Text Size


Begin forwarded message:

From: JACK SARFATTI <Sarfatti@PacBell.net>
Subject: [Starfleet Command] Antony Valentini update & string theorists strike it rich [3 Attachments]
Date: July 31, 2012 1:30:34 PM PDT
To: Exotic Physics <exoticphysics@mail.softcafe.net>
Reply-To: SarfattiScienceSeminars@yahoogroups.com

Chown, M., 2002, Core reality, New Scientist

An Interview with Antony Valentini, 202, Metanexus

Antony Valentini , Wikipedia

Towler, M., 2009, Why does nobody like pilot-wave theory?

Valentini’s book project


[1] Valentini, A., Subquantum Information and Computation. Pramana Journal of Physics, 2002. 59(2): p. 269-277. DOI: 10.1007/s12043-002-0117-1. Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0203049.


String Theorists get biggest new science prize - Lubos Motl not on the list yet ;-)
by Philip Gibbs
Yuri Milner http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Milner is a Russian hi-tech investor who dropped out of physics classes as a student. He must have done quite well with his investments because he has just given away $27,000,000 in prizes to nine physicists in $3,000,000 chunks. He plans to do the same every year making his the biggest recurring science prize of them all. Recipients of the prize this year which is given in fundamental physics are Ed Witten, Alan Guth, Nima Arkani-Hamed, Jaun Maldacena, Nathan Seiberg, Maxim Kontsevich, Ashoke Sen, Alexei Y. Kitaev and Andre Linde.

Past winners will select future winners so we can expect to see a lot of rich people in String theory and cosmology in the coming years.


String Theory returns to symmetry
by Philip Gibbs
The strings 2012 conference has finished and it is great to see that all the talks are online as slides and videos. Despite what you hear from some quarters, string theory is alive and progressing with many of the brightest young people in physics still wanting to do strings. Incredibly the next three strings conferences in Korea, US and India are already being organised. How many conference series have that many groups keen to organise them?

It has become a tradition for David Gross to give some kind of outlook talk at these conferences and this time he said there were three questions he would like to see answered in his lifetime

How do the forces of nature unify?
How did the universe begin and how will it end?
What is string theory?
The last of these questions is one he has been asking for quite a few years now. We know string theory only as a small set of perturbative formulations linked together by non-perturbative dualities. There has to be an underlying theory based on some unifying principle and it is important to find it if we are to understand how string theory works at the all-important Planck scale. This time Gross told us that he has heard of something that may answer the question. Firstly he now thinks the correct question to ask is "What are the underlying symmetries of string theory?" and he thinks that work on higher spin symmetries could lead to the answer. What is this about?

For about 16 years it has been known that an important element of quantum gravity is the holographic theory. This says that in order to avoid information loss by black holes the amount of information in any volume of space must be bounded by the area of a surface that surrounds it in Planck units. This might mean that the theory in the bulk of spacetime is equivalent to a different theory on the boundary.

Jack Sarfatti Comment - WHEN IS THE BOUNDARY? We have two cosmic boundaries past and future.

Tamara Davis Ph.D. based on her Fig 1.1 with my Wheeler-Feynman addition.

How can that happen? How can it be that all the field variables in the volume of spacetime only carry an amount of information that can be contained on the surface. We can reason that measurement below the Planck distance is not possible, but even then there should be at least a few valid field parameters for each Planck volume of space. If the holographic principle is right there must be a huge amount of redundancy in this volumetric description of field theory. Redundancy can be taken to imply symmetry. Each degree of symmetry or dimension of the group Lie algebra tells us that one field variable is redundant and can be taken out by gauge fixing it. In gauge theories we get one set of redundant parameters for each point in spacetime, but if the holographic principle is correct there must be a redundancy for almost every field variable in the bulk of spacetime and we will need it to be supersymmetry to deal with the fermions. I call this complete symmetry. It means that the fields of the theory are given by a single adjoint representation of the symmetry. This does not happen in normal gauge theories or in general relativity or even supergravity, but it does happen in Chern-Simons theory in 3D which can be reduced to a 2D WZW model on the boundary, so perhaps something is possible.

If there is symmetry for every degree of freedom in the bulk then the symmetries must match the spin characteristics of the fields. Supergravity only has symmetries corresponding to spin half and spin one fields but it has fields from spin zero scalars up to spin two. String theory goes even further with higher excitations of the string providing an infinite sequence os possible states with unlimited spin. This is why the idea of higher spin symmetries is now seen as a possible solution to the problem.

