Time stamping in EPRB experiments: application on the test of non-ergodic theories

Abstract

In Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments, the record of the time of detection of each single photon ("time stamping") provides much more information than the usual record of coincidence rates. It is a preferable technique for several reasons, and it can be realized with accessible means nowadays. As an illustration of its capacities, we show that a certain class of non-ergodic (local realistic) models that violates the Bell's inequalities, even in ideally perfect setups, is disproved from the examination of time stamped files. This class of models, which has remained untested until now, exploits the finite size of the time window defining the coincidences, and it cannot be disproved by measuring coincidence rates. We use not only our own experimental data, but also the data obtained in the Innsbruck experiment with random variable analyzers.

Event-by-event simulation of experiments to create entanglement and violate Bell inequalities

“…In another paper in this volume we demonstrate that the EPRB experiments of M.B. Agüero et al 15 and Adenier et al 16,17 show the same features. This suggests that the conclusion that single photon experiments agree with quantum theory is premature and that more precise experiments are called for.…”

Event-based simulation of quantum physics experiments

“…We show that the event-based model reproduces the exact results of quantum theory if γ → 1 − and that by changing γ it can also reproduce the numerical values of the correlations, as measured in experiments. 129,136 Note that this Bell-test experiment involves two degrees of free-K. Michielsen dom of one particle, while the EPRB thought experiment 94 and EPRB experiments with single photons 25,117,120,124 involve two degrees of freedom of two particles. Hence, the Bell-test experiment with single neutrons is not performed according to the CHSH protocol 116 because the two degrees of freedom of one particle are not manipulated and measured independently.…”

“…Hence, also the conclusion about the state of the system depends on the value of W . Analysis of the data of the experiment by Weihs et al shows that W can be as large as 150 ns for the Bell-CHSH inequality to be violated and in the time-stamping EPRB experiment of Agüero et al 124 |S| ≤ 2 is clearly violated for W < 9µs. Hence, the use of a time-coincidence window does not create a "loophole".…”

Event‐by‐event simulation of quantum phenomena

“…Hence, also the conclusion about the state of the system depends on the value of W , which turns W into a socalled context parameter. Analysis of the data of the experiment by Weihs et al shows that W can be as large as 150 ns for the Bell inequality to be violated [58] and in the time-stamping EPRB experiment of Agüero et al [61] |S| ≤ 2 is clearly violated for W < 9 µs. Hence, the use of a time-coincidence window does not create a "loophole".…”