Question: Do we really need to spend too much time on Bell's theorem/test when there are numerous/easier proofs of quantum entanglement?(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The numerous/easier proofs are: - Almost all experiments in which two photons are generated via

a) SPDC (Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser, Machâ€“Zehnder interferometer et el.)

b) Fiber coupler

c) Quantum dots

d) Atomic cascades (used in the original Bell's test/theorem)

For example in DCQE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser): [Broken]

one of the twin/entangled photon's path can be manipulated to get (or erase) which-way information andthe effect can be instantaneously seen on its remote twinin term of the patterns the twin would make on the screen.

Is there a way/logic that LHV (local hidden variable) theory can explain this? Are there anyloopholes?

Spending time on Bell's theorem might be useful as it serves as additional/secondary proof and it proves/confirms the cosine relationship (from QM theory)

however do we need to argue/doubt the existence of Quantum Entanglement?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

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!

# Proving Entanglement - Do we need Bells Theorem?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**