Abstract
Leggett formulated an inequality that seems to generalize the Bell theorem to non-local hidden variable theories. Leggett inequality is violated by quantum mechanics, as was confirmed by experiment. However, a careful analysis reveals that the theory applies to a class of local theory. Contrary to what happens in the derivation of Bell inequality, it is not necessary to make the hypothesis of outcome independence to derive the Leggett inequality.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
If the value of those hidden variables associated with the particle at B is affected by the switching of the detector at A, we have a non-local influence, and if the value of the hidden variables at the time of the emission of the pair is affected, we have retrocausality.
Actually, Ref. [10] assumed deterministic theories, so that hypothesis (OI) was replaced by the stricter hypothesis of determinism, while stochastic theories obeying condition (OI) were treated in Refs. [19, 20]. Condition (OI), however, was assumed implicitly, and this fact was first pointed out in Ref. [16], which referred to (OI) as “completeness”, while the more neutral and technical term “outcome-independence” was coined by Shimony [17]. We prefer using the term “Reducibility of Correlations”, which describes better the essence of the hypothesis.
In my opinion, using “locality” as a synonymous of (MI)+(OI)+(SI) is misleading, since physicists not working in the field of Bell inequalities when reading “locality” translate to either “no-signaling” or “no-action-at-a-distance”, while papers using “locality” in the specialized sense do not customarily warn their readers of the terminology. For this reason, in the present manuscript I am avoiding using locality in this specialized sense, and refer to it merely as no-signaling.
The hidden-variable theory might predict that the average value observed at one arm 〈σ〉 a,b ≡∑σP(σ,τ|a,b)≠0. In this case C(a,b) would not be the correlator, but simply the spin-spin average. However, 〈σ〉 a,b ≠0 would already contradict existing experiments.
References
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., Rosen, N.: Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777
Ruark, A.E.: Is the quantum-mechanical description of physical reality complete? Phys. Rev. 48(5), 466 (1935). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.48.466.2
Bohr, N.: Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev. 48(8), 696 (1935). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.48.696
Kemble, E.C.: The correlation of wave functions with the states of physical systems. Phys. Rev. 47(12), 973 (1935). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.47.973.2
Furry, W.H.: Note on the quantum-mechanical theory of measurement. Phys. Rev. 49(5), 393 (1936). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.49.393
Wolfe, H.C.: Quantum mechanics and physical reality. Phys. Rev. 49(3), 274 (1936). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.49.274
Bohm, D.: A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of “hidden” variables. I. Phys. Rev. 85(2), 166 (1952). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.85.166
Bohm, D.: A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of “hidden” variables. II. Phys. Rev. 85(2), 180 (1952). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.85.180
Bohm, D., Aharonov, Y.: Discussion of experimental proof for the paradox of Einstein, Rosen, and Podolsky. Phys. Rev. 108(4), 1070 (1957). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.108.1070
Bell, J.S.: On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. Physics 1, 195 (1964)
Brans, C.H.: Bell’s theorem does not eliminate fully causal hidden variables. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 27, 219 (1988). doi:10.1007/BF00670750
Hall, M.J.W.: Local deterministic model of singlet state correlations based on relaxing measurement independence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 250404 (2010). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.250404
Di Lorenzo, A.: A simple model for the spin singlet: mathematical equivalence of non-locality, slave will and conspiracy. J. Phys. A, Math. Theor. 45(26), 265302 (2012). http://stacks.iop.org/1751-8121/45/i=26/a=265302
Di Lorenzo, A.: Are quantum correlations genuinely quantum? Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 27, 1345016 (2012). http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0217979213450161
