## 4.3. Bell’s theorem, the Aspect-Gröblacher experiments, and the nonlocality of reality
One of the principles considered most sacred by Einstein and indeed by most physicists up until the 1980s is the principle of local causality, or locality for short. This principle (which comes from Einstein's theory of special relativity) states that no physical effect can be transmitted with a velocity faster than light. Also implied, but not always stated, is the principle that all physical effects must decrease as the distance between the source of the effect and the object affected increases. In practice, this principle prohibits not only all instantaneous action-at-a-distance, but also any action-at-a-distance when the distances are so large that the longest-range known force that can transmit signals, the electromagnetic force, cannot feasibly produce the effect. __If the particles of a system are assumed to be independent of each other except for physical effects that travel no faster than the velocity of light, the system is said to be local. This means, e.g., that if a measurement is made on one particle, the other particles cannot be affected before a local signal from the first particle can reach them.__
In addition to locality, the other strongly held principle was the principle of objective reality (see __Section 1.1__). This principle states that there is a reality that exists whether or not it is observed. Prior to the discovery of quantum mechanics, this meant that this reality consisted of material particles or waves that always had definite physical properties, and which could become known either by making a measurement or by calculation using classical laws and a known initial state. For example, a particle always had a definite position and velocity prior to measurement, even though they may not have been known until a measurement or calculation was made. We call this __strong objectivity__. After the development of quantum mechanics, those who believe in an observer-created reality believe that only a wavefunction exists prior to an observation but this is still considered to be objectively real. However, its physical parameters, such as position and velocity, are indefinite until a measurement is made. This is called __weak objectivity__.
Weak objectivity was difficult enough to accept by some physicists, but quantum theory predicted something else that was even harder to accept--that reality is __nonlocal__. This means that __a measurement on one particle in a nonlocal system is correlated with a measurement on any of the other particles in the system even if no local signal passes from the first measurement to the second__. For example, a measurement of the position of one particle in a nonlocal system is correlated with a position measurement on any of the other particles, independent of any local signals. A __nonlocal system__ of particles is described by a wavefunction formed by a superposition of individual particle wavefunctions in such a way that all of the individual waves are locked together into a coherent whole. In such a __coherent superposition__, it is no longer possible to identify the individual particle components. The system behaves as a whole rather than as a collection of independent particles. We shall describe an example of a nonlocal system when we discuss Bell's theorem below.
Einstein could never accept a reality which was nonlocal or which was indefinite. His paper written with Podolsky and Rosen in 1935 [the famous EPR paper, *Can A Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete?*,* *A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, N. Rosen, Phys. Rev. 47 (1935) 777-780] was an attempt to use a thought experiment to show that, because quantum mechanics could not describe a reality which was both local and definite, the theory was incomplete. [Biographical note: This was Einstein's last major paper on quantum theory. Until he died in 1955, he tried to devise a "unified field theory" which would unite general relativity with electromagnetism in one theory. He failed in this because he could not accept the quantum description of electromagnetism. Actually, his failure is no greater than that of present-day physicists, who have produced many candidates for a unified field theory but none that can be verified with current experimental techniques.]
Following the EPR paper, many physicists expended a great deal of effort in trying to devise theories that were complete, namely __theories that assumed that parameters like position and velocity are at all times definite even if they are unknown__, and which at the same time gave results that agree with quantum theory. (These are called __hidden variable__ theories, which by definition assume strong objectivity.) None of these theories found general acceptance because they were inelegant, complicated, and awkward to use, and the best-known version also turned out to be extremely nonlocal (David Bohm, see __Section 6.2__).
