Quantum probabilities and violation of CHSH-inequality from classical random signals and threshold type properly calibrated detectors

We present a purely wave model (based on classical random field) which reproduces quantum probabilities (given by the fundamental law of quantum mechanics, Born's rule) including probabilities for joint detection of a pair of quantum observables (e.g., spin or polarization projections). The crucial point of our approach is that the presence of detector's threshold and calibration procedure have to be treated not as simply experimental technicalities, but as the basic counteparts of the theoretical model. The presence of the background field (vacuum fluctuations) is also the key-element of our prequantum model. It is of the classical signal type and the methods of classical signal theory (including statistical radiophysics) are used for its development. We stress that our prequantum model is not objective, i.e., the values of observables (clicks of detectors) cannot be assigned in advance, i.e., before measurement. Hence, the dilemma, nonobjectivity or nonlocality, is resolved in favor of nonobjectivity (our model is local of the classical field type). In particular, we reproduce the probabilities for the EPR-experiment for photon polarization and, hence, violate CHSH inequality for classical random signals (measured by the threshold type and properly calibrated detectors acting in the presence of the background field).

[1]  A. Khrennikov,et al.  Bell’s inequality, Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen arguments and von Neumann’s projection postulate , 2009 .

[2]  Mark Beck,et al.  Comparing measurements of g (2) (0) performed with different coincidence detection techniques , 2007 .

[3]  Arkady Plotnitsky,et al.  Epistemology and Probability: Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, and the Nature of Quantum-Theoretical Thinking , 2009 .

[4]  G. Adenier A fair sampling test for EPR-Bell experiments , 2008 .

[5]  G. Jaeger,et al.  Entanglement, Information, and the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics , 2010 .

[6]  Masanori Ohya,et al.  A new treatment of communication processes with Gaussian channels , 1986 .

[7]  M. Ozawa,et al.  Reconstructing Bohr’s Reply to EPR in Algebraic Quantum Theory , 2011, 1107.0737.

[8]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  The Principle of Supplementarity: A Contextual Probabilistic Viewpoint to Complementarity, the Interference of Probabilities and Incompatibility of Variables in Quantum Mechanics , 2005 .

[9]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  EPR "paradox", projection postulate, time synchronization "nonlocality" , 2009 .

[10]  Andrei Khrennikov Quantum theory: Reconsideration of foundations , 2003 .

[11]  A. Khrennikov Analysis of the role of von Neumann’s projection postulate in the canonical scheme of quantum teleportation , 2008, 0805.3258.

[12]  A. Zeilinger,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics , 1989 .

[13]  J. Bell,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quatum Mechanics , 1988 .

[14]  Aaron D. O’Connell Dance of the Photons: From Einstein to Quantum Teleportation , 2011 .

[15]  Cecilia Flori,et al.  Kochen-Specker Theorem , 2013 .

[16]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Contextual Approach to Quantum Formalism , 2009 .

[17]  W. Philipp,et al.  Comment on "Exclusion of time in the theorem of Bell , 2002 .

[18]  O. Gühne,et al.  State-independent experimental test of quantum contextuality , 2009, Nature.