DOCSLIB.ORG

My God, He Plays Dice! How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Mechanics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
My God, He Plays Dice! How Albert Einstein Invented Most of Quantum Mechanics My God, He Plays Dice! How Albert Einstein Invented Most Of Quantum Mechanics Bob Doyle The Information Philosopher “beyond logic and language” Is it possible that the most famous critic of quantum mechanics actually invented most of its fundamentally important concepts? In his 1905 Brownian motion paper, Einstein quantized matter, proving the existence of atoms. His light quantum hypothesis showed that energy itself comes in particles (photons). He showed energy and matter are interchangeable, E = mc2. In 1905 Einstein was first to see nonlocality and instantaneous action-at-a-distance. In 1907 he saw quantum “jumps” between energy levels in matter, six years before Bohr postulated them in his atomic model. Einstein saw wave-particle duality and the “collapse” of the wave in 1909. And in 1916 his transition probabilities for emission and absorption processes introduced onto- logical chance when matter and radiation interact, making quantum mechanics statistical. He discovered the indistinguishability and odd quantum statistics of elementary particles in 1925 and in 1935 speculated about the nonseparability of interacting identical particles. It took physicists over twenty years to accept Einstein’s light-quantum. He explained the relation of particles to waves fifteen years before Heisenberg matrices and Schrödinger wave functions. He saw indeterminism ten years before the uncertainty principle. And he saw nonlocality as early as 1905, presenting it formally in 1927, but was ignored. In the 1935 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper, he explored non- separability, which was dubbed “entanglement” by Schrödinger. The EPR paper has gone from being irrelevant to Einstein’s most cited work and the basis for today’s “second revolution in quantum mechanics.” In a radical revision of the history of quantum physics, Bob Doyle develops Einstein’s idea of objective reality to resolve several of today’s most puzzling quantum mysteries, including the two-slit experiment, quantum entanglement, and microscopic irreversibility. This book on the web informationphilosopher.com/einstein/ My God, He Plays Dice! How Albert Einstein Invented Most Of Quantum Mechanics Bob Doyle The Information Philosopher “beyond logic and language” First edition, 2019 © 2019, Bob Doyle, The Information Philosopher All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by electronic or mechanical means (including photo- copying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without the prior permission of The Information Philosopher. Publisher’s Cataloging-In-Publication Data (Prepared by The Donohue Group, Inc.) Names: Doyle, Bob, 1936- author. Title: My God, he plays dice! : how Albert Einstein invented most of quantum mechanics / Bob Doyle, the Information Philosopher. Description: First edition. | Cambridge, MA, USA : I-Phi Press, 2019. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: ISBN 9780983580249 | ISBN 9780983580256 (ePub) Subjects: LCSH: Einstein, Albert, 1879-1955--Influence. | Quantum theory. | Science--History. Classification: LCC QC174.13 .D69 2019 (print) | LCC QC174.13 (ebook) | DDC 530/.12--dc23 I-Phi Press 77 Huron Avenue Cambridge, MA, USA Dedication This book is dedicated to a handful of scholars who noticed that Albert Einstein’s early work on quantum mechanics had been largely ignored by the great “founders” of quantum theory, over- shadowed by his phenomenal creations of special and general relativity and by his dissatisfaction with “quantum reality.” Most notably I want to thank Leslie Ballentine, Frederik. J. Belinfante, David