2014/03/14 by Jan Walleczek, Gerhard Groessing, Gerhard Grössing · 14 citations
Arts and Humanities · Mathematics · Physics and Astronomy · Psychology · #Argument (complex analysis) #Arrow's impossibility theorem #Bell test experiments #Bell's theorem #CHSH inequality #De Broglie–Bohm theory #Discrete mathematics #Epistemology #Fundamental theorem #Generalization #Hidden variable theory #Impossibility #Interpretations of quantum mechanics #Kochen–Specker theorem #Local hidden variable theory #Mathematical economics #Mathematics #No-go theorem #Philosophy #Philosophy and History of Science #Philosophy and Theoretical Science #Philosophy of science #Physics #Quantum #Quantum Mechanics and Applications #Quantum entanglement #Quantum mechanics #Quantum nonlocality #Quantum process #Randomness #Social choice theory #Theoretical physics #quant-ph
paper · pdf · doi:10.1088/1742-6596/504/1/012001
published in Journal of Physics Conference Series 504, 012001 (IOP Publishing) · 8 pages, 2 figures, 1 table; talk presented at the 2nd international symposium on "Emergent Quantum Mechanics" (Vienna, Austria, 3-6 October, 2013), (http://www.emqm13.org/) To be published in J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. (2014)
arxiv created 2014/03/14 · openalex publication_date 2014/04/14 · arxiv updated 2014/09/30 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/06
Does "epistemic non-signalling" ensure the peaceful coexistence of special relativity and quantum nonlocality? The possibility of an affirmative answer is of great importance to deterministic approaches to quantum mechanics given recent developments towards generalizations of Bell's theorem. By generalizations of Bell's theorem we here mean efforts that seek to demonstrate the impossibility of any deterministic theories to obey the predictions of Bell's theorem, including not only local hidden-variables theories (LHVTs) but, critically, of nonlocal hidden-variables theories (NHVTs) also, such as de Broglie-Bohm theory. Naturally, in light of the well-established experimental findings from quantum physics, whether or not a deterministic approach to quantum mechanics, including an emergent quantum mechanics, is logically possible, depends on compatibility with the predictions of Bell's theorem. With respect to deterministic NHVTs, recent attempts to generalize Bell's theorem have claimed the impossibility of any such approaches to quantum mechanics. The present work offers arguments showing why such efforts towards generalization may fall short of their stated goal. In particular, we challenge the validity of the use of the non-signalling theorem as a conclusive argument in favor of the existence of free randomness, and therefore reject the use of the non-signalling theorem as an argument against the logical possibility of deterministic approaches. We here offer two distinct counter-arguments in support of the possibility of deterministic NHVTs: one argument exposes the circularity of the reasoning which is employed in recent claims, and a second argument is based on the inconclusive metaphysical status of the non-signalling theorem itself. We proceed by presenting an entirely informal treatment of key physical and metaphysical assumptions, and of their interrelationship, in attempts seeking to generalize Bell's theorem on the basis of an ontic, foundational interpretation of the non-signalling theorem. We here argue that the non-signalling theorem must instead be viewed as an epistemic, operational theorem i.e. one that refers exclusively to what epistemic agents can, or rather cannot, do. That is, we emphasize that the non-signalling theorem is a theorem about the operational inability of epistemic agents to signal information. In other words, as a proper principle, the non-signalling theorem may only be employed as an epistemic, phenomenological, or operational principle. Critically, our argument emphasizes that the non-signalling principle must not be used as an ontic principle about physical reality as such, i.e. as a theorem about the nature of physical reality independently of epistemic agents e.g. human observers. One major reason in favor of our conclusion is that any definition of signalling or of non-signalling invariably requires a reference to epistemic agents, and what these agents can actually measure and report. Otherwise, the non-signalling theorem would equal a general "no-influence" theorem. In conclusion, under the assumption that the non-signalling theorem is epistemic (i.e. "epistemic non-signalling"), the search for deterministic approaches to quantum mechanics, including NHVTs and an emergent quantum mechanics, continues to be a viable research program towards disclosing the foundations of physical reality at its smallest dimensions.