Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/CommonHTML/jax.js
Submit manuscript...
MOJ
eISSN: 2573-2919

Ecology & Environmental Sciences

Opinion Volume 2 Issue 1

The Kochen-specker theorem with two trials of measurements

Nagata k,1 Nakamura T2

1Department of Physics, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Korea
2Department of Information and Computer Science, Keio University, Japan

Correspondence: Nagata K, Department of Physics, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon 305-701, Korea

Received: February 02, 2017 | Published: February 13, 2017

Citation: Nagata K, Nakamura T. The Kochen-specker theorem with two trials of measurements. MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2017;2(1):5-6. DOI: 10.15406/mojes.2017.02.00011

Download PDF

We review non-classicality of quantum datum. We consider whether we can assign the predetermined “hidden” result to numbers 1 and −1 as in results of measurements in a thought experiment. We assume the number of measurements is two. If we detect 1/2 as 1 and detect | as −1, then we can derive the Kochen-Specker theorem. The same situation occurs when we use a new measurement theory that the results of measurements are either 1/2 or − 1/2

PACS numbers: 03.65.Ud, 03.65.

Opinion

The quantum theory1–5 is indeed successful physical theory. From the incompleteness argument of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR),6 a hidden variable interpretation of the quantum theory has been as an attractive topic of research.2,3 The no-hidden variables theorem of Kochen and Specker (KS theorem)7 is very famous. In general, the quantum theory does not accept the KS type of hidden-variable theory. Greenberger, Horne, and Zeilinger discover8,9 the so-called GHZ theorem for four-partite GHZ state. And, the KS theorem becomes very simple form (see also Refs.10–14). For the KS theorem, it is begun to research the validity of the KS theorem by using inequalities (see Refs.15–18). To find such inequalities to test the validity of the KS theorem is particularly useful for experimental investigation.19 Many researches address non-classicality of observables. And non-classicality of quantum state itself is not investigated at all (however see20). Further, non-classicality of quantum datum is not investigated very well. Does finite-precision measurement nullify the Kochen-Specker theorem? Meyer discusses that finite precision measurement nullifies the Kochen-Specker theorem.21 Cabello discusses that finite-precision measurement does not nullify the Kochen-Specker theorem.17 We address the problem. Here we ask: Can we assign definite value into each quantum datum? We cannot assign definite value into each quantum datum. This gives the very simple reason why Kochen-Specker inequalities are violated in real experiments. Further, our discussion says that cannot assign definite value to each quantum datum even though the number of measurements is two. This gives the Kochen-Specker theorem in two trials of measurements. These argumentations would provide supporting evidence of the statement by Cabello.

In this paper, we review non-classicality of quantum datum. We consider whether we can assign the predetermined “hidden” result to numbers 1 and −1 as in results of measurements in a thought experiment. We assume the number of measurements is two. If we detect as 1 and detect as −1, then we can derive the Kochen-Specker theorem. The same situation occurs when we use a new measurement theory22 that the results of measurements are either 1|2 or 1|2 . We consider a value V which is the sum of data in some experiments. The measured results of trials are either 1 or −1. We assume the number of −1 is equal to thenumber of 1. The number of trials is 2. Then we have

V=1+1=0 (1)

First, we assign definite value into each experimental datum. In the case, we consider the Kochen-Specker realism. By using r1,r2,r1' and r2', we can define experimental data as follows r1=1,r2=1,r1'= 1 and r2'=1

Let us write V as follows

V=(2l=1rl) (2)

The possible values of the measured results rl are either 1 or −1. The same value is given by

V=(2l=1rl') (3)

We change the label as ll' .The possible values of the measured results rl' are either 1 or −1. In the following, we evaluate a value V×V and derive a necessary condition under an assumption that we assign definite value into each experimental datum.

