A Bell inequalities demonstration

microsansfil
Messages
325
Reaction score
43
TL;DR Summary
I try to understand why the correlator boundaries is −1 ≤ C(x y) ≤ 1
Hello,

In this thesis https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01743877/document at "1.2.2 Bell inequalities" page 7-8 it's define a correlation function :

C(x y) = P(+ + |x y) + P(− − |x y) − P(+ − |x y) − P(− + |x y), with −1 ≤ C(x y) ≤ 1.

How do one get to this relationship −1 ≤ C(x y) ≤ 1 ?

Thanks
Patrick
 
Physics news on Phys.org
microsansfil said:
Summary:: I try to understand why the correlator boundaries is −1 ≤ C(x y) ≤ 1

Hello,

In this thesis https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01743877/document at "1.2.2 Bell inequalities" page 7-8 it's define a correlation function :

C(x y) = P(+ + |x y) + P(− − |x y) − P(+ − |x y) − P(− + |x y), with −1 ≤ C(x y) ≤ 1.

How do one get to this relationship −1 ≤ C(x y) ≤ 1 ?

Thanks
Patrick
It's just a consequence of positivity $$P(\pm \pm' | xy) \geq 0$$ and normalisation $$P(++|xy) + P(+-|xy) + P(-+|xy) + P(--|xy) = 1$$ of the probabilities.
 
  • Like
Likes microsansfil and vanhees71
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
I asked a question related to a table levitating but I am going to try to be specific about my question after one of the forum mentors stated I should make my question more specific (although I'm still not sure why one couldn't have asked if a table levitating is possible according to physics). Specifically, I am interested in knowing how much justification we have for an extreme low probability thermal fluctuation that results in a "miraculous" event compared to, say, a dice roll. Does a...
Back
Top