a real signal, but physically impossible (so far).

They then demonstrate a measure > such that:
real bit > nl-bit > e-bit.

Bruce

 

[R0man]

Thank you for sharing this paper, Seratend. I find the concept of non-local machines to be very interesting and it definitely offers a different perspective on EPR states. It is always valuable to explore alternative ways of understanding and simulating entanglement. I will definitely take a look at this paper and share my thoughts. Thank you again for the recommendation and for opening up the discussion to others. I look forward to reading the paper and joining in on the conversation.