Is the Moon There When Nobody Looks?

Reality and the Quantum Theory

N. David Mermin

Citation: Phys. Today 38(4), 38 (1985); doi: 10.1063/1.880968

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.880968
View Table of Contents: http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/PHTOAD/v38/i4
Published by the American Institute of Physics.

Additional resources for Physics Today

Homepage: http://www.physicstoday.org/
Information: http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us
Daily Edition: http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition

Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms
Is the moon there
when nobody looks?
Reality and the quantum theory
Einstein maintained that quantum metaphysics entails spooky actions
at a distance; experiments have now shown that what bothered Einstein
is not a debatable point but the observed behavior of the real world.

N. David Mermin

Quantum mechanics is magic1 ition expects to be there. in part of space A; it should also be
Einstein didn't like this. He wanted independent of whether or not any
In May 1935, Albert Einstein, Boris things out there to have properties, measurement at all is carried out
Podolsky and Nathan Rosen published2 whether or not they were measured4: in space A. If one adheres to this
an argument that quantum mechanics We often discussed his notions on program, one can hardly consider
fails to provide a complete description objective reality. I recall that dur- the quantum-theoretical descrip-
of physical reality. Today, 50 years ing one walk Einstein suddenly tion as a complete representation
later, the EPR paper and the theoreti- stopped, turned to me and asked of the physically real. If one tries
cal and experimental work it inspired whether I really believed that the to do so in spite of this, one has to
remain remarkable for the vivid illus- moon exists only when I look at it. assume that the physically real in
tration they provide of one of the most The EPR paper describes a situation B suffers a sudden change as a
bizarre aspects of the world revealed to ingeniously contrived to force the quan- result of a measurement in A. My
us by the quantum theory. tum theory into asserting that proper- instinct for physics bristles at this.
Einstein's talent for saying memora- ties in a space-time region B are the Or, in March 1947,
ble things did him a disservice when he result of an act of measurement in I cannot seriously believe in [the
declared "God does not play dice," for it another space-time region A, so far quantum theory] because it cannot
has been held ever since that the basis from B that there is no possibility of the be reconciled with the idea that
for his opposition to quantum mechan- measurement in A exerting an influ- physics should represent a reality
ics was the claim that a fundamental ence on region B by any known dynami- in time and space, free from spooky
understanding of the world can only be cal mechanism. Under these condi- actions at a distance.
statistical. But the EPR paper, his tions, Einstein maintained that the The "spooky actions at a distance"
most powerful attack on the quantum properties in A must have existed all (spukhafte Fernwirkungen) are the ac-
theory, focuses on quite a different along. quisition of a definite value of a proper-
aspect: the doctrine that physical prop- ty by the system in region B by virtue of
erties have in general no objective Spooky actions at a distance the measurement carried out in region
reality independent of the act of obser- Many of his simplest and most explic- A. The EPR paper presents a wave-
vation. As Pascual Jordan put it3 it statements of this position can be function that describes two correlated
Observations not only disturb found in Einstein's correspondence particles, localized in regions A and B,
what has to be measured, they with Max Born.5 Throughout the book far apart. In this particular two-parti-
produce it. . . . We compel [the elec- (which sometimes reads like a Nabokov cle state one can learn (in the sense of
tron] to assume a definite posi- novel), Born, pained by Einstein's dis- being able to predict with certainty the
tion. . . . We ourselves produce the taste for the statistical character of the
results of measurement. quantum theory, repeatedly fails, both David Mermin is director of the Laboratory of
Jordan's statement is something of a in his letters and in his later commen- Atomic and Solid State Physics at Cornell
truism for contemporary physicists. tary on the correspondence, to under- University. A solid-state theorist, he has
Underlying it, we have all been stand what is really bothering Ein- recently come up with some quasithoughts
taught, is the disruption of what is stein. Einstein tries over and over about quasicrystals. He is known to PHYSICS
being measured by the act of measure- again, without success, to make himself TODAY readers as the person who made
ment, made unavoidable by the exis- clear. In March 1948, for example, he "boojum" an internationally accepted scienti-
tence of the quantum of action, which writes: fic term. With N. W. Ashcroft, he is about to
generally makes it impossible even in start updating the world's funniest solid-state
That which really exists in B physics text. He says he is bothered by Bell's
principle to construct probes that can should . . . not depend on what theorem, but may have rocks in his head
yield the information classical intu- kind of measurement is carried out anyway.

38 PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1985 0031-9228 / 85 / 0400 38-10/$0,1.Q0 © 1985American Institute of Physios
Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms
An EPR apparatus. The experimental setup consists of two detectors, A and B, and a source of something ("particles"
or whatever) C. To start a run, the experimenter pushes the button on C; something passes from C to both detectors.
Shortly after the button is pushed each detector flashes one of its lights. Putting a brick between the source and one of
the detectors prevents that detector from flashing, and moving the detectors farther away from the source increases the
delay between when the button is pushed and when the lights flash. The switch settings on the detectors vary randomly
from one run to another. Note that there are no connections between the three parts of the apparatus, other than via
whatever it is that passes from C to A and B. The photo below shows a realization of such an experiment in the
laboratory of Alain Aspect in Orsay, France. In the center of the lab is a vacuum chamber where individual calcium
atoms are excited by the two lasers visible in the picture. The re-emitted photons travel 6 meters through the pipes to
be detected by a two-channel polarizer. Figure 1

PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1985 39

Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms
 The result of a run. Shortly after the
experimenter pushed the button on the
source in figure 1, the detectors flash one
lamp each. The experimenter records the
switch settings and the colors of the lamps
and then repeats the experiment.
Here, for example, the record reads
32RG—the switches are in positions 3 and
2 and the lamps flashed R and G,
respectively. Figure 2

result of a subsequent measurement) question: "Is it rigorously deter- doned. I am therefore inclined to
either the position or the momentum of ministic?" believe that the description of
the particle in region B as a result of Pauli goes on to state the real nature of quantum mechanics . . . has to be
measuring the corresponding property Einstein's "philosophical prejudice" to regarded as an incomplete and
of the particle in region A. If "that Born, emphasizing that "Einstein's indirect description of reality
which really exists" in region B does point of departure is 'realistic' rather
not depend on what kind of measure- than 'deterministic'." According to A fact is found
ment is carried out in region A, then the Pauli the proper grounds for challeng- The theoretical answer to this chal-
particle in region B must have had both ing Einstein's view are simply that lenge to provide "any fact anywhere"
a definite position and a definite mo- One should no more rack one's was given in 1964 by John S. Bell, in a
mentum all along. brain about the problem of famous paper6 in the short-lived jour-
Because the quantum theory is in- whether something one cannot nal Physics. Using a gedanken experi-
trinsically incapable of assigning val- know anything about exists all the ment invented7 by David Bohm, in
ues to both quantities at once, it must same, than about the ancient ques- which "properties one cannot know
provide an incomplete description of tion of how many angels are able to anything about" (the simultaneous
the physically real. Unless, of course, sit on the point of a needle. But it values of the spin of a particle along
one asserts that it is only by virtue of seems to me that Einstein's ques- several distinct directions) are required
the position (or momentum) measure- tions are ultimately always of this to exist by the EPR line of reasoning,
ment in A that the particle in B kind. Bell showed ("Bell's theorem") that the
acquires its position (or momentum): Faced with spooky actions at a dis- nonexistence of these properties is a
spooky actions at a distance. tance, Einstein preferred to believe direct consequence of the quantitative
At a dramatic moment Pauli appears that things one cannot know anything numerical predictions of the quantum
in the Born-Einstein Letters, writing about (such as the momentum of a theory. The conclusion is quite inde-
Born from Princeton in 1954 with his particle with a definite position) do pendent of whether or not one believes
famous tact on display: exist all the same. In April 1948 he that the quantum theory offers a com-
Einstein gave me your manuscript wrote to Born: plete description of physical reality. If
to read; he was not at all annoyed Those physicists who regard the the data in such an experiment are in
with you, but only said you were a descriptive methods of quantum agreement with the numerical predic-
person who will not listen. This mechanics as definitive in princi- tions of the quantum theory, then
agrees with the impression I have ple would . . . drop the requirement Einstein's philosophical position has to
formed myself insofar as I was for the independent existence of be wrong.
unable to recognize Einstein when- the physical reality present in In the last few years, in a beautiful
ever you talked about him in either different parts of space; they would series of experiments, Alain Aspect and
your letter or your manuscript. It be justified in pointing out that the his collaborators at the University of
seemed to me as if you had erected quantum theory nowhere makes Paris's Institute of Theoretical and
some dummy Einstein for yourself, explicit use of this requirement. I Applied Optics in Orsay provided8 the
which you then knocked down with admit this, but would point out: experimental answer to Einstein's
great pomp. In particular, Ein- when I consider the physical phe- challenge by performing a version of
stein does not consider the concept nomena known to me, and espe- the EPR experiment under conditions
of "determinism" to be as funda- cially those which are being so in which Bell's type of analysis applied.
mental as it is frequently held to be successfully encompassed by quan- They showed that the quantum-theore-
(as he told me emphatically many tum mechanics, I still cannot find tic predictions were indeed obeyed.
times).... In the same way, he any fact anywhere which would Thirty years after Einstein's challenge,
disputes that he uses as criterion make it appear likely that [the] a fact—not a metaphysical doctrine—
for the admissibility of a theory the requirement will have to be aban- was provided to refute him.

