Timeline for Bell's theorem: why does "correlation = cosine" rules out hidden variables?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 6 at 19:31 | answer | added | DrChinese | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 6 at 18:57 | comment | added | DrChinese | Part II: It is important therefore to say whether you are specifying: a) electrons or photons; b) entangled pairs or an unentangled single particle; c) if entangled, whether they are correlated or anti-correlated; and d) whether you need the Correlation or Match percentages. Otherwise, we end up running in circles. :) | |
| Jan 6 at 18:56 | comment | added | DrChinese | Part I: For entangled electrons in singlet state (i.e. opposite outcomes at the same angle): The Match % is sin^2(θ/2) with a range of 0 to 1. The MisMatch % is cos^2(θ/2) with a range of 0 to 1. Correlation % is Matches - Mismatches. Therefore the Correlation % is sin^2(θ/2)-cos^2(θ/2) with a range of -1 to 1. This is the same as -cos(θ), due to the formula: cos(θ)=cos^2(θ/2)-sin^2(θ/2). When considering the prediction for a single electron with a known spin angle measured at theta relative to that, the Match % is cos^2(θ/2). | |
| Jan 4 at 13:05 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Aug 25, 2023 at 0:04 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 9:03 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Mar 24, 2023 at 2:22 | comment | added | Mauricio | I think the actual rule is $\cos^2(\theta/2)$. | |
| Mar 24, 2023 at 2:21 | history | edited | Mauricio | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 5 characters in body; edited title
|
| Mar 23, 2023 at 23:07 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Nov 18, 2022 at 17:19 | comment | added | WillO | Your electrons are in an unentangled state. Of course you will not get any Bell violations from unentangled electrons. | |
| Nov 18, 2022 at 17:01 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Oct 14, 2022 at 16:32 | answer | added | TKoL | timeline score: 0 | |
| Mar 21, 2021 at 13:41 | comment | added | Christian | I'm sorry if I'm using the wrong terminology. In "Something Deeply Hidden" by Sean Carroll he states rather flatly that any local theory is impossible because measurements at an angle of 45deg are correlated 71% instead of 50%. I then headed to Wikipedia which also states that "[...] the existence of local hidden variables [...] according to Bell's inequality, could not agree with the dependence predicted by quantum mechanical theory, namely, that the correlation is the negative cosine of the angle." | |
| Mar 20, 2021 at 12:44 | comment | added | glS | I don't really understand the relation between this and Bell's theorem. Which version of the theorem are you thinking about? | |
| Mar 18, 2021 at 9:31 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 18, 2021 at 10:03 | |||||
| Mar 18, 2021 at 9:31 | history | asked | Christian | CC BY-SA 4.0 |