مجله پژوهش های فلسفی

Journal of Philosophical Investigations

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

اعضای هیات تحریریه

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پرسش‌های متداول

اخبار و اعلانات

پیوندهای مفید

A Kantian Solution for the Freedom of Choice Loophole in Bell Experiments

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 Instituto de Ciências Exatas e Tecnológicas Universidade Federal de Viçosa Florestal, Brazil

2 Department of Philosophy Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais Belo Horizonte, Brazil

چکیده

Bell’s theorem is based on the assumptions of local causality and measurement independence. The last assumption is identified by many authors as linked to the freedom of choice hypothesis. In this sense the human free will ultimately can ensure the measurement independence assumption. The incomplete experimental conditions for supporting this assumption are known in the literature as “freedom-of-choice loophole” (FOCL). Although there is no consensus among the scientists that the measurement independence is linked to human choices, in a recent paper, published in a prestigious journal, signed by more than a hundred authors, this assumption was seriously taken for the first time in an experiment known as Big Bell Test (Abellán et al. 2018). Using photons, single atoms, atomic ensembles and superconducting devices, this experiment was performed in five continents, and involved twelve laboratories, adopting human choices to close the FOCL. Nevertheless, the possibility of human freedom of choice has been a matter of philosophical debate for more than 2000 years, and there is no consensus among philosophers on this topic. If human choice is not free, this solution would not be sufficient to close FOCL. Therefore, in order to support the basic assumption of this experiment, it is necessary to argue that human choice is indeed free. In this paper, we present a Kantian position on this topic and defend the view that this philosophical position is the best way to ensure that Big Bell Test can in fact close the loophole. 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

A Kantian Solution for the Freedom of Choice Loophole in Bell Experiments

نویسندگان [English]

  • Romeu Rossi Junior 1
  • Patricia Kauark-Leite 2

1 Instituto de Ciências Exatas e Tecnológicas Universidade Federal de Viçosa Florestal, Brazil

2 Department of Philosophy Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais Belo Horizonte, Brazil

چکیده [English]

