tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3832136017893749497.post631122563338269936..comments2023-09-29T08:49:30.765-04:00Comments on Elliptic Composability: Florin Moldoveanuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01087655914212705768noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3832136017893749497.post-41126804464133691682016-09-28T06:20:23.859-04:002016-09-28T06:20:23.859-04:00Florin,
I'm looking forward to see your modif...Florin,<br /><br />I'm looking forward to see your modified program. I am not dogmatic against non-realism, it just doesn't seem to me that it can work. I would be happy to be proven wrong.<br /><br />However, keep in mind that you should obey locality.<br /><br />AndreiAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3832136017893749497.post-45523959400808820142016-09-27T21:56:19.358-04:002016-09-27T21:56:19.358-04:00"However, you may use Bell's theorem to t..."However, you may use Bell's theorem to test non-realism. You said that the spins are randomly created at the time of measurement and the experimenters have free-will. Why are you not testing this scenario with the above program and prove the greatness of non-realism?"<br /><br />Ha ha. Be careful what you are wishing for. Actually you get me a great idea for the next post. Let me show how the above program can be modified to prove non-realism. Stay tuned for the next post.Florin Moldoveanuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01087655914212705768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3832136017893749497.post-36537671233820891092016-09-26T19:51:24.927-04:002016-09-26T19:51:24.927-04:00Particle physicists employ relativistic quantum fi...Particle physicists employ relativistic quantum field theory (QFT) that is formulated according to equal time commutators on a spatial surface. The commutators occur according to the Wightman condition inside light cones. In this way QFT is formulated according to local amplitudes or fields. This is useful for practical reasons. In the LHC the production of a W^+ W^- particle pair is an entangled state, which is a nonlocal quantum physics. However, the W^± is only stable for a distance of 10^{-16}cm or for a time of 10^{-26} seconds. This means that nonlocal physics is almost irrelevant to the sorts of observables high energy physicsts are interested in. Nonlocal physics is lost as decoherence sends entanglement phases into the environment in very short time. <br /><br />Quantum experiments that test nonlocality involve low energy photons, systems that are stable, atomic transitions that occur in reasonable time frames and so forth. It is then possible to nonlocal physics over distances of a lab bench. Entanglements between a photon and the electronic state of an atom can be studied with high-Q cavities, and atomic transitions or Rabi oscillations occur on a time scale of 10^6 sec, which in photon distance is 100m. The energy scale of the physical systems is ideal for this sort of work.<br /><br />We have an interesting sort of duality at work. In the AdS/CFT duality gravitation in the AdS bulk is nonlocal, since the propagator of the gravity field in effect propagates on itself. The conformal field theory on the boundary of the AdS is local. We can also “toggle” a sort of duality between the nonlocality of the bulk gravity and the boundary CFT. If you think about this it means that what Lubos is talking about may have a complementary relationship with nonlocality! Entanglements have some curious relationships with gravitation, which is where things are really interesting, and this holds for tiny entanglements a quantum optical experimenter is woorking with on a bench.<br /><br />Where Lubos is wrong, along with his silly attachment to this orange baboon running for US President, and oh yeah global warming and … , is that he dismisses nonlocality as silliness. He does this with a lot of physics, and he fails to see that even physics that is wrong is not to be condemned, but learned from for its being wrong can tell us something.<br /><br />LCLawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3832136017893749497.post-11718943393240428142016-09-24T09:09:43.110-04:002016-09-24T09:09:43.110-04:00Dear Florin,
The only way to properly test a dete...Dear Florin,<br /><br />The only way to properly test a deterministic theory like classical electromagnetism is:<br /><br />1. Choose (or determine experimentally)the initial conditions (position/momenta of charges and, if necessary, the electric and magnetic fields)<br /><br />2. Start a computer simulation using the equation of classical electromagnetism (Maxwell's equation + Lorentz force)<br /><br />3. Allow the simulation to decide what measurements will be performed and what are the results.<br /><br />4. Compare those results with QM prediction.<br /><br />What Bell's theorem does is the folowing:<br /><br />1. Selects a very small part of the initial state (the spin components of the particles) disregarding anything else.<br /><br />2. Pulls out of thin air a part of the final state (the orientation of the detectors)<br /><br />3.Finds a contradiction with the QM prediction.<br /><br />This is a joke. However, you may use Bell's theorem to test non-realism. You said that the spins are randomly created at the time of measurement and the experimenters have free-will. Why are you not testing this scenario with the above program and prove the greatness of non-realism?<br /><br />PS<br /><br />Lubos has written a so-called explanation of quantum non-commutativity in terms of, you may guess, observer dependence. I would be curious to read your opinion on that. It seems to me that the guy doesn't understand the reason for non-commutativity (doesn't have anything to do with observers). In the end no explanation has been provided. Measurements are qualia, they change the soul of the observer, etc. That's great, but why a specific quale is related to a specific system preparation remains a mystery.<br /><br />There is a lot of juice to be extracted from that confused text, but i'll let you choose when to do it.<br /><br />AndreiAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com