arXiv subjects

Carsten Held

Publications and source records attributed to Carsten Held.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2020

Quantum-Mechanical Correlations and Tsirelson Bound from Geometric Algebra

The Bell-Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality can be used to show that no local hidden-variable theory can reproduce the correlations predicted by quantum mechanics (QM). It can be proved that certain QM correlations lead to a violation of the classical bound established by the inequality, while all correlations, QM and classical, respect a QM bound (the Tsirelson bound). Here, we show that these well-known results depend crucially on the assumption that the values of physical magnitudes are scalars. The result implies, first, that the origin of the Tsirelson bound is geometrical, not physical; and, second, that a local hidden-variable theory does not contradict QM if the values of physical magnitudes are vectors.

quant-ph↗

arXiv2019

Non-Contextual and Local Hidden-Variable Model for the Peres-Mermin and Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger Systems

A hidden-variable model for quantum-mechanical spin, as represented by the Pauli spin operators, is proposed for systems illustrating the well-known no-hidden-variables arguments by Peres and Mermin (1990) and by Greenberger, Horne, and Zeilinger (1989). Both arguments rely on an assumption of non-contextuality; the latter argument can also be phrased as a non-locality argument, using a locality assumption. The model suggested here is compatible with both assumptions. This is possible because the scalar values of spin observables are replaced by vectors that are components of orientations.

quant-ph↗

arXiv2007

Axiom System and Completeness Expression for Quantum Mechanics

The standard axiomatization of quantum mechanics (QM) is not fully explicit about the role of the time-parameter. Especially, the time reference within the probability algorithm (the Born Rule, BR) is unclear. Using a plausible principle P1, about the role of probability in a physical theory, and a second principle P2 affording a most natural way to make BR precise, a logical conflict with the standard expression for the completeness of QM can be derived. Rejecting P1 is implausible. Rejecting P2 leads to unphysical results and to a conflict with a generalization of P2, a principle P3. It is thus made plausible that the standard expression of QM completeness must be revised. An absolutely explicit form of the axioms is provided, including a precise form of the projection postulate. An appropriate expression for QM completeness, reflecting the restrictions of the Gleason and Kochen-Specker theorems is proposed.

quant-ph↗