International Journal of Theoretical Physics

, Volume 1, Issue 4, pp 387–407 | Cite as

On pair annihilation and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox

  • Mendel Sachs


Discussion is given to the experimental facts that are associated with ‘pair annihilation’, as a real example, rather than a gedanken experiment, to illustrate the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. It is shown how the paradox disappears in a nonlinear relativistically covariant spinor field theory of this author, which takes thesingle interaction, rather thanmany free particles, as the elementary entity. In this theory there is no actual annihilation of matter. Rather, the observed facts that are conventionally interpreted as ‘pair annihilation’ arederived from an exact solution of the nonlinear field equations for the interacting pair in a particular deeply bound state. This solution reveals the observed facts, including the energy separation of 2m from the asymptotic state where the particles can be assumed to be (almost) free, and the prediction of two distinguishable currents whose phases are correlated by a 90° difference and are polarized in a common plane that is perpendicular to the direction of propagation of interaction with a detecting apparatus. The paradox disappears essentially because of the rejection by this theory (in principle and in the exact mathematical formalism) of anyphysical description in terms of truly uncoupled partial systems.


Field Theory Field Equation Experimental Fact Interact Pair Free Particle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bohm, D. (1952).Physical Review,85, 166, 180.Google Scholar
  2. Bohr, N. (1949). In:Albert Einstein—Philosopher Scientist, ed. Schlipp, P. A., pp. 201 and 666. The Library of Living Philosophers, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  3. Chew, G. F. (1963).S-Matrix Theory of Strong Interactions. W. A. Benjamin, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  4. Dirac, P. A. M. (1963).Scientific American,208, No. 5, 45.Google Scholar
  5. Dirac, P. A. M. (1966).Lectures on Quantum Field Theory. Belfer Graduate School of Science, Yeshiva University.Google Scholar
  6. Einstein, A., Podolsky, B. and Rosen, N. (1935).Physical Review,47, 777.Google Scholar
  7. Furry, W. H. (1936).Physical Review,49, 393, 476.Google Scholar
  8. Heitier, W. (1944).The Quantum Theory of Radiation, 2nd edition, Section 16. Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Klemperer, O. (1934).Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society. Mathematics and Physical Sciences,30, 347.Google Scholar
  10. Sachs, M. (1964).Nuovo cimento,31, 98.Google Scholar
  11. Sachs, M. (1965).Nuovo cimento,37, 977.Google Scholar
  12. Sachs, M. and Schwebel, S. L. (1961).Nuovo cimento, Suppl.27, 197.Google Scholar
  13. Sachs, M. and Schwebel, S. L. (1962).Journal of Mathematics and Physics,3, 843.Google Scholar
  14. Schwinger, J. (1966).Physical Review,152, 1219.Google Scholar
  15. Schwinger, J. (1967).Physical Review,158, 1391.Google Scholar
  16. Wheeler, J. A. and Feynman, R. P. (1945).Review of Modern Physics,17, 157.Google Scholar
  17. Wu, C. S. and Shaknov, I. (1950).Physical Review,77, 136.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Company Limited 1968

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mendel Sachs
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhysicsState University of New YorkBuffalo

Personalised recommendations