text:
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 forums@fqxi.org 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.

Contests Home

Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Introduction

Order posts by:
chronological order
most recent first

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

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

John-Erik Persson: on 3/13/18 at 18:41pm UTC, wrote Declan Traill If you read this you may be interested in my last blog at: ...

Terry Bollinger: on 3/2/18 at 1:00am UTC, wrote Declan, I've discovered that if you make a lot of FQXi comments for a lot...

Ulla Mattfolk: on 2/26/18 at 17:26pm UTC, wrote Also, how is the QM line computed? + uncertainties? entanglements????

Ulla Mattfolk: on 2/26/18 at 17:15pm UTC, wrote Hi, Have you tried to put it on a Bloch sphere? The slope is important. Is...

Peter Jackson: on 2/26/18 at 15:53pm UTC, wrote Declan, Richard I explained the fit to Richard. It's been interesting how...

richard nixey: on 2/26/18 at 1:01am UTC, wrote Declan, Does your code completely fit the mechanism in Peter Jacksons...

Kamal Rajpal: on 2/25/18 at 16:55pm UTC, wrote Dear Declan Andrew Traill, 2D space can be filled up with squares but not...

Kamal Rajpal: on 2/25/18 at 15:14pm UTC, wrote Dear Declan Andrew Traill, The tables on page 10 and 12 are similar. The...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Dear Reality Fans, The real VISIBLE Universe never “started out.”..." in First Things First: The...

isabell ella: "If you are facing Cash app related problems and want to get support..." in Cosmic Dawn, Parallel...

Georgina Woodward: "Quite right Lorraine, ( to be clear perhaps I should have said..." in Cosmological Koans

Lorraine Ford: "Honestly Georgina, Wake up! Change of number is NOT energy." in Cosmological Koans

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Michael Hussey: "https://www.google.com" in New Nuclear "Magic...

Michael Hussey: "it is really difficult to understand what is all about all the things..." in New Nuclear "Magic...

Stefan Weckbach: "I have a problem with the notion of time in the multiverse scenario that..." in First Things First: The...

RECENT ARTICLES

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

FQXi FORUM
July 18, 2019

CATEGORY: FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017 [back]
TOPIC: A Fundamental Misunderstanding by Declan Andrew Traill [refresh]

Author Declan Andrew Traill wrote on Jan. 12, 2018 @ 19:45 GMT
Essay Abstract

Quantum Mechanics claims that particles can become entangled such that there is a correlation in the detected results from EPR type experiments that cannot be explained by Classical Physics. This paper shows that the result can be fully explained by Classical Physics, and that the correlation curve for different angles between the two detectors can by reproduced when modeled this way. The model can even explain the results of the most recent supposed loophole-free Quantum Steering experiments – giving a clear violation of the Steering Inequality.

Author Bio

Declan Traill is a Scientist and Software Engineer with a Science degree from the University of Melbourne in Australia. He has been actively publishing Theoretical Physics papers and contributing to various Physics discussion groups and forums for 20 years. He is interested in re-constructing both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics into a Classical framework that can be understood and visualized using a universal set of principles. The foundations of this framework were layed out in his 2012 FQXi essay titled "A Classical Reconstruction of Relativity" based on work done since 1998 on a new theory named "Energy Field Theory".

Gary D. Simpson wrote on Jan. 13, 2018 @ 01:14 GMT
Declan,

This is an interesting result and the graphics are very easy to understand and compare with the EPR result. I'm glad you've found a way to apply you programming background to a difficult problem in Physics.

I have thought that the problem with Alice and Bob and EPR might be sampling ... namely that the measured results only represent a small fraction of all the atoms or photons that the experiment produces. And hence what we actually see is a distorted dataset and hence distorted conclusions.

You should expect to receive a lot of pushback.

Best Regards,

Gary Simpson

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 13, 2018 @ 01:38 GMT
Thanks Gary,

I am only reporting the facts that I have found.

Facts in Science should be welcomed, not opposed.

Regards,

Declan

Georgina Woodward wrote on Jan. 13, 2018 @ 11:50 GMT
Hi Declan, your entry is not really an essay, and not really addressing the topic of the competition. Looks like you are taking an opportunity to present your report and get some feedback on it.I understand from the end of the piece that you are thinking of security concerns. Hopefully you will find some interested, knowledgeable readers who will take the time to evaluate it. Kind regards Georgina

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 13, 2018 @ 12:09 GMT
Georgina,

Essays come in different forms; some are long winded and wordy, others are concise and to the point. Mine addresses the topic directly, identifying a problem that is fundamental to Physics and possibly preventing the unification of Quantum Mechanics with Classical Physics (and Relativity).

The topic of what is fundamental can be approached from many different angles. This is the approach I have chosen to take, and which may be the most beneficial to Science, rather than some banal discussion on the meaning of the word ‘fundamental’.

