Cited by 419Quantum Mechanics and ApplicationsQuantum Information and CryptographyNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories

An experimental test of non-local realism

Open access
Gröblacher, Simon, Paterek, Tomasz, Kaltenbaek, Rainer, Brukner, Časlav, Żukowski, Marek, Aspelmeyer, Markus, Zeilinger, Anton·2007·Nature

Abstract

Most working scientists hold fast to the concept of 'realism'--a viewpoint according to which an external reality exists independent of observation. But quantum physics has shattered some of our cornerstone beliefs. According to Bell's theorem, any theory that is based on the joint assumption of realism and locality (meaning that local events cannot be affected by actions in space-like separated regions) is at variance with certain quantum predictions. Experiments with entangled pairs of particles have amply confirmed these quantum predictions, thus rendering local realistic theories untenable. Maintaining realism as a fundamental concept would therefore necessitate the introduction of 'spooky' actions that defy locality. Here we show by both theory and experiment that a broad and rather reasonable class of such non-local realistic theories is incompatible with experimentally observable quantum correlations. In the experiment, we measure previously untested correlations between two entangled photons, and show that these correlations violate an inequality proposed by Leggett for non-local realistic theories. Our result suggests that giving up the concept of locality is not sufficient to be consistent with quantum experiments, unless certain intuitive features of realism are abandoned.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature05677

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The observed S_NLHV = 3.8521 ± 0.0227 violates inequality (68) by 3.2 standard deviations.

    “The observed S N LHV = 3.8521 ± 0.0227 violates inequality (68) by 3.2 standard deviations.”

    From Multiphoton entanglement and interferometry (2012) · cites this paper as Gröblacher et al. (2007)

  • The Gröblacher et al. experiment excluded a broad class of nonlocal hidden-variable theories.

    “This way, Gröblacher et al. experiment excluded a broad class of nonlocal hidden-variable theories.”

    From Multiphoton entanglement and interferometry (2012) · cites this paper as Gröblacher et al. (2007)

  • The Leggett-type inequality was experimentally tested by Gröblacher et al. (2007) using a SPDC source with visibilities ∼99.0±1.2% (H/V), ∼99.2±1.6% (±45°), and ∼98.9±1.7% (R/L).

    “The Leggett-type inequality valid for nonlocal realistic theories of the discussed type was experimentally tested by Gröblacher et al. (2007).In the experiment a SPDC source of high-fidelity two-photon entangled states was used, with visibilities ∼ 99.0 ± 1.2% in the H/V basis, ∼ 99.2 ± 1.6% in the ±45 • basis and ∼ 98.9 ± 1.7% in the R/L basis.”

    From Multiphoton entanglement and interferometry (2012) · cites this paper as Gröblacher et al. (2007)

  • The same experiment gave S_Bell = 2.178 ± 0.0199, violating the CHSH inequality by ∼9 standard deviations.

    “At the same time measurements gave S Bell = 2.178 ± 0.0199, which violates the CHSH inequality by ∼9 standard deviations.”

    From Multiphoton entanglement and interferometry (2012) · cites this paper as Gröblacher et al. (2007)

  • The Leggett-type inequality (68) follows from identity (67) plus assumptions (L1)-(L3).

    “This, plus the above assumptions, implies a Leggett-type inequality (for details of the derivation see Groblacher et al., 2007) of the following form:”

    From Multiphoton entanglement and interferometry (2012) · cites this paper as Groblacher et al., 2007

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gröblacher, S., Paterek, T., Kaltenbaek, R., Brukner, Č., Żukowski, M., Aspelmeyer, M., & Zeilinger, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Vienna (AT)
  • University of Gdańsk (PL)
Corresponding author
  • Aspelmeyer, Markus
  • Zeilinger, Anton
Venue
Nature
Published
2007-04-19
Volume
446
Issue
7138
Pages
871-875
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2082420839
Cited by
419
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 26
FWCI
23.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2007-09-13)
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Keywords
Bell's theorem, quantum correlations, entangled photons, locality, realism, quantum foundations, hidden variable theories, quantum nonlocality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review