JAMP  Vol.6 No.6 , June 2018
Quantum Local Causality in Non-Metric Space
Abstract: The possibility that quantum mechanics is founded on non-metric space has been previously introduced as an alternative consequence of Bell inequalities violation. This work develops the concept further by an analysis of the iconic Heisenberg gedanken experiment. No lower bound is found in the gedanken uncertainly relation for a non-metric spatial background. This result has the fundamental consequence that the quantum particle trajectory is retained in non-metric space and time. Assignment of measurement number-values to unmeasured incompatible variables is found to be mathematically incorrect. The current disagreement between different formulations of the empirically verified error-disturbance relations can be explained as a consequence of the structure of space. Quantum contextuality can likewise be explained geometrically. An alternative analysis of the extendedEPRperfect anti-correlation configuration is given. The consensus that local causality is the sole assumption is found to be incorrect. There is also the additional assumption of orientation independence. Inequalities violation does not therefore mandate rejection of local causality. Violation of the assumption of orientation independence implies rejection of metric, non-contextual variables algebraically representing physical quantities.
Cite this paper: Ruzzene, F. (2018) Quantum Local Causality in Non-Metric Space. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, 6, 1179-1198. doi: 10.4236/jamp.2018.66100.

[1]   Bell, J.S. (1987) Speaking and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

[2]   Aspect, A., Granger, P. and Roger, G. (1982) Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedanken Experiment: A New Violation of Bell’s Inequalities. Physical Review Letters, 49, 91-94.

[3]   Norsen, T. (2011) J. S. Bell’s Concept of Local Causality. American Journal of Physics, 79, 1261-1275.

[4]   Wiseman, H.M. (2014) The Two Bell’s Theorems of John Bell. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 47, Article ID: 424001.
Wiseman, H.M. and Calvalcanti, E.G. (2015) Causaruminvestigatio and the Two Bell’s Theorems of John Bell.
Norsen, T. (2015) Quantum Solipsism and Non-Locality.
Wiseman, H.M., Rieffel, E.G. and Cavalcanti, E.G. (2016) Reply to Gillis’s “On the Analysis of Bell’s 1964 Paper by Wiseman, Calvalcanti, and Rieffel”.

[5]   Gisin, N. (2010) Non-Realism: Deep Thought or a Soft Option? Foundations of Physics, 42, 80-85.

[6]   Ghirardi, G. (2009) The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: Where Do We Stand? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 174, Article ID: 012013.

[7]   Goldstein, S., Norsen, T., Tausk, D. and Zanghi, N. (2011) Bell’s Theorem. Scholarpedia, 6, 8378.

[8]   Nieuwenhuizen, T.M. (2011) Is the Contextuality Loophole Fatal for the Derivation of Bell Inequalities? Foundations of Physics, 41, 580-591.

[9]   Revzen, M., Mello, P.A., Mann, A. and Johansen, L.M. (2005) Bell’s Inequality Violation with Non-Negative Wigner Functions. Physical Review A, 71, Article ID: 022103.

[10]   Ruzzene, F. (2013) Assumptions of Metric Variable-Type in Bell’s Theorem. American Journal of Modern Physics, 2, 350.

[11]   Ruzzene, F. (2015) Quantum Mechanics in Space and Time. American Journal of Modern Physics, 4, 221.

[12]   Alexia, A. and Philippe, G. (2016) Contexts, Systems and Modalities: A New Ontology for Quantum Mechanics. Foundations of Physics, 6, 121-137.
Alexia, A. and Philippe, G. (2015) Violation of Bell’s Inequalities in a Quantum Realistic Framework. International Journal of Quantum Information, 14, Article ID: 1640002.

[13]   Hensen, B., et al. (2015) Experimental Loophole-Free Violation of a Bell Inequality Using Entangled Electron Spins Separated by 1.3 km.

[14]   Shalm, L.K., et al. (2015) A Strong Loophole-Free Test of Local Realism. Physical Review Letters, 115, Article ID: 250402.

[15]   Marissa, G., et al. (215) Significant Loophole-Free Test of Bell’s Theorem with Entangled Photons. Physical Review Letters, 115, Article ID: 250401.

[16]   Hilbert, D. (2005) The Foundations of Geometry.

[17]   Wylie, C.R. (1992) Foundations of Geometry. Dover Publications Inc., New York.