40 PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1985

Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms
 .31 rCK 22 6G 33 66
33 QQ 11 RR 216R
33 RR 33 6G 136R
188R 31GR 236R
33 GQ 1266 22 RR
eiQR 21GR 11 RR
81 RR 33 G6 216R
S2RR 21 RR 21 RR
33 BB 12BR 23 GG
11QQ 22 RR 32GR
23 RR 13 RB 33 RR
32GR 12 R6 33 GG
12BR 23 66 33 GG
12 RB 1166 23GR
1166 13 RG 21 GR
31 RB 21 RG 12 RR Data produced by the apparatus of figure
1. This is a fragment of an enormous set
12 R6 33 RR 32GR of data generated by many, many runs:
13GR 32 6R 32 6R Each entry shows the switch settings and
2266 3266 33 GG the colors of the lights that flashed for a
run. The switch settings are changed
12 RG 3366 31 RG randomly from run to run. Figure 3
12GR 21 RR 13 RR
2266 12 R6 13 RG
236R 2266 32 R6
33 RR 11G6 316R
Attitudes toward this particular 50- 3366 23 6R 23 RR is an attitude I would characterize as
year sequence of intellectual history 31 R6 22 RR 33 RR balanced. This was expressed to me
and scientific discovery vary widely.9 most succinctly by a distinguished
From the very start Bohr certainly took 31 RR 1166 136R Princeton physicist on the occasion of
it seriously. Leon Rosenfeld describes10 33 RR 32 6R 11GG my asking how he thought Einstein
the impact of the EPR argument: 32 R6 13RG 31 6R would have reacted to Bell's theorem.
This onslaught came down upon us 31 R6 13GR 31 RG He said that Einstein would have gone
as a bolt from the blue. Its effect home and thought about it hard for
on Bohr was remarkable. . . . A 11RR 23 GG 136R several weeks—that he couldn't guess
new worry could not have come at 236R 33 RR 23 R6 what he would then have said, except
a less propitious time. Yet, as soon 12GG 31 GR 3166 that it would have been extremely
as Bohr had heard my report of 11GG 13RG 23 RG interesting. He was sure that Einstein
Einstein's argument, everything
else was abandoned. 13RG 23 RR 21 RR would have been very bothered by
Bell's theorem. Then he added,
Bell's contribution has become cele- 31 RG 12GR 23 RG Anybody who's not bothered by
brated in what might be called semi- 23GR 31 R6 1166 Bell's theorem has to have rocks in
popular culture. We read, for example, 316R 32 RG 2266 his head.
in The Dancing Wu Li Masters that 11 23 R6 216R 1166 To this moderate point of view I
Some physicists are convinced that would only add the observation that
[Bell's theorem] is the most impor- 22 RR 2266 11BG contemporary physicists come in two
tant single work, perhaps, in the 126R 22 RR 21 RB varieties. Type 1 physicists are both-
history of physics. 32 6R 13RR 11RR ered by EPR and Bell's theorem. Type
And indeed, Henry Stapp, a particle 22 RR 21G6 12 RG 2 (the majority) are not, but one has to
theorist at Berkeley, writes that 12 1266 236R 83 SR distinguish two subvarieties. Type 2a
Bell's theorem is the most pro- physicists explain why they are not
found discovery of science.
33 RR 2266 32 BR bothered. Their explanations tend ei-
At the other end of the spectrum, 11RR 2266 S1B6 ther to miss the point entirely (like
Abraham Pais, in his recent biography 2366 3166 21R6 Bom's to Einstein) or to contain phys-
of Einstein, writes13 of the EPR arti- 2366 136R 13R6 ical assertions that can be shown to be
cle—that "bolt from the blue," the false. Type 2b are not bothered and
basis for "the most profound discovery
33RR 216R 13R6 refuse to explain why. Their position is
of science": 236R 33RR 13R6 unassailable. (There is a variant of
The only part of this article which 2166 23RR 13BR type 2b who say that Bohr straightened
will ultimately survive, I believe, 136R 22 RR 23RB out14 the whole business, but refuse to
is . . . a phrase ["No reasonable de- explain how.)
3366 12RR 22 BB
finition of reality could be expected
to permit this"] which so poignant- 1166 23 R6 11RR A gedanken demonstration
ly summarizes Einstein's views on 12RR 23 RG 31RB To enable you to test which category
quantum mechanics in his later 1266 326R 83RR you belong to, I shall describe, in black-
years. 316G 31RG 83R6 box terms, a very simple version of
I think it is fair to say that more Bell's gedanken experiment, deferring
32RG 22GG 11RR to the very end any reference whatever
physicists would side with Pais than 216R 1166 32RG
with Stapp, but between the majority either to the underlying mechanism
position of near indifference and the 2266 11GG 32BR that makes the gadget work or to the
minority position of wild extravagance 22RR 21RG 13BB quantum-theoretic analysis that ac-
13RR 11RR 238R
2166
Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75.
12RQ 32BR PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1985
Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms
41
 31RR 22QQ 33 QQ
33 QQ URR £1GR
33 RR 33QQ 13GR
1£GR 31GR £3GR
33 QQ 1£GG 22 RR
£1GR £1GR URR
21RR 33QQ £1GR
22 RR £1 RR £1 RR
33 GG 1£GR £3GG
UGG 22RR 3£GR
£3RR 13RG 33RR
3£GR 1£RG 33 GG
Switches set the same: the data of figure
3, but highlighted to pick out those runs in 1£GR £3GG 33 GG
which both detectors had the same 1£RG 11GB £3GR
switch settings as they flashed. Note that 13RG £1GR
in such runs the lights always flash the UGG
same colors. Figure 4 31 RG £1 RG 1£RR
1£RG 33RR 3£GR
133R 32GR 3£GR
22 QQ 3£GG 33 GQ
counts for the data. Perhaps this pressing of the button and the flashing 1£RG 33GQ 31RG
backwards way of proceeding will make of the light on a detector can only be 1£GR £1RR 13RR
it easier for you to lay aside your provided by the passage of something 1£RG
(which we shall call a "particle," 22 QQ 13RG
quantum theoretic prejudices and de-
cide afresh whether what I describe is though you can call it anything you £3GR 22 QQ 3£RG
or is not strange.15 like) between the source and that 33RR USB 31GR
What I have in mind is a simple detector. This can easily be tested; for 33 QQ £3GR £3RR
gedanken demonstration. The appara- example, by putting a brick between 31RG 22 RR
the source and a detector. In subse- 33 RR
tus comes in three pieces. Two of them
(A and B) function as detectors. They quent runs, that detector will not flash. 31RR 11BG 13GR
are far apart from each other (in the When the brick is removed, everything 33RR 3£GR UGG
analogous Aspect experiments over 10 works as before. 3£RG 13RG 31GR
meters apart). Each detector has a Typical data from a large number of 31RG 13GR 31RG
switch that can be set to one of three runs are shown in figure 3. There are £3GG 13GR
positions; each detector responds to an just two relevant features: URR
event by flashing either a red light or a • If one examines only those runs in £3GR 33RR £3RG
green one. The third piece (C), midway which the switches have the same 1£GG 31GR 31GG
between A and B, functions as a source. setting (figure 4), then one finds that 11GB 13RG £3RG
(See figure 1.) the lights always flash the same colors. 13RG £3RR £1RR
There are no connections between • If one examines all runs, without
the pieces—no mechanical connec- any regard to how the switches are set 31RG 1£GR £3RG
tions, no electromagnetic connections, (figure 5), then one finds that the £3GR 31RG UGG
nor any other known kinds of relevant pattern of flashing is completely ran- 31GR 3£RG 22QQ
connections. (I promise that when you dom. In particular, half the time the £3RG £1GR UGG
learn what is inside the black boxes you lights flash the same colors, and half
will agree that there are no connec- the time different colors.
22RR 22QG UGG
tions.) The detectors are thus incapa- That is all there is to the gedanken 1£GR 22RR £1RG
ble of signaling to each other or to the demonstration. 3£GR 13RR URR
source via any known mechanism, and Should you be bothered by these data 22RR £1GG 1£RG
with the exception of the "particles" unless you have rocks in your head? 1£GG £3GR £3GR
described below, the source has no way 33RR
of signaling to the detectors. The How could it work? 22QG 3£GR
demonstration proceeds as follows: Consider only those runs in which URR 22QQ £1GG
The switch of each detector is inde- the switches had the same setting when £3GG 31GG £1RG
pendently and randomly set to one of the particles went through the detec- £3GG 13GR 13RG
its three positions, and a button is tors. In all such runs the detectors 33RR £1GR 13RG
pushed on the source; a little after that, flash the same colors. If they could
each detector flashes either red or communicate, it would be child's play £3GR 33RR 13RG
green. The setting of the switches and to make the detectors flash the same £1GG £3RR 13GR
the colors that flash are recorded, and colors when their switches had the 13GR 22RR £3RG
then the whole thing is repeated over same setting, but they are completely 33GG 1£RR 22GG
and over again. unconnected. Nor can they have been
The data consist of a pair of numbers preprogrammed always to flash the UGG £3RG URR
and a pair of colors for each run. A run, same colors, regardless of what is going 1£RR £3RG 31RG
for example, in which A was set to 3, B on, because the detectors are observed 1£GG 3£GR £3RR
was set to 2, Aflashedred, and B flashed to flash different colors in at least some 31GG 31RG £3RG
green, would be recorded as "32RG," as of those runs in which their switches 3£RG
shown in figure 2. are differently set, and the switch 22GQ URR
Because there are no built-in connec- settings are independent random £1GR UGG 3£RG
tions between the source C and the events. 2&GG UGG 3£GR
detectors A and B, the link between the How, then, are we to account for the S2RR £1RG 1366
13RR URR £3GR
42 PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1985 £1GG 1£RG 3£GR
Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms
 31RR ££66 33BB
33QQ 11RR £1BR
33RR 3366 13BR
1£GR 316R £3QR
33BQ 1£66 ££RR
£1QR £16R 11RR
£1RR 3366 £1QR
££RR £1RR £1RR
33BB 1£6R £3Q6
1166 ££RR 3£6R
£3RR 13R6
Switches set any way: the data of figure 3£GR 1£R6 3366
3, but highlighted to emphasize only the 1£6R £366 3366
colors of the lights that flashed in each run,
no matter how the switches were set when 1£R6 1166 £36R
the lights flashed. Note that the pattern of 1166 13R6 £16R
colors is completely random. Figure 5 3 IRQ £1R6 1£RR
1£R6 3£6R
136R 3£6R 3£6R
££66 3£66 3366
first feature of the data? No problem at 1£R6 3366 31R6 the requirement that each particle
all. Born, in fact, in a letter of May should, in one way or another, carry to
1948, offers5 such an explanation to 1£QR £1RR 13RR its detector a set of instructions for how
Einstein:, ££66 1£R6 13R6 it is to flash for each of the three
It seems to me that your axiom of £38R ££66 3£R8 possible switch settings, and that in any
the "independence of spatially 33RR 1166 316R run of the experiment both particles
separated objects A and B" is not 3366 £36R £3RR should carry the same instruction sets:
as convincing as you make out. It • A set of instructions that covers each
does not take into account the 31R6 ££RR 33RR of the three possible settings is required
fact of coherence; objects far 31RR 1166 136R because there is no communication
apart in space which have a com- 33RR 3£6R 1166 between the source and the detectors
mon origin need not be indepen- 3£RB 13R6 316R other than the particles themselves. In
dent. I believe that this cannot be runs in which the switches have the
denied and simply has to be ac- 3 IRQ 136R 31R6 same setting, the particles cannot know
cepted. Dirac has based his whole 11RR £366 136R whether that setting will be 11, 22, or
book on this. £36R 33RR £3R6 33. For the detectors always to flash
In our case the detectors are triggered 1£66 316R 3166 the same colors when the switches have
by particles that have a common origin 1166 13R6 £3R6 the same setting, the particles must
at the source C. It is then easy to dream carry instructions that specify colors
up any number of explanations for the
13R6 £3RR £1RR for each of the three possibilities.
first feature of the data. 31R6 1£6R £3R6 • The absence of communication
Suppose, for example, that what each £36R 31R6 1166 between source and detectors also re-
particle encounters as it enters its 316R 3£R6 ££66 quires that the particles carry such
detector is a target (figure 6) divided £3R6 £16R 1166 instruction sets in every run of the
into eight regions, labeled RRR, RRG, ££RR ££66 1166 switches experiment—even those in which the
RGR, RGG, GRR, GRG, GGR, and end up with different set-
GGG. Suppose each detector is wired 1£6R ££RR £1R6 tings—because the particles always
so that if a particle lands in the GRG 3£6R 13RR 11RR have to be prepared: Any run may
bin, the detector flips into a mode in ££RR £166 1£R6 turn out to be one in which the switches
which the light flashes G if the switch is 1£66 £36R £36R end up with the same settings.
set to 1, R if it is set to 2, and G if it is set This generic explanation is pictured
to 3; RGG leads to a mode with R for 1
33RR ££66 3£6R schematically in figure 7.
and G for 2 and 3, and so on. We can 11RR ££66 £166 Alas, this explanation—the only one,
then easily account for the fact that the £366 3166 £1R6 I maintain, that someone not steeped in
lights always flash the same colors £366 136R 13R6 quantum mechanics will ever be able to
when the switches have the same 33RR £16R 13R6 come up with (though it is an entertain-
settings by assuming that in each run
the source always fires its particles into £36R 33RR 13R6 ing game to challenge people to try)—is
untenable. It is inconsistent with the
bins with the same labels. £166 ci3RR 136R second feature of the data: There is no
Evidently this is not the only way. 136R ££RR £3R6 conceivable way to assign such instruc-
One could imagine that particles come 3366 1£RR ££66 tion sets to the particles from one run
in eight varieties: cubes, spheres, te- 1166 £3R6 11RR to the next that can account for the fact
that in all runs taken together, without
trahedra,.... All settings produce R
when a cube is detected, a sphere 1£RR £3R6 31R6 regard to how the switches are set, the
results in R for settings 1 and 2, G for 1£66 3£6R £3RR same colors flash half the time.
setting 3, and so forth. The first 3166 31R6 £3R6 Pause to note that we are about to
feature of the data is then accounted 3£R6 ££66 11RR show that "something one cannot know
for if the two particles produced by the £16R 1 166 3£R3 anything about"—the third entry in an
instruction set—cannot exist. For even
source in each run are always both of
the same variety. ££66 1166 3£QR if instruction sets did exist, one could
Common to all such explanations is ££RR £1R8 13BQ never learn more than two of the three
13RR 11RR £3QR
£1BB 1£R6 3£QR PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1985 43
Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms
=• T ra D ::DD
 Model of a detector to produce data like
those in figure 4. Particles from the source
fall with equal probability into any of the
eight bins; for each bin the color flashed
depends on the switch as indicated on the
back of the box. Figure 6