We introduce an assumption that Sum rule and Product rule commute.23 We have

V×V

=(2l=1r1)×(2l'=1l')

=2l=1.2l'=1rlrl'

2l=1.2l'=1|rlrl'|

=2l=1.2l'=1(rl)2

= 2((1)2 + (−1)2)
= 4. (4)

The inequality (4) can be saturated because the following case is possible

|{l|rl=1}||=||{l'|rl'=1}||

|{l|rl=1}||=||{l'|rl'=1}|| (5)

Thus,

(V×V)max=4 (6)

Therefore we have the following assumption concerning the Kochen-Specker realism

(V×V)max=4 (7)

Next, we derive another possible value of the product V×V of the value V under an assumption that we do not assign definite value into each experimental datum. This is quantum mechanical case.

In this case, we have

V×V=0 (8)

We have the following assumption concerning quantum mechanics

(V×V)max=0 (9)

We cannot assign the truth value “1” for the two assumptions (7) and (9), simultaneously. We derive the KS paradox. Thus we cannot assign definite value into each experimental datum. The number of data is two. We can derive the similar KS paradox when we use a new measurement theory 22 that the results of measurements are either 1/2 or 1/2 . In conclusions, non-classicality of quantum datum has been investigated. We have considered whether we can assign the predetermined “hidden” result to natural number1 and −1 as in results of measurement in a thought experiment. The number of trials has been twice. If we detect | as 1 and detect | as −1, then we can have derived the Kochen-Speker theorem. The same situation has occurred when we use a new measurement theory22 that the results of measurements are either 1|2 or 1|2 . Generally Multiplication is completed by Addition. Therefore, we think that Addition of the starting point may be superior to any other case.

Acknowledgements

None.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sakurai JJ. Modern quantum mechanics, revised edition. American Journal of Physics. 1995;63: 93 p.
  2. Peres A. Quantum Theory: concepts and methods. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic publishers; 1993.
  3. Redhead M. Incompleteness, Nonlocality, and Realism. 2nd ed. Oxford, USA: Clarendon Press; 1989.
  4. Von J Neumann. Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton, New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press; 1995.
  5. Nielsen MA, Chuang IL. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. USA: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
  6. Einstein A, Podolsky B, Rosen N. Can quantum–mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys Rev. 1935;47:777.
  7. Kochen S, Specker EP. Analysis of bell–type experiments and its local realism. J Math Mech. 1967;17:59.
  8. Greenberger DM, Horne MA, Zeilinger A. Going beyond bell's theorem. Quantum Physics. 2007;69–72.
  9. Greenberger DM, Horne MA, Shimony A, et al. Bell’s theorem without inequalities. Am J Phys. 1990;58:1131.
  10. Pagonis C, Redhead MLG, Clifton RK. Phys Lett A. 1991;155:441.
  11. Mermin ND. Phys Today. 1990;43(6):9.
  12. Mermin ND. Quantum mysteries revisited. AmJ Phys. 1990;58:731.
  13. Peres A. Phys Lett A. 1990;151(3–4):107.
  14. Mermi ND. Simple unified form for the major no–hidden–variables theorems. Phys Rev Lett. 1990;65: 3373.
  15. Simon C, Brukner C, Zeilinger A. Dynamics of coarsening foams: accelerated and self–limiting drainage. Phys Rev Let. 2001;86:4427.
  16. Larsson JA. Europhys Lett. 220;58:799.
  17. Cabello A. Finite–precision measurement does not nullify the Kochen–Specker theorem. Phys Rev A. 2002;65:052101.
  18. Nagata K, Math J. Analysis of bell–type experiments and its local realism. Phys. 2005;46:102101.
  19. Huang YF, Li CF, Zhang YS, et al. Experimental test of the Kochen–Specker theorem with single photons. Phys Rev Lett. 2003;90:250401.
  20. Pusey MF, Barrett J, Rudolph T. On the reality of the quantum state. Nature Phys. 2012;8: 475.
  21. Meyer DA. Finite precision measurement nullifies the Kochen–Specker theorem. Phys Rev Lett .2009;83:3751.
  22. Nagata K, Nakamura T. Violation of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. International Journal of Theoretical Physics. 2010;49(1):162–170.
  23. Nagata K, Nakamura T. On the bell–kochen–specker paradox. Physics Journal. 2015;1(3):183–188.
Creative Commons Attribution License

©2017 Nagata, et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and build upon your work non-commercially.