Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

I A computational model of Bell correlations

  1. Dec 17, 2017 #76
    Trying to reproduce the correlation we could try the following reasoning :

    The model is : $$C(a,b)=\int \underbrace{A(a,x)\cdot B(b,x)}_{AB(a,b,x)}dx$$
    more generally :

    $$AB(a,b,x)=g(A(a,x),B(b,x))$$

    numerically an exhaustive search over the functions : $$g,A,B : \{0,1\}^2->\{0,1\}$$ since a,b can take 2 values and x too for the spin 1/2 case (we could remap the names of the two angles)

    The total number of functions AB is $$2^{(2^3)}=256$$

    The decomposition above gave 192 functions generated.

    Hence i came to the paradox : even if in this way 75% of the functions can be generated , the quantum real function shall be in the remaining.

    But then this also lead to the fact that the decomposition $$AB(a,b,x)=g(h(A(a,x),B(b,x)),A'(a,x))$$
    Gives 256 over 256 functions (but seems physically akward or unacceptable)?

    I would like to try functions thst can take 3 values but on my pc it will last weeks...
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2017
  2. Apr 14, 2018 #77
    Addendum, erratum :

    In fact nonlocality is hidden here, since if the angles can take $$na,nb$$ values then the cube can be sliced in $$nb$$ functions of $$ a$$ and $$\lambda$$, hence it depends on $$a$$ and a property of b.
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted