Quantum nonlocality: how does nature do it?

Abstract: Local realistic and stochastic hidden variable models define experimental protocols, which are inconsistent with experimental protocols used in real Bell Tests. Therefore, it is not surprising that they fail to describe correctly the experimental data. In 2009 Nicholas Gisin claimed in Science, that quantum correlations come from outside the space-time due to the quantum magic. Since we do not believe in magic, we propose a locally causal explanation of these correlations. Neither super-determinism nor retro- causality is needed, nor is experimenter’s freedom of choice (EFO) compromised. In our contextual model, setting dependent variables describing measuring instruments are correctly introduced. Outcomes are predetermined both by instrument variables and variables describing incoming correlated signals at the moment of the measurement. There does not exist a joint probability distribution of variables describing all the possible settings, thus Bell inequalities may not be derived. In this talk, based on the articles listed below, we also explain in detail why the assumption called free choice-no conspiracy-measurement independence has nothing to do with EFO and should be rather called noncontextuality assumption. The violation of Bell inequalities neither implies the nonlocality of Nature nor the violation of EFO. It only confirms the contextuality of some observables in quantum domain and that outcomes are not predetermined before the experiment is done.

mathematical physicsgeneral physicsquantum physics

Audience: advanced learners

( paper )

---

QM Foundations & Nature of Time seminar

Series comments: Description: Physics foundations discussion seminar

Current access link in th.if.uj.edu.pl/~dudaj/QMFNoT

---