Spooky Action At A Distance

Anand Prahlad
anand.prahlad@gmail.com
December 11, 2009

Abstract
This is a fun project I do after work, with my buddies. If you spot an
error or want to add some material that could improve it, drop a comment.
I’ll be happy to include it in the post.

1 Bell’s Inequality
The Bell Inequality is a maths result that is valid for sets (& consequently for
all logical systems that are based on set theory). It’s trivial & doesn’t require
more than high-school set theory to understand. Consider the following Venn
diagram:

1
 From the diagram we see that:

A = {1, 2, 5, 4}
B = {2, 3, 5, 6}
C = {4, 5, 6, 7}

Now, we have:

(A, ¬B) = {1, 4}

(B, ¬C) = {2, 3}
(A, ¬C) = {1, 2}

Thus, we see that:

N (A, ¬B) = N (B, ¬C) = N (A, ¬C) = 2

And so we finally get the famous Bell Inequality:

N (A, ¬B) + N (B, ¬C) ≥ N (A, ¬C) (1)

It’s a simple matter to see that this result is valid even if some of the sets
in the above example are disjoint. Thus, the Bell Inequality is a general math-
ematical result that applies to any bunch of 3 sets.

2 How Quantum Mechanics violates the Bell In-

equality
Let’s consider an entangled pair of electrons - a pair in the singlet state. The
singlet state is mathematically described by:

|u, d > −|d, u >

|Φ >= √ (2)
2
Let’s try to apply the Bell Inequality to this situation. From equation (1),
let’s keep sets A, B & C as:

A = spin 1 up along axis 3

B = spin 1 up along 45 degrees between 1 & 3 axes
C = spin 1 up along axis 1

Now, because the electron pair is in a singlet state, we notice that the fol-
lowing results hold good for electron 2:

¬B = spin 2 up along 45 degrees between 1 & 3 axes

¬C = spin 2 up along axis 1

2
2.1 Probabilistic Form
Now, if we take a large number of readings then the Bell Inequality (1) can be
expressed in equivalent probabilistic terms as:
P (A, ¬B) + P (B, ¬C) ≥ P (A, ¬C) (3)
Now, in Quantum Mechanics probabilities are expressed using projection
operators.
Probability of some condition A happening =< Ψ|PA |Ψ >;
where:
PA = Projection operator for condition A
|Ψ > = System state vector
Also, the probabilities of 2 conditions A & B happening together is given by
the dot product of the 2 projection operators in the following way:
Probability of both A & B happening =< Ψ|PA .PB |Ψ >;
Thus, equation (3), can then be expressed using projection operators in the
following manner:
< Φ|PA,¬B |Φ > + < Φ|PB,¬C |Φ > ≥ < Φ|PA,¬C |Φ > (4)
⇒ < Φ|PA .P¬B |Φ > + < Φ|PB .P¬C |Φ > ≥ < Φ|PA .P¬C |Φ > (5)
One way that we can simplify the above equation is by making use of the fact
that Quantum Mechanical probabilities are rotationally invariant. In equation
(3), P (A, ¬B) & P (B, ¬C) are the same because they only differ in that the
system is rotated by 45 degrees. Thus, equation (5) can then be simplified to:

2 < Φ|PA .P¬B |Φ > ≥ < Φ|PA .P¬C |Φ > (6)

2.2 Action of Sigma Matrices

Sigma (denoted by σ) matrices (also called Pauli matrices, BTW) are complex
Hermitian, unitary matrices that represent the spin observable of an electron in
each of the 3 axes.
In order to verify that Quantum Mechanics violates the Bell Inequality given
by equation (6), we need to perform some fairly (but not too much!) elaborate
calculations which will involve the action of the sigma matrices. Thus, it will
be helpful to remember how each of the Sigma matrices act on the up & down
states of the electron. Anytime you’re confused in the calculations, just consult
the table given below:
σ3 |u> |u>
σ3 |d> −|d>
σ1 |u> |d>
σ1 |d> |u>
σ2 |u> i|d>
σ2 |d> −i|u>

3
 When dealing with the singlet state, we denote the spin observables of the
first electron by the usual, σ. The spin observables of the second electron
however, are normally denoted by another Greek letter, Tau, τ . The action
of the τ matrices is the same as that of the σ matrices, except that they only
operate on the second electron.

2.3 Calculating the LHS value of the Bell Equation

Ok, that’s enough ground work. Let’s solve the Bell equation starting with the
LHS first. We have:
2 < Φ|PA .P¬B |Φ > (7)
Now, from a little playing around with equations (I do not have time to show
examples, although this result is more or less evident) we have:
 
σ3 + 1
PA = (8)
2

Following the same pattern, we also have:

 
τ45◦ + 1
PB = (9)
2

The projection operator for condition A, i.e., PA is fine as it is already

expressed in terms of the standard σ vectors. However, the same is not the case
for PB . We really want to write it using the standard τ vectors, i.e., τ1 ; τ2 ; τ3 .
This will involve a tiny bit more work.

2.3.1 Re-writing the Projection operator for B

From equation (9), we express the Projection operator for B as:
 
τ45◦ + 1
PB =
2

Now,
τ45◦ = τ.n̂45◦
Where, n̂45◦ is the unit vector that lies at 45◦ to the 1 & 3 axes.
Since it is a unit vector, the co-efficients of n̂45◦ are nothing but the cosines
of the angles between the vector & the axes, i.e.

n̂45◦ = {cos 45◦ }x1 + {0}x2 + {cos 45◦ }x3

1
= √ {x1 + x3 }
2

[Remember cos 45◦ = √1 ,

2
right?]

4
 Thus, we can then construct:

τ45◦ = τ.n̂45◦
1
= √ {τ1 + τ3 }
2
Substituting the above, into the equation for the projection operator of B,
i.e., equation(9) we get:
 
τ45◦ + 1
PB =
2
1
!
√ {τ1 + τ3 } + 1
2
=
2

Substituting the values of PA & PB into the equation(7), which is the LHS
of Bell’s Inequality, we have:

LHS = 2 <Φ|PA .PB |Φ> (10)

√1 {τ1
!

σ3 + 1

2
+ τ3 } + 1
= 2 <Φ| . |Φ> (11)
2 2
|u,d>−|d,u>
Where <Φ| = <u,d|−<d,u|
√
2
& |Φ>= √
2
, i.e., the bra & ket forms of
the singlet state respectively.

2.3.2 Calculation of the value

At first glance, this looks like a monster equation. But it’s really not that bad
when you examine it a little :-) The tricks that we use here will become useful
again while calculating the value of the RHS part of the Bell equation.
Let us begin by focus on the following sub-expression in the equation (11):

√1 {τ1
" !#
σ3 + 1

2
+ τ3 } + 1
. |Φ> (12)
2 2
√1 {τ1
" !# 
σ3 + 1

2
+ τ3 } + 1 |u, d > −|d, u >

⇒ . √ (13)
2 2 2

When we consider the action of σ32+1 , then the term involving |d, u > gets

eliminated because it is orthogonal to it. Thus, the sub-expression (13) gets

reduced to:
√1 {τ1 + τ3 } + 1
! 
2 |u, d >
√ (14)
2 2
Now, when we compare the original equation (11) with sub-expression (14),
we see that we can eliminate the action of τ1 because there is no complimentary
< d, d| term in <Φ|. Thus, sub-expression (14) further reduces to:

5
 τ3
!
√
2
+1 |u, d >

√ (15)
2 2
 
1 |u, d> |u, d>
⇒ − + √ (16)
2 2 2
  
1 1 1
⇒ |u, d> − +√ (17)
2 2 2

Let us substitute this into the original LHS equation (11), we then get:
   
1 1 1
2 <Φ| |u, d> − +√ (18)
2 2 2
    
< u, d|− < d, u| 1 1 1
⇒ 2 √ |u, d> − +√ (19)
2 2 2 2
Simplifying we get:
  
2 1 1 1
√ <u, d|u, d> − +√ (20)
2 2 2 2
  
2 1 1 1
⇒ √ − +√ (21)
2 2 2 2
⇒ 0.146 (22)

2.4 Calculating the RHS value of the Bell Equation

Now, to calculate the RHS of the Bell equation (6). Don’t worry, we have
already done all the heavy-lifting while calculating the LHS. Calculating the
RHS is mostly a rehash of the tricks we used earlier.
We have the RHS:
< Φ|PA .P¬C |Φ > (23)
Now:
 
σ3 + 1
PA is : &;
2
 
τ1 + 1
P¬C is :
2

Unlike the case of the LHS, we needn’t spend time simplifying the above
projection operators because they are already written in terms of the standard
σ & τ operators. Whew!
Ok, substituting this into the above equation (23) we get:
    
σ3 + 1 τ1 + 1
<Φ| . |Φ> (24)
2 2

6
 Where <Φ| & |Φ> are the usual abbreviations for the bra & ket forms of
the singlet state i.e., <u,d|−<d,u|
√
2
& |u,d>−|d,u>
√
2
.
Let’s now focus on the sub-expression between the box brackets, i.e.,
   
σ3 + 1 τ1 + 1
. |Φ> (25)
2 2
    
σ3 + 1 τ1 + 1 |u, d > −|d, u >
⇒ . √ (26)
2 2 2

Now, σ32+1 removes the orthogonal vector |d, u> from the above expression

to give:   
τ1 + 1 |u, d>
√
2 2
This can be further simplified by seeing that the action of τ1 can be eliminated
because there is no complimentary <u, u| term in <Φ|. Thus, the sub-expression
(26) finally reduces to:  
1 |u, d>
√
2 2
Upon substituting the above result into the original RHS equation (24) we
get:
    
σ3 + 1 τ1 + 1
<Φ| . |Φ>
2 2
  
1 |u, d>
⇒ <Φ| √
2 2
   
< u, d|− < d, u| 1 |u, d>
⇒ √ √
2 2 2
1 1
⇒ √ . √ {<u, d|u, d>}
2 2 2

This simplifies to:

1
{1} (27)
4
⇒ 0.25 (28)

2.5 Violation & what it implies

Comparing the value of the LHS (22) with the above value for the RHS (28),
we see that the former is smaller than the latter, which is a violation of the
Bell Inequality (6). Thus, Quantum Mechanics cannot be based on set theory.
And since Classical Physics has set theoretic foundations, therefore Quantum
Mechanics can in no way be described via Classical Physics.