Skip to main content
Log in

Frequency Analysis of the EPR-Bell Argumentation

  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We perform a frequency analysis of the EPR-Bell argumentation. One of the main consequences of our investigation is that the existence of probability distributions of the Kolmogorov-type which was supposed by some authors is a mathematical assumption which may not be supported by actual physical quantum processes. In fact, frequencies for hidden variables for quantum particles and measurement devices may fluctuate from run to run of an experiment. These fluctuations of frequencies for micro-parameters need not contradict to the stabilization of frequencies for physical observables. If, nevertheless, micro-parameters are also statistically stable, then violations of Bell's inequality and its generalizations may be a consequence of dependence of collectives corresponding to two different measurement devices. Such a dependence implies the violation of the factorization rule for the simultaneous probability distribution. Formally this rule coincides with the well known BCHS locality condition (or outcome independence condition). However, the frequency approach implies totally different interpretation of dependence. It is not dependence of events, but it is dependence of collectives. Such a dependence may be induced by the same preparation procedure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. J. S. Bell, Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 447 (1966); Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969). J. F. Clauser and A. Shimony, Rep. Prog. Phys. 41, 1881 (1978). A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, and G. Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982). A. Home and F. Selleri, Riv. Nuovo Cimento 14, 1 (1991). H. P. Stapp, Phys. Rev. A 3, 1303 (1971). P. H. Eberhard, Nuovo Cimento B 38, 75 (1977); Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1474 (1982). A. Peres, Am. J. Phys. 46, 745 (1978); Found. Phys. 14, 1131 (1984); 16, 573 (1986). P. H. Eberhard, Nuovo Cimento B 46, 392 (1978); J. Jarrett, No \(\hat u\) s 18, 569 (1984). M. Kupczynski, Phys. Lett. A 121, 205 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  3. B. d'Espagnat, Veiled Reality: An Analysis of Present-Day Quantum Mechanical Concepts (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1995). A. Shimony, Search for a Naturalistic World View (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993). A. Peres, Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  4. L. de Broglie, La thermodynamique de la particule isolée (Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1964). G. Lochak, Found. Phys. 6, 173 (1976). E. Nelson, Quantum Fluctuation (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1985). W. de Muynck and W. De Baere, Ann. Israel Phys. Soc. 12, 1 (1996). W. de Muynck, W. De Baere, and H. Martens, Found. Phys. 24, 1589 (1994). W. de Muynck and J. T. van Stekelenborg, Ann. Phys. 45, 222 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  5. L. Accardi, Urne e Camaleoni: Dialogo sulla realta, le leggi del caso e la teoria quantistica (Il Saggiatore, Rome, 1997); “The probabilistic roots of the quantum mechanical paradoxes,” in The Wave-Particle Dualism: A Tribute to Louis de Broglie on his 90th Birthday, S. Diner, D. Fargue, G. Lochak, and F. Selleri, eds. (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1970), pp. 47-55.

    Google Scholar 

  6. I. Pitowsky, Phys. Rev. Lett 48, 1299 (1982); Phys. Rev. A 27, 2316 (1983). S. P. Gudder, J. Math Phy. 25, 2397 (1984). A. Fine, Phys. Rev. Lett. 48, 291 (1982). P. Rastal, Found. Phys. 13, 555 (1983). W. Muckenheim, Phys. Rep. 133, 338 (1986). W. De Baere, Lett. Nuovo Cimento 39, 234 (1984); 40, 448 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  7. A. Yu. Khrennikov, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, ser. Matem. 322, 1075 (1992); J. Math. Phys. 32, 932 (1991); Phys. Lett. A 200, 119 (1995); Phys. A 215, 577 (1995); Int. J. Theor. Phys. 34, 2423 (1995); J. Math. Phys. 36, 6625 (1995); P-adic-valued Distributions in Mathematical Physics (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1994); Non-Archimedean Analysis: Quantum Paradoxes, Dynamical Systems and Biological Model (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  8. A. Yu. Khrennikov, Bell and Kolmogorov: Probability, Reality and Nonlocality, Reports of Växjö University, N. 13 (1999); Interpretations of Probability (VSP, Utrecht, 1999).

  9. A. N. Kolmogorov, Grundbegriffe der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung (Springer, Berlin, 1933); reprinted: Foundations of the Probability Theory (Chelsea, New York, 1956).

    Google Scholar 

  10. R. von Mises, The Mathematical Theory of Probability and Statistics (Academic, London, 1964).

    Google Scholar 

  11. L. E. Ballentine, Rev. Mod. Phys. 42, 358 (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  12. D. Bohm and B. Hiley, The Undivided Universe: An Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (Routledge &;;; Kegan Paul, London, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Khrennikov, A. Frequency Analysis of the EPR-Bell Argumentation. Foundations of Physics 32, 1159–1174 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016590811533

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016590811533

Navigation