Theoretical Resolution of EPR Paradox

International Journal of Applied Physics

© 2017 by SSRG - IJAP Journal

Volume 4 Issue 3

Year of Publication : 2017

Authors : Tapan Kumar Ghosh

10.14445/23500301/IJAP-V4I6P101

How to Cite?

Tapan Kumar Ghosh, "Theoretical Resolution of EPR Paradox," SSRG International Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 4,  no. 3, pp. 1-5, 2017. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/23500301/IJAP-V4I6P101

Abstract:

Bell’s inequality together with widely used CHSH inequality on joint expectation of spin states between Alice and Bob ends are taken as a decisive theorem to challenge EPR Paradox. All experiments on the polarisation states of entangled particles violate Bell’s inequality as well as CHSH inequality and Einstein’s version of reality now is considered wrong somehow. Bell’s argument clearly shows that quantum mechanics simultaneously can not justify both ‘locality’ and ‘counterfactual definiteness’. ‘Locality’ means that no causal connection can be made faster than light. ‘Counterfactual definiteness’, sometimes called ‘realism’ refers to the assumption on the existence of properties of objects prior to measurement. This paper shows on the contrary that Quantum Mechanics is neither. Any kind of hidden variable or information that was advocated in EPR paradox to make Quantum Mechanics compatible with ‘local realism’ at once becomes redundant if standard Copenhagen interpretation is upheld assuming Quantum Mechanics ‘nonlocal’ and ‘counterfactually indefinite’. This article shows that Quantum Mechanics is nonlocal as regards conservation laws and does not possess counterfactual definiteness for that particle of the entangled pair whose spin state is detected earlier in the polariser and possess counterfactual definiteness for that particle detected later in the analyser.

Keywords:

Quantum Mechanics; Entangled Pair; EPR Paradox; Bell’s inequality; CHSH Inequality; Conservation Laws; Non-locality; Counter Factual indefiniteness.

References:

[1] Einstein, A; B Podolsky; N Rosen (1935-05-15). "Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete?" (PDF). Physical Review. 47 (10): 777–780. Bibcode:1935PhRv...47..777E. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.47.777.
[2] Bell, John (1964). "On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox" (PDF). Physics. 1 (3): 195–200.
[3] Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New Violation of Bell's Inequalities, A. Aspect, P. Grangier, and G. Roger, Physical Review Letters, Vol. 49, Iss. 2, pp. 91–94 (1982) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.91.
[4] J.F. Clauser; M.A. Horne; A. Shimony; R.A. Holt (1969), "Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories", Phys. Rev. Lett., 23 (15): 880– 4, Bibcode:1969PhRvL..23..880C, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.23.880.