Recent content by RUTA

Good questions! Here is my response. Careful, in order to get this posted today (because of other commitments) I've been working on this since 3am and it's about 6am now, so I'm on very little sleep. Part 1: Paradox of Length Contraction Physics tells me the following two facts are true when...

Whether something is a bodily object or a quantum is established by its context. A silver atom behaves as a qubit in the Stern-Gerlach experiment while a rubidium atom exchanging 100,000 photons per second with its environment of an atomic trap is a bodily object.

Hilbert space kinematics describes quantum phenomena in spacetime. If you apply Hilbert space kinematics to what you otherwise consider to be a bodily object, e.g., a cat in a box or Debbie in her lab, then you get contradictions and/or absurdities. I call that a "phenomenological fact" because...

I'm simply stating a phenomenological fact. If one imagines otherwise and uses that model to create a new formalism for new phenomena, that's a different story. As of now, we know which phenomena are described by Hilbert space kinematics and which are described by spacetime kinematics, and if...

We (actually, Bub's ref 49) have a specific computation starting with: at the bottom of p. 18 and ending with: at the bottom of p. 19. Again, the contradictions that arise in EWFS are due to the inconsistent use of the physics formalism. In this case, quanta that obey Hilbert space...

We explain the LF inequality in the three equations just before the conclusion I sent you: The reason we talk about Bong et al. is because it's an actual experiment. The gedanken version would require an actual observer be screened off (be kept from interacting with the environment of...

Here is a very simple explanation of entanglement using polarization-entangled photons. You can see how entanglement is all about conservation per the equality of perspectives:

I started research in quantum foundations in 1994, so I sometimes use the specialized terminology that comes with the field. Sorry.

The exact definition is: So, it's not just c and d but "any set of events on a spacelike hypersurface," which would cover any hidden variables. That's why we wrote: and concluded:

To violate SI (NSD) there has to be a correlation between measurement settings and the hidden variables of the quantum system. If you don't invoke hidden variables (and we don't), then what is correlated with the measurement settings to violate SI? By L we mean "no spooky actions at a...

You're welcome :-) As we point out in the paper, LF doesn't get you anything new beyond Bell. We state for example: NSD is statistical independence and L is locality exactly per Bell, so QM violating the LF inequality is the same as QM violating Bell's inequality. Both NSD and L involve hidden...

Yes, they start from an operationalist perspective exactly like Einstein did with his 1905 SR paper. Wiltsche, McDevitt and I are working to justify that by basing all of physics in phenomenology directly. Yes, in that same paper we wrote: [Grangier et al., 2024] reach a similar conclusion...

Let me first point out that the quantum reconstruction program is not producing an interpretation of QM, it is producing a reconstruction of the Hilbert space kinematics of QM via empirical and mathematical facts. In doing so, it has advanced QM from an operational theory providing structural...

If you're willing to accept a principle explanation in lieu of a constructive explanation for polarization-entangled photons, try this one:

What do you mean by "a quantum object"?