Skip to main content

Early History of Bell’s Theorem

  • Conference paper
Coherence and Quantum Optics VIII

Abstract

Bell’s Theorem is one of the most profound results in physics of the twentieth century. Not only does it have a significant impact on natural philosophy and on the true meaning of quantum mechanics, it also has stimulated important and practical new research in quantum optics. In 1972 at the CQ03 Rochester conference, in response to a number of disturbing issues and challenges then raised by Ed Jaynes concerning the foundations of quantum electrodynamics, I introduced the quantum optics community to Bell’s Theorem and a few of the associated mysteries manifest in quantum entanglement. Given the widespread belief that the foundations of quantum mechanics were then well understood, needless to say, my 1972 talks were then met with considerable skepticism. Eventually, however, the importance of Bell’s Theorem gained full acceptance, so that now it is discussed in many recent quantum mechanics and quantum optics textbooks. Similarly, my first experimental test (with Stuart Freedman in 1972) of the Bell-Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt prediction has since then been repeated and confirmed literally dozens of times, and that prediction now provides a standard quantitative measure of entanglement. Moreover, the fundamental ideas underlying Bell’s Theorem have been found to be sufficiently useful and important, that it is doubtful that the parallel conference ICQI-2001 would have occurred without them. This article recounts the important historical events behind the development of Bell’s Theorem.

Formerly at Department of Physics, univ. of California — Berkeley (retired).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. J. F. Clauser and A. Shimony, Rep. Prog. Phys. (1978) 411881–1927.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Epistemological Letters (Association Ferdinand Gonseth, Institut de la Methode, Case Postale 1081, CH-2501, Bienne.) This newspaper was somewhat unique for its time, in that it openly proclaimed that the usual stigma against hidden-variable theories, and the like, was to be absent for publications within it.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. S. Bell, Speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics, (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1987).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Max Jammer, in Sect. 4.2 of his book, The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechancs, (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1966) argues that Bohr’s denial of realism was in response to his being strongly influenced by the contemporary philosophers, Kierkegaard and Høffding.

    Google Scholar 

  5. J. von Neumann, Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanic, (Springer-Verlag, 1932). English translation: Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, (Princeton University Press, 1955).

    Google Scholar 

  6. A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen (1935), Phys. Rev. 47, 777–80.

    Article  ADS  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. N. Bohr,Phys. Rev. 48, 696 (1935); Nature 136, 65 (1935).

    Article  ADS  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. E. Schrödinger, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 31, 555 (1935).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. W. H. Furry, Phys. Rev. 49, 393 (1936); Phys. Rev. 49, 476 (1936). The second paper emphasizes the differences between his and Schrödinger’s views of this result.

    Article  ADS  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. A. H. Compton and A. W. Simon, Phys. Rev. 26, 289–299 (1925). This experiment is a more precise repetition of an earlier experiment by W. Bothe and H. Geiger, Zeits. für Physik, 26, 44 (1924). Schrödinger, however, subsequently found a semi-classical explanation of this experiment, and went on to propose an important relevant experiment. See “Splitting photons?”.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. N. Bohr, H. A. Kramers, and J. C. Slater, Phil. Mag. [6] 47, 785–802 (1924).

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. S. Bell, Phys. World, Aug. 33–40 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  13. D. Bohm, Quantum Theory, (Prentis Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1950).

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. Bohm and Y. Aharonov, Phys. Rev. 108, 1070 (1957).

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  15. C. S. Wu and I. Shaknov, Phys. Rev. 77, 136 (1950).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. D. Bohm, Phys. Rev. 85, 169 (1952). See also, D. Bohm and 1. P. Vigier, Phys. Rev. 96, 208 (1954). Fortunately, this work was published before the APS policy had been formulated. Presumably, it would have not passed muster under that policy.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. L. deBroglie, Nonlinear Wave Mechanics, (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1960); Ondes Electromagnetiques et Photons, (Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1968); and Introduction to the Vigier Theory of Elementary Particles, (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1963).

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. S. Bell, Revs. Mod. Phys. 38, 447 (1965).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. J. S. Bell, Physics, 1, 195 (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  20. John Bell confesses in the preface to his book, Speakable and unspeakale in quantum mechanics, to being similarly enamored with these features of pilot-wave theories.

