Return Home
It is currently Thu Aug 06, 2020 8:35 am

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2017 11:45 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 7:05 am
Posts: 414
I do not understand how Tom's slit detectors work in exp. 2. There are only two logical options. They are either anonymous detectors (they detect but don't tell us what slit the photon traveled) or detectors that introduce distinguishability (they detect and tell us what slit the photon traveled). The recording doesn't matter (as far as we have verified until now), because for option one there will always be a diffraction pattern whether the detectors are on or off, and for option two there will always be two bars when the detectors are on regardless of whether they are outputting to a recording or not. There are many experiments where detectors placed at the slits destroy interference, and these detectors are not themselves recording anything (they are just filters or polarizers).

The point Tom has previously tried to emphasize about QM being only about the availability of information and the detectors not causing wave collapse is a sound one, and supported by top quantum physicists. But this new notion about the recording is a bit odd. If the interference being destroyed depended on whether a slit detector had a recording attatched to it or not, then no slit detectors would have destroyed interference in the past because that has never been done before. I think there is either something wrong with Tom's realization of the concept, or something wrong with my understanding of how his detectors work. Also note that his experiments mostly display a standard double slit setup with a 'screen' behind, but I don't think they would work like that. There is no such thing as a big screen that records individual photon counts. Most "double slit" type experiments that do that do not employ a screen, but a photomultiplier tube (camera) that scans along some axis and "catches" the photons as the experiment runs. This data is then later reconstructed by a computer into information that represents what the total pattern of photons (interference or not) would have been if there had been a screen there.

To demonstrate the non-causality of the detectors and the importance of information, one must either move the detectors away from the slits (as in a delayed choice quantum eraser) or erase the detector information (as in the two slit eraser). Tom proposes something similar to the latter. However, in the two slit eraser, the 'detectors' at the slits are QWP's. They "output" their which path recording to the idler photon via entanglement. Then, when an erasure is performed on the idler, that which path recording is erased and the interference returns.

Tom's idea does the same thing but without using entanglement at all. Just physically record then physically erase. Would it work? I don't know. It doesn't seem as if it should, but then, who knows. I guess if it does work, many people will want to be having a talk with him.

_________________
What was it like to wake up after having never gone to sleep?


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 1:32 am 
Offline
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 1:00 am
Posts: 7
Has there been any news regarding the publishing of Tom's proposed experiments as "proper" physics papers?

Tom briefly explained this process being "80-90% complete" in the opening of the MBT Forum Fireside Chat #31 which was back in February 2017.


Top
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 5:22 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
It was my understanding that Tom Campbell was working with some interested active physicists, with access to laboratories and equipment, about performing some of these experiments. It was not expected that Tom, being retired as a physicist and with no such access, would be involved in the actual experimentation nor probably the reporting, other than perhaps in an advisory capacity and perhaps as an author on the papers resulting. We would have to find out from Tom where this process of performing and reporting on these experimental projects stands.

I can ask Tom if he is ready to provide an update on the board or elsewhere.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 5:18 pm 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
I have already heard from Tom Campbell regarding your request for information. He sent a paper of ~20 pages in PDF form. Here is his note regarding the status of this paper.
Ted, attached is the latest update (as of a few days ago) -- it may not be the final “final”, but it is getting closer
As you see from this note, this paper is not ready for release other than for preliminary discussion. If Tom did not want anyone to have a copy yet, he would not have sent this copy to me to provide you some information. I will post the Title, Authors and Abstract below:

On testing the simulation theory[Not Final Version.]

Tom Campbell, Houman Owhadi, Joe Sauvageau, David Watkinson

May 9, 2017

Abstract
Can the theory that reality is a simulation be tested? We investigate this question
based on the assumption that if the system performing the simulation is finite
(i.e. has limited resources), then to achieve low computational complexity, such a
system would, as in a video game, render content (reality) only at the moment that
information becomes available for observation by a player and not at the moment of
detection by a machine (that would be part of the simulation and whose detection
would also be part of the internal computation performed by the Virtual Reality
server before rendering content to the player). Guided by this principle we describe
conceptual wave/particle duality experiments aimed at testing the simulation theory.

I have not included the email addresses for the authors which are included in the paper.

Since this is a preliminary version of the paper, I am not posting it for download. If you are a scientist and want a preliminary copy as represented by this PDF file, PM me with an email address and affiliation to send a copy to you. Please do not request one as a souvenir. If you are a scientist that can make use of a physics paper, please let me know and I will forward you a copy. The full paper has email addresses for the authors to correspond with them and make comments and suggestions.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 11:22 pm 
Offline
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 1:00 am
Posts: 7
Thanks Ted, much appreciated!