Anyhow, thanks for taking the time to read it. If you are familiar with the EPR experiment and its meaning and importance to Physics then hopefully you can appreciate what I have discovered in my analysis and its potential ramifications for Physics?

Regards,

Declan

Peter Jackson replied on Jan. 13, 2018 @ 21:53 GMT
Georgina,

I can see your point about 'word count', however this really DOES address the subject more than any (many) I've read so far! What can be more fundamental and revolutionary than finally escaping the weird nonsense of QM and rationalising physics!!??

Declan's finding really DOES do that, and indeed represents the mathematical code for the rationale and simple experiment in mine. Of course all those steeped in the Doctrine of the last 100 years will likely kick, scream, complain and deny, or just ignore, for another 10 years yet.

I know you're not so 'steeped'. Rather you've seemed a bit fearful of QM, so often criticised any essays addressing it, but it really IS MOST fundamentally important for physics to escape the wonderland it's been in.

I think and hope you'll fully understand mine (though a good idea of what needs to be achieved would help) which then also shows how the quantum world becomes fully rational and compatible with Relativity AT LAST! (though both interpretations need slight adjustment)

I'm off to celebrate.

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward replied on Jan. 14, 2018 @ 04:09 GMT
Declan, you are right there are lots of ways an essay can be presented. Yours was a brief illustrated report.It would, I think, have been helpful if you had explained your approach to the competition topic up front, so that it appears relevant to it. I.e. Rather than 'what is fundamental?' you choose to identify a fundamental problem and address it. It would also have been helpful for me if you had written more to explain the background and walk through the significance. You write " The probability of a non-detect event is proportional to the square of the cosine of the angle between the photon polarization axis and the detector polarization axis –such that the greater the angle difference, the more likely a non-detect will occur." OK, but you don't explain why that is. From what I read, I get the impression that what is going on is various people tinkering with results, including or excluding them to tr and get the kind of relation they are hoping for. That is my impression knowing very little about this kind of work. I'd be interested to know if this kind of analysis has been done before as the problem has been around a long time. Are there any comparable findings from others? I think it will be really good to get feedback from people who can analyse what you have done and agree or disagree on its significance- rather than nice graph or enjoyed your paper.. Good luck with it. Kind regards Georgina

report post as inappropriate

John-Erik Persson wrote on Jan. 13, 2018 @ 19:24 GMT
Andrew

Thank you for this very important contribution!

Do you think that maybe entanglement is an illusion as well and photon as a PARTICLE and instead A and B are affected by the same WAVE?

Regards John-Erik

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 13, 2018 @ 20:56 GMT
John-Erik,

Thank you.

Yes, It does look likely that entanglement is an illusion, as it is the one aspect of Physics (QM primarily) that defies logic and cannot be explained Classically (other than the explanation in my essay).

Photons are electromagnetic waves. They are emitted and absorbed by atoms in discrete quanta, yes, giving them the appearance of being particles; but I’m not convinced that they are held together in the same way as the wave-functions of other particles such as electrons. Indeed, a photon in space can be a wavetrain of several metres in length - hardly particle like. Photons of radio waves can have very long wavelengths (hundreds of meters), meaning that if they are particles they would be truly huge!

Regards,

Declan

Peter Jackson wrote on Jan. 13, 2018 @ 21:35 GMT
Declan,

That finding's astounding. A revolution in physics! Classical QM!!! I've checked it and it's correct. I know that because my own essay; 'Absolute Simplicity' gives the full rationale and repeatable experimental protocol (with photographs) proving the very same thing!

I recall a previous essay & cited an earlier paper of yours on the right tracks. I interesting note you also cite some of mine, which also show how the result unifies the description of QM and SR. I'm sure you'll completely understand and like mine.

Many may miss this so for anyone else reading this; YES you CAN believe your own eyes. This is genuine and really important new physics.

Very well done. We must get together on it, though I see we live almost precisely a hemisphere apart!

Very best of luck in the contest.

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 13, 2018 @ 21:54 GMT
Peter,

Thank you. I’m glad you understand the significance of this and concur with it. I have found your past essays, and now your latest one, very interesting and helpful in advancing our understanding of how the EPR experimental results are obtained by the combined effects of polarizers and photomultipliers resulting in a cosine squared dependence on angle.

Yes, we are almost exactly a hemisphere apart - which may explain the perfect correlation in our findings!

Best of luck for your essay this year...

Regards,

Declan

Andrew Beckwith wrote on Jan. 14, 2018 @ 08:02 GMT

One nit though. Why is a classical presentation of entanglement the most

foundational aspect of physics?

You make it appear as though this is a TOE in the making

Can you explain more?

Thanks

Andrew

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 14, 2018 @ 08:17 GMT
Andrew,

Thank you. Yes I would be glad to: the entanglement aspect of QM is the reason that Local Real models for the Universe have been considered to be disproven, placing QM as a more fundamental theory that cannot be explained by Classical Physics. QM theorists assert that fundamentally the Universe obeys strange laws such as entanglement and only reduces to Classical Physics is special circumstances. Hence if this can be proven to be false, and that every aspect of Physics can be explained Classically then the very nature and character of Physics is changed and unification, or a TOE becomes possible. See my 2012 FQXi essay for how Relativity can be explained Classically; so if QM too can be explained Classically, then we have the makings of a Theory Of Everything, or TOE.

Regards,

Declan

John-Erik Persson wrote on Jan. 14, 2018 @ 17:29 GMT
Declan

I see that your ideas are very like mine. See my comment above. I therefore suggest that you take a look at my article called Fundamental Errors in Physics.

From _______________ John-Erik

report post as inappropriate

Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Jan. 15, 2018 @ 16:14 GMT
Quantum steering exploits quantum correlations whereby an observer, Alice, can influence, or as it is said to steer, Bob’s physical system in a bipartite entanglement with Alice's. This is a nonlocal process inaccessible to classical world. This in turn results in violation of some inequalities. This is employed by some to try to understand how quantum mechanics leads in the large action limit to classical physics. However, it is not in of itself a classical underpinning of quantum mechanics.

I am having a hard time pinning that down in your essay. Computer codes can of course be written to output almost anything. I include the diagram in the attachment to illustrate where quantum steering sits with respect to the various levels of quantum nonlocality.

Cheers LC

attachments: levels_of_nonlocality.png

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 15, 2018 @ 20:50 GMT
Lawrence,

That is what Steering is *supposed* to be, but my analysis shows that there need not be ANY Steering occurring at all, as the QM correlation curve can be obtained by applying simple Classical selection rules giving Alice and Bob the choice to return either +1, -1 or 0.

Regards,

Declan

Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Jan. 15, 2018 @ 21:41 GMT
Dear Declan Andrew Traill,

I am in full agreement with you that entanglement, "a nonlocal process inaccessible to the classical world", is a most serious problem facing those who wish a comprehensible universe. Like you, I find it possible to produce a classical model that violates Bell's theorem. In the following I will try to compare our two results, both of which lead to the...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Peter Jackson replied on Jan. 16, 2018 @ 13:05 GMT
Edwin,

Nice analysis, initially as mine, but Declan's code doesn't just achieve your cos(a.b) curve (good but not quite complete) it produces the paired offset Cos2 curves of Bell, of Born's rule ('Law'), and indeed Malus's Law (Intensity = the square).!!

While it looks to simply use 2 spin states it's one step more complex than that, as I show in my own essay which explanation & experiment underpins Declan's code.

One state is 'curl' (max at poles) but that goes to zero at the equator and has inverse values (complementarity) with the LINEAR left/right (or up/down) over 180o momentum at the EQUATOR. So which is also then zero at poles. Both change by cos theta as my full explanation why.

I also show how just then adding 'c' in the electrons local centre of mass frame for re-emissions unifies the mechanism with Einsteins final ('52) explanation of SR!! I suspect we really may be on the verge of a revolution in physics!

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 16, 2018 @ 23:34 GMT
Edwin,

Thank you for your comment and approval of my essay.

I have not read yours as yet, but have it on my list of things to do soon.

In your comment you talk about two spin states in free space. I don’t suggest that the spin is confined to only two possible orientations, but only the reading of the spin is. The spin is free to be in any orientation but the cosine of the angle difference between its spin and the polarization axis determines the probability of detection as a +1 or -1. Once the polarizer has shifted the photon/particle’s orientation to align with its, then the photomultiplier amplified the signal which has the effect of applying another cosine to the detection probability. So we end up with a cosine squared relationship (also explained in Peter’s past and current essays, as pointed out above).

Again, many thanks for the positive comment...

Regards,

Declan

Eckard Blumschein wrote on Jan. 16, 2018 @ 04:12 GMT
Dear Declan Andrew Traill,

Are you aware of R. McEachern's paper I just pointed to in the thread 31426 (by Flavio Del Santo)?

I feel enlighted by Edwin Eugene Klingman's proficient detailed comments.

Best regards,

Eckard

report post as inappropriate

Eckard Blumschein replied on Jan. 16, 2018 @ 16:44 GMT
Correction:

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 16, 2018 @ 23:20 GMT
Dear Eckard,

I have not seen that essay yet, I will have a look...

I have read and agree with Alan’s essay - a fine piece of work.

Best Regards,

Declan

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 17, 2018 @ 04:58 GMT
Dear Eckard,

I cannot find any essay by R. McEachern's, is it a paper located elsewhere? If so, can you provide a URL link to it?

Thanks,

Declan

Alan M. Kadin wrote on Jan. 16, 2018 @ 16:41 GMT
Dear Declan,

I read your paper with great interest, being somewhat familiar with the issues of photon entanglement experiments. As you know, these have been difficult experiments, subject to measurement and interpretation bias, which claim to prove that entanglement is real.

