Skip to main content

Aspects of Nonlocality in Quantum Mechanics

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: The Frontiers Collection ((FRONTCOLL))

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. W. Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy (Harper, New York 1962)

    Google Scholar 

  2. E. Schrödinger, “Discussion of probability relations between separated systems,” Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 31, 555–563 (1935)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete?” Physical Review 48, 777–780 (1935)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. This formulation follows that given in A. Shimony, “The Logic of EPR,” Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie 26, 399–411 (2001). To my knowledge, the first to use inductive logic explicitly in a discussion of EPR was B. d’Espagnat, Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Benjamin, Menlo Park, CA 1971); 2nd edn (1976); 3rd edn (1989).

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (Ref 3)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. G.-C. Ghirardi and R. Grassi, “Outcome Predictions and Property Attribution: the EPR Argument Reconsidered,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 25, 397–423 (1994); and M. Redhead and P. la Rivière, “The Relativistic EPR Argument,” in R. S. Cohen, M. Horne and J. Stachel, eds, Potentiality, Entanglement and Passion-at-a-Distance (Kluwer, Dordrecht 1997), pp 197–215. A. Shimony and H. Stein, “On quantum nonlocality, special relativity, and counterfactual reasoning,” in A. Ashtekar, R. S. Cohen, D. Howard, J. Renn, S. Sarkar, and A. Shimony (eds), Revising the Foundations of Relativistic Physics: Festschrift in Honor of John Stachel (Kluwer, Dordrecht 2001), have argued that the assumption of non-quantum mechanical elements of physical reality is needed for justifying a large class of counterfactual inferences.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. J. S. Bell, “On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox,” Physics 1, 195–200 (1964); reprinted in J. S. Bell, Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1987)

    Google Scholar 

  8. This generalization draws upon the following. J. S. Bell, “Introduction to the Hidden-Variable Question,” in B. d’Espagnat, ed, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Academic, New York 1971), pp 171–181; reprinted in Bell, Speakable and Unspeakable (Ref 7). J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony and R. A. Holt, “Proposed Experiment to Test Local Hidden Variable Theories,” Physical Review Letters 23, 880–883 (1969). J. F. Clauser and M. A. Horne, “Experimental Consequences of Local Objective Theories,” Physical Review D 10, 526–535 (1974). J. Jarrett, “On the Physical Significance of the Locality Conditions in the Bell Arguments,” Nous 18, (1984). A. Shimony (1990), “An Exposition of Bell’s Theorem,” in A. Miller, ed, Sixty Years of Uncertainty (Plenum, New York 1990), pp 33–43; reprinted in A. Shimony, Search for a Naturalistic World View, vol 2 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jarrett, “On the Physical Significance of the Locality Conditions” (Ref 8)

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. J. Freedman and J. F. Clauser, “Experimental Test of Local Hidden-Variable Theories,” Physical Review Letters 28, 938–941 (1972)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Unpublished, though widely reported. For details see R. A. Holt, Ph. D. thesis, Physics Department, Harvard University, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. F. Clauser, “Experimental Investigation of a Polarization Correlation Anomaly,” Physical Review Letters 36, 1223–1226 (1976)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, and G. Roger, “Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using Variable Analyzers,” Physical Review Letters 49, 1804–1807 (1982)

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. W. Tittel, J. Brendel, H. Zbinden, and N. Gisin, “Violation of Bell Inequalities by Photons More than 10 km Apart,” Physical Review Letters 81, 3563–3566 (1998)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  15. G. Weihs, T. Jennewein, C. Simon, H. Weinfurter, and A. Zeilinger, “Violation of Bell’s Inequality under Strict Einstein Locality Conditions: Photons Do not Wear Socks,” Physical Review Letters 81, 5039–5043 (1998)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. Clauser and Horne, “Experimental Consequences of Local Objective Theories” (Ref 8)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. T. Maudlin, Quantum Non-locality and Relativity (Blackwell, Oxford 1994)

    Google Scholar 

  18. N. D. Mermin and G. M. Schwarz, “Joint distributions and local realism in the higher-spin Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment,” Foundations of Physics 12, 101–135 (1982). A. Garg and N. D. Mermin, “Detector inefficiencies in the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment,” Physical Review D 35, 3831–3835 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. E. Fry and T. Walther, “A Bell Inequality Experiment Based on Molecular Dissociation — Extension of the Lo-Shimony Proposal to 199Hg (Nuclear Spin 1/2) Dimers,” in R. S. Cohen, M. Horne and J. Stachel, eds, Experimental Metaphysics (Kluwer, Dordrecht 1997), pp 61–71

    Google Scholar 

  20. E. Fry (private commnication).

    Google Scholar 

  21. P. H. Eberhard, “Bell’s Theorem and the Different Conceptions of Locality,” Nuovo Cimento B 46, 392–419 (1978). G.-C. Ghirardi, A. Rimini and T. Weber, “A General Argument against Super-luminal Transmission through the Quantum Mecahnical Measurement Process,” Lettere al Nuovo Cimento 27, 293–298 (1980). D. Page, “The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen physical reality is completely described by quantum mechanics,” Physics Letters A 91, 57–60 (1982)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  22. A. Connes, Noncommutative Geometry (Academic, New York 1994)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. M. Heller and W. Sasin, “Noncommutative Unification of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics,” International Journal of Theoretical Physics 38, 1619–1642 (1999); M. Heller, W. Sasin, and Z. Odrzygozdz, “State Vector Reduction as a Shadow of a Noncommutative Dynamics,” Journal of Mathematical Physics 41, 1–12 (2000)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. A. Shimony, “Can the Fundamental Laws of Nature be the Results of Evolution?” in J. Butterfield and C. Pagonis, eds, From Physics to Philosophy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1999), pp 208–223

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shimony, A. (2007). Aspects of Nonlocality in Quantum Mechanics. In: Quantum Mechanics at the Crossroads. The Frontiers Collection. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg . https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32665-6_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics