Loophole-free Bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres

More than 50 years ago, John Bell proved that no theory of nature that obeys locality and realism can reproduce all the predictions of quantum theory: in any local-realist theory, the correlations between outcomes of measurements on distant particles satisfy an inequality that can be violated if the particles are entangled. Numerous Bell inequality tests have been reported; however, all experiments reported so far required additional assumptions to obtain a contradiction with local realism, resulting in ‘loopholes’. Here we report a Bell experiment that is free of any such additional assumption and thus directly tests the principles underlying Bell’s inequality. We use an event-ready scheme that enables the generation of robust entanglement between distant electron spins (estimated state fidelity of 0.92 ± 0.03). Efficient spin read-out avoids the fair-sampling assumption (detection loophole), while the use of fast random-basis selection and spin read-out combined with a spatial separation of 1.3 kilometres ensure the required locality conditions. We performed 245 trials that tested the CHSH–Bell inequality S ≤ 2 and found S = 2.42 ± 0.20 (where S quantifies the correlation between measurement outcomes). A null-hypothesis test yields a probability of at most P = 0.039 that a local-realist model for space-like separated sites could produce data with a violation at least as large as we observe, even when allowing for memory in the devices. Our data hence imply statistically significant rejection of the local-realist null hypothesis. This conclusion may be further consolidated in future experiments; for instance, reaching a value of P = 0.001 would require approximately 700 trials for an observed S = 2.4. With improvements, our experiment could be used for testing less-conventional theories, and for implementing device-independent quantum-secure communication and randomness certification.

[1]  Albert Einstein,et al.  Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? , 1935 .

[2]  A. Shimony,et al.  Proposed Experiment to Test Local Hidden Variable Theories. , 1969 .

[3]  Randall C. Thompson,et al.  Experimental Test of Local Hidden-Variable Theories , 1976 .

[4]  G. Roger,et al.  Experimental Test of Bell's Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers , 1982 .

[5]  Garg,et al.  Detector inefficiencies in the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment. , 1987, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[6]  Hong,et al.  Measurement of subpicosecond time intervals between two photons by interference. , 1987, Physical review letters.

[7]  Tony Leggett,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics: Collected Papers on Quantum Philosophy , 1988 .

[8]  Eberhard,et al.  Background level and counter efficiencies required for a loophole-free Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment. , 1993, Physical review. A, Atomic, molecular, and optical physics.

[9]  Ekert,et al.  "Event-ready-detectors" Bell experiment via entanglement swapping. , 1993, Physical review letters.

[10]  J. Bell Atomic-cascade photons and quantum-mechanical nonlocality , 1995 .

[11]  H. Weinfurter,et al.  Violation of Bell's Inequality under Strict Einstein Locality Conditions , 1998, quant-ph/9810080.

[12]  C. Monroe,et al.  Experimental violation of a Bell's inequality with efficient detection , 2001, Nature.

[13]  Adrian Kent,et al.  Quantum nonlocality, Bell inequalities, and the memory loophole , 2002 .

[14]  C. Simon,et al.  Robust long-distance entanglement and a loophole-free bell test with ions and photons. , 2003, Physical review letters.

[15]  Richard D. Gill Time, Finite Statistics, and Bell's Fifth Position , 2003 .

[16]  J. Bell,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics: Preface to the first edition , 2004 .

[17]  Pieter Kok,et al.  Efficient high-fidelity quantum computation using matter qubits and linear optics , 2005 .

[18]  V. Scarani,et al.  Device-independent security of quantum cryptography against collective attacks. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[19]  D. Matsukevich,et al.  Bell inequality violation with two remote atomic qubits. , 2008, Physical review letters.

[20]  Roger Colbeck,et al.  Quantum And Relativistic Protocols For Secure Multi-Party Computation , 2009, 0911.3814.

[21]  H. Weinfurter,et al.  Towards a Loophole-Free Test of Bell's Inequality with Entangled Pairs of Neutral Atoms , 2009, 0906.0703.

[22]  Erik Lucero,et al.  Violation of Bell's inequality in Josephson phase qubits , 2009, Nature.

[23]  Rupert Ursin,et al.  Violation of local realism with freedom of choice , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Stefano Pironio,et al.  Random numbers certified by Bell’s theorem , 2009, Nature.

[25]  Christian Kurtsiefer,et al.  Experimentally faking the violation of Bell's inequalities. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[26]  B. Hensen,et al.  High-fidelity projective read-out of a solid-state spin quantum register , 2011, Nature.

[27]  G. Rempe,et al.  An elementary quantum network of single atoms in optical cavities , 2012, Nature.

[28]  H. Weinfurter,et al.  Heralded Entanglement Between Widely Separated Atoms , 2012, Science.

[29]  A. Zeilinger,et al.  Bell violation using entangled photons without the fair-sampling assumption , 2012, Nature.

[30]  M. Markham,et al.  Heralded entanglement between solid-state qubits separated by three metres , 2012, Nature.

[31]  Aaron J. Miller,et al.  Detection-loophole-free test of quantum nonlocality, and applications. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[32]  S. Wehner,et al.  Bell Nonlocality , 2013, 1303.2849.

[33]  C. Abellán,et al.  Generation of Fresh and Pure Random Numbers for Loophole-Free Bell Tests. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[34]  J. S. BELLt Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox , 2018 .