Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-fwgfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-15T21:21:44.813Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Bell's Theorem without Inequalities: On the Inception and Scope of the GHZ Theorem

from Part II - Bell's Theorem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2016

Olival Freire
Affiliation:
Universidade Federal da Bahia
Osvaldo Pessoa
Affiliation:
University of São Paulo
Shan Gao
Affiliation:
Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Since its inception, fifty years ago, Bell's theorem has had a long history not only of experimental tests but also of theoretical developments. Studying pairs of correlated quantummechanical particles separated in space, in a composite “entangled” state, Bell [1] showed that the joint ascription of hidden variables and locality to the system led to an inequality that is violated by the predictions of quantum mechanics. Fifteen years later, experiments confirmed the predictions of quantum mechanics, ruling out a large class of local realist theories.

One of the most meaningful theoretical developments that followed Bell's work was the Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger (GHZ) theorem, also known as Bell's theorem without inequalities. In 1989, the American physicists Daniel Greenberger and Michael Horne, who had been working on Bell's theorem since the late 1960s, together with the Austrian physicist Anton Zeilinger, introduced a novelty into the testing of entanglement, extending Bell's theorem in a different and interesting direction. According to Franck Laloë [2],

For many years, everyone thought that Bell had basically exhausted the subject by considering all really interesting situations, and that two-spin systems provided the most spectacular quantum violations of local realism. It therefore came as a surprise to many when in 1989 Greenberger, Horne, and Zeilinger (GHZ) showed that systems containing more than two correlated particles may actually exhibit even more dramatic violations of local realism.

The trio analyzed the Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen 1935 argument once again and were able to write what are now called Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger (GHZ) entangled states, involving three or four correlated spin-1/2 particles, leading to conflicts between local realist theories and quantum mechanics. However, unlike Bell's theorem, the conflict now was not of a statistical nature, as was the case with Bell's theorem, insofar as measurements on a single GHZ state could lead to conflicting predictions with local realistic models [3–5]. In this paper we present the history of the creation of this theorem and analyze its scope.

Type
Chapter
Information
Quantum Nonlocality and Reality
50 Years of Bell's Theorem
, pp. 141 - 148
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Bell, J.S. 1964, On the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox, Physics 1, 195–200.Google Scholar
[2] Laloe, F. 2012, Do We Really Understand Quantum Mechanics? (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
[3] Greenberger, D., Horne, M., and Zeilinger, A. 1989, Going beyond Bell's theorem. In: Kafatos, M.C. (eds.), Bell's Theorem, Quantum Theory and Conceptions of the Universe (Kluwer, Dordrecht), pp. 69–72.
[4] Greenberger, D.M., Horne, M.A., Shimony, A., and Zeilinger, A. 1990, Bell's theorem without inequalities, American Journal of Physics 58(12), 1131–43.Google Scholar
[5] Greenberger, D. 2002, The history of the GHZ paper, in R.A., Bertlmann and A., Zeilinger (eds.). Quantum (Un)speakables: From Bell to Quantum Information. Berlin: Springer, pp. 281–6.
[6] Clauser, J.F., Horne, M.A., Shimony, A., and Holt, R.A. 1969, Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories, Physical Review Letters 23(15), 880–84.Google Scholar
[7] Whitaker, A. 2012, The New Quantum Age (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
[8] Rauch, H., Zeilinger, A., Badurek, G.,Wilfing, A., Bauspiess, W., and Bonse, U. 1975, Verification of coherent spinor rotation of fermions, Physics Letters A 54(6), 425–7.Google Scholar
[9] Rauch, H. 2012, Quantum physics with neutrons: From spinor symmetry to Kochen– Specker phenomena, Foundations of Physics 42(1), 153–72.Google Scholar
[10] Horne, M.A. and Zeilinger, A. 1985, A Bell-type EPR experiment using linear momenta, in P., Lahti and P., Mittelstaedt (eds.), Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics: 50 Years of the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen Gedanken Experiment (World Scientific, Singapore), pp. 435–9.
[11] Ghosh, R. and Mandel, L. 1987, Observation of nonclassical effects in the interference of two photons, Physical Review Letters 59(17), 1903–5.Google Scholar
[12] Horne, M.A., Shimony, A., and Zeilinger, A. 1989, Two-particle interferometry, Physical Review Letters 62(19), 2209–12.Google Scholar
[13] Mermin, N.D. 1990, What's wrong with these elements of reality? Physics Today 43(6), 9–11.Google Scholar
[14] Clifton, R.K., Redhead, M.L.G., and Butterfield, J.N. 1991, Generalization of the Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger algebraic proof of nonlocality, Foundations of Physics 21(2), 149–84.Google Scholar
[15] Gilder, L. 2008, The Age of Entanglement – When Quantum Physics Was Reborn (Knopf, New York).
[16] Heywood, P. and Redhead, M.L.G. 1983, Nonlocality and the Kochen–Specker paradox, Foundations of Physics 13: 481–99.Google Scholar
[17] Zukowski, M., Zeilinger, A., Horne, M.A., and Ekert, A.K. 1993, “Event-readydetectors” Bell experiment via entanglement swapping, Physical Review Letters 71(26), 4287–90.Google Scholar
[18] Bouwmeester, D., Pan, J.W., Mattle, K., Eibl, M., Weinfurter, H., and Zeilinger, A. 1997, Experimental quantum teleportation, Nature 39, 575–9.Google Scholar
[19] Bouwmeester, D., Pan, J.W., Daniell, M., Weinfurter, H., and Zeilinger, A. 1999, Observation of three-photon Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger entanglement, Physical Review Letters 82(7), 1345–9.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×