Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Foundations
Testing real quantum theory in an optical quantum network
arXiv
Authors: Zheng-Da Li, Ya-Li Mao, Mirjam Weilenmann, Armin Tavakoli, Hu Chen, Lixin Feng, Sheng-Jun Yang, Marc-Olivier Renou, David Trillo, Thinh P. Le, Nicolas Gisin, Antonio Acín, Miguel Navascués, Zizhu Wang, Jingyun Fan
Year
2021
Paper ID
41151
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
117
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Quantum theory is commonly formulated in complex Hilbert spaces. However, the question of whether complex numbers need to be given a fundamental role in the theory has been debated since its pioneering days. Recently it has been shown that tests in the spirit of a Bell inequality can reveal quantum predictions in entanglement swapping scenarios that cannot be modelled by the natural real-number analog of standard quantum theory. Here, we tailor such tests for implementation in state-of-the-art photonic systems. We experimentally demonstrate quantum correlations in a network of three parties and two independent EPR sources that violate the constraints of real quantum theory by over 4.5 standard deviations, hence disproving real quantum theory as a universal physical theory.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2021 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Quantum theory is commonly formulated in complex Hilbert spaces.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.