Reply to arXiv:2111.13357 ("The Quantum Eraser Non-Paradox'')

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2112.00436v1
• Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 11:55:02 GMT
• Title: Reply to arXiv:2111.13357 ("The Quantum Eraser Non-Paradox'')
• Authors: Colm Bracken, Jonte R Hance, Sabine Hossenfelder
• Abstract summary: We argue that we have forgotten to consider superpositions of detector eigenstates. We also note that no one has ever observed such detector superpositions.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In a recent criticism (arXiv:2111.13357) of our paper arXiv:2111.09347, Drezet argues that we have forgotten to consider superpositions of detector eigenstates. However, such superpositions do not occur in the models our paper is concerned with. We also note that no one has ever observed such detector superpositions.

Related papers

• Alexander S. Holevo's Researches in Quantum Information Theory in 20th Century [53.64687146666141]
  This paper reviews Holevo's contributions to quantum information theory during the 20 century. At that time, he mainly studied three topics, classical-quantum channel coding, quantum estimation with Cramero-Rao approach, and quantum estimation with the group covariant approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-25T12:06:49Z)
• Antiparticles in non-relativistic quantum mechanics [55.2480439325792]
  Non-relativistic quantum mechanics was originally formulated to describe particles. We show how the concept of antiparticles can and should be introduced in the non-relativistic case without appealing to quantum field theory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-02T09:16:18Z)
• Exact quantum revivals for the Dirac equation [55.2480439325792]
  We generalize the Talbot effect and the revivals of the Schr"odinger equation to a relativistic situation with non zero mass. The revivals are exact, that is, are true revivals without taking any particular limit such as the non relativistic one. Several plots of the revivals are presented, which are useful for exemplifying the procedure proposed along the text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-21T20:35:09Z)
• Relative facts do not exist. Relational Quantum Mechanics is Incompatible with Quantum Mechanics. Response to the critique by Aur\'elien Drezet [0.0]
  We point out that our critical analysis of RQM was precisely based on the most recent formulation of RQM, and that the theses in the critique are based on neither RQM assumptions nor on our arguments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-14T14:13:56Z)
• A critical analysis of `Relative facts do not exist. Relational quantum mechanics is incompatible with quantum mechanics' by Jay Lawrence, Marcin Markiewicz and Marek \'{Z}ukowski [0.0]
  We discuss a recent work by J.Lawrence et al.[arxiv.org/abs/2208.11793] criticizing relational quantum mechanics (RQM) and based on a famous nonlocality theorem. Here, we show that the claims presented in this recent work are unjustified and we debunk the analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-02T18:52:17Z)
• On a gap in the proof of the generalised quantum Stein's lemma and its consequences for the reversibility of quantum resources [51.243733928201024]
  We show that the proof of the generalised quantum Stein's lemma is not correct due to a gap in the argument leading to Lemma III.9. This puts into question a number of established results in the literature, in particular the reversibility of quantum entanglement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-05T17:46:05Z)
• In defense of Relational Quantum Mechanics: A note on `Qubits are not observers' [0.0]
  This is a short note to answer Brukner's objection [see arXiv:2107.03513] to Rovelli's theory and concerning the preferred basis problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-05T19:17:14Z)
• The Quantum Eraser Non-Paradox: a comment on arXiv:2111.09347v1 [0.0]
  This is a short reply to arXiv:2112.00436v1 and arXiv:2111.09347v1 by C. Bracken, J.R. Hance, and S. Hossenfelder.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-26T08:38:24Z)
• Reply to Comment on "Strong Quantum Darwinism and Strong Independence are Equivalent to Spectrum Broadcast Structure" [77.34726150561087]
  In a recent comment [Feller et. al. arXiv:2101.09186] on our Letter [Phys. Lett. 122, 010403], Feller et. al identified a mistake in our mathematical expression of "strong independence" for states that satisfy Spectrum Broadcast Structure. We concede that we wrote a mathematical condition that is necessary but not sufficient. However, we used the original and correct qualitative definition for "strong independence" throughout the paper and in our proofs, therefore the proofs and statements, aside from the aforementioned mathematical expression, remain correct.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-26T12:55:49Z)
• The Time-Evolution of States in Quantum Mechanics [77.34726150561087]
  It is argued that the Schr"odinger equation does not yield a correct description of the quantum-mechanical time evolution of states of isolated (open) systems featuring events. A precise general law for the time evolution of states replacing the Schr"odinger equation is formulated within the so-called ETH-Approach to Quantum Mechanics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-04T16:09:10Z)
• A response to criticisms on "CMB Constraints Cast a Shadow on CSL Model" [0.0]
  We explain why the arguments presented in [G. R. Bengochea, G. Leon, P. Pearle, and D. Sudarsky, arXiv:2008.05285, see also arXiv:2006.05313] are either incorrect or a confirmation of the robustness of our results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-06T11:50:07Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.