[18]   Robinson Gilbert De, B. (1959) The Foundations of Geometry. 4th Edition, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.

[19]   Wylie, C.R. (1970) Introduction to Projective Geometry. Dover Publications Inc., New York.

[20]   Peres, A. (2000) Delayed Choice for Entanglement Swapping. Journal of Modern Optics, 47, 139-143.

[21]   Caslav, B., Markus, A. and Anton, Z. (2005) Complementarity and Information in Delayed-Choice for Entanglement Swapping. Foundations of Physics, 35, 1909-1919.
Ma, X., Zotter, S., Kofler, J., Ursin, R., Jennewein, T., Brukner, C. and Zeilinger, A. (2012) Experimental Delayed-Choice Entanglement Swapping. Nature Physics, 8, 479-484.

[22]   Jacques, V., Wu, E., Grosshans, F., Treussart, F., Grangier, P., Aspect, A. and Roch, J.F. (2007) Experimental Realization of Wheeler’s Delayed-Choice Gendanken Experiment. Science, 315, 966-968.
Norsen, T. (2006) Comment on “Experimental Realization of Wheeler’s Delayed-Choice Gedanken Experiment”.

[23]   Heisenberg, W. (1949) The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory. Dover Publications Inc., New York.

[24]   Ozawa, M. (2003) Universally Valid Reformulation of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle on Noise and Disturbance in Measurements. Physical Review A, 67, Article ID: 042105.
Ozawa, M. (2015) Heisenberg’s Original Derivation of the Uncertainty Principle and Its Universally Valid Reformulation. Current Science, 109, 2006-2016.
Busch, P., Lahti, P.P. and Werner, R. (2013) Proof of Heisenberg’s Error-Disturbance Relation. Physical Review Letters, 111, Article ID: 160405.
Busch, P., Laht, P. and Werner, R. (2014) Measurement Uncertainty: Reply to Critics.
Lund, A.P. and Wiseman, H.M. (2010) Measuring Measurement-Disturbance Relationships with Weak Values. New Journal of Physics, 12, Article ID: 093011.
Appleby, D.M. (2016) Quantum Errors and Disturbances: Response to Busch, Lahti and Werner. Entropy, 18, 174.

[25]   Ballentine, L.E. (1970) The Statistical Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Reviews of Modern Physics, 42, 358-381.

[26]   Transtrum Mark, K. and Van Huele Jean-Francois, S. (2005) Commutation Relations for Functions of Operators. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 46, Article ID: 063510.

[27]   Boughn, S. (2017) Making Sense of Bell’s Theorem and Quantum Nonlocality. Foundations of Physics, 47, 640-657.
Marck, Z. and Caslav, B. (2014) Quantum Non-Locality—It Ain’t Necessarily So….. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 47, Article ID: 424009.

[28]   Federico, L. (2017) Stop Making Sense of Bell’s Theorem and Nonlocality? A Reply to Stephen Boughn.

[29]   Norsen, T. (2006) Bell Locality and the Nonlocal Character of Nature. Foundations of Physics Letters, 19, 633-655.

[30]   Norsen, T. (2006) Counter-Factual Meaningfulness and the Bell and CHSH Inequalities.

[31]   Norsen, T. (2007) Against “Realism”. Foundations of Physics, 37, 311-340.

[32]   Roderich, T. (2015) The Assumptions of Bell’s Proof.

[33]   Hess, K., De Raedt, H. and Michielsen, K. (2016) Counterfactual Definiteness and Bell’s Inequality. Journal of Modern Physics, 7, 1651-1660.

[34]   Cabello, A. (2010) Proposal for Revealing Quantum Nonlocality via Local Contextuality. Physical Review Letters, 104, Article ID: 220401.
Cabello, A. (2008) Experimentally Testable State-Independent Quantum Contextuality. Physical Review Letters, 101, Article ID: 210401.

[35]   Liu, B.-H., Hu, X.-M., Chen, J.-S., Huang, Y.-F., Han, Y.-J., Li, C.-F., Guo, G.-C. and Cabello, A. (2016) Nonlocality from Local Contextuality. Physical Review Letters, 117, Article ID: 220402.

[36]   La Cour Brian, R. (2017) Local Hidden-Variable Model for a Recent Experimental Test of Quantum Nonlocality and Local Contextuality. Physics Letters A, 38, 2230.