    Google Scholar 

  21. C. A. Kocher and E. D. Commins, Phys. Rev. Lett., 18, 575 (1969).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  22. According to David Wick [The Infamous Boundary — Seven Decades of Controversy in Quantum Physics, Birkhäuser, Boston, 1995], my 1969 letter was the first response to his 1964 paper that Bell had received

    Book  Google Scholar 

  23. J. F. Clauser, Bull. Amer. Phys. Soc. 14, 578 (1969).

    Google Scholar 

  24. J, F, Clauser, M. A. Home, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Phys. Rev. Lett., 23, 880 (1969). This paper first coined the term “Bell’s Theorem”.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. S. J. Freedman and J. F. Clauser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 28, 938 (1972).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. J. F. Clauser, Phys. Rev. Lett., 36, 1223, (1976).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. J. F. Clauser, Il Nuovo Cimento, 33B, 740 (1976).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. E. S. Fry and R. C. Thompson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 465 (1976).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  29. J. F. Clauser and M. A. Home, Phys. Rev. D 10, 526–535 (1974).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  30. Shortly following CHSH, Bell did extend the range of applicability of the CHSH result further to include the effects of additional hidden variables in each apparatus. [J. S. Bell, Introduction to the hidden-variables question, in Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Proceedings of the International School of Physics, “Enrico Fermi”, B. d’ Espagnat, ed. (Academic Press, New York, 1971), pp. 170–194]. However, in doing so he adds no new premises to Bell’ s Theorem in this new derivation, and similarly explicitly assumes determinism to hold.

    Google Scholar 

  31. J. S. Bell, Science, 177, 880 (1972).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. E. S. Fry, T. Walther, and S. Li, Phys. Rev. A, 52, 4381–4395 (1995).

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  33. A. Aspect, P. Grangier and G. Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett., 49, 91 (1982).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  34. J.S. Bell, Communication at the 6th Gift Conf. Jaca, June 1975, Res Th 2053-CERN. Perhaps, Bell’s reason for not publishing this result in 1975 is that he may have been afraid that doing so might warrant his being branded a quack, given the then existing stigma against such work.

    Google Scholar 

  35. See, J. S. Bell, A. Shimony, M. A. Home, and J. F. Clauser, Dialectica, 39, pp.85–110, (1985), for a republication of this interchange that also includes Bell’s “Beablesrd paper.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. See also, A. Shimony, Search for a Naturalistic World, (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1993). More recently, the importance of these concepts was independently rediscovered by J. Jarrett [Noûs, 18,569 (1984)].

    Book  Google Scholar 

  37. W. E. Lamb and Scully, in Polarization: Matière et Rayonnement, (Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1969), edited by Société Française de de Physique.

    Google Scholar 

  38. P. A. Franken, in Atomic Physics: Pooceedings of the 1st International Conference on Atomic Physics, (Plenum, New York, 1968) V. Hughes et al. eds., p.377.

    Google Scholar 

  39. E, T. Jaynes and Cummings, Proc. IEEE 51, 89 (1963); C. R. Stroud, Jr. and E. T. Jaynes, Phys. Rev. A 1,106 (1970); M. D. Crisp and E. T. Jaynes, Phys. Rev. 179, 1253 (1969); 185, 2046 (1969). See also, P. A. Nesbet, Phys. Rev. A 4, 259 (1971).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. J. F. Clauser, Phys. Rev. A, 6, 49 (1972).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  41. The proceedings of this conference are in Coherence and Quantum Optics, (Plenum Press, New York, 1973) L. Mandel and E. Wolf, eds.

    Google Scholar 

  42. J. M. Jauch and F. Rohrlich, The Theory of Photons and Electrons (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1955).

    Google Scholar 

  43. J. M. Jauch, Dialogue on the Question ARE QUANTA REAL? (Univ. of Geneva, preprint, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  44. E. Schrödinger, Physikalische Zeits. 23, 301–303 (1922); Die Naturwissenschaften 12, 720-724 (1924); Il Nuovo Cimento 9,162-170 (1958).

    Google Scholar 

  45. A. Ádám, L. Jánnosy and P. Varga, Acta Phys. Hung., 4, 301 (1955); Ann. Physik, 16, 408, (1956).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. J. F. Clauser, Phys. Rev. D, 9, 853 (1974).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  47. P. Grangier, G. Roger, and A. Aspect, Europhys. Lett., 20, 1061 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  48. A. Aspect, J. Dalibard and G. Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett., 49, 1804 (1982).

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this paper

Cite this paper

Clauser, J.F. (2003). Early History of Bell’s Theorem. In: Bigelow, N.P., Eberly, J.H., Stroud, C.R., Walmsley, I.A. (eds) Coherence and Quantum Optics VIII. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8907-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8907-9_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-4715-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-8907-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics