Physics – Quantum Physics
Scientific paper
2011-04-11
Physics Research International, vol. 2012, Article ID 352543, 5 pages, 2012
Physics
Quantum Physics
Scientific paper
10.1155/2012/352543
Bell's theorem, and its experimental tests, has shown that the two premises for Bell's inequality - locality and objective reality - cannot both hold in nature, as Bell's inequality is broken. A simple test is proposed, which for the first time may decide which alternative nature actually prefers on the fundamental, quantum level. If each microscopic event is truly random (e.g. as assumed in orthodox quantum mechanics) objective reality is not valid, whereas if each event is described by an unknown but deterministic mechanism ("hidden variables") locality is not valid. This may be analyzed and decided by the well-known reconstruction method of Ruelle and Takens; in the former case no structure should be discerned, in the latter a reconstructed structure should be visible. This could in principle be tested by comparing individual "hits" in a double slit experiment, but in practice a single fluorescent atom, and its (seemingly random) temporal switching between active/inactive states would possibly be better/more practical, easier to set up, observe and analyze. However, only imagination limits the list of possible experimental setups.
No associations
LandOfFree
Reality or Locality? - Proposed test to decide \textit{how} Nature breaks Bell's inequality does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with Reality or Locality? - Proposed test to decide \textit{how} Nature breaks Bell's inequality, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Reality or Locality? - Proposed test to decide \textit{how} Nature breaks Bell's inequality will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-58744