Home
Login
Terms of Use
Privacy and Cookies Policies
Jack Sarfatti's Blog
Blog (Full Text Display)
News
Science
Weird Desk
News Archive
Science News (2010)
Weird Desk (2010)
Library
Research
Fringes
Physics
UFO Sightings Map
Cosmology
Nanotechnology
Advanced Propulsion
Metamaterials
Quantum Computing
Privacy, Cookies and Terms
Text Size
You are here:
Home
Jack Sarfatti's Blog
Beyond the Kalamides Gedankenexperiment which appears now to be refuted - June 2, 2013
Beyond the Kalamides Gedankenexperiment which appears now to be refuted - June 2, 2013
Status
Photo
Place
Life Event
What's on your mind?
Jack Sarfatti
about an hour ago
near
San Francisco
Kalamidas Affair
Like
·
·
Share
Jack Sarfatti
On Jun 2, 2013, at 7:22 AM, JACK SARFATTI <
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
> wrote:
Yes it's always the case that if the time evolution is unitary signal interference terms cancel out. That is essence of the no-signal argument.
It's what defeated my 1978 attempt usin
g two interferometers on each end of the pair source that David Kaiser describes in How the Hippies Saved Physics that was in first edition of Gary Zukav's Dancing Wu Li Masters. Stapp gave one of the first no-signal proofs in response to my attempt.
I. However, one of the tacit assumptions is that all observables must be Hermitian operators with real eigenvalues and a complete orthogonal basis.
II. Another assumption is that the normalization once chosen should not depend on the free will of the experimenter.
Both & II are violated by Glauber states. The linear unitary dynamics is also violated when the coherent state is Higgs-Goldstone vacuum/groundstate expectation value order parameter of a non-Hermitian boson second quantized field operator where the c number local nonlinear nonunitary Landau-Ginzburg equation in ordinary space replaces the linear unitary Schrodinger equation in configuration (or Wigner phase space more generally) as the dominant dynamic. P. W. Anderson called this "More is different."
For example in my toy model NORMALIZED so as to rid us of that damn spooky telepathic psychokinetic voodoo magick without magic
|A,B> = [2(1 + |<w|z>|^2)]^-1/2[|0>|z> + |1>|w>]
<0|1> = 0 for Alice A
<w|z> =/= 0 for Bob B
Take
Trace over B {|0><0| |A,B><A,B|} = 1/2 etc.
probability is conserved and Alice receives no signal from Bob in accord with Abner Shimony's "passion at a distance".
However, probability is not conserved on Bob's side!
Do the calculation if you don't believe me.
Two more options
i. use 1/2^1/2 normalization, then we get an entanglement signal for Alice with violation of probability conservation for Alice, though not for Bob
ii Final Rube Goldberg option (suspect)
use different normalizations depending on who does the strong von Neumann measurement Alice or Bob.
Now this is a violation of orthodox quantum theory ladies and gentlemen.
Sent from my iPhone in San Francisco, Russian Hill
====================================================================
about an hour ago
·
Edited
·
Like
·
1
Jack Sarfatti
On Jun 2, 2013, at 12:56 AM, nick herbert <
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
> wrote:
Kalamidas Fans--
I have looked over Martin Suda's two papers entitled 1. Taylor expansion of Output States and 2. Interferometry at the 50/50 BS.
My conclusion is that Martin is within one millimeter of a solid refutation of the kalamidas scheme. Congratulations, Martin, on
achieving this result and on paying so much close attention to kalamidas's arguments.
The result, as expected, comes from a very strange direction. In particular, the approximation does not enter into Suda's refutation.
Martin accepts all of kalamidas's approximations and refutes him anyway.
I have not followed the math in detail but I have been able to comprehend the essential points.
First, on account of the Martin Suda paradox, either PACS or DFS can be correctly used at this stage of the argument. So martin
derives the kalamidas result both ways using PACS (Kalamidas's Way) and then DFS (Howell's Way). Both results are the same.
Then Martin calculates the signal at the 50/50 beam splitter (Alice's receiver) due to Bob's decision to mix his photon with a coherent state |A>.
Not surprisingly Martin discovers lots of interference terms.
So Kalamidas is right.
However all of these interference terms just happen to cancel out.
So Kalamidas is wrong.