Hall, M.J.W.: Relaxed Bell inequalities and Kochen-Specker theorems. Phys. Rev. A 84, 022102 (2011). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.84.022102
Jarrett, J.P.: On the physical significance of the locality conditions in the bell arguments. Noûs 18(4), 569 (1984). http://www.jstor.org/stable/2214878
Shimony, A.: In: Miller, A.I. (ed.) Sixty-Two Years of Uncertainty: Historical, Philosophical, and Physical Inquiries into the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, pp. 33–43. Plenum, New York (1990)
Clauser, J.F., Horne, M.A., Shimony, A., Holt, R.A.: Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories. Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.23.880
Clauser, J.F., Horne, M.A.: Experimental consequences of objective local theories. Phys. Rev. D 10, 526 (1974). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.10.526
Bell, J.S.: In: D’Espagnat, B. (ed.) 49th International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi”: Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Varenna, Italy, pp. 171–181. Academic Press, New York (1971)
Freedman, S.J., Clauser, J.F.: Experimental test of local hidden-variable theories. Phys. Rev. Lett. 28(14), 938 (1972). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.28.938
Aspect, A., Grangier, P., Roger, G.: Experimental realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm gedanken experiment; a new violation of Bell’s inequalities. Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 91 (1982). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.91
Aspect, A., Dalibard, J., Roger, G.: Experimental test of Bell’s inequalities using time-varying analyzers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.1804
Tapster, P.R., Rarity, J.G., Owens, P.C.M.: Violation of Bell’s inequality over 4 km of optical fiber. Phys. Rev. Lett. 73(14), 1923 (1994). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.73.1923
Tittel, W., Brendel, J., Gisin, B., Herzog, T., Zbinden, H., Gisin, N.: Experimental demonstration of quantum correlations over more than 10 km. Phys. Rev. A 57(5), 3229 (1998). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.57.3229
Weihs, G., Jennewein, T., Simon, C., Weinfurter, H., Zeilinger, A.: Violation of Bell’s inequality under strict Einstein locality conditions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 81(23), 5039 (1998). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.5039
Rowe, M.A., Kielpinski, D., Meyer, V., Sackett, C.A., Itano, W.M., Monroe, C., Wineland, D.J.: Experimental violation of a Bell’s inequality with efficient detection. Nature 409, 791 (2001). doi:10.1038/35057215
Leggett, A.: Nonlocal hidden-variable theories and quantum mechanics: an incompatibility theorem. Found. Phys. 33, 1469 (2003). doi:10.1023/A:1026096313729
Gröblacher, S., Paterek, T., Kaltenbaek, R., Brukner, Č., Żukowski, M., Aspelmeyer, M., Zeilinger, A.: An experimental test of non-local realism. Nature 446(7138), 871 (2007). doi:10.1038/nature05677
Paterek, T., Fedrizzi, A., Gröblacher, S., Jennewein, T., Żukowski, M., Aspelmeyer, M., Zeilinger, A.: Experimental test of nonlocal realistic theories without the rotational symmetry assumption. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99(21), 210406 (2007). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.210406
Branciard, C., Ling, A., Gisin, N., Kurtsiefer, C., Lamas-Linares, A., Scarani, V.: Experimental falsification of Leggett’s nonlocal variable model. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99(21), 210407 (2007). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.210407
Eisaman, M.D., Goldschmidt, E.A., Chen, J., Fan, J., Migdall, A.: Experimental test of nonlocal realism using a fiber-based source of polarization-entangled photon pairs. Phys. Rev. A 77(3), 032339 (2008). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.77.032339
Branciard, C., Brunner, N., Gisin, N., Kurtsiefer, C., Lamas-Linares, A., Ling, A., Scarani, V.: Testing quantum correlations versus single-particle properties within Leggett’s model and beyond. Nat. Phys. 4(9), 681 (2008). doi:10.1038/nphys1020
Romero, J., Leach, J., Jack, B., Barnett, S.M., Padgett, M.J., Franke-Arnold, S.: Violation of Leggett inequalities in orbital angular momentum subspaces. New J. Phys. 12, 123007 (2010). doi:10.1088/1367-2630/12/12/123007
