intermediate · Physics · Entanglement & the EPR/Bell Inequalities
Tsirelson’s Bound
Quantum mechanics violates the classical CHSH bound ∣S∣≤2, reaching 22 with the right
settings. A natural question: could a cleverer state or measurement push S even higher? Tsirelson's
bound answers no — 22 is the absolute quantum ceiling.
The statement
Tsirelson's bound (1980). For any quantum state and any choice of ±1-valued local
observables, the CHSH value satisfies
∣S∣≤22≈2.828.
Compare the three regimes:
Local realism:∣S∣≤2.
Quantum mechanics:∣S∣≤22.
No-signalling (most general):∣S∣≤4.
Quantum theory sits strictly between classical and the most extreme no-signalling correlations.
Why 22 — the operator argument
Represent Alice's two measurements by Hermitian operators A,A′ and Bob's by B,B′, each with
eigenvalues ±1, so A2=A′2=B2=B′2=1. Alice's operators commute with Bob's
(they act on different particles). The CHSH operator is
S=A⊗B+A⊗B′+A′⊗B−A′⊗B′.
Square it. Using A2=1 etc. and that A-operators commute with B-operators, the
cross-terms collapse and one finds the remarkable identity
S2=41−[A,A′]⊗[B,B′].
The operator norm obeys ∥S2∥≤4+∥[A,A′]∥∥[B,B′]∥. For ±1 observables each
commutator norm is bounded by ∥[A,A′]∥≤2∥A∥∥A′∥=2, so
∥S2∥≤4+2⋅2=8⟹∥S∥≤8=22.
Since ∣S∣=∣⟨S⟩∣≤∥S∥, the CHSH value can never exceed
22.
The bound is tight
The previous lesson exhibited a singlet state and measurement angles achieving exactly 22. So the
bound is not merely an upper limit — it is attained. Maximally entangled two-qubit states with
45∘-spaced settings saturate it.
The takeaway
The factor 2 separating classical from quantum is not arbitrary: it is the operator-norm signature
of non-commuting ±1 observables. The same commutator [A,A′] that forbids simultaneously sharp
values — the very feature EPR found objectionable — is exactly what powers the violation, and exactly
what caps it at 22.
Sign in on the full site to ask questions and join the discussion.