Re: No Planck limit for time!???

From: scerir (scerir@libero.it)
Date: Mon Feb 24 2003 - 15:19:06 MST

  • Next message: gts: "RE: Spyware arms race accelerates"

    >> The Wave Function: It or Bit?
    >> Authors: H. D. Zeh
    >> http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0204088

    [Lee Corbin]
    > "A state of incomplete knowledge is defined
    > on a state of classical configurations?"
    > What does that mean?

    I don't remember what Zeh wrote in that paper.
    Perhaps he was discussing the informational
    completeness - no set of sharp observables can
    be informationally complete (i.e. the Pauli
    problem: under what conditions do position &
    momentum distributions define a state uniquely?).

    But we can say, in general, that the knowledge
    of the prior state of a quantum system is impossible,
    because, otherwise, the unitarity of the evolution
    would be violated. This is sometimes called the
    impossiblity of retrodiction. (There are quantum
    interpretation, like the two-state time symmetrical
    quantum description, shortly ABL rule, in which
    retrodiction is not forbidden. What about MWI?).
    D'Ariano and Yuen provided a general proof about the
    impossibility of measuring perfectly the wavefunction
    (or the density matrix) of a quantum system. Just
    a reversible measurement does not violate the
    unitarity of the evolution, but no information
    about the prior state is obtained with a reversible
    measurement.

    >> This conceptual dilemma

    > What dilemma?

    "It" or "bit" I suppose. Reality or just information?
    Why people say that a state is just information, but
    a superposition of states is something physical?

    Btw, something similar is going on about Bell inequalities.
    The violation of inequalities is real?
    That is to say: is there [1] a real effect (non-locality,
    non-separability, etc.)?
    Or is there some remarkable [2][3] conceptual error,
    in the derivation of those inequalities?
    (No one tested the original Bell inequalities! In performed
    experiments *weaker* inequalities were violated).

    [1] Is the moon there when nobody looks? D. Mermin,1985
        http://digitalphysics.org/Publications/Mer85/scan.htm

    [2] Betting on Bell http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0302113

    [3] E.T. Jaynes, Clearing up Mysteries
        http://bayes.wustl.edu/etj/articles/cmystery.pdf



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Feb 24 2003 - 15:21:18 MST