Cassidy, Carlo Cercigniani, Max Dresden, Arthur Fine, Gerald Holton, Don Howard, Max Jammer, Martin J. Klein, Thomas S. Kuhn, Cornelius Lanczos, Jagdish Mehra, Abraham Pais, Helmut Rechenberg, John C. Slater, John Stachel, A. Douglas Stone, Roger H. Stuewer, and B. L. van der Waerden. I also want to thank the many editors and translators of the Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, as well as the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Princeton University Press for making Einstein’s work available online for scholars everywhere. I have purchased all the volumes of CPAE over the years for my own library, but I am delighted that all these critical documents are now available online for free. Information philosophy builds on the intersection of computers and communications. These two technologies will facilitate the sharing of knowledge around the world in the very near future, when almost everyone will have a smartphone and affordable access to the Internet and the World Wide Web. Information is like love. Giving it to others does not reduce it. It is not a scarce economic good. Sharing it increases the total information in human minds, the Sum of human knowledge. Information wants to be free. Bob Doyle ([email protected]) Cambridge, MA March, 2019 vi My God, He Plays Dice! Contents Contents vii Table of Contents Dedication v Preface xiii Questions to Consider xxii; Plausible, If Radical, Answers to Quantum Questions xxiv 1. Introduction 3 Is Reality Continuous or Discrete? 4; Absolute Principles of Physics 6; Probability, Entropy, and Information 7 2. Chance 11 The History of Chance 13 3. Matter 19 Boltzmann’s Philosophy 22 4. Light 25 Planck’s Discovery of the Blackbody Radiation Law 28; The Significance of Planck’s Quantum of Action 32; Comparison of Matter and Light Distribution Laws 33; The Ultraviolet Catastrophe 34; No Progress on Microscopic Irreversibility 37 5. Statistical Mechanics 39 What Did Statistics Mean for Einstein? 40; What Are the Fluctuations? 41; Had Gibbs Done Everything Before Einstein? 42 6. Light Quantum Hypothesis and Nonlocality 47 Photoelectric Effect 49; Entropies of Radiation and Matter 51; Nonlocality 52 7. Brownian Motion and Relativity 55 8. Specific Heat 59 9. Wave-Particle Duality 65 From Matter to Light to Matter 67 10. Bohr-Einstein Atom 71 Chance in Atomic Processes 77; An Independent Criticism of Bohr on Einstein 78 viii My God, He Plays Dice! 11. Transition Probabilities 81 12. Microscopic Irreversibility 87 The Origin of Microscopic Irreversibility 89; Detailed Balancing 92 13. A Nobel Prize and Experimental Confirmations 95 14. De Broglie Pilot Waves 99 15. Bose-Einstein Statistics 103 16. Bohr-Kramers-Slater 107 17. Matrix Mechanics 111 Heisenberg on Einstein’s Light Quanta 114 18. Wave Mechanics 119 19. Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics 123 Dirac’s Three Polarizers 140; The Mystery of the Oblique Polarizer 140; Objective Reality and Dirac’s “Manner of Speaking” 143; The Schrōdinger Equation 144; Dirac’s Principle of Superposition 144; Dirac’s Axiom of Measurement 146; Dirac’s Projection Postulate 147; Pauli’s Two Kinds of Measurement 149 20 Statistical Interpretation 153 21. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle 159 Heisenberg’s Microscope 160 22. Bohr Complementarity 165 Heisenberg’s Microscope Revisited 167; Bohr’s Uncertainty Derivation 168; Free Choice in Quantum Mechanics 169 23. Nonlocality at the 1927 Solvay Conference 171 “Collapse” of the Wave Function 179; The Two-Slit Experiment 180; Nature’s Choice and the Experimenter’s Choice 181 24. Copenhagen Interpretation 183 What Exactly Is in the Copenhagen Interpretation? 186; Opposition to the Copenhagen Interpretation 191 Contents ix 25. Von Neumann Measurement 195 The Measurement Problem 197; The Measurement Apparatus 198; TheSchnitt and Conscious Observer 200 26. Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen 205 Two Places or Paths at the Same Time? 207; Is Quantum Mechanics Complete or Incomplete? 210; EPR in the 21st Century 213 27. Nonseparability 215 Separability According to Quantum Theory 216 28. Schrödinger and His Cat 219 Superposition 221; Schrödinger’s Cat 222; How Does “Objective Reality” Resolve The Cat Paradox? 226 29. Entanglement and Symmetry 229 Einstein’s Introduction of a False Asymmetry? 230; What Did Einstein See? The Special Frame? 232; No Hidden Variables, but Hidden Constants! 233; Alice’s “Free Choice” of Spin Direction 234; Can Conservation Laws Do It All? 238; Pauli’s Kinds of Measurement Again 239; How Symmetry and Conservation Explain Entanglement 242 30. David Bohm’s Hidden Variables 247 No “Hidden Variables,” but Hidden Constants? 248; Problem of Irreversibility 251 31. Hugh Everett III’s Many Worlds 253 Information and Entropy 255; TheAppearance of Irreversibility in a Measurement 256; On the “Conscious Observer” 258; Bryce De Witt 260; Summary of Everett’s Ideas 260 32. John Bell’s Inequality 263 Bell’s Theorem 265; Experimental Tests of Bell’s Inequality 266; Bell’s “Shifty Split” 274; Are There Quantum Jumps? 275; John Bell Today 277 33. Feynman Two-Slit Experiment 279 Feynman’s Path-Integral Formulation of Quantum Mechanics 287 x My God, He Plays Dice! 34. Decoherence 289 Decoherence and the Measurement Problem 296; What Decoherence Gets Right 294 35. Einstein’s Principles 301 What Were They? 303; Absolute Principles 305 36. Einstein’s Quantum Statistics 307 Elementary Particles Are Not Independent 308; 37. Einstein's Continuum 311 God Created the Integers 312 38. Einstein’s Field Theory 315 Castle In The Air 316 39. Einstein’s Objective Reality 321 Irreversibility and Objective Reality 323 40. Einstein's Quantum Theory 327 41. Einstein’s Cosmology 343 The Cosmological Constant 343; The Flatness Problem 343; The Problem of Missing Mass (Dark Matter) 345; Dark Energy (Is the Expansion Accelerating?) 346; The Information Paradox 347 42. Einstein’s Mistakes 349 Fields and Particles 349; Quantum Physics 350; Cosmology 352 43. Albert Einstein & Information
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aleksei A. Abrikosov 1928–2017
    Aleksei A. Abrikosov 1928–2017 A Biographical Memoir by M. R. Norman ©2018 National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions expressed in this memoir are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences. ALEKSEI ALEKSEEVICH ABRIKOSOV June 25, 1928–March 29, 2017 Elected to the NAS, 2000 Shortly after the 2003 announcement that Aleksei Abrikosov had won the Nobel Prize in Physics, a number of colleagues took Alex to lunch at a nearby Italian restau- rant. During lunch, one of the Russian visitors exclaimed that Alex should get a second Nobel Prize, this time in Literature for his famous “AGD” book with Lev Gor’kov and Igor Dzyaloshinskii (Methods of Quantum Field Theory in Statistical Physics.) Somewhat taken aback, I looked closely at this individual and realized that he was deadly serious. Although I could imagine the reaction of the Nobel Literature committee to such a book (for a lay person, perhaps analogous to trying to read Finnegan’s Wake), I had to admit that my own copy of this book is quite dog-eared, having been put to good use over the By M. R. Norman years. In fact, you know you have made it in physics when your book gets a Dover edition. One of the most charming pictures I ever saw was a rare drawing in color that Alexei Tsvelik did (commissioned by Andrei Varlamov for Alex’s 50th birthday) that was proudly displayed in Alex’s home in Lemont, IL. It showed Alex with his fingers raised in a curled fashion as in the habit of medieval Popes.
