User:Boris Tsirelson/Sandbox1: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Boris Tsirelson (Replacing page with 'Classical physics obeys the counterfactual definiteness and therefore negates entanglement. Classical apparata A, B cannot help Alice and Bob to always win (that is, agree on t...') |
imported>Boris Tsirelson No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Classical physics obeys the counterfactual definiteness and therefore negates entanglement. Classical apparata A, B cannot help Alice and Bob to always win (that is, agree on the intersection). What about quantum apparata? The answer is quite unexpected. | Classical physics obeys the counterfactual definiteness and therefore negates entanglement. Classical apparata A, B cannot help Alice and Bob to always win (that is, agree on the intersection). What about quantum apparata? The answer is quite unexpected. | ||
First, quantum apparata cannot ensure that Alice and Bob win always. Moreover, the winning probability does not exceed | |||
:<math> \frac{ 2 + \sqrt 2 }{ 4 } = 0.853\dots </math> | |||
no matter which quantum apparata are used. | |||
Second, | |||
Revision as of 03:10, 26 September 2010
Classical physics obeys the counterfactual definiteness and therefore negates entanglement. Classical apparata A, B cannot help Alice and Bob to always win (that is, agree on the intersection). What about quantum apparata? The answer is quite unexpected.
First, quantum apparata cannot ensure that Alice and Bob win always. Moreover, the winning probability does not exceed
no matter which quantum apparata are used.
Second,