I understand that you assume an angle-dependent detection efficiency, which may be reasonable. This could be an important result. But for completeness, the analysis should also indicate how sensitively the agreement depends on the particular selection of parameters.

On a more general note, entanglement is central to quantum mechanics, and should not be all that hard to prove. The difficulties suggest that something is seriously wrong.

Furthermore, entanglement is central to the power of not only quantum communications, but also quantum computing. Quantum computing in particular has become a major research engine internationally, with both major corporations and governments investing billions of dollars. Skeptics are being ignored and suppressed.

Given all this investment, I predict that this entire enterprise will fail within about 5 years. Only after that occurs will the mainstream be willing to consider alternatives – namely, that entanglement is an illusion, and the foundations of quantum mechanics are built on quicksand.

I address some similar issues in my own essay, “Fundamental Waves and the Reunification of Physics”.

Best Wishes,

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 16, 2018 @ 23:17 GMT
Alan,

I agree with you that you that Quantum computing doesn’t seem to be getting anywhere fast, and it will be interesting to see what happens in the coming years.

Regards,

Declan

Eckard Blumschein wrote on Jan. 18, 2018 @ 20:01 GMT
Dear Declan,

The FQXi team added the missing references of my essay.

Hopefully you got aware of my correction to the link to Eachern's first paper.

I am also curious how Jochen Szangelios will answer my question concerning DQC1.

Best,

Eckard

report post as inappropriate

Eckard Blumschein replied on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 18:28 GMT
Meanwhile Szangelios replied.

You might also be interested in comments by Bollinger elsewhere.

Eckard

report post as inappropriate

John-Erik Persson wrote on Jan. 18, 2018 @ 20:26 GMT
Declan Traill

Regarding your 'explanation' to destructive superposition that you expressed on my article page:

How do you explain that energy suddenly can disappear somewhere and later pop up in very different point??????

With regards from ________________ John-Erik Persson

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 19, 2018 @ 00:19 GMT
Dear John-Erik,

The light does not suddenly relocate, it is ‘squeezed’ out sideways as it is traveling.

In the case of the two slit experiment, for example, the light from each slit interferes with the other beam causing lateral movement as well as forward movement; such that there is no path leading to the dark regions, but multiple paths leading to the bright regions. All of the light moves towards its destination on the screen at speed ‘c’.

Regards,

Declan

John-Erik Persson replied on Jan. 19, 2018 @ 14:27 GMT
Declan

You have only invented a 'cover up'. To me this represents no logical explanation. However, if you assume light to contain information without energy, you can find a much better explanation.

We can explain bound electrons to generate thermal radiation without having to do the jumping. The bound electron produces only information, or POTENTIAL force that becomes REAL when radiation is hitting the electron that we use as a detector. At that moment the energy comes from the ether, and therefore the emitting electron does not have to loose energy. We do not need quantum jumping.

Best regards from ___________________ John-Erik

report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Jan. 19, 2018 @ 18:59 GMT
John-Eric,

Good to see you here and active. The logical explanation to the 'cover up' emerges if you study quantum optics, even just on wikipedia. i.e. visualise eliptical polarity, or perhaps turn a disc or plate nearly 'edge on'. Now measure it's chord orthogonally, so on both major and minor axis (which is what the 2 channel photomultiplier does).

You'll find one at maximum value (i.e. +1) when the other diminished to near zero, so can't trigger the detector. If you turn the plate 90 degrees on the other axis (so now horizontal not vertical) you'll find the precise opposite That's the foundation (and essentially known science).

There are two other main elements explaining the full experimental findings (and 'predictions' of QM. You'll find those also fully explained and sequenced in my essay, which also reports on a simple experiment (with photo's & protocol) confirming the inverse Cos distributions. (The ontology & mechanism surprisingly also seems to include production of the effects we know as 'Special Relativity'.)

Note the process works for all 'signals', including electrons (fermions) and neutrons, which certainly do have energy of course. I look forward to getting to your 'information based' option for light shortly.

Very best

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Ajay Pokhrel wrote on Jan. 19, 2018 @ 17:35 GMT
Hello Traill,

Well written essay. I am amazed by your way of presenting problems and its solution, in a computational way.

But I have got a feeling that you think entanglement as an illusion. Well, you have presented things clear in the paper. But I am confused if you consider a quantum phenomenon as an illusion if not defined by classical mechanics. Can you give me more viewpoints?

You are welcomed to my essay: Is Mathematics Fundamental where I discuss if mathematics and patterns can be fundamental.

