Lumped Parameter Modeling of a Quantum Optics Circuit and Decisive Test for Time-Symmetric Physics

TL;DR

This paper demonstrates that simple lumped parameter models can accurately predict quantum behavior in entangled circuits, challenging traditional causality assumptions and proposing new experimental tests for time-symmetric physics.

Contribution

It introduces classical Markov Random Field models that replicate quantum predictions in entangled circuits without violating Bell's Theorem, and proposes experiments to distinguish between local realism and time-symmetric physics.

Findings

Models reproduce quantum predictions using classical probabilistic frameworks.

Time-symmetric models do not violate Bell's Theorem.

Proposed experiments could differentiate between local realistic and time-symmetric explanations.

Abstract

This paper showed how a simple lumped parameter model of a circuit can yield correct quantum mechanical predictions of its behavior, even when there is quantum entanglement between components of that circuit. It addresses an important example, the circuit of the original Bell's Theorem experiments for ideal polarizers. Correct predictions emerge from two alternative simple but time-symmetric models based on classical Markov Random Field across space time. Exact agreement here does not violate Bell's Theorem itself, because the interplay between initial and final outcomes in these calculations does not fall within the CHSH definition of time forwards causality. Both models raise interesting questions for future research. The final section discusses several possible directions for following up on these results, both in lumped system modeling and in more general approaches. The final section proposed a new experiment with three-photon entanglement which could tell us which is true, local realistic MRF models and time-symmetric physics, or conventional predictions assuming the usual collapse of the wave function. The appendix worked out what the conventional predictions would be for the proposed experiment, and also gives a simple master equation version of the collapse assumption which does not involve metaphysical observers. Section A.4 gives the prediction for the new models.