Is this article's reliability questionable?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Collin237
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    article
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the reliability of an article concerning laboratory techniques related to Bell's inequalities and the implications of the coincidence-time loophole in quantum experiments. Participants express varying levels of familiarity with the topic and the article's claims.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the validity of the article, comparing it to a seemingly absurd claim about global warming, suggesting skepticism about its reliability.
  • Another participant argues that the article's concern regarding the coincidence-time loophole is not entirely unfounded but indicates that recent experiments have addressed this issue effectively.
  • This second participant mentions that there are Bell inequality derivations that do not rely on local hidden variable (LHV) models, which could counter some arguments made in the article.
  • A mentor later intervenes, stating that the article is from a non-reputable journal and that discussions about such articles are not permitted in the forum.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the reliability of the article. Some participants express skepticism about its claims, while others acknowledge that the concerns raised have been addressed in recent experiments. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the article's validity.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the limitations of the article's claims, particularly regarding the latest experimental techniques that address the coincidence-time loophole. However, the specifics of these techniques and their implications are not fully explored in the thread.

Collin237
Messages
58
Reaction score
6
TL;DR
This guy claims to have obviated the Bell inequality. What did he do wrong to get this result?
This is in reference to the following essay: https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/20/11/877

He's talking about laboratory techniques, which I don't know about. But it sounds like he's saying that the Bell violation comes from the necessity to select the most likely pairing of the two detection sequences.

My gut reaction is that this reminds me of an article in Analog where someone said that global warming is an illusion caused by the use of a new kind of bulb in lamps commonly found near climate lab thermometers. (ROTFL)

Is this article similarly idiotic? Or does it reflect any actual concern about the experiments?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
As I understand, in this article apparent violation of Bell's inequalities is attributed to coincidence-time loophole.
In latest experiments coincidence-time loophole is closed. Experimenters are using pulsed pump lasers so that downconverted photons are generated at certain time windows determined by pump laser pulses. So they use these pump pulses to set coincidence widows rather than photon detections or measurement settings.

So the concern raised in the article is not idiotic, but it has been taken care of and it seems that the author has not investigated latest experiments carefully enough.

Another thing is that there are Bell inequality derivations that do not relay on any LHV model, stochastic, deterministic, contextual or non-contextual. One rather informal counter example type "proof" is here and another formal Eberhard's proof is reproduced here (original is behind paywall). These proofs do not address coincidence-time loophole, but they might be used to counter other arguments used in this article.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Thread closed for Moderation...
 
Good reply by @zonde -- thanks.

@Collin237 -- the reference you linked to is not acceptable. We don't discuss or debunk articles in non-reputable journals.

After a Mentor discussion, this thread will remain closed.
 

Similar threads

High School Questions on QFT & QM: Is QM or QFT Absolute Time?
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
8K
High School QFT & QM Questions (about time, locality, gravity, etc.)
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
High School Unlearning the Block Universe: How Relativity Challenges Our Perception of Time
  • · Replies 90 ·
4
Replies
90
Views
12K
High School Infrared Detectors & The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
11K
Model CO2 as Greenhouse Gas: Tips & Results
  • · Replies 186 ·
7
Replies
186
Views
95K