__In 1964, John Bell (1928 – 1990, brilliant, creative Northern Ireland physicist) devised a way to determine experimentally whether reality could be described by local hidden variable theories, and derived an inequality that was valid only if local hidden variable theories were valid__ [*On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox*, J.S. Bell, Physics 1 (1964) 195-199]. __Furthermore, this inequality depended only on experimentally measured quantities, hence it was independent of any specific theory. Any violation of the inequality would prove that reality cannot be both strongly objective and local.__
Many experiments were subsequently done to test his inequality, with the results that it was always violated, thus showing that if there is a strongly objective reality, it could not be local. In addition, the experiments always gave results that were consistent with the predictions of quantum theory. The best of these experiments were done by a group led by French physicist Alain Aspect in 1981-82 [*Experimental realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New violation of Bell's inequalities*, Alain Aspect, Phillipe Grangier, Gérard Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 91-94]. These results have far-reaching implications in the interpretation of quantum theory, as we shall see below.
**Note: The following discussion is somewhat technical. The reader may wish to skip directly to the bolded conclusions in this section.**
The Aspect experiments used pairs of photons, the two photons of each pair being emitted in opposite directions from a calcium source. These photon pairs had the property that the polarization directions (the vibration directions, which are always perpendicular to the propagation direction) of the two photons of a pair were always parallel to each other, but the polarization directions of different pairs were randomly distributed.
The two sides of the experiment were 12 meters apart (see the diagram below). Each side had two detectors, to detect photons with two different polarization directions. Each detector separately recorded an equal number of photons for all polarization directions, showing that the photons were completely unpolarized. The detectors were wired to measure only coincidence counts, i.e., photons were recorded only if they were detected approximately simultaneously at A and B. Bell’s inequality says that, if reality is local, a certain function S of these coincidence counts, measured for all four combinations of the two polarization angles A1, A2 and the two polarization angles B1, B2, must be between -2.0 and +2.0. The experiments yielded a value for S_{expt} of 2.70 ± 0.015. Thus Bell’s inequality was violated.
**Conclusion: The system in the first Aspect experiments was either indefinite or nonlocal but could not have been both definite and local. This result was independent of whether or not quantum theory was valid.**
These experiments could not distinguish between a reality that is not strongly objective but is local; one that is nonlocal but is strongly objective; and one that is neither strongly objective nor local. Furthermore, the measured value of the function S was always in agreement with the predictions of quantum theory (S_{QM} = 2.70 ± 0.05), which assumes that the photons are described by wavefunctions.
Bell's function F is a measure of the correlations between the polarizations (vibration directions) measured at the two sides A and B. The existence of correlations does not itself prove that reality is indefinite or nonlocal. In fact, correlations can exist between measurements at the two sides whether the photons are local and definite ("real" photons) or whether they are nonlocal and indefinite. If they are local and definite, correlations will exist if the two "real" photons emitted by the source are individual particles that are polarized parallel (or perpendicular) to each other. If they are nonlocal and indefinite, correlations can exist if the system is described by a wavefunction that is a coherent superposition of the waves of the two photons (an "entangled pair"). Because such a wavefunction represents a coherent whole rather than individual particles, it permits correlations that are greater than can exist with local, definite photons. That is why S is greater for entangled photons than for local, definite photons, and why the measured violation of Bell's inequality is consistent with photons described by quantum theory.
Next, the Aspect group showed that the violation of Bell's inequality measured in the first experiments could not have been due to some unknown type of local signal carrying polarization information from one set of detectors to the other, rather than being due to the properties of the wavefunctions alone. By definition, such a local signal would have had to propagate with a velocity no greater than that of light. Thus, the next set of experiments was designed to prevent any possible local signal transmission between the two sides from affecting the results [*Experimental test of Bell's inequalities using time-varying analyzers*, Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard, and Gérard Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982), 1804 - 1807]. To do this, the decision about which polarization direction to measure at side A was made after a possible local signal from a measurement at side B was already in transit, and similarly for the converse. Therefore, a polarization measurement at B could not affect a polarization measurement at A, and vice versa. **The conclusion from the second set of experiments was that the correlations could not have been a result of local signal transmission. This implied that their system was nonlocal.**
Now we must ask whether __any__ class of hidden variable theories, __which are all designed to be strongly objective__, can be excluded by experiment. (Bell's theorem and the Aspect experiments say only that hidden variable theories must be nonlocal. It does not exclude any class of nonlocal hidden variables theory.) To help answer this question, an inequality similar to Bell's inequality was recently devised by Tony Leggett [*Nonlocal hidden-variable theories and quantum mechanics: An incompatibility theorem**,* Foundations of Physics, 33 (2003) 1469–1493]. An experiment was then done by S. Gröblacher *et al*. to see whether a broad class of hidden variable theories (that are all nonlocal) could be excluded [*An experimental test of non-local realism,* Nature 446 (2007) 871-875].
