Yes, here is the free version http://arxiv.org/pdf/1004.2507
I will comment in detail in due course. The obvious question arises, what happens if we use a negative refracting meta-material super-lens plus Yakir Aharonov's weak measurement super-oscillation technique to resolve details smaller than the smallest wavelength in the probe pulse?
Even more revolutionary is getting signal nonlocality violating the no-cloning theorem, punching a hole in the t'Hooft-Susskind solution to the black hole information paradox? Perhaps not. These are all interesting questions.
If we could violate Heisenberg's uncertainty principle would quantum mechanics show signal nonlocality? Perhaps not. I don't know off-hand at this moment.
If quantum mechanics were more non-local it would violate the uncertainty principle
Jonathan Oppenheim1, ∗ and Stephanie Wehner2, †
1DAMTP, University of Cambridge, CB3 0WA, Cambridge, UK 2Institute for Quantum Information, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA (Dated: April 16, 2010)
"The two defining elements of quantum mechanics are Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, and a subtle form of non-locality which Einstein famously called “spooky action at a distance”. The first principle states that there are measurements whose results cannot be simultaneously predicted with certainty. The second that when performing measurements on two or more separated systems the outcomes can be correlated in a way that defies the classical world. These two fundamental features have thus far been separate and distinct concepts. Here we show that they are inextricably and quantitatively linked. Quantum mechanics cannot be more non-local without violating the uncertainty principle. In fact, the link between uncertainty and non-locality holds for all physical theories. More specifically, the degree of non-locality of any theory is solely determined by two factors – one being the strength of the uncertainty principle, and the second one being the strength of a property which Schro ?dinger called “steering”. The latter determines which states can be prepared at one location given a measurement at another, and in most theories of nature this is determined by causality alone."
On Nov 20, 2010, at 4:22 PM, Nicole C. Tedesco wrote:
Have you read this paper from Oppenheim and Wehner? (I don’t have a Science subscription.)
Thoughts? Suggestions? Gripes?
The only thing I can say at this point is a non sequitur: I find it interesting to watch computer science and physics increasingly converging on each other, leaving physics looking more and more like a problem of information processing and leaving computing and information theory looking more and more like physics! I know this is old news, especially since t’Hooft, but interesting to watch nevertheless.
Nicole C. Tedesco
"Here we show that not only do quantum correlations not undermine the uncertainty principle, they are determined by it."
This, so far, is nothing new. The original 1935 EPR paper showed that without a real physical nonlocal action at a distance the Heisenberg principle would be violated. That is:
Locality implies violation of Heisenberg uncertainty at one end for one subsystem of the entangled pair of subsystems.
Therefore: Heisenberg uncertainty implies nonlocality.
The key issue, however, is control of the nonlocality. In orthodox quantum theory, the no-cloning a quantum in an arbitrary state theorem, presupposes uncontrollable randomness of the physical nonlocal action, what Bohm and Hiley called the "fragility of the quantum potential" in their book "The Undivided Universe."
"Here, we take a very different approach and relate the strength to non-local correlations to two inherent properties of any physical theory.
We first describe what are widely considered the central phenomena of quantum mechanics – uncertainty and non-locality, but in a general setting, so that they can be quantified for all theories, not just quantum mechanics. We also define a generalised notion of steering, an aspect of quantum mechanics which was considered central by Schro ?dinger [9, 10], but which has received less attention. We then show that they are all linked by a single equation. In particular, we find that two basic principles inherent to any theory, namely our ability to steer, and the existence of uncertainty relations, completely determine the strength of non-local correlations. The steering properties of quantum mechanics itself are only restricted by causality and thus we find that the uncertainty relation and causality are the only limitations which determine quantum non-locality. ...
Quantum mechanics as well as classical mechanics obeys the no-signalling principle, meaning that information cannot travel faster than light. This means that the probability that Bob obtains outcome b when performing measurement t cannot depend on Alice’s choice of measurement setting (and vice versa)."
Nicole, I'm not sure, but I think they assume this no-signalling as a postulate. If that is the case, the paper will not be of interest for me because the important issue is violation of that postulate in a more general post-quantum theory in which the quantum theory they consider is a limiting case in the same sense that global special relativity is the limit of general relativity when the curvature tensor is zero in a finite region of 4D spacetime.