Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

New theory of the UBIT

  1. Feb 25, 2014 #1
    Hi, I've just finished reading the article "Reality Bits" in the
    January 25-31, 2014 edition of New Scientist.

    These links are introductions for those of you who do not read
    New Scientist:

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/...aster-bit.html [Broken]

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.4535

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-bit

    Can anybody explain what Dr. Wootters is talking about?

    I don't think he is reformulating QM with the mere substitution
    of sqrt(-1) for its matrix identity since that would only yield a
    notationally equivalent and trivial reformulation and the math
    would not change.

    But instead, I think Dr. Wooters has a new approach to
    avoiding imaginary numbers in QM.

    At this point I don't have a clue what Dr. Wooters is proposing
    and any incite would be greately appreciated.

    EDIT: and some insights would be appreciated too.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 25, 2014 #2

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Your New Sci link needs to be repaired---copy it from browser window, not from the page.
    Other people more familiar with Quantum Information theory and/or Wootters' work can help more. I'll try to help by giving some links to other related work by Wootters
    W. K. Wootters, “Entanglement Sharing in Real-Vector-Space Quantum Theory,” Found. Phys. 42, 19 (2012).
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.1479
    L. Hardy and W. K. Wootters, "Limited Holism and Real-Vector-Space Quantum Theory," Found. Phys. 42, 454 (2012).
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.1479
    I notice two year interval between preprint submission to arxiv and publication. No idea why that long, not all that unusual though.

    Wootters got BS Stanford 1973 and PhD UTex Austin 1980. Notice that he hasn't published much (29 papers on arxiv) for someone in his 60s, but he has co-authored with Lucien Hardy (big name) on one occasion and he has published in good peer-review journals (Foundations of Phys, Physical Review A,…, and he is Prof at Williams College. So the news is mostly good. Here is the paper you linked:
    A. Aleksandrova, V. Borish, and W. K. Wootters, "Real-vector-space quantum theory with a universal quantum bit," Phys. Rev. A 87, 052106 (2013).
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.4535

    Here is his most recent paper, but there is no arxiv preprint with that exact title:
    W. K. Wootters, "Communicating through Probabilities: Does Quantum Theory Optimize the Transfer of Information?" Entropy 15, 3220 (2013).
    It could be substantially the same as this recent preprint with different title:
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.2018
    Optimal Information Transfer and Real-Vector-Space Quantum Theory



     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  4. Feb 25, 2014 #3
    Hope this works....

    http://www.newscientist.com/article...o-u-searching-for-the-quantum-master-bit.html

    EDIT: Maybe this one....

    http://www.newscientist.com/article...o-u-searching-for-the-quantum-master-bit.html

    I get to it in win8.1 metro IE, by tabbing back to the source page, then clicking
    the blank page tab.

    In fact, I am noticing the above technique needs to be done on the links you(marcus)
    have also posted. ???
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2014
  5. Feb 25, 2014 #4

    atyy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Of course famous people who've done good work can be crackpots (in the bad sense) like Josephson, but Wootters is one of the inventors of quantum teleportation. So he is at least as big a name as Hardy (I think).
     
  6. Feb 25, 2014 #5
    Or Bill Shockley...don't be lookin' at me...I ain't famous.....
     
  7. Feb 25, 2014 #6

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Last edited: Feb 25, 2014
  8. Feb 25, 2014 #7
    I would never use "teleportation" to travel. But I would use
    it for my luggage. Same goes for "airportation"; too many of
    them are falling short of the target for my taste.

    Remember what happened in "Twelve Monkeys"?

    Give Wooters a break, even Kepler had some bad assignments.

    EDIT: I surmise that Dr. Wootters was talking about sending
    quantum information through a noisy copper wire with 100%
    accuracy.
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2014
  9. Feb 25, 2014 #8

    atyy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Why should we give him a break? That's usually needed only when someone's done something not so good.
     
  10. Feb 25, 2014 #9
    Stand corrected, but at this point I'm not even sure if he's "not so bad".
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: New theory of the UBIT
  1. New Unified Theories (Replies: 3)

Loading...