analiza aiqbench
This paper resolves ambiguity in Bell's theorem by demonstrating that rejecting Parameter Independence is necessary to explain quantum correlations without superluminal signaling. It proposes random-matrix collapse dynamics as a framework where hidden variables act as stochastic streams rather than pre-existing values, effectively blocking the "quantum Sorites" argument while preserving No-Signaling.
How the Quantum Sorites Phenomenon Strengthens the Bell Argument and How a Random-Matrix Collapse Dynamics Answers It
arXiv:2607.17894v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Bell proved that no theory of pre-existing local values can reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics, but his proof leaves the culprit ambiguous: one may reject either of two independence conditions, Outcome Independence or Parameter Independence, and most commentators have found Outcome Independence the safer sacrifice. The first part of this paper presents, in a form adapted to spin-1/2 particles in the singlet state, an argument (Forster 2014) that removes the ambiguity: using a chained family of experiments in which quantum mechanics predicts an extreme pattern of correlations -- the quantum Sorites phenomenon -- a contradiction is derived without ever assuming Outcome Independence. Under the resulting theorem, anyone who holds that hidden variables could improve on the quantum probabilities must give up Parameter Independence itself. That looks like a heavy price, because Parameter Independence appears to be protected twice over: rejecting it seems to put superluminal influences into spacetime, and its statistical shadow -- the No-Signaling condition -- is experimentally beyond reproach The second part of the paper shows that the price is payable. In the random-matrix collapse dynamics proposed by Kryukov, measurement is a random walk of the quantum state, and the hidden variable is not a stock of values fixed at the source but the random stream that drives the walk -- like the stored random numbers of a computer simulation, with the measurement settings playing the role of seeds. In that framework Parameter Independence is false while Outcome Independence and No-Signaling are both true, and one can say exactly how the Sorites argument is blocked, why the violation involves no process propagating in spacetime, and why the influence of one wing's setting on the other wing's outcome -- demonstrated here in a simulation -- can never be used to send a message.
Abstract:Bell proved that no theory of pre-existing local values can reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics, but his proof leaves the culprit ambiguous: one may reject either of two independence conditions, Outcome Independence or Parameter Independence, and most commentators have found Outcome Independence the safer sacrifice. The first part of this paper presents, in a form adapted to spin-1/2 particles in the singlet state, an argument (Forster 2014) that removes the ambiguity: using a chained family of experiments in which quantum mechanics predicts an extreme pattern of correlations -- the quantum Sorites phenomenon -- a contradiction is derived without ever assuming Outcome Independence. Under the resulting theorem, anyone who holds that hidden variables could improve on the quantum probabilities must give up Parameter Independence itself. That looks like a heavy price, because Parameter Independence appears to be protected twice over: rejecting it seems to put superluminal influences into spacetime, and its statistical shadow -- the No-Signaling condition -- is experimentally beyond reproach The second part of the paper shows that the price is payable. In the random-matrix collapse dynamics proposed by Kryukov, measurement is a random walk of the quantum state, and the hidden variable is not a stock of values fixed at the source but the random stream that drives the walk -- like the stored random numbers of a computer simulation, with the measurement settings playing the role of seeds. In that framework Parameter Independence is false while Outcome Independence and No-Signaling are both true, and one can say exactly how the Sorites argument is blocked, why the violation involves no process propagating in spacetime, and why the influence of one wing's setting on the other wing's outcome -- demonstrated here in a simulation -- can never be used to send a message.
arXiv:2607.17894 [quant-ph]
(or arXiv:2607.17894v1 [quant-ph] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.17894 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 386 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Lattice-Based Cryptography Explained
Quantum Zeitgeist · 15 aug. 2026

Quantum Channels Defy Entropy Additivity, University of Waterloo Finds
Quantum Zeitgeist · 26 aug. 2026

Generalization and infinite width
LessWrong · 1 aug. 2026

Researchers Bound Certification Costs for Bell Tests with Tilted Data
Quantum Zeitgeist · 10 sept. 2026