5 ms·

Let's all not be too hasty here. There's a lot of worrying signs, in my view. The paper itself has a sole author, a post-doc with a single paper on arXiv.org[0

by mabbo 5y ago

Let's all not be too hasty here. There's a lot of worrying signs, in my view. The paper itself has a sole author, a post-doc with a single paper on arXiv.org[0]. And the paper is being published in a low-impact rated journal[1]. That doesn't rule it out as a breakthrough, but it means more skepticism is warranted. > For over 55 years, John Bell has misled the physicists community and made us believe... The author makes this a personal, nefarious attack that has been played on us. Not a mistake or disagreement, but that John Bell knew he was wrong. > Einstein said that ... Not many believed him but this was the starting point for me when I came in touch with Bell's theorem. This feels to me like the author is saying "Well Einstein says I'm right". Overall, this feels like something we'll not be talking about for long. (But I'd LOVE to be wrong!) [0]https://arxiv.org/search/physics?searchtype=author&query=Muchowski%2C+E https://arxiv.org/search/physics?searchtype=author&query=Muc... [1]https://iopscience.iop.org/journal/0295-5075 https://iopscience.iop.org/journal/0295-5075

lupire 5y ago
The author is a former postdoc, who was active in academia in the 1970s, and then reappeared on the scene in 2017 to write this paper. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eugen-Muchowski https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eugen-Muchowski
- ajarmst 5y ago
  However, his Doctorate is in Chemical Engineering and what field and area for his postdoc research isn't identified. A postdoc Chemical Engineer wouldn't normally be working on the theoretical foundations of quantum mechanics. I also have to assume that the claim that he is retired after a "[p]rofessional career in the industry" means that he is a retired Chemical Engineer, not a postdoc researcher in quantum mechanics, despite identifying his alma maters as his research affiliation with only a tiny footnote disclosing that he is 'retired'. This is also the latest of multiple attempts to publish this work over a period of years---and is apparently only the second paper he's written. If he has indeed 'refuted' Bell's Theorem (and thus undermined the foundations of large swaths of theoretical Quantum Mechanics), one might expect he'd have at least one collaborator, a current research affiliation, and the interest of a journal with an impact factor greater than 2. It's possible he is the mythical solitary untrained genius, shunned by the establishment and producing Nobel-prize caliber research in his basement. That's probably not the way to bet, though.
  - newdude116 5y ago
    "A postdoc Chemical Engineer wouldn't normally be working on the theoretical foundations of quantum mechanics." Sure. But it is not forbidden. Besides the odd circumstances, what outs me off is that he tries to link himself with former (well known) universities. He may have attended them, but he is in no way affiliated with them anymore. Crackhead-alarm
  - GistNoesis 5y ago
    I'm curious to know what/who would be needed to convince the scientific community.
    - gus_massa 5y ago
      It's difficult to know, but I'll copy one of my comments, with a few additions. The problem is that (ignoring MA3) until the section "Predicting measurement results for the initial context" (inclusive) it is totally trivial if you have a background in Physics and Quantum Mechanics. It's not the usual model because it uses one (or two?) hidden variables, but it's easy to understand. But the next section "Predicting measurement results for an arbitrary context" is totally unintelligible. My guess is that the unintelligible part is hiding that when you measure a photon with a polarizer with an angle alpha, the other photon gets that information with an implicit faster than light communication. I have read it three times and I gave up. To convince the scientific community it will be good to implement this model and post it in github or something. * One function that create a pair of entangled photons X and Y. * One function f that takes the photon X and the angle alpha and says if it passed the filter. * One function g that takes the photon Y and the angle beta and says if it passed the other filter. Bonus points if f and g are the same functions (or the only change is a pi/2). No cheating, like using alpha in g, or assuming that alpha is 0. Run a Montecarlo simulation and show that it gets the expected result. It's like 30 lines of Python or Fortran or whatever. Transforming this to an analytical calculation is easy, but in an analytical calculations is easier to hide a change of variables and another trick that "transmit" alpha from one detector to the other.
      - GistNoesis 5y ago

by mabbo 5y ago

lupire 5y ago

The author is a former postdoc, who was active in academia in the 1970s, and then reappeared on the scene in 2017 to write this paper. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eugen-Muchowski https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eugen-Muchowski

ajarmst 5y ago
However, his Doctorate is in Chemical Engineering and what field and area for his postdoc research isn't identified. A postdoc Chemical Engineer wouldn't normally be working on the theoretical foundations of quantum mechanics. I also have to assume that the claim that he is retired after a "[p]rofessional career in the industry" means that he is a retired Chemical Engineer, not a postdoc researcher in quantum mechanics, despite identifying his alma maters as his research affiliation with only a tiny footnote disclosing that he is 'retired'. This is also the latest of multiple attempts to publish this work over a period of years---and is apparently only the second paper he's written. If he has indeed 'refuted' Bell's Theorem (and thus undermined the foundations of large swaths of theoretical Quantum Mechanics), one might expect he'd have at least one collaborator, a current research affiliation, and the interest of a journal with an impact factor greater than 2. It's possible he is the mythical solitary untrained genius, shunned by the establishment and producing Nobel-prize caliber research in his basement. That's probably not the way to bet, though.
- newdude116 5y ago
  "A postdoc Chemical Engineer wouldn't normally be working on the theoretical foundations of quantum mechanics." Sure. But it is not forbidden. Besides the odd circumstances, what outs me off is that he tries to link himself with former (well known) universities. He may have attended them, but he is in no way affiliated with them anymore. Crackhead-alarm
- GistNoesis 5y ago
  I'm curious to know what/who would be needed to convince the scientific community.
  - gus_massa 5y ago
    It's difficult to know, but I'll copy one of my comments, with a few additions. The problem is that (ignoring MA3) until the section "Predicting measurement results for the initial context" (inclusive) it is totally trivial if you have a background in Physics and Quantum Mechanics. It's not the usual model because it uses one (or two?) hidden variables, but it's easy to understand. But the next section "Predicting measurement results for an arbitrary context" is totally unintelligible. My guess is that the unintelligible part is hiding that when you measure a photon with a polarizer with an angle alpha, the other photon gets that information with an implicit faster than light communication. I have read it three times and I gave up. To convince the scientific community it will be good to implement this model and post it in github or something. * One function that create a pair of entangled photons X and Y. * One function f that takes the photon X and the angle alpha and says if it passed the filter. * One function g that takes the photon Y and the angle beta and says if it passed the other filter. Bonus points if f and g are the same functions (or the only change is a pi/2). No cheating, like using alpha in g, or assuming that alpha is 0. Run a Montecarlo simulation and show that it gets the expected result. It's like 30 lines of Python or Fortran or whatever. Transforming this to an analytical calculation is easy, but in an analytical calculations is easier to hide a change of variables and another trick that "transmit" alpha from one detector to the other.
    - GistNoesis 5y ago