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 10:12 GMT
Dear Ajay,

Entanglement is my main problem with QM due to its illogical behavior and the problems it poses to being able to model the Universe in a rational way. However, I also disagree with the QM interpretation in regards to other aspects of Physics. For example, the interpretation of wave functions as probability amplitudes, although it works, leads us away from a clear picture of what is happening to particles on the microscopic scale. In Classical Physics a wave function describes the position of a test particle at any place/time and thus describes every aspect of a wave structure, the same should be true at the Quantum level. I have determined the wave functions for the electron and positron based on them being 3D wave structures rather than point particles. These are wave functions in the Classical sense rather than probability amplitudes. My paper on this can be found here: http://vixra.org/abs/1507.0054

Also, there must be real reasons based on Classical Physics for what appear to be random or statistical events, but it is just difficult, if not impossible, to know the minute details of the Physics of a situation to be able to determine these reasons. Similarly there must be short-lived intermediate states between stable states when quantum jumps occur. Some of the time scales at which these changes occur are starting to become possible to probe with recents advances and techniques, but there is a way to go yet.

These are some of the problems that need to be addressed to unify the QM view of the world with Classical Physics, no doubt there are others too.

Regards,

Declan

John R. Cox wrote on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 03:11 GMT
Declan,

It is good to see some community support for classical arguments that challenge the QM method which requires *entanglement* to explain correlation of events. And I would hope that there is also a level of concern among the Western physics community in pursuing alternative protocols, whether Quantum or Classical, to find some clarifying agency in the phenomenon. In the public domain it is the Chinese whom are claiming real time advances in Quantum State Communications, and whatever the physical reality might turn out to be; success in the "Quantum Experiments at Space Scale" (Quess satellite program) would have an immediate impact on global communications markets. Theatre-wide military application should also be a great concern given that the Chinese are known to have been increasing their conventional forces budget by 10% per year over the past 20 years, and their stated intent is towards a hegemony which would expel democratic interests from their sphere of influence. Hard scientific proof of falsification of the claimed 'unhackable' security of quantum communication, and effective counter-measures, are likely to become as big an industrial investment strategy as has been the decades long quest for the elusive Quantum state. Good Luck, we are all in the brave new world of "Big Science". jrc

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 10:20 GMT
Dear John,

A lot of the reporting of advances is just hype around activities that are being undertaken but are not proof or big advances of QM entanglement. There has been talk of Quantum computers for years with very little to show for the millions that has been poured into the area of research. Surely if the theory of operation had merit it would have been achieved by now?

Regards,

Declan

Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 14:11 GMT
A clear-cut viewpoint, pointing to a fundamental observation. Good job, very precise essay.

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 21, 2018 @ 00:08 GMT
Dear Stephen,

Thank you, I’m glad you liked it and understood it.

Best Regards,

Declan

Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 18:11 GMT
Hi Declan,

Your essay gives a very interesting conclusion. The two feet on the floor again.

But there are some things that I don't understand, sorry for that I have no programmation background.

You are concluding that non-detect events are the reason that the classical model can again be the explanation of "entanglement". In my own primitive thinking this means that "What we don't see is the reason that our "perceptions and its explanations" are wrong, just because we can generate an output of this "unseen" that proves it.Am I understanding this right or am I just wrong, if so help me.

I can agree with the three-dimensional wave perception of particle experience (like in Peter Jackson's essay's), what I don't understand that if it is so simple to explain "entanglement" in a "classical way" that this was not found before, there are a lot of scientists (like Joy Christian) who are seriously researching this subject.

And after three times reading your essay I still do not understand in the classical way entanglement, thank you for making me think again. I hope that you also may have a look at my essay : Foundational Quantum Reality Loops , it may not be your cup of tea, but I hope that it contains also thoughts that in turn make you think.

best regards

Wilhelmus de Wilde

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 21, 2018 @ 00:06 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thank you for your comment and questions.

Yes, essentially the correlation that is interpreted as being due to entanglement can be explained due to what is not detected, but is dependent on the angle difference between the photon’s polarization axis and that of the detector. This means that a specific region of possible orientations there is a higher chance of not getting a detection.

Prior to the loophole-free experiments, there was already acknowledged the possibility of what was termed the ‘detection loophole’ where detection efficiency (i.e. not every photon is detected) could bias the result set and falsely cause the correlation to appear to be entanglement.

The use of a Steering Inequality was supposed to account for that by including Alice’s non-detects in the statistical calculation that determines the degree of correlation. However, as I have demonstrated, if the two functions I have shown (for Alice and Bob) are used, and the Steering Inequality is calculated on a the result set, there is still violation and the supposed QM ‘entanglement’ correlation curve is obtained.

I hope this helps you understand my explanation in regards to the explanation for entanglement using Classical Physics.

I will have a look at your essay too...

Best Regards,

Declan

austin fearnley wrote on Jan. 21, 2018 @ 10:35 GMT
Declan

Have you seen an R language computer simulation of Pearle's (1970) model for the EPR-Bohm correlations by Richard Gill in July 2015 at http://rpubs.com/gill1109/pearle2 ?

The third graph shows that data are less likely to be gathered at theta = 90 and 270 degree.

The model uses a particular function to decide on whether data are excluded and this is the relevant part of the R code:

U

report post as inappropriate

austin fearnley replied on Jan. 21, 2018 @ 10:43 GMT
Declan

My last post must have fallen foul of special symbols in the text, so I am trying again.