Surprisingly the idea of higher spin symmetry as a theory of quantum gravity is far from new. It goes back to the 1980s when it was founded by Vasiliev and Fradkin. It is a difficult and messy idea but recent progress means that it is now becoming popular both in its own right and as a possible new understanding of string theory.

There is one other line of development that could lead to a new understanding of string theory, namely the work on supersymmetry scattering amplitudes. Motl has been following this line of research which he calls the twistor mini-revolution for some time and has a nice summary of the conference talk on the subject by Nima Arkani-Hamed. It evolved partly out of the need to calculate scattering amplitudes for the LHC where people noticed that the long pages of solutions could be simplified to some very short expressions. After much thought these expressions seem to be about permutations and Grassmanians with things like infinite dimensional Yangian symmetry playing a big role. Arkani-Hamed believes that this is also applicable to string theory and could explain the holographic principle. The Grassmanians also link nicely to algebraic geometry and possibly work on hyperdeterminants and qubits.

I have to confess that as an undergraduate at Cambridge University in the late 1970s I was completely brainwashed into the idea that symmetry is the route to the underlying principles of nature. At the time the peak of this idea was supergravity in higher dimensions and Stephen Hawking who had just been inaugurated into the Lucasian chair at Trinity college was its greatest advocate. When string theory took over shortly after people looked for symmetry principles there too, but without convincing success. It is true that there are plenty of symmetries in string theory including supersymmetry of course, but different sectors of string theory have different symmetry, so symmetry seems more emergent than an underlying principle. I think the generations of undergraduates after mine were given a much more prosaic view of the role of symmetry and they stopped looking out for it as a source of deep principles.

Due to my brainwashing I have never been able to get over the idea that symmetry will play a huge role in the final theory. In the 1990s I developed my own idea of how infinite dimensional symmetries could describe string theory in a pregeometric phase. The permutation group played a central role in those ideas and was extended to larger string inspired groups with the algebra of string creation operators generating also the Lie algebra of the symmetry. Now that I know about the importance of complete symmetry and higher spin symmetry I recognise that these aspects of the theory could also be significant. Perhaps it is just a matter of time now before string theorists finally catch up with what I did nearly twenty years ago :)

Philip Gibbs | July 31, 2012 at 9:49 am | Categories: Conference, String Theory | URL:http://wp.me/pPg89-11B

Thanks Art Wagner - also related article on optomechanics in latest Physics Today
Proposal to demonstrate the non-locality of Bohmian mechanics with entangled
Boris Braverman1, 2 and Christoph Simon2
1Department of Physics, MIT-Harvard Center for Ultracold Atoms, and Research Laboratory of Electronics,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
2Institute for Quantum Information Science and Department of Physics and Astronomy,
University of Calgary, Calgary T2N 1N4, Alberta, Canada
Bohmian mechanics reproduces all statistical predictions of quantum mechanics, which ensures that entanglement cannot be used for superluminal signaling. However, individual Bohmian particles can experience superluminal influences. We propose to illustrate this point using a double double slit setup with path-entangled photons. The Bohmian velocity field for one of the photons can be measured using a recently demonstrated weak-measurement technique. The found velocities strongly depend on the value of a phase shift that is applied to the other photon, potentially at spacelike separation.

Nonlocal Interferometry Using Macroscopic Coherent States and Weak Nonlinearities

B. T. Kirby, J. D. Franson
(Submitted on 23 Jul 2012)
A straightforward method for performing nonlocal interferometry using macroscopic coherent states is described. The required entanglement can be generated using weak nonlinearities while Bell's inequality can be violated using single photons as a probe. A large number of photons can be absorbed with only a small reduction in the visibility of the nonlocal interference, which may be of practical use in quantum communications in addition to being of fundamental interest.
Comments:    4 pages, 5 figures
Subjects:    Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
Cite as:    arXiv:1207.5487v1 [quant-ph]
Submission history
From: James Franson [view email] [v1] Mon, 23 Jul 2012 19:12:18 GMT (238kb)
On Jul 28, 2012, at 1:41 PM, art wagner <wagnerart@hotmail.com> wrote:

Keith wrote:

Jack's idea is interesting b/c he's using standard quantum theory and exploring a corner case--distinguishable but non-orthogonal states which have interesting properties. Using the standard formalism, you find a modulation term that seems to be under the control of Alice, the sender. I get slightly different results depending on the specifics of how the signaling scheme is defined, but I so see a modulation term. The coherent states are subtle and so there could still be errors in what I've done, but there does seem to be something going on to me.

Jack Sarfatti • Yes, Keith, that is correct. You can force the effect to vanish by adhoc normalization, but that is a contradiction in the formalism. If the Born probability rule applies using normalized density operators and measurement projection operators should not require an adhoc second normalization. Since the coherent states are eigenstates of a non-Hermitian operator the usual conditions for the Born probability may not apply. This is an empirical question since forcing the second normalization is circular reasoning assuming what must be tested for by experiment. It's the orthogonality of base eigenstates of Hermitian operators that is assumed for the Born probability axiom to work.

21 minutes ago

Jack Sarfatti • Keith, relevant to this is P.W. Anderson's "phase rigidity" of spontaneous broken symmetry order parameters. The Glauber coherent states are such order parameters for a spontaneous broken global U1 gauge group corresponding to number-phase complementarity. The Glauber states have been generalized to any Lie Group G not just U1. It's this phase rigidity that is the cause of the violation of the Born probability rule in my opinion. However, one may also need a topological obstruction of some kind to get the phase rigidity. In superfluids it's the quantized vortices from the nonlinear term in the Landau-Ginzburg equation that replaces the Schrodinger eq (effective c-number IR field theory) that are the obstructions.

1 second ago

Nick, that is a Red Herring. The bare Bohm model you cite never claims to be a complete theory. Indeed, I suspect the problem you raise below was one of the reasons Vigier introduced the quantum noise - sub-quantal Brownian motion terms. Decay of unstable real particles is a zero point vacuum fluctuation effect not found in bare non-relativistic quantum mechanics.
For example, the bare Dirac equation does not give the Lamb shift and the magnetic moment of the electron correctly - you need QED radiative correction. Same idea here for bare Bohm theory. It's only the zero order starting point so to speak.

In any case, Basil will correct me if my memory here is mistaken?

On Jul 26, 2012, at 12:42 PM, nick herbert <quanta@cruzio.com> wrote:

If these two BM examples have been treated
in the literature I am not aware of it.
You are more knowledgable than I.
Please cite references.

Note that ordinary QM treats these two problems
quite simply without recourse to zero-point fluctuations.

Jack: No, I don't think so. You must couple the atomic electron Hamiltonian to a random EM field ~ j.Azpf mimicking virtual photons to compute decays if you don't use QED.

In other words, if you simply start with

H0 = p^2/2m + e^2/r

where m is the muon mass & r is the relative coordinate

you cannot calculate the decay of the muon in orthodox QM without adding some Hint to H0. So it comes down to the same thing in essence no matter which interpretation you use.

Nick: I am interested in reading Vigier's BM description
of these two experiments to see if his method
does indeed, as you are apparently claiming,
give the same results as non-relativistic QM.

On Jul 26, 2012, at 11:55 AM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

On Jul 26, 2012, at 9:50 AM, nick herbert <quanta@cruzio.com> wrote:

1. The oft-cited remark that non-relativistic Bohmian mechanics gives the same result
as conventional QM for all conceivable experiments is plain wrong. The two theories
possess radically different ontologies which lead to radically different consequences.

What exists in QM is a wavefunction, spread out in configuration space
(and this wavefunction is "real" according to PBR). For a given quantum state
all systems represented by that state have the same ontology.

What exists in BM is an actual particle which for S-states has the remarkable property
that v=0. In BM all systems represented by the same state are different--their difference (in the  S-state case) being the differing positions of the static electron. A Bohmian S-state
consists of an ensemble of stationary electrons each in a different position whose
position pattern is given by psi squared.

It is this v=0 property of BM S-wave electrons that is used to create counterexamples to the  contention that BM and QM give the same predictions.

1. Muonic Hydrogen. Like the electron the muon in the BM picture is stationary. Hence the muon  lifetime in BM is the just the natural lifetime. However in QM the muon has a velocity distribution  so the lifetime is lengthened by relativity. BM and QM predict different lifetimes for the muonic atom. One may object that I have introduced relativity into a non-rel situation. However the QM and BM states are still non-rel The lifetime of the muon can be seen as a measuring device probing the ontology of the muonic hydrogen. The probe uses a relativity effect to measure a non-rel configuration.

Nick, you have neglected coupling to the zero point vacuum fluctuations that trigger when the unstable particle decays. The unstable real particle gets a kick from a virtual particle giving it a velocity. I think this is done explicitly in Vigier's sub-quantum stochastic Brownian motion addition to the bare NR QM Bohm model you cite. So when you do that everything works. Similarly below.

