Paper detail

Classical probability model for Bell inequality

We show that by taking into account randomness of realization of experimental contexts it is possible to construct common Kolmogorov space for data collected for these contexts, although they can be incompatible. We call such a construction "Kolmogorovization" of contextuality. This construction of common probability space is applied to Bell's inequality. It is well known that its violation is a consequence of collecting statistical data in a few incompatible experiments. In experiments performed in quantum optics contexts are determined by selections of pairs of angles $(θ_i, θ^\prime_j)$ fixing orientations of polarization beam splitters. Opposite to the common opinion, we show that statistical data corresponding to measurements of polarizations of photons in the singlet state, e.g., in the form of correlations, can be described in the classical probabilistic framework. The crucial point is that in constructing the common probability space one has to take into account not only randomness of the source (as Bell did), but also randomness of context-realizations (in particular, realizations of pairs of angles $(θ_i, θ^\prime_j)$). One may (but need not) say that randomness of "free will" has to be accounted.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.