Paper detail

Revisiting Hardy's Paradox: Counterfactual Statements, Real Measurements, Entanglement and Weak Values

Classical-realistic analysis of entangled systems have lead to retrodiction paradoxes, which ordinarily have been dismissed on the grounds of counter-factuality. Instead, we claim that such paradoxes point to a deeper logical structure inherent to quantum mechanics, which is naturally described in the language of weak values, and which is accessible experimentally via weak measurements. Using as an illustration, a gedanken-experiment due to Hardy\cite{hardy}, we show that there is in fact an exact numerical coincidence between a) a pair of classically contradictory assertions about the locations of an electron and a positron, and b) the results of weak measurements of their location. The internal consistency of these results is due to the novel way by which quantum mechanics "resolves" the paradox: first, by allowing for two distinguishable manifestations of how the electron and positron can be at the same location: either as single particles or as a pair; and secondly, by allowing these properties to take either sign. In particular, we discuss the experimental meaning of a {\em negative} number of electron-positron pairs.

preprint2001arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.