2. Electron Capture decay. Certain radioactive elements (Beryllium 7, for instance) possess an excess  positive charge and do not have enough energy to decay by positron emission. Instead they capture the  S-state electron which transforms a nuclear proton into a neutron and neutrino (inverse beta decay).  Electron Capture (EC) is a very delicate probe of the ontology of the S-state electron. QM ontology  (all electrons the same) predicts a smooth exponential decay. After many half-lifes all the Be7 is gone.
BM ontology predicts a very different outcome: exponential decay for all electrons located inside the nucleus;infinite life for stationary Bohmian electrons located outside the nucleus.

If these two counter-examples to the QM/BM experimental identity conjecture have been discussed in the literature, I am unaware of it. But they should be.

Nick Herbert

z,z',w,w' are complex number eigenvalues of Glauber coherent states
|Alice> = |z>A|1>A + |z'>A|0>A    trapped ion
|Bob> = |w>B|+>B + |w'>B|->B    trapped ion
Entanglement swap the internal trapped ion discrete qubit states, leaving the Glauber coherent states fixed.
|Alice>, |Bob> ----> |Alice'>, |Bob'>
|Alice'> = |z>A|+>B + |z'>A|->B
|Bob'> = |w>B|1>A + |w'>B|0>A
Now, two entanglement signal nonlocality is possible between Alice and Bob. 

The key to this is Valentini’s “signal nonlocality” (see below) which I captured here in a particular instance

On Jul 24, 2012, at 5:39 PM, art wagner wrote:

"The aim of this paper is to define in theoretical terms and summarise the available experimental evidence that physical and mental "objects", if considered "information units", may present similar classical and quantum models of communication beyond their specific characteristics. Starting with the Remote State Preparation protocol, a variant of the teleportation protocol, for which formal models and experimental evidence are already available in quantum mechanics, we outline a formal model applied to mental information we defined Remote State Preparation of Mental Information (RSPMI), and we summarise the experimental evidence supporting the feasibility of a RSPMI protocol. The available experimental evidence offers strong support to the possibility of real communication at distance of mental information promoting the integration between disciplines that have as their object of knowledge different aspects of reality, both physical and the mental, leading to a significant paradigm shift in cognitive and information science." http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1201.6624

All papers by Khrennikov:  http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Khrennikov_A/0/1/0/all/0/1

Subquantum Information and Computation
Antony Valentini
(Submitted on 11 Mar 2002 (v1), last revised 12 Apr 2002 (this version, v2))
It is argued that immense physical resources - for nonlocal communication, espionage, and exponentially-fast computation - are hidden from us by quantum noise, and that this noise is not fundamental but merely a property of an equilibrium state in which the universe happens to be at the present time. It is suggested that 'non-quantum' or nonequilibrium matter might exist today in the form of relic particles from the early universe. We describe how such matter could be detected and put to practical use. Nonequilibrium matter could be used to send instantaneous signals, to violate the uncertainty principle, to distinguish non-orthogonal quantum states without disturbing them, to eavesdrop on quantum key distribution, and to outpace quantum computation (solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time).
Comments:    10 pages, Latex, no figures. To appear in 'Proceedings of the Second Winter Institute on Foundations of Quantum Theory and Quantum Optics: Quantum Information Processing', ed. R. Ghosh (Indian Academy of Science, Bangalore, 2002). Second version: shortened at editor's request; extra material on outpacing quantum computation (solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time)
Subjects:    Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
Journal reference:    Pramana - J. Phys. 59 (2002) 269-277
DOI:    10.1007/s12043-002-0117-1
Report number:    Imperial/TP/1-02/15
Cite as:    arXiv:quant-ph/0203049v2

► 3:15► 3:15
US Scientists Discuss Secret CIA Testing of Uri ...
Aug 13, 2008 - 3 min - Uploaded by mathienco
Dr. Hal Puthoff and Laser Physicist Russel Targ talking about Uri Geller's secret CIA tests at SRI. ... Watch ...

► 5:58► 5:58
Hal Puthoff pt.5 of 5- Remote Viewing and ...
Nov 20, 2007 - 6 min - Uploaded by newrealities
Hal Puthoff pt.5 of 5- Remote Viewing and Consciousness ... of the online series Puthoff discusses the ...

► 32:09► 32:09
Secret CIA Psychic Lab Experiments - Watch Free ...
Jun 3, 2012 - 32 min
For over 20 years, scientists at Stanford Research Institute (SRI)... (RV) Remote Viewing, and the research ...

