Recent content by jk22

For a qubit the measurement could be written as a transition operator ##\Psi_{n+1}=T\Psi_n/||T\Psi_n||## where T is not forcedly a unitary operator. But the problem is that it remains probabilities and in fact there would be infinite number of ways to extrapolate. It is like saying something...

Ìt is supposed that the handicap is deafness while look is predominent, the symbols would come before the explanation of calculation.

By substitution rule : If 5+5+5=15, we substitute the symbol 5 by 8 this means 8+8+8=18

I mean an idealized point source not a slit. But quantum mechanics could be involved by computing the diffusion of a delta function or 2 and superposing the resulting wavefunction at different times. In the case of one source, the wf after the source is a chirp of modulus 1, but the factor in...

Consider 1 and 2 point sources. Then corpuscular view gives a single peak in those cases, whereas considering the undulation of a quantity along the path gives fringes in both cases. My question is : is it true that the case single point source gives a single peak and two would give fringes...

I don't know which prediction for CHSH is made by QFT ? QM predicts ##2\sqrt2## and HV 2, whereas experimental values are inbetween, 2.67, 2.25, 2.47, 2.73, 2.07, 2.22 which is on average nearer to 2 than to QM ?

I would say that the usage of ##\lambda## is neither local nor temporal. I.e. all covariances in CHSH are simultaneously measured, I don't know if this is experimentally the case. It is also at all places simultaneously.

Thanks for all the explanations. Even if this mixing of math I have done seems local, there remain to calculate ##\max A(\lambda_1)B(\lambda_2)## which is non locsl, like if the computer or the consciousness would modify the wanted results.

I'm just considering that a particle s1 is going to A and another particle s2 to B measurement places. But I'm still mixing information (math) and the physics described by the symbols. This I call local in the sense that "every element of physical reality (particles 1 and 2, each flying in one...

That's ok if lambda is information, but let suppose it is a physical particle. In a spacetime diagram lambda is first at the source, then it goes with at most speed of light in both directions ? For then arriving in A and B ? This seems physically impossible, or that formula is a mixture of...

Coming back to Bell's CHSH inequality, I'm confused that the formula : $$\int A(\vec{a},\lambda)B(\vec{b},\lambda)\rho(\lambda)$$ is considered local. Like how can the "element" lambda be at the same time both in A and B ? It seems lambda is non local there, at the measurement time. Or am I...

What if in fact x and y would represent the position of relativistic particles with their own proper time ##x(\tau_1)y(\tau_2)##

In fact to have two path we would need ##\int x_1dy_1+\int y_2dx_2##. Classically What If we suppose the path were probabilists ? Then like in quantum mechanics, it could follow both path, or a superposition of them ? It gives back xy because of the sum of the weights.

What about if we say x depends on a parameter fw1 and y on fw2 where fwi represented free will of person i. Could freewill be linked to a single parameter time ?

I rather see as x and y are independent. It's clear that if one assumes a common cause parameter that determines the variables x and y it could change, (like in Bell's theorem)