.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The entanglement case and the fully deterministic case produce

identical results (yes):

The entanglement dictates 100% correlation at equal detector

angles (a-b=0) as a result of the cos^{2}Malus law. In multi

photon GHZ type experiments, with 3, 4 or more entangled

photons, this means that if you know the outcome of one

measurement then you know them all.

And that's of course the same for the fully deterministic case.

There is a difference though. To be more exact:

In an N photon experiment with equal detector settings there are:

- N random local processes in case of the Bell Inequality calculations.

- 1 random global process in case of N entangled photons.

- 0 random processes in the fully deterministic case.

The EPR tests do support both the entangled caseandthe fully

deterministic case. The fully deterministic case is proved if the A

photon is detectedbeforethe B photon is even emitted.

If the correlation is still 100% then this means that the results of

the B measurement is fully deterministic over the entire path from

PDC to detector.

All EPR experiments with PDC's test on the fully deterministic case

when viewed from the appropriate SR reference frame. The B photon

is emitted a long time (~5 ns) after the A photon in the PDC.

This means that there are always reference frames in which the

A photon is detected before the B photon is even emitted.

Special Relativity states that the laws of physics should be the same

in all reference frames.

It should not be that hard to device an experiment were the A photon

is detected before the emission of the B photon in all reference frames.

If B is emitted after any "collapse of the wave function" "projection"

"application of born's rule" or however you want to call it then this

would prove that the underlying physics of Quantum Mechanics could

be fully deterministic, at least for the spin type measurements.

The "hidden variables" would predetermine the outcome of the

measurement in the fully deterministic case. The stochastic nature

of QM would be due to a random spread in the HV's but not to

an a priory non-determinism of QM. No non-locality or FTL action

on a distance would be needed.

If the laws of physics are the same in all reference frames then

the current EPR experiments already support such a full determinism

for spin related experiments. That is, if there aren't any of these

loopholes anymore :^)

Regards, Hans.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# EPR results equal the Fully Deterministic case

Loading...

Similar Threads for results equal Fully | Date |
---|---|

B Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment Results | Feb 7, 2018 |

I Time independent Schrodinger equation results (1D) | May 8, 2017 |

I Real world process that results in reciprocal wavefunction | Mar 31, 2017 |

A A surprise result using Helmann-type potential | Feb 12, 2017 |

Measured result is equal to expectation value | Feb 23, 2015 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**