    [Show full text]
  • Lev Davidovich Landau Born: 12 January, 1908, Baku, Russian Empire Died: 1 April, 1968, Moscow, Soviet Union
    Symmetry XIII (2019) 1 Dedicated to Lev Davidovich Landau Born: 12 January, 1908, Baku, Russian Empire Died: 1 April, 1968, Moscow, Soviet Union Symmetry XIII (2019) 2 Volume XIII, 2019 Editorial Symmetry This issue of symmetry is dedicated to the great physicists Lev Devidovich Landau. An annual Publication of CDP, TU Landau Soviet theoretical physicist, one of the founders of quantum theory of (Covid-19 Issue) condensed matter whose pioneering research in this field was recognized with the Patron 1962 Nobel Prize for Physics. In the year 1941, he successfully applied quantum Prof. Dr. Binil Aryal theory to the movement of superfluid liquid helium. Landau argued for the need of yet another radical conceptual revolution in physics in order to resolve the Advisory Board mounting difficulties in relativistic quantum theory. The collective work of Prof. Dr. Om Prakash Niraula Landau’s group embraced practically every branch of theoretical physics. In 1946 Prof. Dr. Raju Khanal he described the phenomenon of Landau damping of electromagnetic waves in Prof. Dr. Narayan Prasad Adhikari plasma. Together with Vitaly L. Ginzburg, in 1950 Landau obtained the correct Prof. Dr. Ram Prasad Regmi equations of the macroscopic theory of superconductivity. During the 1950s he and Prof. Dr. Ishwar Koirala collaborators discovered that even in renormalized quantum electrodynamics, a Dr. Hari Prasad Lamichhane new divergence difficulty appears (the Landau pole). The phenomenon of the Dr. Bal Ram Ghimire coupling constant becoming infinite or vanishing at some energy is an important Dr. Ajay Kumar Jha feature of modern quantum field theories. In this volume, there are 7 articles Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • A Question of Quantum Reality 24 September 2020
    A question of quantum reality 24 September 2020 virtuality. Bell spent most of his working life at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland, and Bertlmann first met him when he took up a short-term fellowship there in 1978. Bell had first presented his theorem in a seminal paper published in 1964, but this was largely neglected until the 1980s and the introduction of quantum information. Bertlmann discusses the concept of Bell inequalities, which arise through thought experiments in which a pair of spin-½ particles propagate in opposite directions and are measured Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain by independent observers, Alice and Bob. The Bell inequality distinguishes between local realism—the 'common sense' view in which Alice's observations do not depend on Bob's, and vice versa—and Physicist Reinhold Bertlmann of the University of quantum mechanics, or, specifically, quantum Vienna, Austria has published a review of the work entanglement. Two quantum particles, such as of his late long-term collaborator John Stewart Bell those in the Alice-Bob situation, are entangled of CERN, Geneva in EPJ H. This review, "Real or when the state measured by one observer Not Real: that is the question," explores Bell's instantaneously influences that of the other. This inequalities and his concepts of reality and theory is the basis of quantum information. explains their relevance to quantum information and its applications. And quantum information is no longer just an abstruse theory. It is finding applications in fields as John Stewart Bell's eponymous theorem and diverse as security protocols, cryptography and inequalities set out, mathematically, the contrast quantum computing.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Copy 2020 11 26 Stylia
    This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from Explore Bristol Research, http://research-information.bristol.ac.uk Author: Stylianou, Nicos Title: On 'Probability' A Case of Down to Earth Humean Propensities General rights Access to the thesis is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International Public License. A copy of this may be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode This license sets out your rights and the restrictions that apply to your access to the thesis so it is important you read this before proceeding. Take down policy Some pages of this thesis may have been removed for copyright restrictions prior to having it been deposited in Explore Bristol Research. However, if you have discovered material within the thesis that you consider to be unlawful e.g. breaches of copyright (either yours or that of a third party) or any other law, including but not limited to those relating to patent, trademark, confidentiality, data protection, obscenity, defamation, libel, then please contact [email protected] and include the following information in your message: •Your contact details •Bibliographic details for the item, including a URL •An outline nature of the complaint Your claim will be investigated and, where appropriate, the item in question will be removed from public view as soon as possible. On ‘Probability’ A Case of Down to Earth Humean Propensities By NICOS STYLIANOU Department of Philosophy UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL A dissertation submitted to the University of Bristol in ac- cordance with the requirements of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in the Faculty of Arts.
    [Show full text]
  • Disproof of John Stewart Bell
    Disproof of John Stewart Bell T. Liffert 4th October 2020 Abstract The proof of John Stewart Bell [1] [2] is based on wrong premises. A deterministic model for a hidden mechanism with an parameter λ is therefor possible. This model is possible by an integration of the experimental context into the wave function 1 The basic experiment The following considerations are based on an experiment with a pair of en- tangled photons, each of them meets a polarisation filter. The crucial phe- nomenon consists of the fact, that, if the polarisation filters are adjusted identically, the photons react always identically: Either both will be ab- sorbed or both will be transmitted. For the angular difference Φ between the polarisation filter adjustments the probability, that both photons give identi- cal measurement results, is the square of the cosine of that angular difference (law of Malus)[3]. The set of the possible measurement results is a binary one, it can be referred to by expressions like f0; 1g or f+1; −1g. For later considerations of serie experiments and related expected values I use the set f+1; −1g, for the treatment of the proof variant according to Wigner-Bell I choose the set f0; 1g. I use the following assignments for measurement results and eigenstates • 0 j0i ! 1 • 1 j1i ! −1 May α denote the measurement result of the left photon and β the one of the right photon. The upper proposition for the conditional probability P of identical measurement results given the angular difference Φ one would write like this: P (α = βjΦ) = cos2 Φ (1) 1 1.1 The quantum mechanical doctrine In the literature that I know there is a strict separation between the quantum state jΨi of the pair of photons on the one hand and the experimental context, consisting of nothing more than the angular difference of the polarisation filters or the polarizers, on the other hand.
    [Show full text]
  • John S. Bell's Concept of Local Causality
    John S. Bell’s concept of local causality Travis Norsena) Department of Physics, Smith College, McConnell Hall, Northampton, Massachusetts 01063 (Received 15 August 2008; accepted 6 August 2011) John Stewart Bell’s famous theorem is widely regarded as one of the most important developments in the foundations of physics. Yet even as we approach the 50th anniversary of Bell’s discovery, its meaning and implications remain controversial. Many workers assert that Bell’s theorem refutes the possibility suggested by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) of supplementing ordinary quantum theory with “hidden” variables that might restore determinism and/or some notion of an observer- independent reality. But Bell himself interpreted the theorem very differently—as establishing an “essential conflict” between the well-tested empirical predictions of quantum theory and relativistic local causality. Our goal is to make Bell’s own views more widely known and to explain Bell’s little- known formulation of the concept of relativistic local causality on which his theorem rests. We also show precisely how Bell’s formulation of local causality can be used to derive an empirically testable Bell-type inequality and to recapitulate the EPR argument. VC 2011 American Association of Physics Teachers. [DOI: 10.1119/1.3630940] I. INTRODUCTION theory could be rendered compatible with local causality by following Newton and by denying that the theory in question In its most general sense, “local causality” is the idea that provided a complete description of the relevant phenomena. physical influences propagate continuously through space— This changed in 1905 with Einstein’s discovery of special that what Einstein famously called “spooky actions at a dis- relativity, which for the first time identified a class of causal 1 tance” are impossible.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Dirac Tradition
    In the Dirac tradition The late Richard Feynman - 'a way of looking at things so they appear not so mysterious'. It was Paul Dirac who cast quantum mechanics into the form we now use, and many generations of theo­ reticians openly acknowledge his in­ fluence on their thinking. When Dirac died in 1984, St. John's College, Cambridge, his base for most of his lifetime, institu­ ted an annual lecture in his memory at Cambridge. The first lecture, in 1986, attracted two heavyweights - Richard Feynman (see page 1) and Steven Weinberg. Far from using the lectures as a platform for their own work, in the Dirac tradition they pre­ sented stimulating material on deep underlying questions. (The lectures - 'Elementary Parti­ cles and the Laws of Physics' by Richard P. Feynman and Steven Weinberg - are published by Cam­ bridge University Press.) Richard Feynman When I was a young man, Dirac was my hero. He made a break­ through, a new method of doing tic quantum mechanics. However, cles, then to get the new wave- physics. He had the courage to the puzzle of negative energies that function from the old you must put simply guess at the form of an the equation presented, when it in a minus sign. It is easy to de­ equation, the equation we now call was solved, eventually showed monstrate that if Nature was non- the Dirac equation, and to try to in­ that the crucial idea necessary to relativistic, if things started out that terpret it afterwards. Maxwell in his wed quantum mechanics and relati­ way then it would be that way for day got his equations, but only in vity together was the existence of all time, and so the problem would an enormous mass of 'gear antiparticles.
