- #1
bohm2
- 828
- 55
Is anyone familiar with Suarez's papers in this area? I've posted his most recent and pertinent papers on the topic below and even though I read them all, I'm still having trouble understanding his arguments:
http://lanl.arxiv.org/pdf/1204.1712.pdf
The "forthcoming publications" include the following:
http://lanl.arxiv.org/pdf/1204.1732.pdf
Interestingly, the PBR theorem is also mentioned in his most recent paper:
http://lanl.arxiv.org/pdf/1204.5848.pdf
Single-photon space-like antibunchingFurther considerations on the similarities and differences between the kind of nonlocality demonstrated by our experiment and the better known form of nonlocality revealed by the violation of Bells inequality will be presented by some of us in a forthcoming publication.
http://lanl.arxiv.org/pdf/1204.1712.pdf
The "forthcoming publications" include the following:
"Empty waves", "many worlds", "parallel lives" and nonlocal decision at detectionI discuss an experiment demonstrating nonlocality and conservation of energy under the assumption that the decision of the outcome happens at detection. The experiment does not require Bell's inequalities and is loophole-free...If one assumes that the decision of the outcome happens at detection, the experiment presented above is a clear demonstration of nonlocality (likely the first loophole-free one), and shows that this principle rules the whole quantum physics...If one rejects the view that the outcome is decided at detection, then one has to accept de Broglie's "empty wave" and at the end "many worlds", where the experimental violation of Bell's inequality even without detection loophole does not prove nonlocality.
http://lanl.arxiv.org/pdf/1204.1732.pdf
Interestingly, the PBR theorem is also mentioned in his most recent paper:
Decision at the beam-splitter, or decision at detection, that is the questionThis interpretation is proved to be at odds with quantum mechanics by the recently established PBR theorem [11]. The formulation of this theorem according to [10, 12] shows that it rules out models that are "less random than quantum" but not models "less nonlocal than quantum". Conversely, the falsification of models "less nonlocal than quantum" [9] does not falsify "models less random than quantum".
http://lanl.arxiv.org/pdf/1204.5848.pdf
Last edited: