Abstract

Bell inequalities were created with the goal of improving the understanding of foundational questions in quantum mechanics. To this end, they are typically applied to measurement results generated from entangled systems of particles. They can, however, also be used as a statistical tool for macroscopic systems, where they can describe the connection strength between two components of a system under a causal model. We show that, in principle, data from macroscopic observations analyzed with Bell’ s approach can invalidate certain causal models. To illustrate this use, we describe a macroscopic game setting, without a quantum mechanical measurement process, and analyze it using the framework of Bell experiments. In the macroscopic game, violations of the inequalities can be created by cheating with classically defined strategies. In the physical context, the meaning of violations is less clear and is still vigorously debated. We discuss two measures for optimal strategies to generate a given statistic that violates the inequalities. We show their mathematical equivalence and how they can be computed from CHSH-quantities alone, if non-signaling applies. As a macroscopic example from the financial world, we show how the unfair use of insider knowledge could be picked up using Bell statistics. Finally, in the discussion of realist interpretations of quantum mechanical Bell experiments, cheating strategies are often expressed through the ideas of free choice and locality. In this regard, violations of free choice and locality can be interpreted as two sides of the same coin, which underscores the view that the meaning these terms are given in Bell’s approach should not be confused with their everyday use. In general, we conclude that Bell’s approach also carries lessons for understanding macroscopic systems of which the connectedness conforms to different causal structures.

Highlights

  • The debate about the meaning of these assumptions and the experimental findings is still ongoing, with great intensity. This is partly due to the fact that the terms realism, free will and locality are cherished notions about which people hold passionate beliefs, based on their everyday experiences in the macroscopic world or assumptions about nature

  • We present a short sketch of the proof, where the presentation is made in terms of physical Bell experiments, using the notions of Bell locality and free choice

  • Market participants have certain information at their disposal, which may consist of publicly known facts, rumors and instructions from their managers. We summarize this information in just two categories, 0 and 1, and identify it with the questions x, y that Alice and Bob are asked in the macroscopic game

Read more

Summary

Introduction

John Bell’s seminal work [1–6] has triggered a rich tradition of experimental studies [7–13]. Bell’s work and the CHSH quantities can be seen as providing statistical tools to investigate general causal models on the microand macroscopic level. We will use this point of view in two ways. We will use the comparison with the macroscopic game to discuss interpretations of violations of Bell inequalities in quantum mechanical experiments, with a view to explicate concepts such as free choice, locality, contextuality and predictive completeness. We conclude by discussing different terminologies and interpretations of connection strength with Bell’s approach in macro- and microscopic situations

A Macroscopic Game
Winning by Cheating
Measure μ1
Measure μ2
Measuring Connection Strength
Winning with Additional Resources from Nature
Social and Financial Systems
Discussion
The Hidden Variable Space
Causality, Connection Strength and Explainability in Machine Learning
Findings
Connection Strength in Quantum Systems, Free Choice and Locality
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call