I'm not a scientist but very much interested in the paper nonetheless. I've followed some discussions in the physics forums (here, here and here) and I'm very curious about the proposed detection mechanism as it seems to be the main source of debate among experts in the field.

Will we get notified via this thread as soon as the paper has been published in its final form?


Top
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 2:58 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
I will ask Tom to send us a link for download once the paper is published in final form. I did not even look at the paper he sent. Not sure if I could follow it and I've got too many problems with 'pacemaker syndrome' to think that I can dig my way through it now so may not try. I have not paid attention to these arguments about what is true or not regarding these experiments.

I do know what Reality is like from the viewpoint of things like ADCs, both spontaneous and deliberate, receiving information on request from the LCS and I wrote the first paper extending Tom's original description of the VR being based upon probability as calculated by TBC to explain how it is rendered for our experience of being avatars here. You might even find it amusing as I used Heidi from the old children's book by Johanna Spyri, living in the Swiss Alps as an illustration. That is if the Swiss are not utterly tired of hearing about Heidi by now. You will see from this link why Tom Campbell is now taking the position that he does. viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2453#p2828 This is where all of this started. Tom has never told me that there are any flaws in this descriptive paper as he has done this further work trying to get clear experiments performed that can prove that this is a Virtual Reality as we describe it and its origin in the LCS.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 6:42 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:32 pm
Posts: 1536
Location: Lincoln, NE
Quote:
Since this is a preliminary version of the paper, I am not posting it for download. I
Not posting for download is understandable and wise IMVHO. Sorry to hear of your pacemaker syndrome popping up, too.

Thanks for this version, all the same, as I am quite interested in the topic's progress among the conventional science parties.


Top
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 12:15 pm 
Offline
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:23 am
Posts: 4
I found a public "On testing the simulation theory" paper here - On testing the simulation theory - https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.00058.pdf


Top
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 2:35 pm 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
This paper has been accepted for publication. Here is the link to the publishing web site and the version that is apparently being published and should be referenced instead of any others.
Quote:
International Journal of Quantum Foundations 3 (2017) 78-99

Original Paper

On Testing the Simulation Theory
Tom Campbell 1, Houman Owhadi 2, *, Joe Sauvageau 3, and David Watkinson 4
1 PO Box 4103, Huntsville, AL 35815, USA
2 California Institute of Technology, Computing & Mathematical Sciences, MC 9-94
Pasadena, CA 91125, USA
3 Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Drive,
Pasadena, CA 91109, USA
4 Main Street Multimedia, Inc. 3005 Main St. #406, Santa Monica, CA 90405, USA
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-mail: owhadi@caltech.edu

Received: 9 March 2017 / Accepted: 6 June 2017 / Published: 20 June 2017
Abstract:
Can the theory that reality is a simulation be tested?
We investigate this question based on the assumption that if the system performing
the simulation is finite (i.e. has limited resources), then to achieve low
computational complexity, such a system would, as in a video game, render
content (reality) only at the moment that information becomes available for
observation by a player and not at the moment of detection by a machine (that
would be part of the simulation and whose detection would also be part of the
internal computation performed by the Virtual Reality server before rendering
content to the player). Guided by this principle we describe conceptual
wave/particle duality experiments aimed at testing the simulation theory.
Keywords:
Simulation theory; wave-particle duality; quantum eraser; double
slit; Von Neumann-Wigner interpretation; virtual reality
The paper is apparently no longer available for download from the publisher.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 9:37 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:44 am
Posts: 1251
Excellent! It's good to know progress is being made. Hopefully if this gets some attention it will encourage some researchers to take up the proposed double slit experiments. Is there anything new about the experiments?


Top
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:56 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:34 pm
Posts: 158
Thanks Ted :)


Top
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 8:31 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:32 pm
Posts: 1536
Location: Lincoln, NE
The link returns <Bad Request> to me. Anyone else get that return ?


Top
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 8:40 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
It works for me. Or do you mean the link in the post to download the paper? I haven't tried that link lately.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:27 am 
Offline
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 1:00 am
Posts: 7
http://www.ijqf.org/archives/4105


Top
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:51 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:32 pm
Posts: 1536
Location: Lincoln, NE
Quote:
It works for me. Or do you mean the link in the post to download the paper? I haven't tried that link lately.

Ted
I meant this link:

>http://ccs.infospace.com/ClickHandler.a ... tpage=true<


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 Next

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited