Quantum Chance: Nonlocality, Teleportation and Other Quantum Marvels

If you love physics, but do not have a scientific background, you can get through this short work with some effort. It revolves largely around Bell's Game (now referred to as Bell's Theorem to give it some dignity). Bell's Game demonstrates that things can happen at faster than light speeds, a strong contradiction to Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity. But, and this saves the discrepancy, no information can be carried at such speeds. This is the quantum physics concept of entanglement. You do not have to have a mathematical background to grasp the main ideas of this work. But if you do not have some experience with math you will probably get lost and give up. It took me about four hours over the course of a few days to grasp the math because of all the possibilities, probabilities, and "rules" of the game.During the past decade or so many books on quantum physics have been published that are aimed at the laymen. Most attempt to deal with the problem of uncertainty, which is at the root of quantum physics, and, for lack of a better term, certainty (or determinism if you like), which is the foundation of classical physics. This clash has been described as physics in crisis. Humankind has always felt a need to understand the world/universe. When something happens that cannot be explained (e.g. lightning), then some paranormal explanation is called into play...the gods. Later, when lightning is understood scientifically, the gods are released as the creators. But the paranormal is still very much with us worldwide. So the mystics have jumped on uncertainty to declare that it is obvious science does not, and cannot, have all the answers; but we do. This has been a great thorn in the side of scientists as they struggle to deal with uncertainty.Thankfully, this work does not delve into that debate directly. You will learn something about the uncertainty principle and the clash with classical physics. And the author does point out that what we know now will almost certainly not be the same a thousand years from now (assuming the unlikely scenario where mankind does not destroy itself). So the reader is urged to try to understand science as best we know it now.Perhaps when the LHC (CERN) starts up again this year we may make new discoveries in physics that may some day lead to "The Theory of Everything." Until then, pay your money and take your choice. Or maybe figure out how to reconcile physics and metaphysics.Footnote: This reviewer, while holding an advanced degree, does not have a formal background in math or physics; they are just great hobbies. So pundits may take exception to some of the definitions included above.

I recently became interested in understanding quantum mechanics as I find the subject fascinating. One article, which I believe was published online by the Atlantic, dedicated a significant amount of words to Nicolas Gisin and his promotion of intuitionist mathematics. From there, I quickly discovered "Quantum Chance: Nonlocality, Teleportation and Other Quantum Marvels." I assumed it would be far beyond my ability to comprehend, but I ordered it anyways. To my surprise, Nicholas goes out of his way to simplify advanced concepts such as the Bell Inequality using simplified stories, analogies, and then basic mathematical proofs. I am a patent attorney by trade, and I consider myself particularly adept at breaking down and explaining complex topics in written word and basic figures. Nicholas Gisin is simply on another level, and I am in awe and inspired by the genius of his writing and approach.This book is absolutely perfect for someone like myself with a solid background in computer science, basic logic, and zero understanding of quantum mechanics. If you are on the fence and intimidated at the thought of attempting to understand quantum mechanics, buy this book. Read the preface and introduction as they serve as a foreshadowing and a roadmap for both the concepts of the book but the approach one should take in digesting the material. The information density of this book is outstanding, and I very much appreciated guidance from the author early on regarding when to keep reading beyond portions that escape my immediate understanding, as later words can bring clarity and that 'aha' moment.

Reading this short but dense book was a struggle for me—perhaps because it is so ``audio-talking’’ while I’m more visual and mathematical. I was confused from the beginning because he didn’t talk about the historical context of the presentation: where did this particular Bell Game come from? (e.g., the ``bounded by 3’’ inequality is unusual and not in Wikipedia). What makes Gisin’s tests different from most other tests (like Zeilinger’s)? I think he should have introduced some background material before elaborating on the details of his Bell test. Early Bell discussions were for electron spins but for practical reasons then switched to light polarizations. I wasn’t familiar with his ``time-bin encoded quantum information’’ (but I now know it is something worth knowing and he claims it to be better for long distances). I was expecting to understand traditional polarization experiments, so his time-bin test threw me for the first half of the book. Maybe others will have an easier time than I did (especially since most of the reviews were very positive). He has few figures, and his Figure 5.1 with tilted polarizations was irrelevant didn’t pertain to his time bin testing. And his term ``anti-parallel’’ only applies to spins (it seems that the book has a few editing problems). It wasn’t clear what the crystals in Bob and Alice’s boxes did (store correlation data?). He is strongly against local hidden variables but didn’t say much about Bohm’s non-local hidden variables or mechanisms. And he didn’t appear to know about Aharonov or Penrose or Cramer/Kastner for quantum time-reversible information versus classical time-forward information. I would think that stressing the grand mystery of non-local correlations should go along with some possible mechanisms.

The format of the text of this book has been set and does not adjust to the size of the screen that one is using. This means that the text is far too small to be read comfortably on a smartphone.

I don't believe it. Phew

Approfondimento molto interessante sul tema della non località della fisica quantistica.Mi permetterei di suggerire, e questo vale in generale per ogni pubblicazione a carattere scientifico, che l'autore indichi dove e come contattarlo per chiedere delucidazioni e chiarimenti.Desidero aggiungere che, volendo chiedere un chiarimento al Prof Gisin, ho trovato le sue coordinate all'Università di Ginevra su Internet, gli ho scritto una mail ieri sera attorno alle 18.00 e stamattina 8 maggio 2020 poco dopo le 9.00 mi è arrivata la risposta!Formidabile! Grazie, Professore.

I can't take a book seriously that is so dismissive of determinism. To mention a topic and belittle it in such a way detracts from the book in a way that reveals an emotional element in being unable to dismiss it out of scientific logic or evidence. Many better books on this subject out there

I came at this book as a philosopher who is very interested in what the cutting edge of physics has to say about the way the universe works. When reading books about Quantum anything, you always have to be careful about the level of maths required to fully understand the theories. My own level is not great, but I found the basic principles graspable, although I did smile when the writer said, "normally 1+1=2...".Essentially, this book sets out to show why Quantum Theory predicts that two remotely separated particles must come up with identical random values when examined, without breaking the prohibition on faster-than-light communication. This would be mind-bending enough, but the author then sets out, rather modestly given his role, the experimental proof which demonstrates this.Apart from the clear and lucid explanations of this phenomenon, the author won me over with some of his comments about the way that non-locality was received - and is still received - by other physicists. He does not attempt to offer an explanation of *why* the universe works like this, but he rightly raises his eyebrows at scientists who follow the "Shut up and calculate" mantra.The fundamental issues he covers in this book are crucial to future discoveries about free will, consciousness and other key philosophical issues; I am much better informed as a result of reading it.