entries (revealed in those runs where the time. The data described above That's it. Clearly there are no con-
the switches ended up with two differ- violate this Bell's inequality, and there- nections between the source and the
ent settings). Here is the argument. fore there can be no instruction sets. detectors or between the two detectors.
Consider a particular instruction set, If you don't already know how the We can nevertheless account for the
for example, RRG. Should both parti- trick is done, may I urge you, before data as follows:
cles be issued the instruction set RRG, reading how the gedanken demonstra- When the switches have the same
then the detectors will flash the same tion works, to try to invent some other setting, the spins of both particles are
colors when the switches are set to 11, explanation for the first feature of the measured along the same direction, so
22, 33, 12, or 21; they will flash data that does not introduce connec- the lights will always flash the same
different colors for 13, 31, 23, or 32. tions between the three parts of the colors if the measurements along the
Because the switches at each detector apparatus or prove to be incompatible same direction always yield opposite
are set randomly and independently, with the second feature. values. But this is an immediate conse-
each of these nine cases is equally quence of the structure of the spin
likely, so the instruction set RRG will One way to do it singlet state, which has the form
result in the same colors flashing % of Here is one way to make such a
the time. device: (1)
Evidently the same conclusion holds Let the source produce two particles of
for the sets RGR, GRR, GGR, GRG and spin V2 in the singlet state, flying apart independent of the direction of the spin
RGG, because the argument uses only toward the two detectors. (Granted, this quantization axis, and therefore yields
the fact that one color appears twice is not all that easy to do, but in the Orsay + — or — 4- with equal probability,
and the other once. All six such experiments described below, the same but never + + or — — , whenever the
instructions sets also result in the same effect is achieved with correlated pho- two spins are measured along any
colors flashing % of the time. tons.) Each detector contains a Stern- common direction.
But the only instruction sets left are Gerlach magnet, oriented along one of To establish the second feature of the
RRR and GGG, and these each result in three directions (a(1), a(2), or a(3)), perpen- data, note that the product mlm2 of the
the same colors flashing all of the time. dicular to the line of flight of the results of the two spin measurements
Therefore if instruction sets exist, particles, and separated by 120°, as (each of which can have the values
the same colors will flash in at least % indicated in figure 8. The three settings + V2 or - V2) will have the value - XU
of all the runs, regardless of how the of the switch determine which orienta- when the lights flash the same colors
instruction sets are distributed from tion is used. The light on one detector and + V4 when they flash different
one run of the demonstration to the flashes red or green, depending on colors. We must therefore show that
next. This is Bell's theorem (also whether the particle is deflected toward the product vanishes when averaged
known as Bell's inequality) for the the north (spin up) or south (spin down) over all the nine distinct pairs of
gedanken demonstration. pole of the magnet as it passes between orientations the two Stern-Gerlach
But in the actual gedanken demon- them; the other detector uses the oppo- magnets can have. For a given pair of
stration the same colors flash only \ site color convention. orientations, a<0 and a ° \ the mean

44 PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1985

Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms
 ' 2 3

R6R

Instruction sets. To guarantee that the detectors of figure 6 flash the same color
when the switches are set the same, the two particles must in one way or another
carry instruction sets specifying how their detectors are to flash for each possible
switch setting. The results of any one run reveal nothing about the instructions
beyond the actual data; so in this case, for example, the first instruction (1R) is
"something one cannot know anything about," and I've only guessed at it,
assuming that "it exists all the same." Figure 7

value of this product is just the expecta- instruction sets are the only way to The photon pairs are emitted by cal-
tion value in the state ip of the corre- account for the first feature of the data. cium atoms in a radiative cascade after
sponding g product
p of (commuting)((1)g her- Bell's analysis adds to the discussion suitable pumping by lasers. Because
(0
iti
mitian b b l
observables a (0 • S(1) and those runs in which the switches have the initial and final atomic states have
&iJ) • S(2). Thus the second feature of different settings, extracts the second J=0, quantum theory predicts (and
the data requires: feature of the data as a further elemen- experiment confirms) that the photons
tary prediction of quantum mechanics, will be found to have the same polariza-
(2) and demonstrates that any set of data tions (lights flashing the same colors in
exhibiting this feature is incompatible the analogous gedanken experiment) if
But equation 2 is an immediate conse-
quence of the linearity of quantum with the existence of the instruction they are measured along the same
mechanics, which lets one take the sets apparently required by the first direction—feature number 1. But if
sums inside the matrix element, and feature, quite independently of the the polarizations are measured at 120°
the fact that the three unit vectors formalism used to explain the data, and angles, then theory predicts (and exper-
around an equilateral triangle sum to quite independently of any doctrines of iment confirms) that they will be the
zero: quantum theology. same only a quarter of the time
[V4 = cos2( 120°)]. This is precisely what
=2Ja(J)
The experiments is needed to produce the statistics of
=0 (3)
The experiments of Aspect and his feature number 2 of the gedanken
This completely accounts for the colleagues at Orsay confirm that the demonstration: The randomly set
data. It also unmasks the gedanken quantum-theoretic predictions for this switches end up with the same setting
demonstration as a simple embellish- experiment are in fact realized, and (same polarizations measured) % of the
ment of Bohm's version of the EPR that the conditions for observing the time, so in all runs the same colors will
experiment. If we kept only runs in results of the experiment can in fact be flash V 3 xl +2/3X(V4) =V2 the time.
which the switches had the same set- achieved. (A distinguished colleague The people in Orsay were interested
ting, we would have precisely the once told me that the answer to the in a somewhat modified version of
Bohm-EPR experiment. The assertion EPR paradox was that correlations in Bell's argument in which the angles of
that instruction sets exist is then bla- the singlet state could never be main- greatest interest were multiples of
tant quantum-theoretic nonsense, for it tained over macroscopic distances— 22.5°, but they collected data for many
amounts to the insistence that each that anything, even the passage of a different angles, and, except for EPR
particle has stamped on it in advance cosmic ray in the next room, would specialists, the conceptual differences
the outcome of the measurements of disrupt the correlations enough to des- between the two cases are minor.16
three different spin components corre- troy the effect.) There are some remarkable features
sponding to noncommuting observables In these experiments the two spin-V2 to these experiments. The two polar-
S-a ( '\ t = l,2, 3. According to EPR, particles are replaced by a pair of ization analyzers were placed as far as
this is merely a limitation of the photons and the spin measurements 13 meters apart without producing any
quantum-theoretic formalism, because become polarization measurements. noticeable change in the results, there-

PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1985 45

Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms
by closing the loophole that the strange from one detector to the other. (This weather conditions....
quantum correlations might somehow corresponds to a refinement of the Heady stuff indeed! But just what is
diminish as the distance between re- gedanken demonstration in which, to this nonlocal effect? Using the lan-
gions A and B grew to macroscopic be absolutely safe, the switches are not guage of the gedanken demonstration,
proportions. At such separations it is given their random settings until after let us talk about the 'W-color" of a
hard to imagine that a polarization the particles have departed from their particle (iVcan be 1, 2, or 3) as the color
measurement of photon # 1 could, in common source.) (red or green) of the light that flashes
any ordinary sense of the term, "dis- when the particle passes through a
turb" photon #2. Indeed, at these What does it mean? detector with its switch set to N.
large separations, a hypothetical dis- What is one to make of all this? Are Because instruction sets cannot exist,
turbance originating when one photon there "spooky actions at a distance"? we know that a particle cannot at the
passed through its analyzer could only A few years ago I received the text of a same time carry a definite 1-color, 2-
reach the other analyzer in time to letter from the executive director of a color and 3-color to its detector. On the
affect the outcome of the second polar- California thinktank to the Under- other hand, for any particular N(say 3),
ization measurement if it traveled at a secretary of Defense for Research and we can determine the 3-color of the
superluminal velocity. Engineering, alerting him to the EPR particle heading for detector A before it
In the third paper of the Orsay correlations: gets there by arranging things so that
group's series, bizarre conspiracy the- If in fact we can control the faster- the other particle first reaches detector
ories are dealt a blow by an ingenious than-light nonlocal effect, it would B, where its 3-color is measured. If the
mechanism for rapidly switching the be possible... to make an untap- particle at B was 3-colored red, the
directions along which the polariza- pable and unjammable command- particle at A will turn out to be 3-
tions of each photon are measured. control-communication system at colored red, and green at B means green
Each photon passes to its detector very high bit rates for use in the at A.
through a volume of water that sup- submarine fleet. The important Three questions now arise:
ports an ultrasonic standing wave. point is that since there is no • Did the particle at A have its 3-color
Depending on the instantaneous ampli- ordinary electromagnetic signal prior to the measurement of the 3-color
tude of the wave, the photon either linking the encoder with the de- of the particle at B? The answer cannot
passes directly into a polarizer with one coder in such a hypothetical sys- be yes, because, prior to the measure-
orientation or is Bragg reflected into tem, there is nothing for the enemy ment of the 3-color at B, it is altogether
another with a different orientation. to tap or jam. The enemy would possible that the roll of the dice at B or
The standing waves that determine the have to have actual possession of the whim of the B-operator will result
choice of orientation at each detector the "black box" decoder to inter- in the 2-color or the 1-color being
are independently driven and have cept the message, whose reliability measured at B instead. Barring the
frequencies so high that several cycles would not depend on separation most paranoid of conspiracy theories,
take place during the light travel time from the encoder nor on ocean or "prior to the measurement of the 3-

46 PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1985

Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms
A realization of the detector to produce the data of figure 3. The
particles have a magnetic moment and can be separated into "spin
up" and "spin down" particles by the Stern-Gerlach magnet inside
the detector. Setting the switch to positions 1, 2, or 3 rotates the
north pole of the magnet along the coplanar unit vectors a(1), a(2), or
a(31, separated by 120°. The vector sum of the three unit vectors is, of
course, zero. The switch positions on the two detectors correspond
to the same orientations of the magnetic field. One detector flashes
red for spin up, green for spin down; the other uses the opposite color
convention. Figure 8

