Search FQXi

If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

 all posts
 member posts highlighted
 member posts only

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help

Eckard Blumschein: on 4/18/17 at 6:02am UTC, wrote Rob, For the first time, I confirm that a viXra paper the content of which...

Robert McEachern: on 4/13/17 at 0:53am UTC, wrote Colin, "Treating the quantum correlation as a problem in communications...

Colin Walker: on 4/12/17 at 23:27pm UTC, wrote Hi Rob Treating the quantum correlation as a problem in communications and...

Robert McEachern: on 4/12/17 at 18:54pm UTC, wrote Jonathan, After reading about the one time pad, read about double and...

Jonathan Dickau: on 4/12/17 at 16:10pm UTC, wrote This is starting to make sense Rob.. The detection process has...

Robert McEachern: on 4/11/17 at 12:23pm UTC, wrote Jonathan, It all results from behaviors being driven by a single-bit of...

Jonathan Dickau: on 4/11/17 at 1:19am UTC, wrote That's a cool image.. Silent running and non-interacting until spotted. ...

Robert McEachern: on 4/11/17 at 0:27am UTC, wrote Jonathan, Actually, what it suggests is that nature's "identical...

June 24, 2017

CATEGORY: Ultimate Reality [back]
TOPIC: Quickfire Quantum Qs [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 12:53 GMT
This is a place to post quick queries about quantum-related issues.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Apr. 8, 2017 @ 09:31 GMT
:) what is a particle ?

report post as inappropriate

Robert H McEachern wrote on Apr. 10, 2017 @ 17:25 GMT
It has recently been demonstrated that Quantum Correlations can be Produced Classically with detection efficiencies higher than supposedly possible for any non-quantum system. (Note: The paper reports double-detection efficiencies (0.72) rather than the more commonly reported conditional detection efficiencies. For the model presented, the latter is equal to the square root of the former:...

view entire post

attachments: Classical_and_Quantum_Correlation_Curves_2.jpg

report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Apr. 10, 2017 @ 22:02 GMT
Thanks Rob..

For taking us to the other side of the (quantum) mirror.

All the Best,


report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Apr. 10, 2017 @ 22:08 GMT
This would suggest that..

What we are seeing as quantumness is simply nature's truncation (or its failure to represent and/or propagate) the higher harmonics of the (Classical) variational waveform via microscale dynamics.

All the Best,


report post as inappropriate

Robert H McEachern replied on Apr. 11, 2017 @ 00:27 GMT

Actually, what it suggests is that nature's "identical particles" have the exact same interaction behavior, that identical submarines have, that are attempting to detect each other, and that results in behaviors identical to "quantum tunneling" and "virtual particles".

If they cannot detect each other's existence, in an ocean of noise, then they can sail (tunnel) right past each other as though the other does not even exist, with no interaction whatsoever. But when they do detect each other, they sound general quarters, "ALL AHEAD FULL! DIVE! DIVE DIVE!" and make such a disturbance that even a distant destroyer (observer) on the surface can detect the sudden appearance of the formerly undetectable, "virtual" subs. But if the subs subsequently lose contact (the ability to detect a single bit of information) with each other, then they return to running silent, running deep (not interacting), and they disappear, back into the ocean of noise from which they first materialized; and the distant observer is left to wonder if they were ever really there.

Rob McEachern

report post as inappropriate

Eckard Blumschein wrote on Apr. 18, 2017 @ 06:02 GMT

For the first time, I confirm that a viXra paper the content of which is at least as good as the average in arXiv, and nature communication ones although it just summarizes what you already told us on FQXi.

I am not sure how to better reach those who are not familiar with Shannon and his anti-blockuniverse opinion.

I see similar or possibly even related hurdals in case of the two notions of infinity, the logical Galilean one and the pragmatical Leibniz/Bernoulli one. The former is absolute without a reference, the latter os relative: "larger than any reference".

Your hint to the squared FT seems to confirm my insight that cosine transform yields the same as does FT except for an arbitrarily chosen phase.


report post as inappropriate

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.