Quick Navigation
Topics
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
Quantum Foundations
Extended Boole-Bell inequalities applicable to quantum theory
arXiv
Authors: Hans De Raedt, Karl Hess, Kristel Michielsen
Year
2009
Paper ID
9251
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
111
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We address the basic meaning of apparent contradictions of quantum theory and probability frameworks as expressed by Bell's inequalities. We show that these contradictions have their origin in the incomplete considerations of the premisses of the derivation of the inequalities. A careful consideration of past work, including that of Boole and Vorob'ev, has lead us to the formulation of extended Boole-Bell inequalities that are binding for both classical and quantum models. The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm gedanken experiment and a macroscopic quantum coherence experiment proposed by Leggett and Garg are both shown to obey the extended Boole-Bell inequalities. These examples as well as additional discussions also provide reasons for apparent violations of these inequalities.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2009 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We address the basic meaning of apparent contradictions of quantum theory and probability frameworks as expressed by Bell's inequalities.
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.