PIRSA:14010102

Noncontextuality without determinism and admissible (in)compatibility relations: revisiting Specker's parable.

Kunjwal, R. (2014). Noncontextuality without determinism and admissible (in)compatibility relations: revisiting Specker's parable.. Perimeter Institute. https://pirsa.org/14010102

Kunjwal, Ravi. Noncontextuality without determinism and admissible (in)compatibility relations: revisiting Specker's parable.. Perimeter Institute, Jan. 14, 2014, https://pirsa.org/14010102 

          @misc{ pirsa_PIRSA:14010102,
            doi = {10.48660/14010102},
            url = {https://pirsa.org/14010102},
            author = {Kunjwal, Ravi},
            keywords = {Quantum Foundations},
            language = {en},
            title = {Noncontextuality without determinism and admissible (in)compatibility relations: revisiting Specker{\textquoteright}s parable.},
            publisher = {Perimeter Institute},
            year = {2014},
            month = {jan},
            note = {PIRSA:14010102 see, \url{https://pirsa.org}}
          }

Ravi Kunjwal

Funds for Scientific Research - FNRS

Talk number
PIRSA:14010102
Collection
Talk Type
Subject
Abstract
The purpose of this talk is twofold: First, following Spekkens, to motivate noncontextuality as a natural principle one might expect to hold in nature and introduce operational noncontextuality inequalities motivated by a contextuality scenario first considered by Ernst Specker. These inequalities do not rely on the assumption of outcome-determinism which is implicit in the usual Kochen-Specker (KS) inequalities. We argue that they are the appropriate generalization of KS inequalities, serving as a test for the possibility of noncontextual explanations of experimental data. This is very much in the spirit of Bell inequalities, which provide theory-independent tests for local hidden variable explanations of experimental data without relying on the assumption of outcome-determinism. The second purpose is to point out a curious feature of quantum theory, motivated by the connections between (in)compatibility and (non)contextuality: namely, that it admits all conceivable (in)compatibility relations between observables.