Litcius/Paper detail

What Do Bell-Tests Prove? A Detailed Critique of Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt Including Counterexamples

K. Hess

2021Journal of Modern Physics18 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

Many future directions of scientific endeavors depend on quantum theory and the precise interpretation and significance of the entanglement of quantum-particles. This interpretation depends in turn on the physical meaning of so called Bell-tests that are mostly performed using entangled photons and randomly switched polarizers to measure their polarization at distant locations. This paper presents a detailed critique of the well known theory of Bell tests given by Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH). It is demonstrated that several important steps of the CHSH derivations contain serious inaccuracies of the underlying physics and probability theory and even a calculus error. As a consequence, the Bell-CHSH theory cannot be used to demonstrate extreme and opposite interpretations of entanglement such as super-luminal influences or alternatively super-determinism that cast aspersions on Einstein’s concepts of locality and separability.

Topics & Concepts

Quantum entanglementEPR paradoxCHSH inequalityQuantum nonlocalityTheoretical physicsPhysicsBell test experimentsQuantum mechanicsDeterminismInterpretation (philosophy)Local hidden variable theoryBell's theoremCounterexampleMeasure (data warehouse)Statistical physicsQuantumMathematicsComputer scienceDiscrete mathematicsDatabaseProgramming languageQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsBiofield Effects and BiophysicsQuantum Information and Cryptography
What Do Bell-Tests Prove? A Detailed Critique of Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt Including Counterexamples | Litcius