Can Bell's Ansatz Explain the Correlation in the EPRB Experiment?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jk22
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Knowledge
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the correlation in the EPRB experiment, emphasizing the role of local hidden variables and measurement angles. It concludes that the correlation can be expressed as an integral: \(\int_{\Omega[ta,tb]}a(ta,v)b(tb,v)\rho_{end}(ta,tb,v)\). The measurement angles are fixed and embedded in the functions generating outcomes, which affects the integration process. Additionally, the analysis of the Bell-CHSH inequality reveals complexities in measurement results that can yield values of 4, 0, or -4 depending on the outcomes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the EPRB experiment and its implications in quantum mechanics.
  • Familiarity with local hidden variable theories.
  • Knowledge of Bell's theorem and the Bell-CHSH inequality.
  • Basic proficiency in quantum mechanics terminology and mathematical notation.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical formulation of the EPRB experiment and its correlation functions.
  • Explore the implications of local hidden variable theories on quantum mechanics.
  • Investigate the Bell-CHSH inequality and its significance in quantum entanglement.
  • Examine the role of measurement angles in quantum experiments and their impact on results.
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, researchers in quantum mechanics, and students studying the foundations of quantum theory will benefit from this discussion.

jk22
Messages
732
Reaction score
25
considering the eprb experiment, the correlation is written in terms of local hidden variable :

The density of probability at the source is uniform it cannot depend on the measurement angles. Rho(v)

The measurement are made at the two places a(ta,v) b(tb,v)

The datas are the recollected at the same point.

In this last operation it is clear that the integration 'knows' about the measurement angles !

Hence the conclusion is that the correlation at the end should be written as \int_{\Omega[ta,tb]}a(ta,v)b(tb,v)\rho_{end}(ta,tb,v) ?
 
jk22 said:
considering the eprb experiment, the correlation is written in terms of local hidden variable :

The density of probability at the source is uniform it cannot depend on the measurement angles. Rho(v)

The measurement are made at the two places a(ta,v) b(tb,v)

The datas are the recollected at the same point.

In this last operation it is clear that the integration 'knows' about the measurement angles !

Hence the conclusion is that the correlation at the end should be written as \int_{\Omega[ta,tb]}a(ta,v)b(tb,v)\rho_{end}(ta,tb,v) ?
Strictly speaking, the measurement angles are not variables as far as the integration is concerned. They are embeded into the functions which generate the outcomes and are fixed.
 
To continue i had the following analysis of bell-chsh : we consider the measurement results of the operator chsh : AB-AB'+A'B'+A'B

Consdering first the a side we get result a for the forst term. Now the wavefunction is an eigenstate of A hence the measurement for the second term gives again a. The same reasoning applies for a'. Then i consider the b side and i got the following problem : after measuring the third term which gives b' i measure again with B but after measuring B' the wavefunction is not an eigen state of B hence the measurement result for chsh could be : ab-ab'+a'b'+\-a'b ?
 
Last edited:
Add: the later result if it is a minus sign would mean that we have for the measurement results (a+a')(b-b')=4,0 or -4 separately.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 178 ·
6
Replies
178
Views
9K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
12K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
8K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
  • · Replies 874 ·
30
Replies
874
Views
45K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
6K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K