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

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

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

 RSS feed | RSS help

February 20, 2018

ARTICLE: DoubleThink [back to article]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Roumen Tsekov wrote on Mar. 8, 2008 @ 14:12 GMT
This is an interesting topic but the basic idea is due to the quantum superposition. Recently it was realized that macroscopic systems (computers are also macroscopic devices) will obey a nonlinear Schrodinger equation (see for instance arXiv:0711.1442 attached bellow). Hence, the superposition principle is no more valid.

attachments: 0711.1442.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Eckard Blumschein replied on Jan. 30, 2010 @ 20:31 GMT
Already Rafael Bombelli (1526-1573) understood that any complex number occurs together with its conjugate (suo Residuo), cf. Helmut Gericke, Geschichte des Zahlbegriffs. Accordingly, a complex representation of a real world quantity is redundant. It does not convey more information as compared with the seemingly poorer real-valued one. I will reconsider this as soon as the first quantum computer shows its claimed superiority.

Eckard Blumschein

report post as inappropriate

paul valletta wrote on Mar. 10, 2008 @ 15:19 GMT
"How much information is really there in a quantum state?"

And how does one go about counting or accounting it?

How far back into the past does a Quantum State remain intact, what memory of a previous state does a Q-bit have/retain?

To possibly be in "Two Places at Once", one really has to define "place" , what here is meant place? this the same as being in "two space's" at one instant of time? thus a particle can be in ANY two location of the future, or ANY two locations of a past, but curiously NEVER in a single location of the present/now?

To be at two seperated locations "in a superposition", one has to be isolated from the "time" that governs both loctions, thus external to a 4-Dimensional space-time.

Has there been a single recorded example of an Electron being detected in a single place, ie a definate "now"?

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.