javisot's latest activity

Moreover, this sort of idle speculation is probably just a waste of time. Anyone can throw words together. Learning real physics, on the...

I've found an intuitive pictorial way to answer one of the @DrChinese 's central questions: How to describe the timeline of the full...

First, a reminder of the forum rules regarding personal hypotheses and theories: they are not permitted. But since you’ve already...

Hello and welcome to PF! The concept of white holes has a history in the maximally extended Schwarzschild solution and might be of...

This is true. I put that in bold to make sure it's clear. I agree with this statement. However, I do not agree with this. Here's why...

So yes. I think what Dr. Chinese wants to convey is that, even though (1) can be rewritten as (2)—and that stems from the lack of an...

Thanks for saying this. Yes, I get a bit caught up in these discussions. I really don't mind the back and forth, somehow I always gain...

As @Sambuco said, there's no "think" about it. It's a mathematical proof. It's the same algebra that I had already done before I posted...

I think you meant ##\psi##, not ##\phi##. The initially prepared states are singlets. Meaning, they cannot be entangled. That's true...

"Orthodox QM" itself is a term for which there might well be at least as many meanings as there are quantum physicists. :wink: I'll...

I understood that you were referring to that with those words in bold. We've said that there is no inherent order (this statement...

Q: Why is photon 2 presented in a Bell state with photon 3 (such as your ##\ket{\psi^+}_{23}## above), and not in that same identical...

We all agree on that. My question is whether it's really important.

Please note that personal speculations are off limits here. In non-relativistic QM, yes. But as @renormalize points out, that's not...

Why? If 2 and 3 were maximally entangled, they couldn't be entangled with 1 and 4 respectively, right? Because that would violate MoE...