Big Bell Test Collaboration: Challenging Local Realism with Human Choices

In summary, the results of the big Bell test show that local realism cannot be true in bi-partite and tri-partite scenarios.
  • #1
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,131
1,878
Not sure if this reference has been posted yet, but I just saw it come through and thought I'd share. This is the "Big Bell Test Collaboration" using measurement choices provided by persons (as opposed to computer generated "random" choices). (The authors are a virtual who's who in the world of entanglement.)

https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.04431

"A Bell test, which challenges the philosophical worldview of local realism against experimental observations, is a randomized trial requiring spatially-distributed entanglement, fast and high-efficiency detection, and unpredictable measurement settings. While technology can perfect the first two of these, and while technological randomness sources enable device-independent protocols based on Bell inequality violation, challenging local realism using physical randomizers inevitably makes assumptions about the same physics one aims to test. Bell himself noted this weakness of physical setting choices and argued that human free will could rigorously be used to assure unpredictability in Bell tests. Here we report a suite of local realism tests using human choices, avoiding assumptions about predictability in physics. We recruited ~100,000 human participants to play an online video game that incentivizes fast, sustained input of unpredictable bits while also illustrating Bell test methodology. The participants generated 97,347,490 binary choices, which were directed via a scalable web platform to twelve laboratories on five continents, in which 13 experiments tested local realism using photons, single atoms, atomic ensembles, and superconducting devices. Over a 12-hour period on the 30 Nov. 2016, participants worldwide provided a sustained flow of over 1000 bits/s to the experiments, which used different human-generated bits to choose each measurement setting. The observed correlations strongly contradict local realism and other realist positions in bi-partite and tri-partite scenarios. Project outcomes include closing of the freedom-of-choice loophole, gamification of statistical and quantum non-locality concepts, new methods for quantum-secured communications, a very large dataset of human-generated randomness, and networking techniques for global participation in experimental science."
 
  • Like
Likes Lord Crc, RUTA, PeterDonis and 6 others
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Is this better than coin flipping?
 
  • #3
I was happy to take part as one of the people from around the world!
 
  • #4
StevieTNZ said:
I was happy to take part as one of the people from around the world!

You are a superdeterministic person :)
 
  • #5
So, quantum mechanics as usual?
 
  • Like
Likes DrChinese
  • #6
Humans are not good pseudo-random number generators, even when they give their best. For instance, suppose that we want to generate a random sequence of digits from 0 to 9. If some digit is 7, the probability that the next digit is also 7 is 1/10. However, if a human chooses that one digit is 7, the probability that his next choice will also be 7 is typically less than 1/10. Typically, human choices of wannabe random sequences show an antibunching effect.

One example of such an antibunching effect can be seen in my own attempt to distribute points "randomly" in Fig. 2 of http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0904.2287 .(Fortunately, this does not affect the results of this paper.)
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Demystifier said:
Humans are not good pseudo-random number generators

The point of big Bell test is not to generate unpredictable random numbers, computer RNGs as you said are better than humans in that. The point of the test is to close the freedom of choice loophole.
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier

What is the "Big Bell Test Collaboration"?

The Big Bell Test Collaboration is a global scientific experiment that aims to challenge the concept of local realism, a fundamental principle in physics that suggests that objects can only influence each other through direct physical interactions. The experiment involves human participants making choices that will influence the outcome of a quantum mechanics experiment, and the results will be used to test the validity of local realism.

Why is it important to challenge local realism?

Local realism has been a cornerstone in physics for many years, but recent advancements in quantum mechanics have raised questions about its validity. By challenging local realism, we can gain a deeper understanding of the nature of reality and potentially uncover new principles of physics.

How can I participate in the Big Bell Test Collaboration?

Anyone can participate in the Big Bell Test Collaboration by visiting the project's website and completing a series of simple tasks. These tasks involve making choices that will influence the outcome of a quantum mechanics experiment. The results of your choices will then be used in the overall analysis of the experiment.

What is the goal of the Big Bell Test Collaboration?

The goal of the Big Bell Test Collaboration is to gather a large and diverse dataset of human choices that will be used to test the validity of local realism. By involving a large number of people from different backgrounds, the experiment aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the nature of reality.

What are the potential implications of the Big Bell Test Collaboration?

If the results of the Big Bell Test Collaboration show that local realism is not a valid principle, it could have significant implications for our understanding of the universe. It could open up new avenues for research and potentially lead to breakthroughs in the fields of quantum mechanics and physics.

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
667
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Replies
93
Views
4K
Replies
63
Views
7K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
3
Replies
82
Views
10K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
49
Views
2K
Back
Top