Have you seen an R language computer simulation of Pearle's (1970) model for the EPR-Bohm correlations by Richard Gill in July 2015 at http://rpubs.com/gill1109/pearle2 ?

The third graph shows that data are less likely to be gathered at theta = 90 and 270 degree.

The model uses a particular function to decide on whether data are excluded and this is the relevant part of the R code:

U is uniformly distributed

s i given by (2/sqrt(3*U+1)) - 1

where Pearle's "r" is arc cosine of "s"; divided by pi/2

this seems to be similar to your method of excluding data but I am not sure how close it is. Does your model give a curve which asymptotically approach the cosine curve as the number of pairs of particles emitted increases? The points plotted in your Figure 2 do not look like an exact match but that could be caused by a small sample? If your function is different, which gives the better fit to the cosine curve?

Best wishes

Austin

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 21, 2018 @ 14:50 GMT
Dear Austin,

Thank you for bringing that to my attention, I have not seen it before and it is great supporting evidence. The exact shape of the correlation curve can be tweaked by changing the algorithm for non-detects, and there may be different algorithms for different types of detectors. In my last graph the Steering Inequality is modeled so some of the non-detects (Alice’s) are admitted as valid results. Thus has the effect of changing the correlation curve away from a perfect cosine, primarily as perfect correlation and anti-correlation cannot be achieved at 0 and 180 degrees in such a model (as non-detects are included in the data).

Regards,

Declan

austin fearnley replied on Jan. 23, 2018 @ 15:46 GMT
Dear Declan

The paper that I mentioned by Gill shows the possibility of obtaining an asymptotically exact cosine curve by removing data according to a formula. I have written, a few years ago, a visual basic program (mimicking Chantal Roth's original java pprogram) to obtain the cosine curve but it does remove a lot of data (about 25%, by my memory?).

I am quite suspicious that you...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Jan. 24, 2018 @ 10:47 GMT
Dear Declan ! Many thanks for supporting my work by rating it up; Jan20, I already rated yours with 10. See my post above. I can learn at FQXI at lot of things by reading the key essays, which are connected to my own research on the logic of exponentiality and the fundamentals of science. Best: stephen

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 24, 2018 @ 14:28 GMT
Dear Stephen,

Ok, many thanks - I was wondering where that 10 came from...

Best Regards,

Declan

Colin Walker wrote on Jan. 25, 2018 @ 01:52 GMT
Dear Declan

I also have been investigating classically produced quantum correlations, in the context of Rob McEachern's one bit hypothesis. The simplified model I came up with had a similar amount of noise obscuring the cosine, but when the number of trials was increased to one billion, a residual systematic error of about 1 percent was discovered. This was verified with a purely...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 25, 2018 @ 02:44 GMT
Dear Colin,

Ok thanks for the comment. Austin brought the Pearle R code to my attention a few days ago (see his comment and my reply above). That is good supporting evidence for my essay.

My model does a very similar thing, although my algorithm for non-detects is based on cosine squared (Born’s rule - see past and current essays by Peter Jackson on the origin of cos squared dependency).

It’s good to have some like minded people in the contest. We should support each other’s work with a decent rating.

Regards,

Declan

Francesco D'Isa wrote on Jan. 25, 2018 @ 21:06 GMT
Dear Declan,

I read your essay, but due my formation in philosophy I've no means to evaluate – nor even to fully comprehend – your physics hypothesis. As far as I understand, it's quite revolutionary, if true – but sadly the history of science is full of thunderous silences.

Could you please sum up your discovery in not specialists term? If it's possible, of course.

Bests,

Francesco D'Isa

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 02:23 GMT
Dear Francesco,

Thank you for your kind comment.

Ok, I will try:

Most of Physics can be understood and makes sense in terms of Classical Physics that people can understand and is what is termed “Local and Real”. We can ‘see’ what is going on and can build a model of it.

Quantum Mechanics, on the other hand, has some strange counterintuitive aspects, with...

view entire post

Francesco D'Isa replied on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 07:39 GMT
Dear Declan,

thank you very much. It seems a very important discovery! I will rate it high to raise the curiosity of the specialists.

Best regards and wish you luck!

Francesco D'Isa

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 07:55 GMT
Dear Francesco,

Thank you very much, it would be good if it could get looked at by the establishment.

Do you have an essay too?

Best Regards,

Declan

austin fearnley wrote on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 17:05 GMT
Dear Declan

Please note that I have posted a reply to you on my own thread. Some of it is better placed on your thread so here it is ...

I still have a couple of points about your contest paper which I will likely post in your thread. But I have not got to grips with the Steering Inequality yet. The Steering Inequality is a theoretical device (2011 paper) which is not part of the recent experimental results (2015 paper)? The 2015 paper did not mention 'steering' AFAIK and anyway they only had 245 pairs of outcomes. And surely they did not contaminate an experimental finding with results other than +1 or -1? I presume that the steering inequality implies that some data were not detected to be measured for some genuine pairs which would have reduced the correlation absolute size if that data had been detected in the 2015 experiment? Or am I missing something from the 2015 experimental design?

