A stronger Bell argument for (some kind of) parameter dependence

Q1 Arts and Humanities

Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics Pub Date : 2020-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.shpsb.2017.03.002

Paul M. Näger

{"title":"A stronger Bell argument for (some kind of) parameter dependence","authors":"Paul M. Näger","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsb.2017.03.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>It is widely accepted that the violation of Bell inequalities excludes local theories of the quantum realm. This paper presents a new derivation of the inequalities from non-trivial non-local theories and formulates a stronger Bell argument excluding also these non-local theories. Taking into account all possible theories, the conclusion of this stronger argument provably is the strongest possible consequence from the violation of Bell inequalities on a qualitative probabilistic level (given usual background assumptions). Among the forbidden theories is a subset of outcome dependent theories showing that outcome dependence is not sufficient for explaining a violation of Bell inequalities. Non-local theories which can violate Bell inequalities (among them quantum theory) are rather characterized by the fact that at least one of the measurement outcomes in some sense (which is made precise) probabilistically depends both on its local as well as on its distant measurement setting (‘parameter’). When Bell inequalities are found to be violated, the true choice is not ‘outcome dependence or parameter dependence’ but between two kinds of parameter dependences, one of them being what is usually called ‘parameter dependence’. Against the received view established by Jarrett and Shimony that on a probabilistic level quantum non-locality amounts to outcome dependence, this result confirms and makes precise Maudlin’s claim that some kind of parameter dependence is required.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54442,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics","volume":"72 ","pages":"Pages 1-28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.shpsb.2017.03.002","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355219815300290","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

It is widely accepted that the violation of Bell inequalities excludes local theories of the quantum realm. This paper presents a new derivation of the inequalities from non-trivial non-local theories and formulates a stronger Bell argument excluding also these non-local theories. Taking into account all possible theories, the conclusion of this stronger argument provably is the strongest possible consequence from the violation of Bell inequalities on a qualitative probabilistic level (given usual background assumptions). Among the forbidden theories is a subset of outcome dependent theories showing that outcome dependence is not sufficient for explaining a violation of Bell inequalities. Non-local theories which can violate Bell inequalities (among them quantum theory) are rather characterized by the fact that at least one of the measurement outcomes in some sense (which is made precise) probabilistically depends both on its local as well as on its distant measurement setting (‘parameter’). When Bell inequalities are found to be violated, the true choice is not ‘outcome dependence or parameter dependence’ but between two kinds of parameter dependences, one of them being what is usually called ‘parameter dependence’. Against the received view established by Jarrett and Shimony that on a probabilistic level quantum non-locality amounts to outcome dependence, this result confirms and makes precise Maudlin’s claim that some kind of parameter dependence is required.

查看原文本刊更多论文

(某种)参数依赖性的一个更强的贝尔论证

人们普遍认为，违反贝尔不等式排除了量子领域的局部理论。本文给出了非平凡非局部理论中不等式的一种新的推导，并给出了一个更强的贝尔论证，也排除了这些非局部理论。考虑到所有可能的理论，这个更有力的论点的结论可以证明是在定性概率水平上(给定通常的背景假设)违反贝尔不等式的最强可能结果。在被禁止的理论中，结果依赖理论的一个子集表明，结果依赖不足以解释贝尔不等式的违反。可能违反贝尔不等式的非局部理论(其中包括量子理论)的特点是，至少有一个测量结果在某种意义上(这是精确的)概率既取决于其局部也取决于其遥远的测量设置(“参数”)。当发现违反贝尔不等式时，真正的选择不是“结果依赖或参数依赖”，而是在两种参数依赖之间进行选择，其中一种通常被称为“参数依赖”。与Jarrett和Shimony建立的在概率层面上量子非定域性等同于结果依赖的公认观点相反，该结果证实并精确地提出了Maudlin的主张，即需要某种参数依赖。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 物理-科学史与科学哲学

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

13.3 weeks

期刊介绍： Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics is devoted to all aspects of the history and philosophy of modern physics broadly understood, including physical aspects of astronomy, chemistry and other non-biological sciences. The primary focus is on physics from the mid/late-nineteenth century to the present, the period of emergence of the kind of theoretical physics that has come to dominate the exact sciences in the twentieth century. The journal is internationally oriented with contributions from a wide range of perspectives. In addition to purely historical or philosophical papers, the editors particularly encourage papers that combine these two disciplines. The editors are also keen to publish papers of interest to physicists, as well as specialists in history and philosophy of physics.