Einstein did not consider Quantum Mechanics, QM, complete or consistent. In 1949, he stated that
“I am, in fact firmly convinced that the essentially statistical character of contemporary quantum theory is solely to be ascribed to the fact that this [theory] operates with an incomplete description of physical systems ” [EINSTEIN 1949]
In this statement, Einstein emphasized the indeterminism, statistical character, as the objectionable nature of QM. But, it is not the indeterminism that bothered Einstein. Howard [HOWARD 1985a] articulated Einstein’s position as two principles.
Separability Principle “asserts that any two spatially separated systems posses their own real states”
Locality Principle “asserts that all physical effects are propagated with finite, subluminal velocities”
I take Separability Principle and Locality Principle as Einstein position against the QM. Proving Einstein wrong is equivalent to invalidating these two principles.
Einstein’s persistent claims on incompleteness of QM are considered to be refuted by Bohr’s Complementarity Principle.
Complimentarily Principle asserts that “The quantum postulate implies that any observation of atomic phenomena will involve an interaction with the agency of observation not to be neglected” [HOWARD 2004]
Aspect, in his Nobel Prize Lecture [ASPECT 2022], claimed that “Einstein’s local realism [Separability and Locality Principle] is untenable [because it is] violating Bell’s inequalities”. He declared that “Einstein’s local realism” is now experimentally refuted and that Nature is non-local, meaning physical influences can propagate instantaneously from one end of the universe to another.
Proving Einstein wrong is now claimed to be a closed debate. The experimental verdict, however, is predicated on Bell’s Theorem.
‘So quantum mechanics cannot be embedded in a locally causal theory” [BELL 2001]
In the rest of the article, I examine the logical structure of Bell’s theorem and the conclusions thereof. I argue that Bell’s theorem does not prove Einstein wrong. [HOWARD 1985b] Not all physicists regard Bell’s theorem as significant. Feynman wrote that
“People knew it [Bell’s Theorem] had to happen before; all he did was to demonstrate it.” [FEYNMAN 2016]
The forthcoming Corpuscular Theory of Quantum Phenomena predicts non factorizable correlations that agree with standard QM, Locality Principle, Separability Principle, and Complementarity Principle. It shows that the debate between Einstein and Bohr did not prove either of them wrong. They were referring to different aspects of the same quantum phenomena.
Does Entanglement prove Quantum Mechanics or Einstein Wrong?
Schrödinger introduced entanglement in 1935 and called it “the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics” [SCHRODINGER 1935]. It implies that a particle can instantaneously influence another far away particle, and Einstein’s Spooky Action-at-a-Distance is real. Maudlin [MAUDLIN 2011] stated that entangled particles are connected and they remain in (quantum) communication after they are separated. He identified its three mysterious features.[MAUDLIN 2011]
- “The quantum connection is unattenuated”
- “The quantum connection is discriminating”
- “The quantum connection is faster than light (Instantaneous)”
If we have two entangled particles, after they separate by a billion light years, they remain in communication forever. No kind of shielding can attenuate or block the communication. We wait for the particles to move apart for one billion years and fill the space between them with lead blocks. Still, their entanglement does not attenuate!
Quantum communication does not break or jam even if billions of identical particles are nearby. It can recognize and single out the entangled particle among all others. When one particle interacts with a measurement apparatus, the quantum communication automatically and instantaneously modifies the state of the other.
Physicists face two choices.
- Entanglement as interpreted in QM is a symptom of its incompleteness
- Entanglement is truly weird but that is the way nature is. We better get used to it.
Maudlin [MAUDLIN 2011 and Aspect [ASPECT 2015] chose the latter. As the 2022 Physics Nobel Prize suggests, most physicists agree. How did the majority of physicists come to believe the reality of Spooky Action-at-a-Distance? Aspect’s Nobel Lecture states the lines of reasoning.
If “Quantum Correlations violate Bell’s inequalities”
Then “Spooky Action-at-a-Distance is real.”
Proving Einstein wrong by Bell’s Theorem is a false deduction. In the next blog, I will step through Bell’s Theorem to identify its false premises and consequences.
REFERENCES
Aspect, A., 2022. Nobel Lecture, https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2022/aspect/lecture/
Aspect, Alain. (2015). “Closing the Door on Einstein and Bohr’s Quantum Debate”, Physics. 8. 10.1103/Physics.8.123.
Bell, Mary Ellen, Kurt Gottfried and Martinus J. G. Veltman. “John S. Bell on the foundations of quantum mechanics.” (2001), p. 229.
Howard, Don (1985a). Einstein on Locality and Separability. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 16 (3):1, p.171.
Howard, Don (1985b). Einstein on Locality and Separability. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 16 (3):1, p. 195.
Howard, D. (2004). Who Invented the “Copenhagen Interpretation”? A Study in Mythology. Philosophy of Science, 71(5), p. 669-682.
Maudlin, Tim. (2011). Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity: Metaphysical Intimations of Modern Physics: Third Edition. Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity: Metaphysical Intimations of Modern Physics: Third Edition, p.. 22.
Schilpp, Paul Arthur (ed.), 1949. Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist (The Library of Living Philosophers: Volume 7), Evanston, IL: The Library of Living Philosophers, p. 667.
Schrödinger, E., 1935. “Discussion of Probability Relations Between Separated Systems,” Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 31: 555–563; 32 (1935): 446–451.
Whitaker, A., Richard Feynman and Bell Theorem, American Journal of Physics 84, 493–494 (2016)