CIA-Initiated RV Program at SRI
CIA-Initiated Remote Viewing At Stanford Research Institute. by H. E. Puthoff, Ph. D. Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin 4030 Braker Lane W., #300. Austin ...
You visited this page on 7/23/12.
Remoteviewed.com - Hal Puthoff
Remote Viewing - About Hal Puthoff and SRI. ... The CIA Star Gate Files ... Dr. Harold E. Puthoff is Director of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin.
Remote viewing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In the early 1970s, Harold E. Puthoff and Russell Targ joined the Electronics and ... In 1972, Puthoff tested remote viewer Ingo Swann at SRI, and the experiment led to a visit ... The initial CIA-funded project was later renewed and expanded.
You've visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 7/16/12
Dr. Harold E. Puthoff (Remote Viewing) From the Secret Life of ...
Dr. Harold E. Puthoff at The Arlington Institute Speaks of the beginnings of the real ...CIA-Initiated Remote Viewing Program at Stanford Research Institute ...

Thanks to Art Wagner for sending me Hammond's clearly written paper.

"There is yet other evidence of the probity of this
approach reaching back to the 1970s. It was shown
that general relativity with torsion could be formu-
lated as a local gauge theory under the Poincare
group. Now, we know there are two Casimir in-
variants of this group, P^2 and L^2
–the square of the translation operator and Pauli-Lubanski spin operator.
Although this was formulated with a symmetric
metric tensor, so was the spin theory resulting from
the torsion potential.[7] In that case, the ideas not
only carry over to the non-symmetric case, they pro-
vide an interpretation as well as a raisond’tre for the
non-symmetric metric tensor. In any case, we have
come to think of mass and spin as being associated
with the gravitational field, and the above results
show a very natural framework for just that.

In this approachthere is a natural string coupling:
The symmetric part of the metric tensor is associ-
ated with the Nambo-Goto term


and the antisymmetric part with the Kalb-Ramond term


This gives a natural union between gravity and string theory

The necessity of torsion, from a potential, has already been
demonstrated in two ways. First it was in shown
in [11] the correct law for the conservation of total
angular momentum plus spin can only be achieved
with torsion. This in itself is a strong enough argu-
ment for its presence, but it was also shown that it
is necessary from gauge invariance arguments.

In the final analysis then, we have particles with
intrinsic spin giving rise to a field. The potential
of this field is the antisymmetric part of the met-
ric tensor. This is a new physical interpretation of
the antisymmetric part of the metric tensor entirely
different from previous work"

Begin forwarded message:

Light hadron masses from lattice QCD
Reviews of Modern Physics – April - June 2012 Volume 84, Issue 2

Zoltan Fodor and Christian Hoelbling
One of the most basic tests of quantum chromodynamics in the strong coupling regime is whether it can successfully predict the spectrum of light hadron masses in terms of a small number of inputs. This article surveys the status of lattice calculations of the spectrum, including the formalism, theoretical uncertainties, and current results. The calculations successfully reproduce relevant parts of the observed spectrum at the percent level.
Published 4 April 2012 (47 pages)
pp. 449-495 [View PDF (1,712 kB)]

So who needs Mach’s Principle for the origin of inertia?

Bearing in mind Basil Hiley’s remark:

To build in wholeness in this preliminary way, we stressed in the UU that the "particle and the field were never separate".  Here we were motivated by the work of Frederick Frank at Bristol and Bilby and his co-workers at Sheffield.  They had been exploring the geometry of continuous dislocations in crystals and had shown that the equation of migration of dislocation was similar to a relativistic particle dynamics which involved the speed of sound rather than the speed of light. Furthermore the stress forces in the lattice had a similar form to electromagnetic fields.  Notice you can't separate the particle from the field: no lattice, no particle implies no field, no particle.  We do not give any meaning to the statement that 'the particle is in one of the wave packets'. That is, questions about "empty wave packets" has no meaning in the structure we had in mind.

Gaussian quantum information
Christian Weedbrook, Stefano Pirandola, Raúl García-Patrón, Nicolas J. Cerf, Timothy C. Ralph, Jeffrey H. Shapiro, and Seth Lloyd
Quantum information processing and communication protocols are typically expressed in terms of discrete units of information, the quantum bits (or qubits). However, certain experimental setups involving, for instance, light or atomic ensembles, are based on continuous quantum system and, in particular, on Gaussian states and operations. This review adapts the main ideas and protocols in the field of quantum information to such systems, and explains their advantages and limitations.
Published 1 May 2012 (49 pages)
pp. 621-669 [View PDF (1,385 kB)]

Glauber states are displaced Gaussians in the phase space of the quantum oscillator normal mode.

Theoretical aspects of massive gravity
Kurt Hinterbichler
The discovery that the expansion rate of the Universe is accelerating, perhaps due to a nonzero and very small cosmological constant, has led to many speculations regarding modifications to the long distance structure of general relativity. This review discusses modifications which generate a mass for the graviton from a theoretical point of view and includes a treatment of diffeomorphism invariance, interactions, and the low-energy effective field theory treatment of such theories.
Published 7 May 2012 (40 pages)
pp. 671-710 [View PDF (758 kB)]

Dual pairing of symmetry and dynamical groups in physics
D. J. Rowe, M. J. Carvalho, and J. Repka
Symmetries, group theory, and the related theory of Lie algebras underlie quantum mechanics and provide the essential language for the interpretation of physical phenomena. This review discusses foundations and applications of dual representations of pairs of symmetry and dynamical groups primarily in atomic and nuclear physics, especially in the context of bosonic and fermionic many-body systems such as superconductors, molecules, and nuclei. By studying such dual subgroup chains, associations of phenomenological many-body models with microscopic approaches are revealed.
Published 11 May 2012 (47 pages)
pp. 711-757 [View PDF (1,104 kB)]

Colloquium: Supersolids: What and where are they?
Massimo Boninsegni and Nikolay V. Prokof’ev
Supersolid is the name of an exotic quantum phase of matter, combining the seemingly antithetical properties of crystal and superfluid phases. This phase is expected to exist in rather extreme circumstances, for example, in solid helium near absolute zero. Indeed, claims of its experimental observation have been made. This Colloquium reviews the bulk of the existing phenomenology and offers an interpretation of it, based on theoretical results of first principle computer simulations. Other physical systems in which the supersolid phase might be observed in the laboratory are also described.
Published 11 May 2012 (18 pages)
pp. 759-776 [View PDF (861 kB)]

I predicted super solids before Tony Leggett I think? See my publication list on Wikipedia.

Multiphoton entanglement and interferometry
Jian-Wei Pan, Zeng-Bing Chen, Chao-Yang Lu, Harald Weinfurter, Anton Zeilinger, and Marek Żukowski
Light is made out of photons, which now can be efficiently created, manipulated, and detected. This provides us with the possibility of testing several fundamental aspects of quantum mechanics, ranging from the quantization of energy to the superposition principle, or the violation of Bell inequalities. Also, the degree of control that has been achieved over the properties of the photons has opened up a broad spectrum of applications in the context of quantum information science. This review provides an introduction to multiphoton systems, with an emphasis on their entanglement properties. It also contains an exposition of the fundamental tests that have been carried so far with such systems, as well as the key experiments on quantum communication and computation.
Published 11 May 2012 (62 pages)
pp. 777-838 [View PDF (4,466 kB)]

How higher-spin gravity surpasses the spin-two barrier
Xavier Bekaert, Nicolas Boulanger, and Per A. Sundell
Gauge theories mediate forces through particle of spin one while the gravitational force is mediated through particles of spin two. It has long been thought that there are no consistent theories with fundamental particles of spin greater than 2, but recent constructions show that while this standard lore is probably true in flat spacetimes, spaces with constant curvature that occur in the presence of a cosmological constant provide a loophole that allows construction of consistent higher-spin generalizations of gravity. This review explains the original no-go results in flat space and then discusses the construction of higher-spin theories in backgrounds with a cosmological constant.
Published 3 July 2012 (23 pages)
pp. 987-1009 [View PDF (453 kB)]

In my gauge theory of gravity, the basic LIF tetrads are compensating spin 1 vector fields from localizing the universal space-time symmetry group for all matter fields. Einstein’s spin 2 gravity would be something analogous to a Cooper pair, i.e. an entangled triplet of a pair of spin 1 quanta with S-state orbital. Of course “graviton" higher spin states with P, D ... orbitals are conceivable. Of course a Cooper pair of spin 1/2 electrons are bound by spin 0 phonons - what binds the gravity tetrads into a pair?
Self interaction? Virtual spin 0 Higgs?

‘Standard quantum mechanics’: the Copenhagen interpretation
“A philosophical extravaganza dictated by despair” (Schr¨odinger)

1. System completely described by wave function   representing observer’s knowledge of the system, or ‘potentiality’. The wave function is all there is. ‘Hidden variables’ impossible. (Heisenberg)

2. Description of nature essentially probabilistic. Probability of event related to square of amplitude of wave function related to it (Born rule). ‘Measurement’ randomly picks out exactly one of the many possibilities allowed for by the state’s wave function through nonlocal ‘collapse process’.

3. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle: observed fact that it is not possible to know values of all properties of system at same time; those properties not known with precision must be described by probabilities. Properties in fact supposed to be indeterminate not uncertain.

4. Complementarity principle: there is no logical picture (obeying classical propositional logic) that can simultaneously describe and be used to reason about all properties of a quantum system. Example: matter exhibits a wave-particle duality. An experiment can show the particle-like properties of matter, or wave-like properties, but not both at the same time. (Niels Bohr)

5. Measuring devices are essentially classical devices, and measure classical properties such as position and momentum.

6. The ‘correspondence principle’ of Bohr and Heisenberg: the quantum mechanical description of large systems should closely approximate to the classical description.

Now well-known that Copenhagen cannot be reconstructed as a coherent
philosophical framework - it is a collection of local, often contradictory, arguments
embedded in changing theoretical and sociopolitical circumstances.. ..riddled with
vaccillations, about-faces and inconsistencies. [See Mara Beller book ‘Quantum Dialogue’]

- Towler Bohm Lecture 1

On Jul 16, 2012, at 3:14 AM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

Michael Towler wrote about Bohr:

"(Circular) demonstrations of consistency disguised as compelling arguments of inevitability. [Those who do not agree are] ‘unable to face the facts’ and disagreeing with the masters of the universe thus becomes bad for your career.”

in his Cambridge lectures on Bohm’s quantum theory

Well and good, but the same flaw is found in the proofs prohibiting entanglement signaling.

The no-cloning theorem is incomplete. It only forbids a small class of devices like Nick Herbert’s FLASH based on linearity and unitarity.

There are other ways to skin Schrodinger’s Cat.

Right, this was also when Gregory Corso would crash at our place and I was involved with Ms S with me as Rodolfo. ;-)
Corso wrote at least one poem on my FTL physics ideas.

On Jul 15, 2012, at 3:09 PM, d14947 wrote:

Jack and I experienced a real 'magick' mushroom download with me shortly after he moved into my flat at Union and Grant in North Beach that confirmed quantum entanglement. This was either autumn of '82 or early '83. I was given some mushrooms that were psilocibin cubensis.I ate several of them and almost immediately, within less than a minute Jack looked at my and asked if i was tripping and I was shocked and said no, not at all. I told him I had in the last minute eaten something, but in no way was I feeling anything psychedelic yet.Mushrooms usually took about 45 minutes at least to come on fully.

He told me he could feel it very strongly and his face was flushed and pink.  After some time went by I realized I was not having any kind of psychedelic experience. I was stone cold sober, but Jack was tripping and acting like it, His talk was all about faster than light communication but I don't think the significance of exactly *how* he went on a psychedelic trip really hit him at that point. It was a full-blown 8 hour trip for Jack and I could feel the psychedelic energy radiating from him.This was around the time of Reagan's Star Wars idea that Jack was involved in through Cap  Weinberger Jr and  Alain Aspect's visit to North Beach.

re: http://normanquebedeau.com/Animation_files/spectra.swf

On Jul 15, 2012, at 12:46 PM, CloudRider@aol.com wrote:

Your "magick mushroom" download, circa 1979... (actually, quite late in the psychedelic physics thing?)... is reminiscent of Dr. John Lilly's recounting of his earliest "visits" with Higher Beings in upper satori states as he did his own "traveling" in such realms, first with LSD propelling him from his  isolation-flotation tanks. He recounted in his "Center of the Cyclone" how he made seeming "contact" with these "beings," but they so much as told him he was too stoned to interact meaningfully... and suggested he come back "straight.”

JS: That’s right. Remember Lilly had Feynman come to Esalen and Feynman did experiment with psychedlics in Big Sur when he knew he was dying of what I think was radiation exposure from the Manhattan Project. Lilly and Feynman were old friends from Cal Tech.
DF: Lilly said he then went to Chile and did the meditation thing with Oscar Ichazo, eventually meeting up again with what seemed (to Lilly) to be the same "beings," and having a more memorable interaction with them.
Wonder whether you've written and/or published whether you perceive that your 1953 "phone call" from the beings you recall communicating with  you are/were involved in any of your subsequent "travels" into such realms?

JS: Remember my 1953 contact was very UN-PSYCHEDELIC. I was only about 13 years old in a blue-collar Irish-German-Italian-Jewish/Catholic neighborhood in Flatbush. The phone call(s) were very material mechanical and my mother witnessed at least one of them. This was a real incident not the imaginings of a child.
DF: Also, an associate of Dr. Ray Moody, one Robin Andrews Quayle, back in the late 1980s, early '90s, did some work with "mass UFO experiencers," then later with what are termed "ETI Prodigies," i.e., people who had a perceived interaction and/or "information download" with and from "ETs," relaying or bestowing knowledge of "innovative technologies," etc., and who frequently were unable to make real sense of same because they lacked formal education and thus, "vocabulary" and ability to "do the math," to manifest any productivity or progress as a result of the "data dump.”

JS: Exactly my point. BTW Hal Puthoff needs to clarify if he also had a similar contact about the same time - we are close in age. I had a private dinner with Hal about 1999 when Joe Firmage invited him out to ISSO and something Hal said to me indicated that he had - but perhaps I misunderstood him? Joe Firmage’s contact like Dan Throop Smith’s was more subjective and could be explained as a brain malfunction - a delusion unlike mine. Uri Geller also had a more mechanical contact like mind about the same time (early 1950’s) witnessed by a then young Israeli army recruit who later rose high in the ranks and outed himself on Israeli TV a few years ago. Check with Uri for details.
DF: There’s considerable Internet "conversation" about said "extraterrestrial prodigies," as a quick search shows, and most provocative (and perhaps relevant here) are accounts of "child prodigies" with decidedly "ET alien" coloration. Some of these (ETI prodigy) folks also became rather "paranoid," Robin reported, because they feared that "powers that be" would be "after them" to steal or more likely to "prevent" what they had been "given" from contributing to human progress at the expense of "status quo" dominant tech.

JS: Sure, lots of crazies are attracted to UFOs as well as to the Tea Party and to Occupy. ;-)
DF: There actually was a 1993 conference of these folks, held in the mountains of north Georgia (in the US, not the Near East ;-) to which I was invited and which I attended, while still working as Director of Project Development for the Human Potential Foundation, the nonprofit founded by Senator Pell, funded by Hans Adam II of Liechtenstein and the late Laurance S. Rockefeller, et al. We have the monograph by Ms. Quayle on the "ETI Prodigies" findings, and are continuing to "work it." So your experiences, which you've so candidly been discussing for 'lo these many years, are helpful to what is a fascinating, if not much publicly discussed, facet of the broader "exceptional information" source study. ;-)

JS: I tell it like it really happened. Obviously I would not lie about it since it gives people like Lubos Motl ammunition to attack my physics ideas as a delusional UFO nut and it also led Antony Valentini being pressured to disinvite me to the Bohm Conference I had conceived of with Michael Towler at Cambridge in the first place. See the Wikipedia page on me for details and references.
Dick Farley CloudRider@aol.com
Washington, DC USA
PS -- These are, at least to my colleagues and I, much more interesting questions about the "UFO/ET" and claimed-perceived "contacts," particularly when people who've gone on to accomplish demonstrable stuff are involved. And of course it underpinned my previous query in this thread which also criticized "UFO chaff" as being a distraction from what is potentially more relevant to our understanding of what may be going on. ;-)
In a message dated 7/13/2012 1:45:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarfatti@pacbell.net writes:
Did u download the whole 50 pages?
There is more when I have a chance to scan it. Einhorn’s influence is seen in my discussion of Arthur Koestler’s holons. Of course I knew Koestler from the Uri Geller tests and was at his home on Montpellier Square in London and knew his wife as well - not well of course.
Remember it was written under the influence of magick mushrooms in 1979 from some woman I think she was a friend of Randy T?

On Jul 13, 2012, at 10:34 AM, CloudRider@aol.com wrote:

This is VERY interesting and, as Spock might say, "Fascinating!"
Recently was reviewing work of Stewart Edward White... author of "The Betty Book," trance channeled by his wife, Elizabeth Grant White ("Betty) and published in the late 1930s, after nearly twenty years of work by "Betty," transcribed by her husband, Stewart.
He also published (after Betty's "death," although she continued "contact" and contributions to their effort, or so Stewart believed and wrote) at least two more in the most relevant sequence, "Across the Universe" and "The Unobstructed Universe."
Similar to "The Seth Material" as channeled by Jane Roberts (and transcribed by her husband), a generation later, the Whites' material has many references to (non-physicists) attempting to convey "literarily" what she was "seeing" and what the entities they called the "Invisibles" were supposedly showing and teaching them.
If we consider that the "signal" is coming through, and the sensitivities to RECEIVING same (as opposed to being able to understand and even articulate "in the language of physics" such insights and revelations), it is akin to what has often been described by "UFO experiencers," who receive "data" and who "see things" but are unable, because of their lack of training and vocabulary, or because what they "see" is so at variance with human technology and vernacular as to be "indescribable," making the occasional "download" to the wandering physicist that much more interesting, even allowing for a translatable "breakthrough."
That's what Hynek hoped might happen, as I understood what he was saying and trying to do when he was so sadly taken "off planet."
Just saying... your stuff remains among the most interesting "Out There," and your efforts to explain the Higgs thingy have been both helpful and entertaining.
Keep it up, Jack!