Einstein Podolsky Rosen Criterion Of Reality

[Rade]

In their famous 1935 paper in Physical Review (47):777, Einstein, Podolsky,and Rosen presented a "criterion for reality", Here it is:

"If, without in any way disturbing a system, we can predict with certainty (i.e., with probability equal to unity) the value of a physical quantity, then there exists an element of physical reality corresponding to the physical quantity"

 

----

 

Let us consider a three piece puzzle, which represents a "system" as per EPR, with each piece being a unique "physical quantity". {edit:} the "value" of the physical quantity under consideration is the left or right directed orientation of the "<" and ">" aspect of the quantity.

 

Piece A is a physical quantity |>

 

Piece A' is a physical quantity <|

 

Piece B is a physical quantity that fits between A and A', thus ><

 

When the "system" is "complete" (the three pieces united with their labels), as per the condition of "completeness" of EPR, it would look like: |A>>B<<A'| or {Edit} |A'>>B<<A|

 

==

 

My first claim is that this three piece puzzle meets the criterion of reality presented by EPR, that is, without in any way disturbing |A>>B<<A'| or |A'>>B<<A| , we can predict with certainty the ">" or "<" positional direction (a value) for all three physical quantities, thus there must exist the possibility of three "elements of physical reality" corresponding to these three "physical quantities".

 

My second claim is that I report that I cut from a piece of computer paper three elements of physical reality that correspond to the physical quantities represented by |A>>B<<A'| and |A'>>B<<A| , and that this experiment can be replicated by anyone reading this. Thus the claim of correspondence above can be tested via repeated experimentation.

 

My third claim is that, the puzzle provides an example for possible non-quantum entanglement between |> and <| in such a way that some observer O could cause the two physical quantities to move simultaneously (one held in each hand) to interact at the same moment in time (t) with >B< to reach completeness for the system. Likewise the same observer could cause the A and A' to simultaneously, at the same moment in time (t) to be released from some completed |A>>B<<A'| , and perhaps the A and A" could be transmitted to two additional observers, we can call Alice and Bob, and reach each of them at the same moment in time (t).

 

My forth claim is that it is not possible to make a 100% certain observational prediction as to whether A or A' {edit} by itself will interact with any one side of >B< prior to the system reaching completeness, given that both |> and <| can be rotated. {Edit}: that is, the completed system could also be represented as |A'>>B<<A| . However, we can make a perfect 100% prediction for the "joint observation" of A and A' to unite with, {edit}or be released from, B at the same moment in time (t). Such a joint observation of certainty is possible ONLY because A and A' can become entangled physical quantities due to the actions of observer O.

 

Thus my final claim is that, Schroedinger was incorrect when he concluded, in his review of the EPR paper, that entanglement is a feature that is limited to quantum physical interactions, for nothing being discussed here has anything at all to do with quantum interactions.

 

I wait for someone to explain my error in thinking.

Edited November 13, 2010 by Rade

[Rade]

Note: I made some edits to help with the presentation. Please respond to the edited version.

One additional edit made today to clarify the "value" of the physical quantity under consideration in this example.

Edited November 13, 2010 by Rade