Bell’s theorem is based on the assumptions of local causality and measurement independence. The last assumption is identified by many authors as linked to the freedom of choice hypothesis. In this sense the human free will ultimately can ensure the measurement independence assumption. The incomplete experimental conditions for supporting this assumption are known in the literature as “freedom-of-choice loophole” (FOCL). Although there is no consensus among the scientists that the measurement independence is linked to human choices, in a recent paper, published in a prestigious journal, signed by more than a hundred authors, this assumption was seriously taken for the first time in an experiment known as Big Bell Test (Abellán et al. 2018). Using photons, single atoms, atomic ensembles and superconducting devices, this experiment was performed in five continents, and involved twelve laboratories, adopting human choices to close the FOCL. Nevertheless, the possibility of human freedom of choice has been a matter of philosophical debate for more than 2000 years, and there is no consensus among philosophers on this topic. If human choice is not free, this solution would not be sufficient to close FOCL. Therefore, in order to support the basic assumption of this experiment, it is necessary to argue that human choice is indeed free. In this paper, we present a Kantian position on this topic and defend the view that this philosophical position is the best way to ensure that Big Bell Test can in fact close the loophole. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Bell’s inequality
  • Big Bell test
  • free will
  • Kant
  • agency
مراجع
Abellán C. & et al. (2018). Challenging local realism with human choices, Nature, 557, pp. 212-216.
Abellán, C. & et al. (2015). Generation of fresh and pure random numbers for loophole-free Bell tests, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (25), 250403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.250403
Allison, H. E. (1990). Kant’s theory of freedom, Cambridge University Press.
Allison, H. E. (1996). Idealism and freedom: essays on Kant's theoretical and practical philosophy, Cambridge University Press.
Aspect A, Dalibard J, & Roger G. (1982). Experimental test of Bell’s inequalities using time-varying analyzers, Phys Rev Lett., 49 (25), 1804–1807.
Aspect A, Grangier P, & Roger G. (1982). Experimental realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A new violation of Bell’s inequalities. Phys Rev., 49. 91-94.
Augustine. (2011). On Grace and Free Choice, and Other Writings. Cambridge University Press.
Bell, J. S. (1964). On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox, Physics, 1 (3), 195-200.
Bell, J. S. (2004). Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics, Cambridge Univ. Press.
Bitbol, M. (2010). Reflective metaphysics: understanding quantum mechanics from a Kantian standpoint. Philosophica, 83 (1), 53-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.21825/philosophica.82161
Bitbol, M., Kerszberg, P., & Petitot, J. (Eds.). (2009). Constituting Objectivity: Transcendental Perspectives on Modern Physics. Springer.
Bitbol, M. & Osnaghi, S. (2013). Bohr’s Complementarity and Kant's Epistemology. In Bohr, 1913-2013, Séminaire Poincaré XVII, 145-166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14316-3_8
Borges, M. (2019). Emotion, Reason and Action in Kant. Bloomsbury Academic.
Brans, C. (1988). Bell’s theorem does not eliminate fully causal hidden variables, Int. J. Theor. Phys., 27 (2), pp. 219-226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00670750
Degorre J., S. Laplante, & J. Roland, (2005). Simulating quantum correlations as a distributed sampling problem, Phys. Rev. A, 72 (6), 062314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.72.062314
Dominik R. & et al, (2018). Cosmic Bell Test Using Random Measurement Settings from High-Redshift Quasars, Phys. Rev. Lett., 121, p. 080403. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1808.05966
Falkenburg, B. (forthcoming). From Heisenberg to Mittelstaedt and Scheibe: Kant’s Impact on the “German Copenhagen School” of Quantum Mechanics. In Biagioli, F. Giovanelli, M. (eds.): Neo-Kantian Perspectives on the Exact Sciences.
Fürst, M. et al. (2010). High speed optical quantum random number generation, Opt. Express, 18, p. 13029.
Esfeld, M. (2015). Bell’s theorem and the issue of determinism and indeterminism. Foundations of Physics, 45(5), p. 471-482.
Giustina, M. et al. (2015). Significant-loophole-free test of Bell’s theorem with entangled photons, Phys. Rev. Lett., 115, p. 250401.
Hall M. J. W. (2010). Relaxed Bell inequalities and Kochen-Specker theorems, Phys. Rev. Lett., 105, p. 250404.
Hall M. J. W. (2011). Local Deterministic Model of Singlet State Correlations Based on Relaxing Measurement Independence’, Phys. Rev. A, 84, p. 022102.
Handsteiner J. et al., (2017). Cosmic Bell Test: Measurement Settings from Milky Way Stars, Phys. Rev. Lett., 118, p. 060401.
Hanna, R. (2006). Kant, Science and Human Nature, Oxford University Press.
Hensen B. et al. (2016). Loophole-free Bell test using electron spins in diamond: second experiment and additional analysis, Sci. Rep., 6, p. 30289.
Hensen, B. et al. (2015). Loophole-free Bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres, Nature, 526, pp. 682–686.
Kant, I. (1998). [KrV], Critique of pure reason, translated by P. Guyer and A. Wood, Cambridge University Press.
Kauark-Leite (2012). Théorie quantique et philosophie transcendantale: dialogues possibles. Hermann,
Kauark-Leite (2017). Transcendental Versus Quantitative Meanings of Bohr’s Complementarity Principle. In H. Folse & J. Faye (eds.), Niels Bohr and Philosophy of Physics: Twenty-First Century Perspectives. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, pp. 67-89.
Ou, Z.Y. & Mandel, L. (1988). Violation of Bell’s inequality and classical probability in a two-photon correlation experiment, Phys Rev Lett., 61, 50-53.
Rosenfeld, W. et al. (2017). Event-ready Bell test using entangled atoms simultaneously closing detection and locality loopholes, Phys. Rev. Lett., 119, p. 010402.
San Pedro, I. (2014). Measurement independence, parameter independence and non-locality. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 4(3), 369-374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13194-014-0091-8
Shalm, L. K. et al. (2015). Strong loophole-free test of local realism, Phys. Rev. Lett., 115, p. 250402.
Shih, Y. H. & Alley, C. O. (1988). New type of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiment using pairs of light quanta produced by optical parametric down conversion, Phys Rev Lett., 61, 2921–2924.
Scheidla, T.et al. (2010). Violation of local realism with freedom of choice, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 107, p. 19708-19713.
Shimony, A., Horne, M. A., & Clauser, J. F. (1976). Epistemological Letters. Reprinted in Dialectica 39
Tapster, P. R., Rarity, J. G. & Owens, P. C. M. (1994). Violation of Bell’s inequality over 4 km of optical fiber, Phys Rev Lett., 73, pp. 1923–1926.
Weihs, G. & et al. (1998). Violation of Bell's inequality under strict Einstein locality conditions, Phys. Rev. Lett., 81, 5039.
Wood, A. (1984). Kant’s Compatibilism, in Self and Nature in Kant’s Philosophy, Edited by A. Wood, pp. 73–101.
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله
CAPTCHA Image
مجله پژوهش های فلسفی
دوره 18، شماره 47 - شماره پیاپی 47
مقالات
ویژه‌نامه فلسفه کانت در قرن 21
مرداد 1403
صفحه 189-202
فایل ها
هم رسانی
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار