Shocker: PR Box is logically inconsistent

In summary, the conversation discusses the paper "Super-Quantum, Non-Signaling Correlations Cannot Exist" by Pierre Uzan, which argues that PR boxes cannot exist if the quantum description of correlation experiments is correct. This challenges previous beliefs and is considered a significant finding.
  • #1
jimgraber
Gold Member
247
18
If correct, Uzan refutes Popescu and Rohrlich.
To me this seems like a big deal.

Super-Quantum, Non-Signaling Correlations Cannot Exist
Pierre Uzan
http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.01135

Comments?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Huh? This paper shows that PR boxes cannot exist if you assume that the quantum description of correlation experiments (in terms of Hilbert spaces, observables, etc.) is the correct one. This isn't news. The whole point of the PR box is that it is a hypothetical example of correlations that are more nonlocal than (and thus not allowed by) quantum physics but which still satisfy the no-signalling constraints.
 
  • #3
I could be wrong, but I think it says that PR boxes are mathematically inconsistent, contrary to what was previously believed.
 
  • #4
Closed pending moderation
 

What is the "Shocker: PR Box is logically inconsistent"?

"Shocker: PR Box is logically inconsistent" is a statement or claim that suggests there is a logical inconsistency or contradiction within the PR Box concept or theory.

What is a PR Box?

A PR Box, also known as a Popescu-Rohrlich Box, is a theoretical device used to demonstrate the principles of quantum mechanics, specifically the concept of entanglement.

What does it mean for a PR Box to be logically inconsistent?

A logically inconsistent PR Box would mean that the principles of quantum mechanics are violated or contradictory within this theoretical device. This would have significant implications for our understanding of quantum mechanics and its applications.

What evidence suggests that the PR Box may be logically inconsistent?

There have been several theoretical and experimental studies that have shown potential inconsistencies within the PR Box concept. These include the No-Communication Theorem and the Hardy Paradox, which both challenge the assumptions and predictions of the PR Box.

What are the implications of a logically inconsistent PR Box?

If a PR Box is found to be logically inconsistent, it could potentially lead to a re-examination and revision of our understanding of quantum mechanics. It could also have implications for other theories and technologies that rely on the principles of quantum mechanics, such as quantum computing and cryptography.

Similar threads

A Does Bell's theorem imply nonlocality using a false assumption
    • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
2K
I How do you understand EPR & Bell's Theorem?
    • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
47
Views
4K
A Quantum nonlocality and "spooky action at a distance"
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
4
Replies
138
Views
5K
Implications of Bell's theorem (Laloe paper)
    • Quantum Physics
Replies
20
Views
2K
A Realism from Locality? Bell's Theorem & Nonlocality in QM
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
7
Replies
226
Views
18K
I New experimental support for pilot wave theory?
    • Quantum Physics
3
Replies
99
Views
8K
A Loophole-free test of local realism via Hardy's violation
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
A Is non-locality a necessary consequence of the Bell theorem?
    • Quantum Physics
Replies
17
Views
2K
A Post-Selection: Pre-existing Correlations or Action At A Distance?
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
54
Views
3K
A Another loophole-free test of Bell's theorem
    • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
58
Views
8K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top