Best

Austin

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 29, 2018 @ 05:02 GMT
Dear Austin,

When you talk about the 2015 paper, do you mean “Realization of mutually unbiased bases for a qubit with only one wave plate: theory and experiment” that I referenced in my essay?

If so, I included this reference as it provides information about the detector angles for MUBs where quarter and half wave plates are used (as is the case in the Ref 2 paper).

In that paper ther are -1,+1 and 0 results recorded and a Steering Inequality is used to analyze the results.

Regards,

Declan

austin fearnley replied on Jan. 29, 2018 @ 22:56 GMT
Declan

Very sorry for being obscure and wasting some of your time. The 2015 report was on the latest real experiment, that I know of, to try to close the loopholes (which had only 245 pairs of particles):

https://arxiv.org/abs/1508.05949

Experimental loophole-free violation of a Bell inequality using entangled electron spins separated by 1.3 km

Do you know if this is one of the recent experiments that have used the steering inequality as mentioned in your paragraph following Figure 2?

Best

Austin

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 08:07 GMT
Dear Austin,

Ok, no problem - I will have a look at that paper when I have more time, thanks...

Regards,

Declan

Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 29, 2018 @ 21:17 GMT
Hi Declan Andrew Traill

Wonderful work “ Quantum Mechanics claims that particles can become entangled such that there is a correlation in the detected results from EPR type experiments that cannot be explained by Classical Physics. This paper shows that the result can be fully explained by Classical Physics, and that the correlation curve for different angles between the two detectors can...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 08:39 GMT
Dear snp,

Thank you for your kind comment.

An interesting idea. I also think that the Universe can be modeled using linear equations based on Galilean principles. You might be interested to read my 2012 FQXi essay titled “A Classical Reconstruction of Relativity”.

The creation of Matter by light passing close to atomic nuclei is known to occur - pair production - but this is due to the strong electric field around, for example, a lead nucleus. Likewise electrons and positrons can mutually anihilate to produce gamma rays (light). There is a balance between both these types of events.

I think you have ‘Red shifted’ and ‘Blue shifted’ around the wrong way in you equations 32 and 33. A higher frequency would be a blue shift and a lower frequency would be a red shift.

Regards,

Declan

Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Jan. 31, 2018 @ 18:13 GMT
Thank you Dear Declan Andrew Traill

An interesting idea. I also think that the Universe can be modeled using linear equations based on Galilean principles. You might be interested to read my 2012 FQXi essay titled “A Classical Reconstruction of Relativity”.

The creation of Matter by light passing close to atomic nuclei is known to occur - pair production - but this is due to the strong electric field around, for example, a lead nucleus. Likewise electrons and positrons can mutually anihilate to produce gamma rays (light). There is a balance between both these types of events.

Thank you, can you please send me a copy of paper and more details of pair production …

I think you have ‘Red shifted’ and ‘Blue shifted’ around the wrong way in you equations 32 and 33. A higher frequency would be a blue shift and a lower frequency would be a red shift.

I noticed it. By mistake I sent older essay. FQXi puts older essay only.I put a corrected abstract, please see…

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 2, 2018 @ 21:58 GMT

Best regards

=snp

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Jan. 31, 2018 @ 22:29 GMT
Dear snp,

Here is a link to my 2012 FQXi essay:

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1363

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production

Rega
rds,

Declan

peter cameron wrote on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 20:01 GMT
Hello Declan,

As I understand it your essay explores the boundary between classical and quantum via the concept of 'steering inequality'. Or is it that it explores non-locality via that concept, and that leads you to question whether there exists difference between quantum and classical at the foundational level?

in any case it seems like understanding both local and non-local...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

peter cameron replied on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 20:11 GMT
Declan - to be clear re entangled photons, the scale invariant far field impedance that connects them is what communicates the superposition. The phase of neither is defined until it is measured, and they share that single superposed/entangled wavefunction phase when entangled via the invariant impedance. The phase determines the angular momentum orientation generated by the flow of energy between E and B fields. When that phase is defined at the one via measurement it is no longer superposed, and it's partner wherever she may be likewise has relative phase of her fields defined to conserve angular momentum.

report post as inappropriate

John C Hodge wrote on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 16:35 GMT
Declan Traill:

Here is another support for your model:

(1) superluminal signal of waves in my plenum

(2) all interaction is Bell's non-local - matter warps plenum, plenum divergence directs matter (like in GR)

(3) therefore, quantum weirdness unnecessary, classical scale descriptions work.

and

STOE assumptions that model particle diffraction and that replaces QM

IntellectualArchive, Vol.5, No. 3, P.1 , ISSN 1929-4700, Toronto, Jan. 2014

Therefore, single photon at a time experiment explained, may also explain entanglement and quantum eraser.

