Quantum generalisation of Einstein’s equivalence principle can be verified with entangled clocks as quantum reference frames
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Einstein equivalence principle (EEP) is of crucial importance to test the foundations of general relativity. When the particles involved in the test exhibit quantum properties, it is unknown whether this principle still holds. A violation of the EEP would have drastic consequences for physics. A more conservative possibility is that the EEP holds in a generalised form for delocalised quantum particles. Here we formulate such a generalised EEP by extending one of its paradigmatic tests with clocks to quantum clocks that are in a quantum superposition of positions and velocities. We show that the validity of such a generalised version of the EEP is equivalent to the possibility of transforming to the perspective of an arbitrary Quantum Reference Frame (QRF), namely a reference frame associated to the quantum state of the clock. We further show that this generalised EEP can be verified by measuring the proper time of entangled clocks in a quantum superposition of positions in the Earth gravitational field. The violation of the generalised EEP corresponds to the impossibility of defining dynamical evolution in the frame of each clock, and results in a modification to the probabilities of measurements calculated in the laboratory frame. Hence, it can be verified experimentally, for instance in an atom interferometer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".