Paternostro, M., Jeong, H.: Testing nonlocal realism with entangled coherent states. Phys. Rev. A 81(3), 032115 (2010). doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.81.032115
Lee, C.W., Paternostro, M., Jeong, H.: Faithful test of nonlocal realism with entangled coherent states. Phys. Rev. A 83, 022102 (2011). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.83.022102
Suarez, A.: Nonlocal “realistic” Leggett models can be considered refuted by the before-before experiment. Found. Phys. 38, 583 (2008). doi:10.1007/s10701-008-9228-y
Stefanov, A., Zbinden, H., Gisin, N., Suarez, A.: Quantum correlations with spacelike separated beam splitters in motion: experimental test of multisimultaneity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 120404 (2002). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.120404
Aspect, A.: Quantum mechanics: to be or not to be local. Nature 446, 866 (2007). doi:10.1038/446866a
Colbeck, R., Renner, R.: Hidden variable models for quantum theory cannot have any local part. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101(5), 050403 (2008). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.050403
Di Lorenzo, A.: Determination of hidden variable models reproducing the spin-singlet. Phys. Rev. A 86, 042119 (2012). http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.86.042119
Gröblacher, S., Paterek, T., Kaltenbaek, R., Brukner, Č., Żukowski, M., Aspelmeyer, M., Zeilinger, A.: Supplementary information to an experimental test of non-local realism. Nature 446, 871 (2007). http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v446/n7138/suppinfo/nature05677.html
Acknowledgements
This work was performed as part of the Brazilian Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia para a Informação Quântica (INCT–IQ) and it was supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais through Process No. APQ-02804-10.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Equation (9) is our starting point. Let us study the term
The value of the function inside the absolute value is independent of the choice of coordinate system, so its functional dependence on the coordinates must change with the coordinate system. The same is true for the function F. In Ref. [28] a fixed coordinate system was used, so that the functional dependence of F on its parameters is given. We indicate this fixed function in spherical coordinates as . It is also assumed that and , i.e. the polarizations of the detectors vary in the XY plane of the fixed coordinate system. We call p the unit vector along the Z axis in the coordinate system . The vectors u and v can be written as u=sinθ u (cosϕ u ,sinϕ u ,0)+cosθ u (0,0,1) and v=sinθ v (cosϕ v ,sinϕ v ,0)+cosθ v (0,0,1), with θ u ∈[0,π] and θ v ∈[0,π] the angles with the fixed Z axis. After defining ξ≡(ϕ a +ϕ b )/2 and ϕ≡ϕ a −ϕ b , it is immediate to check that Eq. (16) can be rewritten
with N(≥0) and δ defined by
By averaging Eq. (9) over the possible values of ξ, i.e. rotating a and b in the fixed XY plane while keeping their relative direction unchanged, we obtain
where
and
with S ±≡sinθ u ±sinθ v , α=ϕ u −ϕ v −ϕ. Since N depends only on ϕ u −ϕ v , θ u , and θ v , it is convenient to change variables to χ≡ϕ u −ϕ v and ψ=(ϕ u +ϕ v )/2. The two inner integrals in Eq. (21) then become
After defining the marginal distribution
Eq. (21) can be rewritten
Thus, the correlator satisfies
By letting the angle between a and b vary while keeping both vectors in the XY plane, and summing the inequalities, it can be proved, following Ref. [42], that
with
and another marginal distribution.
Now there is a subtle point to be made: After restoring ϕ u and ϕ v , i.e., writing , Eq. (29) can be cast in invariant form, so thatFootnote 5
Now, if we consider another unit vector p′ and let a and b vary in the plane orthogonal to p′, letting the angle between them take the same values ϕ and ϕ′, the inequality reads
By summing Eqs. (30) and (31), and noticing that [see Eqs. (37)–(43) of Ref. [42] for a proof]
when p⋅p′=0, we arrive at an inequality independent on the knowledge of the measure dF, namely
for p⋅p′=0, which is Leggett inequality.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Di Lorenzo, A. Reassessment of Leggett Inequality. Found Phys 43, 685–698 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-013-9710-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-013-9710-z