Refutation Complete. Martin Suda Wins.
This is a very elegant refutation and if it can be sustained, then Kalamidas's Scheme has definitively
entered the Dustbin of History. And GianCarlo can add it to his upcoming review of refuted FTL schemes.
But before we pass out the medals, there is one feature of the Suda Refutation that needs a bit of justification.
Suda's formulation of the Kalamidas Scheme differs in one essential way from Demetrios's original presentation.
And it is this difference between the two presentations that spells DOOM FOR DEMETRIOS.
Kalamidas has ONE TERM |1,1> that erases which-way information and Suda has two. Suda's EXTRA TERM is |0,0>
and represents the situation where neither of Bob's primary counters fires.
Having another term that erases which-way information would seem to be good, in that the Suda term might be expected to increase
the strength of the interference term.
However--and this is the gist of the Suda refutation--the additional Suda term |0.0> has precisely the right amplitude
to EXACTLY CANCEL the effect of the Kalamidas |1,1> term. Using A (Greek upper-case alpha) to represent "alpha",
Martin calculates that the amplitude of the Kalamidas |1,1> term is A. And that the amplitude of the Suda |0,0> term is -A*.
And if these amplitudes are correct, the total interference at Alice's detectors completely disappears.
Congratulations, Martin. I hope I have represented your argument correctly.
The only task remaining is to justify the presence (and the amplitude) of the Suda term. Is it really physically reasonable,
given the physics of the situation, that so many |0,0> events can be expected to occur in the real world?
I leave that subtle question for the experts to decide.
Wonderful work, Martin.
Nick Herbert
====================================================================
Category:
MyBlog
Written by Jack Sarfatti
Published on Sunday, 02 June 2013 11:38
Categories ...
't Hooft
100 Year Star Ship
Abner Shimony
accelerometers
action-reaction principle
Aephraim Sternberg
Alan Turing
Albert Einstein
Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer
American Institute of Physics
Andrija Puharich
Anthony Valentin
Anton Zeilinger
Antony Valentini
anyon
Apple Computer
Artificial Intelligence
Asher Peres
Back From The Future
Basil Hiley
Bell's theorem
Ben Affleck
Ben Libet
Bernard Carr
Bill Clinton
black body radiation
Black Hole
black hole firewall
black hole information paradox
black holes
Bohm
brain waves
Brian Josephson
Broadwell
Cambridge University
Carnot Heat Engine
Central Intelligence Agency
CIA
Clive Prince
closed time like curves
coherent quantum state
Consciousness
conservation laws
Cosmic Landscape
Cosmological Constant
cosmology
CTC
cyber-bullying
Dancing Wu Li Masters
Dark Energy
Dark Matter
DARPA
Daryl Bem
David Bohm
David Deutsch
David Gross
David Kaiser
David Neyland
David Tong
de Sitter horizon
Dean Radin
Deepak Chopra
delayed choice
Demetrios A. Kalamidas
Demetrios Kalamidas
Dennis Sciama
Destiny Matrix
Dick Bierman
Doppler radars
E8 group
Einstein's curved spacetime gravity
Einstein's happiest thought
electromagnetism
Eli Cartan
EMP Nuclear Attack
entanglement signals
ER=EPR
Eric Davis
Ernst Mach
ET
Eternal Chaotic Inflation
evaporating black holes
Facebook
Faster-Than-Light Signals?
fictitious force
firewall paradox
flying saucers
FQXi
Frank Tipler
Frank Wilczek
Fred Alan Wolf
Free Will
G.'t Hooft
Garrett Moddel
Gary Zukav
gauge theory
general relativity
Geometrodynamics
Gerard 't Hooft
Giancarlo Ghirardi
God
Goldstone theorem
gravimagnetism
gravity
Gravity - the movie
gravity gradiometers
gravity tetrads
Gravity Waves
Gregory Corso
gyroscopes
hacking quantum cryptographs
Hagen Kleinert
Hal Puthoff
Hawking radiation
Heisenberg
Henry Stapp
Herbert Gold
Higgs boson
Higgs field
hologram universe
Horizon
How the Hippies Saved Physics
I.J. Good
ICBMs
Igor Novikov
inertial forces
inertial navigation
Inquisition
Internet
Iphone
Iran
Isaac Newton
Israel
Jack Sarfatti
Jacques Vallee
James F. Woodward
James Woodward
JASON Dept of Defense
Jeffrey Bub
Jesse Ventura
Jim Woodward
John Archibald Wheeler
John Baez
John Cramer
John S. Bell
Ken Peacock
Kip Thorne
Kornel Lanczos
La Boheme
Laputa
Large Hadron Collider
Lenny Susskind
Leonard Susskind
Levi-Civita connection
LHC CERN
libel
Louis de Broglie
Lubos Motl
LUX
Lynn Picknett
M-Theory
Mach's Principle
Mae Jemison
Making Starships and Star Gates
Martin Rees
Mathematical Mind
MATRIX
Matter-AntiMatter Asymmetry
Max Tegmark
Menas Kafatos
Michael Persinger
Michael Towler
microtubules
Milky way
MIT
MOSSAD
multiverse
NASA
Nick Bostrum
Nick Herbert
Nobel Prize
nonlocality
Obama
organized-stalking
Origin of Inertia
P. A. M. Dirac
P.K.Dick
P.W. Anderson
Paranormal
parapsychology
Paul Werbos
Perimeter Institute
Petraeus
Physical Review Letters
Physics Today
Post-Quantum Physics
pre-Big Bang
precognition
presponse
PSI WARS
Psychic Repression
qualia
Quantum Chromodynamics
quantum computers
quantum entanglement
quantum field theory
quantum gravity
Quantum Information Theory
Quantum Theory
RAF Spitfires
Ray Chiao
Red Chinese
Remote Viewing
retrocausality
Reviews of Modern Physics
Richard Feynman
Richard P. Feynman
Rindler effect
Robert Anton Wilson
Robert Bigelow
Roger Penrose
rotating black holes
Roy Glauber
Rupert Sheldrake
Russell Targ
Ruth Elinor Kastner
S-Matrix
Sagnac effect
Sam Ting
Sanford Underground Research Facility
Sarfatti Lectures in Physics
Scientific American
Second Law of Thermodynamics
Seth Lloyd
signal nonlocality
Skinwalker Ranch
social networks
space drive
space-time crystal
SPECTRA - UFO COMPUTER
spontaneous broken symmetry
SRI Remote Viewing Experiments
Stanford Physics
Stanford Research Institute
Star Gate
Star Ship
Star Trek Q
Stargate
Starship
Stephen Hawking
Steven Weinberg
stretched membrane
string theory
strong force gluons
Stuart Hameroff
superconducting meta-material
supersymmetry
symmetries
telepathy
Templeton
The Guardian
Thought Police
time crystal
time travel
topological computers
Topological Computing
torsion
UFO
Unitarity
unitary S-Matrix false?
Unruh effect
Uri Geller
VALIS
virtual particle
Virtual Reality
Warp Drive
weak force
Wheeler-Feynman
WIMP
WMAP
WMD
world crystal lattice
wormhole
Yakir Aharonov
Yuri Milner
Archive ...
November 2015
(1)
January 2015
(1)
December 2014
(1)
August 2014
(2)
July 2014
(2)
June 2014
(2)
May 2014
(1)
April 2014
(6)
March 2014
(6)
February 2014
(1)
January 2014
(3)
December 2013
(5)
November 2013
(8)
October 2013
(13)
September 2013
(8)
August 2013
(12)
July 2013
(3)
June 2013
(32)
May 2013
(3)
April 2013
(6)
March 2013
(6)
February 2013
(15)
January 2013
(5)
December 2012
(15)
November 2012
(15)
October 2012
(18)
September 2012
(12)
August 2012
(15)
July 2012
(30)
June 2012
(13)
May 2012
(18)
April 2012
(12)
March 2012
(28)
February 2012
(15)
January 2012
(25)
December 2011
(29)
November 2011
(30)
October 2011
(39)
September 2011
(22)
August 2011
(41)
July 2011
(42)
June 2011
(24)
May 2011
(13)
April 2011
(13)
March 2011
(15)
February 2011
(17)
January 2011
(31)
December 2010
(19)
November 2010
(22)
October 2010
(31)
September 2010
(41)
August 2010
(30)
July 2010
(27)
June 2010
(12)
May 2010
(20)
April 2010
(19)
March 2010
(27)
February 2010
(34)
Scroll To Top