**Gröblacher ***et al*. concluded that no hidden variable theory that is not counterintuitive (that is not bizarre) can describe reality. If so, then reality cannot have definite properties before measurement. The Aspect and Gröblacher experiments taken together strongly imply that reality is both indefinite and nonlocal (there are no "real" particles). This conclusion is independent of whether or not quantum theory is valid.
The experiments of Aspect and Gröblacher *et al*. do not prove quantum theory to be valid but are consistent with its predictions. [No number of experiments can prove that any physical theory is valid. However, it takes only one well-done experiment, if it is confirmed independently by independent researchers, to prove that a physical theory is invalid.] We have seen in __Section 3.2__ that, if quantum theory is valid, it does not tell us what is there before a measurement. This is the indefiniteness property. In __Chapter 6__ we shall also see that quantum theory is nonlocal.
In a nonlocal system, a measurement made at one end of the system is correlated with a measurement made at the other end even if no local signal passes between the two. It might be thought that, because nonlocal correlations can exist between events occurring at two different points, observers at these two points could use these correlations to communicate instantaneously with each other in violation of Einstein’s special theory of relativity. However, __the nonlocality of quantum theory implies a correlation between data sets, not a transmission of information at greater than light velocities__. Thus, the special theory is not violated. We can see this by realizing that the photons detected at either A or B alone occur completely randomly both in time and in polarization. Consequently, observer A sees no information in his data alone, and likewise with observer B. It is only by later comparing these two random sets of data that a correlation between the two sets can be discovered.
[Technical note: Theoretical calculations indicate that the human eye might be sensitive enough to detect the correlations from entangled pairs of photons without the aid of electronic devices, *Possible entanglement detection with the naked eye*, Brunner, Branciard, Gisin, Phys. Rev. A 78 (2008) 052110.]
There can be strong correlations between two random sets that cannot be discovered by looking at one set alone. This is illustrated by the example of random stereograms (Magic Eye diagrams, see __www.magiceye.com__ and below) which, when first viewed, look like near-random patterns of colored dots (see below). However, there are actually two separate near-random patterns present, and they are displaced from each other by a distance roughly equal to the spacing between a person's eyes. Thus, by looking at the pattern with the direction of the eyes nonconvergent as if looking some distance away, the two eyes see different patterns. The correlations between the patterns are discerned by the brain, and a three-dimensional image is seen.
Magic Eye images may be easier to see if viewed on paper rather than a computer screen. If possible, print this image and follow the instructions below. (You don't need to print in color.)
Hold the center of the printed image *right up to your nose.* It should be blurry. Focus as though you are looking *through* the image into the distance. *Very slowly* move the image away from your face until the *two squares* above the image turn into *three squares*. If you see four squares, move the image farther away from your face until you see three squares. If you see one or two squares, start over!
When you clearly see three squares, hold the page still, and the hidden image will magically appear. Once you perceive the hidden image and depth, you can look around the entire 3D image. The longer you look, the clearer the illusion becomes. The farther away you hold the page, the deeper it becomes. Good Luck!
### 4.4. Another experimental violation of observer independent theory
__Section 4.3__ discussed conflicts between the hidden variables and quantum descriptions of experiments that were done on entangled quantum objects, such as pairs of entangled photons. Recently, measurements were done on pairs of trapped ions that were not entangled, and even with these non-entangled particles, the results were consistent with quantum theory but inconsistent with the assumption of observer-independent particles (*State-independent experimental test of quantum contextuality*, Kirchmair, Zähringer, Gerritsma, Kleinmann, Gühne Cabello, Blatt, Roos*, *Nature 460 (2009), 494-497).
**Share with your friends:** |