Quick Navigation
Topics
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Quantum Foundations
Quantum pigeonhole effect, Cheshire cat and contextuality
arXiv
Authors: Sixia Yu, C. H. Oh
Year
2014
Paper ID
48112
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
118
Citations
N/A
Abstract
A kind of paradoxical effects has been demonstrated that the pigeonhole principle, i.e., if three pigeons are put in two pigeonholes then at least two pigeons must stay in the same hole, fails in certain quantum mechanical scenario. Here we shall show how to associate a proof of Kochen-Specker theorem with a quantum pigeonhole effect and vise versa, e.g., from state-independent proofs of Kochen-Specker theorem some kind of state-independent quantum pigeonhole effects can be demonstrated. In particular, a state-independent version of the quantum Cheshire cat, which can be rendered as a kind of quantum pigeonhole effect about the trouble of putting two pigeons in two or more pigeonholes, arises from Peres-Mermin's magic square proof of contextuality.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2014 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- A kind of paradoxical effects has been demonstrated that the pigeonhole principle, i.e., if three pigeons are put in two pigeonholes then at least two pigeons must stay in the...
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.