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Quantum State Real in the Hilbert Space Formulation?
    Is the Quantum State Real in the Hilbert Space Formulation? Mani L. Bhaumik Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Los Angeles, USA. E-mail: [email protected] Editors: Zvi Bern & Danko Georgiev Article history: Submitted on November 5, 2020; Accepted on December 18, 2020; Published on December 19, 2020. he persistent debate about the reality of a quan- 1 Introduction tum state has recently come under limelight be- Tcause of its importance to quantum informa- The debate about the reality of quantum states is as old tion and the quantum computing community. Almost as quantum physics itself. The objective reality underly- all of the deliberations are taking place using the ele- ing the manifestly bizarre behavior of quantum objects gant and powerful but abstract Hilbert space formal- is conspicuously at odds with our daily classical phys- ism of quantum mechanics developed with seminal ical reality. The scientific outlook of objective reality contributions from John von Neumann. Since it is commenced with the precepts of classical physics that rather difficult to get a direct perception of the events cemented our notion of reality for centuries. Discover- in an abstract vector space, it is hard to trace the ies starting in the last decade of the nineteenth century progress of a phenomenon. Among the multitude of revealing the uncanny quantum world in the microscopic recent attempts to show the reality of the quantum domain shook that perception. state in Hilbert space, the Pusey–Barrett–Rudolph With the particular exception of Einstein, who was the theory gets most recognition for their proof.
    [Show full text]
  • Bohr's Relational Holism and the Classical-Quantum Interaction1
    1 Bohr’s Relational Holism and the classical-quantum Interaction1 Mauro Dorato Department of Philosophy Communication and Media Studies University of Rome “Roma Tre”, Via Ostiense 234, 00144, Rome, Italy [email protected] 1 Introduction: a conflict in Bohr’s philosophy? Bohr’s philosophy of quantum mechanics has often been charged for what is allegedly one of its major shortcomings, namely the advocacy of an unambiguous classical/quantum distinction (let me refer to this view with the label the distinction thesis). As is well known, such a distinction is needed to defend Bohr’s view that any communicable measurement outcome must presuppose a classically describable instrument, with respect to which any reference to the quantum of action can be neglected (Bohr 1958, 4). Critics have then often insisted on the fact that the distinction in question is hopelessly vague (Bell 1987, 29) or at least strongly contextual (Ghirardi 2004), so that Bohr’s interpretation of quantum mechanics suffers from the same vagueness and adhoc-ness. The resulting problem is, allegedly, a renunciation to describe the dynamical interaction between system and apparatus in a physically precise, theoretically based and non-contextual way, and therefore to offer a much-needed solution to the measurement problem. In my paper I will present and critically discuss the main strategies that Bohr used and could have used to defend from this charge his interpretation of quantum mechanics. In particular, in the first part I will reassess the main arguments that Bohr used to advocate the 1 Thanks to Henry Folse and Jan Faye for their attentive reading of a previous draft of the paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Strong Loophole-Free Test of Local Realism*
    Selected for a Viewpoint in Physics week ending PRL 115, 250402 (2015) PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 18 DECEMBER 2015 Strong Loophole-Free Test of Local Realism* † Lynden K. Shalm,1, Evan Meyer-Scott,2 Bradley G. Christensen,3 Peter Bierhorst,1 Michael A. Wayne,3,4 Martin J. Stevens,1 Thomas Gerrits,1 Scott Glancy,1 Deny R. Hamel,5 Michael S. Allman,1 Kevin J. Coakley,1 Shellee D. Dyer,1 Carson Hodge,1 Adriana E. Lita,1 Varun B. Verma,1 Camilla Lambrocco,1 Edward Tortorici,1 Alan L. Migdall,4,6 Yanbao Zhang,2 Daniel R. Kumor,3 William H. Farr,7 Francesco Marsili,7 Matthew D. Shaw,7 Jeffrey A. Stern,7 Carlos Abellán,8 Waldimar Amaya,8 Valerio Pruneri,8,9 Thomas Jennewein,2,10 Morgan W. Mitchell,8,9 Paul G. Kwiat,3 ‡ Joshua C. Bienfang,4,6 Richard P. Mirin,1 Emanuel Knill,1 and Sae Woo Nam1, 1National Institute of Standards and Technology, 325 Broadway, Boulder, Colorado 80305, USA 2Institute for Quantum Computing and Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, N2L 3G1 3Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA 4National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, USA 5Département de Physique et d’Astronomie, Université de Moncton, Moncton, New Brunswick E1A 3E9, Canada 6Joint Quantum Institute, National Institute of Standards and Technology and University of Maryland, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, USA 7Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, California 91109, USA 8ICFO-Institut de Ciencies Fotoniques, The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, 08860 Castelldefels (Barcelona), Spain 9ICREA-Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, 08015 Barcelona, Spain 10Quantum Information Science Program, Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Received 10 November 2015; published 16 December 2015) We present a loophole-free violation of local realism using entangled photon pairs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Quantum World the Disturbing Theory at the Heart of Reality
    The Quantum World The disturbing theory at the heart of reality NEW SCIENTIST 629462_The_Quant_World_Book.indb 3 3/11/17 12:37 PM First published in Great Britain in 2017 by John Murray Learning. An Hachette UK company. Copyright © New Scientist 2017 The right of New Scientist to be identified as the Author of the Work has been asserted by it in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Database right Hodder & Stoughton (makers) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographic rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, John Murray Learning, at the address below. You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data: a catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: on file. ISBN: 978 1 47362 946 2 eISBN: 978 1 47362 947 9 1 The publisher has used its best endeavours to ensure that any website addresses referred to in this book are correct and active at the time of going to press. However, the publisher and the author have no responsibility for the websites and can make no guarantee that a site will remain live or that the content will remain relevant, decent or appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Hypersonic Flight
    Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out For navigation instructions please click here Search Issue | Next Page PHYSICS TODAY November 2017 • volume 70, number 11 A publication of the American Institute of Physics HYPERSONIC FLIGHT The legacy of Ilya Lifshitz Atmospheric methane past and present Gender-based pay disparity Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out For navigation instructions please click here Search Issue | Next Page Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page VERIFY AND Surpass design challenges with ease using COMSOL Multiphysics®. Work with its OPTIMIZE powerful mathematical modeling tools and solver technology to deliver accurate and YOUR DESIGNS comprehensive simulation results. ® Develop custom applications using the with COMSOL Multiphysics Application Builder and deploy them within your organization and to customers worldwide The evolution of computational tools for with a local installation of COMSOL Server™. numerical simulation of physics-based systems has reached a major milestone. Benefit from the power of multiphysics today, request a live demo at comsol.com © Copyright 2017 COMSOL. COMSOL, the COMSOL logo, COMSOL Multiphysics, Capture the Concept, COMSOL Desktop, COMSOL Server, and LiveLink are either registered trademarks or trademarks of COMSOL AB. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners, and COMSOL AB and its subsidiaries and products are not affiliated with, endorsed by, sponsored by, or supported by those trademark owners. For a list of such trademark owners,
    [Show full text]