Testbed protocol examines statistical biases in Bell pair measurements using real quantum hardware, indicating implications for quantum signaling.
This paper presents a testbed protocol for probing whether Weinberg (1989) nonlinear corrections to quantum mechanics produce measurable statistical asymmetries in Bell-pair measurements on real quantum hardware. The protocol prepares maximally entangled Bell states |Φ+⟩ = (|00⟩ + |11⟩)/√2, applies nonlinear Schrödinger equation (NLSE) self-phase modulation (α_ij → α_ij · exp(-i·ε·|α_ij|²)) to the four-dimensional amplitude vector, and tests whether Alice's local basis choice creates a statistically detectable bias in Bob's marginal probabilities — a signature that would constitute a violation of the no-communication theorem if observed on physical hardware. The corrected v2.0 protocol eliminates all classical side-channels present in the initial implementation. Bob's measurement probabilities derive solely from the partial trace over post-NLSE-evolution amplitudes; the bobBiasShift parameter is hardcoded to zero. Bob operates as a process-isolated OS worker (separate PID, zero shared memory, IPC-only communication) with cryptographic proof of separation. The simulator produces exactly 50% accuracy across all experimental modes (Weinberg, control, blinded), confirming the no-signaling theorem holds for the mathematical model. Preliminary hardware results from dual-IonQ trapped-ion backends yield 60% basis-inference accuracy over 40,960 measurements across 5 experimental rounds (p = 0.31), insufficient for statistical significance. A three-phase experimental roadmap is described, scaling from $10K to $2M+, incorporating spacelike separation, independent circuit generation, and atomic-clock synchronization for definitive tests. Includes full mathematical framework, dynamic epsilon evolution algorithm, experimental validation engine architecture (3 modes with z-test, chi-squared, Wilson CI, Cohen's h statistical analysis), honest disclosure of circularity limitations, and hardware integration details for IBM Quantum and IonQ backends.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Megan Middleton (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: