Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

“Solution” of the EPR Paradox: Negative, or Rather Fuzzy Probabilities?

  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Negative probabilities were several times proposed in the literature as a way to reconcile violation of Bell-type inequalities with the premise of local realism. It is argued that instead of using negative probabilities that have no physical meaning one can use for this purpose fuzzy probabilities that have sound and unambiguous interpretation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Butnariu D., and Klement E.P. (1991). “Triangular norm-based measures and their Markov kernel representation”. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 162:111–143

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Cereceda J.L., “Local hidden-variable models and negative-probability measures,” quant-ph/0010091 (2000).

  3. Feynman R.P., “Negative probability,” mimeographed notes (n.d.).

  4. Frank M.J. (1979). “On the simultaneous associativity of F(x,y) and x+y−F(x,y)”. Aequationes Math. 19:194–226

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Giles R. (1976). “Łukasiewicz logic and fuzzy set theory”. Int. J. Man-Machine Studies 8:313–327

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Han Y.D., Hwang W.Y., and Koh I.G. (1996). “Explicit solutions for negative-probability measures for all entangled states”. Phys. Lett. A 221:283–286

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Home D., Lepore V.L., and Selleri F. (1991). “Local realistic models and non-physical probabilities”. Phys. Lett. A 158:357–360

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Mesiar R., and Navara M. (1996). “T s -tribes and T s -measures”. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 201:91–102

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Mückenheim W. (1986). “A review of extended probabilities”. Physics Reports 133:337–401

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Mückenheim W. (1988). “An extended probability response to the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen argument”. In: Selleri F. (eds). Quantum Physics Versus Local Realism. Plenum, New York, pp. 345–364

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pykacz J. (1994). “Fuzzy quantum logics and infinite-valued Łukasiewicz logic”. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 33:1403–1416

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Pykacz J., and D’Hooghe B. (2001). “Bell-type inequalities in fuzzy probability calculus”. Int. J. Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems 9:263–275

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Pykacz J., and Santos E. (1990). “Constructive approach to logics of physical systems: application to EPR case”. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 29:1041–1058

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Pykacz J., and Santos E. (1991). “Hidden variables in quantum logic approach reexamined”. J. Math. Phys. 32:1287–1292

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Pykacz J., and Santos E. (1995). “Bell-type inequalities on tensor products of quantum logics”. Found. Phys. Lett. 8:205–212

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Rothman T., and Sudarshan E.C.G. (2001). “Hidden variables or positive probabilities?”. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 40:1525–1543

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Santos E. (1986). “The Bell inequalities as tests of classical logics”. Phys. Lett. A 115:363–365

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Sudarshan E.C.G. and Rothman T. (1993). “A new interpretation of Bell’s inequalities”. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 32:1077–1086

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Zadeh L.A. (1965). “Fuzzy sets”. Information and Control 8:338–353

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Zadeh L.A. (1968). “Probability measures of fuzzy events”. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 23:421–427

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Zadeh L.A. (1976). “A fuzzy-algorithmic approach to the definition of complex or imprecise concepts”. Int. J. Man-Machine Studies 8:249–291

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instytut Matematyki, Uniwersytet Gdański, Wita Stwosza 57, 80-952, Gdańsk, Poland

    Jarosław Pykacz

Authors
  1. Jarosław Pykacz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jarosław Pykacz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pykacz, J. “Solution” of the EPR Paradox: Negative, or Rather Fuzzy Probabilities?. Found Phys 36, 437–442 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-005-9025-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-005-9025-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation