My comments focus on some foundational questions on the violation of Bell inequalities. Since the paper of Bell (1964), physicists are still looking for a loophole free correlation experiment to definitively settle the questions surrounding the experimental violations reported in the literature. Leaving aside the experiment by Aspect et al. (1982) where the periodic transition probabilities were a major concern, here I would like to stress that for virtually all other experiments it seems to have been the more or less explicit assumption of "rotational invariance" of the correlation measurements what led to the claimed violations. To my knowledge, this assumption has never been proved and the only empirical evidence available so far for the correlation measurements is for an (approximate) cosine-like law for some (not all) absolute orientations. From a probabilistic point of view, we could say that Bell theorem is just showing that the quantum mechanical cosine-like (rotationally invariant) law for the correlation measurements does not specify, in the probability framework of Kolmogorov, a coherent set of correlations.
Discussion of the paper by Ole E. Barndorff-Nielsen, Richard D. Gill and Peter E. Jupp On quantum statistical inference
MINOZZO, Marco
2003-01-01
Abstract
My comments focus on some foundational questions on the violation of Bell inequalities. Since the paper of Bell (1964), physicists are still looking for a loophole free correlation experiment to definitively settle the questions surrounding the experimental violations reported in the literature. Leaving aside the experiment by Aspect et al. (1982) where the periodic transition probabilities were a major concern, here I would like to stress that for virtually all other experiments it seems to have been the more or less explicit assumption of "rotational invariance" of the correlation measurements what led to the claimed violations. To my knowledge, this assumption has never been proved and the only empirical evidence available so far for the correlation measurements is for an (approximate) cosine-like law for some (not all) absolute orientations. From a probabilistic point of view, we could say that Bell theorem is just showing that the quantum mechanical cosine-like (rotationally invariant) law for the correlation measurements does not specify, in the probability framework of Kolmogorov, a coherent set of correlations.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
