Using simple elastic bands to explain quantum mechanics: a conceptual review of two of Aerts’ machine-models

From the beginning of his research, the Belgian physicist Diederik Aerts has shown great creativity in inventing a number of concrete machine-models that have played an important role in the development of general mathematical and conceptual formalisms for the description of the physical reality. These models can also be used to demystify much of the strangeness in the behavior of quantum entities, by allowing to have a peek at what’s going on behind the “quantum scenes,” during a measurement. In this author’s view, the importance of these machine-models, and of the approaches they have originated, have been so far seriously underappreciated by the physics community, despite their success in clarifying many challenges of quantum physics. To fill this gap, and encourage a greater number of researchers to take cognizance of the important work of so-called Geneva-Brussels school, we describe and analyze in this paper two of Aerts’ historical machine-models, whose operations are based on simple breakable elastic bands. The first one, called the spin quantum-machine, is able to replicate the quantum probabilities associated with the spin measurement of a spin-1/2 entity. The second one, called the connected vessels of water model (of which we shall present here an alternative version based on elastics) is able to violate Bell’s inequality, as coincidence measurements on entangled states can do.

[1]  Diederik Aerts The Description of Joint Quantum Entities and the Formulation of a Paradox , 2000 .

[2]  Nicolas Gisin,et al.  Reply to the "Comment on: Testing the speed of 'spooky action at a distance' " , 2008, 0810.4607.

[3]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The Violation of Bell Inequalities in the Macroworld , 2000, quant-ph/0007044.

[4]  Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi,et al.  The δ-Quantum Machine, the k-Model, and the Non-ordinary Spatiality of Quantum Entities , 2011, 1104.4738.

[5]  Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi,et al.  From Permanence to Total Availability: A Quantum Conceptual Upgrade , 2010, 1010.4942.

[6]  R. Feynman The Character of Physical Law , 1965 .

[7]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  A mechanistic macroscopic physical entity with a three-dimensional Hilbert space description , 2001 .

[8]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum, classical and intermediate: An illustrative example , 1994 .

[9]  Erik Lucero,et al.  Quantum ground state and single-phonon control of a mechanical resonator , 2010, Nature.

[10]  Miss A.O. Penney (b) , 1974, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[11]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  AN ATTEMPT TO IMAGINE PARTS OF THE REALITY OF THE MICRO-WORLD , 1990 .

[12]  Diederik Aerts The stuff the world is made of: physics and reality , 1999 .

[13]  A. Blaquiere,et al.  Information Complexity and Control in Quantum Physics , 1987 .

[14]  H. S. Allen The Quantum Theory , 1928, Nature.

[15]  N. David Mermin,et al.  Is the Moon There When Nobody Looks? Reality and the Quantum Theory , 1985 .

[16]  P. Grangier,et al.  Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedankenexperiment : A New Violation of Bell's Inequalities , 1982 .

[17]  P. H. Eberhard,et al.  Bell’s theorem and the different concepts of locality , 1978 .

[18]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Interpreting Quantum Particles as Conceptual Entities , 2010, 1004.2531.

[19]  Giorgio Parisi,et al.  Quantum Mechanics: Quantum observables and states , 2009 .

[20]  R. Kastner The Quantum Liar Experiment in Cramer's Transactional Interpretation , 2009, 0906.1626.

[21]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum Particles as Conceptual Entities: A Possible Explanatory Framework for Quantum Theory , 2009, 1004.2530.

[22]  M. Jammer The philosophy of quantum mechanics , 1974 .

[23]  Diederik Aerts Quantum Mechanics: Structures, Axioms and Paradoxes , 1999 .

[24]  W. Heisenberg,et al.  Philosophic Problems Of Nuclear Science , 1952 .

[25]  M. Sassoli de Bianchi Ephemeral Properties and the Illusion of Microscopic Particles , 2011 .

[26]  Diederik Aerts Quantum structures: An attempt to explain the origin of their appearance in nature , 1995 .

[27]  Elena Castellani Interpreting bodies : classical and quantum objects in modern physics , 1998 .

[28]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The Origin of the Non-Classical Character of the Quantum Probability Model , 1987 .

[29]  R. Mcweeny On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox , 2000 .

[30]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum structures due to fluctuations of the measurement situation , 1993 .

[31]  E. Schrödinger Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik , 2005, Naturwissenschaften.

[32]  E. Schrödinger Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik , 1935, Naturwissenschaften.

[33]  E. Specker,et al.  The Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics , 1967 .

[34]  Sven Aerts A realistic device that simulates the non-local PR box without communication , 2005 .

[35]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  A mechanistic classical laboratory situation violating the Bell inequalities with 2-2 , 1991 .

[36]  A. N. Kolmogorov,et al.  Foundations of the theory of probability , 1960 .

[37]  Dirk Aerts,et al.  A possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics , 1986 .

[38]  A. Gleason Measures on the Closed Subspaces of a Hilbert Space , 1957 .

[39]  Robert W. Spekkens,et al.  Foundations of Quantum Mechanics , 2007 .

[40]  D. Aerts,et al.  The missing elements of reality in the description of quantum mechanics of the E.P.R. paradox situation , 1984 .

[41]  A. Aspect Bell's inequality test: more ideal than ever , 1999, Nature.

[42]  J. Cramer,et al.  The transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics , 1986 .

[43]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The entity and modern physics: the creation-discovery- view of reality 1 , 1998 .