Reputation
624
Next privilege 1,000 Rep.
Create new tags
Badges
7 16
Impact
~25k people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 0 helpful flags
  • 18 votes cast
Apr
16
awarded  Notable Question
Feb
3
awarded  Yearling
Sep
20
awarded  Notable Question
Apr
9
awarded  Notable Question
Jul
2
awarded  Curious
May
24
awarded  Popular Question
Apr
29
awarded  Notable Question
Dec
3
awarded  Popular Question
Oct
3
awarded  Popular Question
Sep
5
awarded  Yearling
Aug
16
awarded  Popular Question
Mar
17
awarded  Popular Question
Feb
28
awarded  Nice Question
Dec
26
accepted When does a pot not spill?
Oct
2
awarded  Nice Question
Sep
5
awarded  Yearling
Aug
25
comment How can new interpretations of QM help?
@RonMaimon: Not an existing one. Any interpretation that could be found in the future. However, if there is no practical problem to solve, even a new interpretation wouldn't provide new value. Btw, is the work of Hooft considered serious? Did he have any concrete results?
Jun
5
comment Adding 3 electron spins
Thanks. I tried a brute force approach diagonalizing the 8x8 matrix for total angular momentum. The result was img31.imageshack.us/img31/6228/3spins.png. The cyclic operator turned out to be nice and also works for 4 spins. I need to study your approach - I forgot the basics :) A bit surprising that there is no easy answer.
Jun
5
comment Show quantum entanglement to a classical thinker
I'll have to study that paper. Then just a last question. Has there been absolutely no objection to the set up? Because the CHSH inequality should (apart from statistics) allow for a statement no matter what physically happens unexpectedly. Unless there are additional assumptions about physical measurements needed. Of course you do not need 100% correlation but only above a limit.
Jun
5
comment Show quantum entanglement to a classical thinker
Thanks, talks exactly about this question. The answer of Frédéric describes it a bit more, too.