Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen Paradox

The Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox or EPR paradox[1] of 1935 is an influential thought experiment in quantum mechanics with which Albert Einstein and his colleagues Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen (EPR) claimed to demonstrate that the wave function does not provide a complete description of physical reality, and hence that the Copenhagen interpretation is unsatisfactory; resolutions of the paradox have important implications for the interpretation of quantum mechanics.

In the May 15, 1935 issue of Physical Review Albert Einstein co-authored a paper with his two postdoctoral research associates at the Institute for Advanced Study, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen.

Einstein and the EPR Paradox

In a complete theory there is an element corresponding to each element of reality. A sufficient condition for the reality of a physical quantity is the possibility of predicting it with certainty, without disturbing the system. In quantum mechanics in the case of two physical quantities described by non-commuting operators, the knowledge of one precludes the knowledge of the other. Then either (1) the description of reality given by the wave function in quantum mechanics is not complete or (2) these two quantities cannot have simultaneous reality. Consideration of the problem of making predictions concerning a system on the basis of measurements made on another system that had previously interacted with it leads to the result that if (1) is false then (2) is also false. One is thus led to conclude that the description of reality as given by a wave function is not complete.

THE paradox of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen [1] was advanced as an argument that quantum mechanics could not be a complete theory but should be supplemented by additional variables.

Information Philosopher is dedicated to the new Information Philosophy, with explanations for Freedom, Values, and Knowledge.

This is the physics definition of the EPR Paradox and an explanation of what it means and how it relates to quantum entanglement.

This video responds to a question about the EPR Paradox. It is explained in simple terms (no maths) but requires knowledge of some of the basics of Quantum M...

In 1935, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) published an important paper in which they claimed that the whole formalism of quantum mechanics together with what they called a “Reality Criterion” imply that quantum mechanics cannot be complete.

A paradox first enunciated by Einstein et al. (1935), who proposed a thought experiment that appeared to demonstrate quantum mechanics to be an incomplete theory. The usual view of quantum mechanics says that a wave function determines the probabilities of an actual experimental result and that it is the most complete possible specification of the quantum state.

A generalization of the 1935 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) argument for measurements with continuous variable outcomes is presented to establish criteria for the demonstration of the EPR paradox, for situations where the correlation between spatially separated subsystems is not perfect.

Quantum diagrams are the best language for Quantum Mechanics since they show not only a final result but also the physical process which leads to the result. The quantum correlation at a distance better known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox may be easily understood being depicted in the time-ordered quantum diagrams.

The Einstein-Podolski-Rosen paradox highlights several strange properties of quantum mechanics including the super position of states, the non locality and its limitation to determine an experiment only statistically.

Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) correlations between human brains are studied to verify if the brain has a macroscopic quantum component.

The Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox or EPR paradox of 1935 is an influential thought experiment in quantum mechanics with which Albert Einstein and his colleagues Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen ("EPR") claimed to demonstrate that the wave function does not provide a complete description of physical reality, and hence that the Copenhagen interpretation is unsatisfactory; resolutions of the paradox have important implications for the interpretation of quantum mechanics.

We show that quantum mechanics cannot describe separated physical systems and that this incapacity is at the origin of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR)paradox. We refer to a more general theory where