color at B" is indistinguishable from This is a most curious state of affairs, 4. A. Pais, Rev. Mod. Phys. 51, 863 (1979).
"prior to the measurement of the 2- (or and while it is wrong to suggest that 5. The Born-Einstein Letters, with com-
1-) color at B." If the 3-color already EPR correlations will replace sonar, it ments by M. Born, Walker, New York
existed, so also must the 2- and 1-colors seems to me something is lost by (1971).
have existed. But instruction sets ignoring them or shrugging them off. 6. J. S. Bell, Physics 1, 195 (1964).
(which consist of a specification of the The EPR experiment is as close to 7. D. Bohm, Quantum Theory, Prentice-
1-, 2-, and 3-colors) do not exist. magic as any physical phenomenon I Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. (1951) pp.
• Is the particle at A 3-colored red after know of, and magic should be enjoyed. 614-619.
the measurement at B shows the color Whether there is physics to be learned 8. A. Aspect, P. Grangier, G. Roger, Phys.
red? The answer is surely yes, because by pondering it is less clear. The most Rev. Lett. 47, 460 (1981). A. Aspect, P.
under these circumstances it is invaria- elegant answer I have found17 to this Grangier, G. Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49,
bly a particle that will cause the last question comes from one of the 91 (1982). A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, G.
detector at A to flash red. great philosophers of our time, whose Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982).
• Was something (the value of its 3- view of the matter I have taken the 9. For a discussion of the views of today's
color) transmitted to the particle at A as liberty of quoting in the form of the physicists toward the meaning of the
poetry it surely is: quantum theory, see the interesting and
a result of the measurement at B? provocative essay "Cognitive Repression
Orthodox quantum metaphysicians We have always had a great deal of difficulty in Contemporary Physics" by E. F. Kel-
would, I believe, say no, nothing has understanding the world view ler, Am. J. Phys. 47, 718 (1977).
changed at A as the result of the that quantum mechanics represents. 10. L. Rosenfeld in Niels Bohr, His Life and
measurement at B; what has changed is Work as Seen by His Friends and Collea-
At least I do,
our knowledge of the particle at A. because I'm an old enough man gues, S. Rozental, ed., North Holland,
(Somewhat more spookily, they might that I haven't got to the point Amsterdam (1967) pp. 114-36.
object to the naive classical assumption that this stuff is obvious to me. 11. G. Zukav, The Dancing Wu-Li Masters—
of localizability or separability implicit An Overview of the New Physics, Mor-
Okay, I still get nervous with it. .. .
in the phrases "at A" and "at B.") This row, New York (1979) p. 282. On the
seems very sensible and very reassur- You know how it always is, same page it is also said that "Bell's
ing: iV-color does not characterize the every new idea, theorem is a mathematical construct
it takes a generation or two which as such is indecipherable to the
particle at all, but only what we know non-mathematician," a view that I hope
until it becomes obvious
about the particle. But does that last that there's no real problem. the rest of this article will dispel.
sentence sound as good when "particle"
I cannot define the real problem, 12. H. Stapp, Nuovo Cimento 40B, 191
is changed to "photon" and' W-color" to (1977).
"polarization"? And does it really help therefore I suspect there's no real problem,
but I'm not sure 13. A. Pais, "Subtle is the Lord..." The
you to stop wondering why the lights Science and the Life of Albert Einstein,
there's no real problem.
always flash the same colors when the Oxford U. P., New York (1982) p. 456.
switches have the same settings? Nobody in the 50 years since Ein- 14. N. Bohr, Phys. Rev. 48, 696 (1935).
What is clear is that if there is spooky stein, Podolsky and Rosen has ever put 15. What follows is a somewhat refined ver-
action at a distance, then, like other it better than that. sion of an argument I published a few
spooks, it is absolutely useless except years ago in Am. J. Phys. 49, 940 (1981),
for its effect, benign or otherwise, on incorporating some improvements sug-
our state of mind. For the statistical Some of the views expressed above were gested by Richard Friedberg. For other
developed in the course of occasional techni-
pattern of red and green flashes at cal studies of EPR correlations supported by
elementary treatments see J. S. Bell's
detector A is entirely random, however beautiful essay, "Bertlemann's Socks
the National Science Foundation under and the Nature of Reality," J. Phys.
the switch is set at detector B. Whether grant No. DMR 83-14625.
the particles arriving at A all come with (Paris) 42, C2-41 (1981), B. d'Espagnat's
article in the November 1979 Scientific
definite 3-colors (because the switch at American, or d'Espagnat's recent book,
B was stuck at 3) or definite 2-colors References In Search of Reality, Springer-Verlag,
(because the switch was stuck at 2) or 1. Daniel Greenberger, discussion remarks New York (1983).
no colors at all (because there was a at the Symposium on Fundamental 16. For a survey of other attempts to realize
brick in front of the detector at B)—all Questions in Quantum Mechanics, the EPR experiment, and the variants of
this has absolutely no effect on the SUNY, Albany, April 1984. Bell's original argument used to inter-
statistical distribution of colors ob- 2. A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, N. Rosen, pret experimental tests, see J. F.
served at A. The manifestation of this Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935). Clauser, A. Shimony, Repts. Prog. Phys.
"action at a distance" is revealed only 41, 1881 (1978).
3. Quoted by M. Jammer, The Philosophy
through a comparison of the data of Quantum Mechanics, Wiley, New 17. R. P. Feynman, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 21,
independently gathered at A and at B. York (1974) p. 151. 471 (1982). •

PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1985 47

Downloaded 13 Oct 2012 to 141.225.218.75. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms