Text Size

Stardrive

Tag » American Institute of Physics

COMMENTS

Comment on “Trouble with the Lorentz Law of Force: Incompatibility with Special Relativity and Momentum Conservation”
Daniel A. T. Vanzella
Published 20 February 2013 (2 pages)
089401

Comment on “Trouble with the Lorentz Law of Force: Incompatibility with Special Relativity and Momentum Conservation”
Stephen M. Barnett
Published 20 February 2013 (1 page)
089402

Comment on “Trouble with the Lorentz Law of Force: Incompatibility with Special Relativity and Momentum Conservation”
Pablo L. Saldanha
Published 20 February 2013 (2 pages)
089403

Comment on “Trouble with the Lorentz Law of Force: Incompatibility with Special Relativity and Momentum Conservation”
Mohammad Khorrami
Published 20 February 2013 (1 page)
089404

Mansuripur Replies:
Masud Mansuripur
Published 20 February 2013 (1 page)
089405
 Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 080503 (2013) [5 pages]

Entanglement and Particle Identity: A Unifying Approach

Abstract
References
No Citing Articles
Download: PDF (111 kB) Export: BibTeX or EndNote (RIS)

A. P. Balachandran1,2,*, T. R. Govindarajan1,3,†, Amilcar R. de Queiroz4,‡, and A. F. Reyes-Lega5,§ 1Institute of Mathematical Sciences, CIT Campus, Taramani, Chennai 600113, India
2Physics Department, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 13244-1130, USA
3Chennai Mathematical Institute, H1, SIPCOT IT Park, Kelambakkam, Siruseri 603103, India
4Instituto de Fisica, Universidade de Brasilia, Caixa Postal 04455, 70919-970 Brasilia, Distrito Federal, Brazil
5Departamento de Física, Universidad de los Andes, Apartado Aéreo 4976 Bogotá, Distrito Capital, Colombia

Received 22 June 2012; revised 8 November 2012; published 22 February 2013

It has been known for some years that entanglement entropy obtained from partial trace does not provide the correct entanglement measure when applied to systems of identical particles. Several criteria have been proposed that have the drawback of being different according to whether one is dealing with fermions, bosons, or distinguishable particles. In this Letter, we give a precise and mathematically natural answer to this problem. Our approach is based on the use of the more general idea of the restriction of states to subalgebras. It leads to a novel approach to entanglement, which is suitable to be used in general quantum systems and especially in systems of identical particles. This settles some recent controversy regarding entanglement for identical particles. The prospects for applications of our criteria are wide ranging, from spin chains in condensed matter to entropy of black holes.

© 2013 American Physical Society

URL:
http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.080503
DOI:
10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.080503
PACS:
03.67.Mn, 02.30.Tb, 03.65.Ud, 89.70.Cf
*bal@phy.syr.edu

†trg@imsc.res.in

‡amilcarq@unb.br

§anreyes@uniandes.edu.co

 Systems of identical particles.—In the case of identical
particles, the Hilbert space of the system is no longer of the
tensor product form. Therefore, the treatment of subsystems
using partial trace becomes problematic. In contrast,
in our approach, all that is needed to describe a subsystem
is the specification of a subalgebra that corresponds to the
subsystem. Then, the restriction of the original state to the
subalgebra provides a physically motivated generalization
of the concept of partial trace, the latter not being sensible
anymore. Applying the GNS construction to the restricted
state, we can study the entropy emerging from the restriction
and use it as a generalized measure of entanglement.

                      Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 080501 (2013) [4 pages]

Fundamental Bound on the Reliability of Quantum Information Transmission

Abstract
References
No Citing Articles
Supplemental Material
Download: PDF (111 kB) Export: BibTeX or EndNote (RIS)

Naresh Sharma* and Naqueeb Ahmad Warsi† Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR), Mumbai 400005, India

Received 17 August 2012; published 20 February 2013

Information theory tells us that if the rate of sending information across a noisy channel were above the capacity of that channel, then the transmission would necessarily be unreliable. For classical information sent over classical or quantum channels, one could, under certain conditions, make a stronger statement that the reliability of the transmission shall decay exponentially to zero with the number of channel uses, and the proof of this statement typically relies on a certain fundamental bound on the reliability of the transmission. Such a statement or the bound has never been given for sending quantum information. We give this bound and then use it to give the first example where the reliability of sending quantum information at rates above the capacity decays exponentially to zero. We also show that our framework can be used for proving generalized bounds on the reliability.

© 2013 American Physical Society

URL:
http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.080501
DOI:
10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.080501
PACS:
03.67.Hk
*nsharma@tifr.res.in

†naqueeb@tifr.res.in

On Feb 22, 2013, at 10:39 AM, JACK SARFATTI <adastra1@me.com> wrote:

O Brave New World ;-)
We argue that generic nonrelativistic quantum field theories with a holographic description are dual to HoĊ™ava gravity. We construct explicit examples of this duality embedded in string theory by starting with relativistic dual pairs and taking a nonrelativistic scaling limit.

<HologramPhysRevLett.110.081601.pdf>


Steven Corneliussen clarified his intent and position in an email to me and Josephson

"It’s important to emphasize one thing that Professor Sarfatti wrote in one of his messages: “Corneliussen did not at all make clear what side he was on.” That’s right, and the reason is that I have no side. I’m a media analyst and a writer and reporter, not a physicist. The article’s purpose was to report on media coverage, not physics merits."

Brian as the "plaintiff" in the case, as it were, seems content with that. He is happy that cold fusion is being aired anew in the major science media.
Jack Sarfatti
American Institute of Physics's trade magazine Physics Today commits libel on Nobel Laureate Brian Josephson.
  • Roosevelt McCarter likes this.
  • Jack Sarfatti The Physics Today blogger gives serious play to GrrlScientist in a vicious mud-slinging defaming general attack on parapsychology focused on Nobel Laureate physicist Brian Josephson a Fellow of the Royal Society, Professor at Cambridge, a guest of the Queen of England etc. These people have no integrity, no intellectual honesty and no shame it appears and they are in what should be fair responsible organizations.

    1) parapsychology is not based on "powerful brain waves"

    2) it is not "faith-based" it adheres to scientific method and this is a libel on several academics in mainstream universities

    As you told Grrl Scientist it is libel to repeat libel. The remarks below are false and designed to humiliate you.
    One more article requires inclusion in this list, but it has a different tenor. At the Guardian, the pseudonymous blogger GrrlScientist is described as a molecular evolutionary biologist and ornithologist. She recently criticized Josephson for "openly espousing parapsychology—a field of quantum kookiness that encompasses a wide array of anti-scientific and pseudoscientific hocus-pocus attributed to powerful brain waves" and for having become "an outspoken supporter of cold fusion, that faith-based idea that is often referred to as 'pathological science' by his scientific colleagues." He has, she charges, "abandoned rationality and the scientific method to advocate boneheaded fantasies."

    ---

    Steven T. Corneliussen, a media analyst for the American Institute of Physics, monitors three national newspapers, the weeklies Nature and Science, and occasionally other publications. He has published op-eds in the Washington Post and other newspapers, has written for NASA's history program, and is a science writer at a particle-accelerator laboratory.

    http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition/science_and_the_media/media_outlets_consider_cold_fusion_and_low-energy_nuclear_reactions#commentsForm-2863960

    Note what US Law says:
    18 U.S.C. § 875(c) criminalizes the making of threats via Internet.

    Cyberbullying is defined in legal glossaries as

    actions that use information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group, that is intended to harm another or others.
    use of communication technologies for the intention of harming another person
    use of internet service and mobile technologies such as web pages and discussion groups as well as instant messaging or SMS text messaging with the intention of harming another person.
    Examples of what constitutes cyberbullying include communications that seek to intimidate, control, manipulate, put down, falsely discredit, or humiliate the recipient. The actions are deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior intended to harm another. Cyberbullying has been defined by The National Crime Prevention Council: “when the Internet, cell phones or other devices are used to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person.[2][3]

    2 ^ Cyberbullying - Law and Legal Definitions US Legal
    3^ Cyber-bullying Definition Legal Definitions

    Stalking online has criminal consequences just as physical stalking. A target's understanding of why cyberstalking is happening is helpful to remedy and take protective action to restore remedy. Cyberstalking is an extension of physical stalking.[23] Among factors that motivate stalkers are: envy, pathological obsession (professional or sexual), unemployment or failure with own job or life; intention to intimidate and cause others to feel inferior; the stalker is delusional and believes he/she "knows" the target; the stalker wants to instill fear in a person to justify his/her status; belief they can get away with it (anonymity).[24][25]

    23 ^ Cyberstalking - Introduction Crime Library, Criminal Minds and Methods
    24 ^ Cyber-Stalking: Obsessional Pursuit and the Digital Criminal, by Wayne Petherick - Stalking Typologies and Pathologies
    25 ^ Ten Reasons Why Someone is Stalking You Online Quit Stalking Me - Cyberstalking

    A majority of states have laws that explicitly include electronic forms of communication within stalking or harassment laws.[11][12]
    Most law enforcement agencies have cyber-crime units and often Internet stalking is treated with more seriousness than reports of physical stalking.[13] Help and resources can be searched by State or area.

    11 ^ Cyberstalking, cyberharassment and cyberbullying NCSL National Conference of State Legislatures
    12 ^ Cyberstalking Washington State Legislature
    13 ^ How To Recognize And Stop Stalking Behavior, by Stephanie Tallman Smith; Lifescript, November 09, 2007
  • Jack Sarfatti There is in addition to the above that deals mainly with single stalkers using emails, social networks and anonymous remailers a new crime and emerging law known as "Organized Stalking" which applies in the above Josephson case.