Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Physics
Quantum Physics
Is a bipartite system necessary for the proof of the PBR theorem?
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="greypilgrim, post: 6292153, member: 490763"] Hi. I'm trying to grasp what the PBR theorem is about. I'm not tackling the full version, but rather the simple example in [USER=61953]@Demystifier[/USER]'s [URL='http://thphys.irb.hr/wiki/main/images/c/cb/PBR.pdf']summary[/URL]. While I think I understand the mathematical steps, my question is why you need [B]two[/B] systems to prove it. Is this only technical or more fundamental? I mean it's not that surprising for a no-go theorem to make use of a bipartite system, but the crucial thing about that, such as in Bell's theorem, usually is that those systems are entangled. Here they just seem to be in a product state. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Physics
Quantum Physics
Is a bipartite system necessary for the proof of the PBR theorem?
Back
Top