Weih's data: what ad hoc explanations do local and non-local models give?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter harrylin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Data Local Models
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the analysis of Weihs et al.'s experimental data regarding local and non-local models in quantum mechanics, particularly in the context of "local realism." Participants, including harrylin and Lugita15, discuss various loopholes such as the detection loophole and coincidence time loophole, emphasizing that while many loopholes have been individually addressed, simultaneous closure remains elusive. The conversation also highlights the importance of data analysis techniques, including the use of MySQL for querying experimental datasets, and references key papers that analyze the implications of these findings on quantum theory.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly local realism and non-locality.
  • Familiarity with experimental loopholes in quantum experiments, such as detection and coincidence time loopholes.
  • Proficiency in data analysis using MySQL, specifically for handling experimental datasets.
  • Knowledge of Bell inequalities and their significance in quantum theory.
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the implications of the Fair Sampling Assumption in EPR experiments.
  • Investigate the analysis techniques used in "A Close Look at the EPR Data of Weihs et al."
  • Learn about the statistical methods for analyzing coincidence counts in quantum experiments.
  • Review the paper "Explaining Counts from EPRB Experiments: Are They Consistent with Quantum Theory?" for further insights.
USEFUL FOR

Researchers in quantum mechanics, experimental physicists analyzing EPR experiments, and data analysts interested in the intersection of quantum theory and experimental data interpretation.

  • #61


Peter Morgan said:
I basically did not much more than what you see in the paper on the arXiv. What looks pretty clear is that a local adjustment can be made to the timings that eliminates the timing features at the nanosecond scale that I at first identified in the longdist35 dataset. I didn't look quantitatively at what might be discovered by looking at multiple datasets (which can become a lot of work, so one wants a relatively strong feeling that it might be worthwhile).
I'm not sure whether the Weihs data contains enough information to characterize what parts of the various timing delays are caused by the electro-optical modulator.
You may have missed the concern that was perhaps first raised by De Raedt: a certain amount of unaccounted birefringence could explain the results instead of "non-locality". Regretfully nobody seems to know if this may have been caused by the EOM or not.
BTW: let's get Gregor Weihs' name right. It's not Weih, nor Weih's. Of course I should feel especially sensitive about this, because there's one place in my arXiv paper where I use Wiehs.
Yeah I know, regretfully my spelling error is in the title and I can't change it. :rolleyes:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K