My plenum is (like zero point energy or "space" in GR) is like your Theta field (higher density=>slower light speed from Shapiro delay observation).

Universe according to the STOE

IntellectualArchive, Vol.4, No. 6, P.6 , ISSN 1929-4700, Toronto, Jan. 2014

"Even when presented with these experimental proofs, many people have

great difficulty believing that the effects actually occur." from your gsj paper

I'll be studing your papers on gsj.

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 8, 2018 @ 10:58 GMT
Dear John,

I will take a look at your work when I get a chance.

Thanks for showing an interest in mine. I also have some papers on ViXra here:

http://vixra.org/author/declan_traill

Regards,

Declan

Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Feb. 12, 2018 @ 14:35 GMT
Dear Declan,

Very interesting essay in the spirit of a deep Cartesian doubt. You give new ideas and important conclusions that are aimed at overcoming the crisis of understanding in the basis of fundamental science. Successes in the Contest!

Yours faithfully,

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 12, 2018 @ 22:04 GMT

Thank you for your kind words and support; I am glad you see the importance of this his work.

Do you have an essay in the contest?

Regards,

Declan

Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 13, 2018 @ 16:33 GMT
Yes, Declan, I invite you to read my essay .

report post as inappropriate

George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 14, 2018 @ 16:59 GMT
Hi Dear Andrew

I have read your work with huge interest. The matter is I am also has come to deep convince long ago in the possibility to interpret as QM laws and events, as well as the relativity in whole, issuing from the causality principle (i.e. in the same principle and fundaments as the classical physics are constructed!)

The problem only is in that, we loss the opportunity of direct observations (measuring) how working these causal-classical relations in the level of particle physics, as well as in case of near to light velocities (that is why we invented a "new kind of natural laws" - QM, ST & GR.)

Meanime, I has felt some complicaton with the QM entanglement that I can not understund how need to solve with classical viewpoint. That is why I am just happy to find your article!

So, I can only very welcame your partisipation in the contest and wish you succeses (meantime, not so much peouple will be with us!) Be well my dear!

Best Regards

report post as inappropriate

George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 06:16 GMT
Dear Andrew,

I am just shocked with this:

//The wave functions presented here describe particles with all the correct properties for an Electron and a Positron and satisfy the requirements of both the Classical and Quantum Mechanical interpretations.// And with the "The rotating vectors" - that is the one effective greatest method! (Most of theorists never using this, but electrical engineers well know it!)

My dear I am just saying the same that you says! What ever you have don that is very right! I no need even to check up all your formulas to say this because your formulas derive from ideas that are out of doubt for me.

Just let me say you some important thing - You have still used the "elementary charge" and with this the electrical and magnetic constants. We must be free of them to be explain everything by el.mag field only. It is possible do by understanding the essence and hugest cognitive significance of alpha (1/137). Then everything will become for you clean as spring water! Please look my works (from reference in the end) there you can find what is alpha, then I believe you can finalized your works and bring it to the very comprehensive level to everybody. Why you - because I am not so well with math, also with English, and also I am not so young!

Best wishes!

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 00:45 GMT
Dear George,

Thanks you for your kind comments. Yes, you are quite right, the charge could be further simplified in terms of something more fundamental. In my solutions the charge parameter just gives the correct amplitude to the wave function. My main concern was to build a model of electrons/positrons that works and can be fully understood in terms of Classical Physics. We know the solutions MUST be stable wave forms as they are solutions to the Schrodinger and Classical wave equations.

Regards,

Declan

Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 15:53 GMT
Declan,

I've just pointed Harri Tianen to yours, you should see his, (very consistent from a different viewpoint) and our discussions.

Did you see Roychouri, & Bollinger? & comment on Gordon Watson's partial algorithm?

Very best

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 02:19 GMT
Peter,

I don't have much time at the moment, but I have had a quick scan through those - some interesting work... I have added a comment & links to my work too.

Regards,

Declan

Kamal L Rajpal wrote on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 13:45 GMT
Dear Declan Andrew Traill,

Having read your Essay, I agree that Einstein was right when he did not agree with the EPR experiment conclusions and had said, “spooky action at a distance” cannot occur and that, “God does not play dice”. Please read Linear Polarization http://vixra.org/pdf/1303.0174v5.pdf

QM claims that an electron can be both spin-up and spin-down at the same time. In my conceptual physics Essay on Electron Spin, I have proved that this is not true. Please read: https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3145 or https://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Rajpal_1306.0141v3
.pdf

Kamal Rajpal

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 00:39 GMT
Dear Kamal,

Thanks for your comment. I had a look at your Linear Polarization paper, however I cannot see how you get your area percentages from the diagrams on page 12? For the examples given in the diagrams, I calculated the areas as shown below, but this is a linear curve, not a cosine squared curve:

0 degrees: 48/48 = 100%

15 degrees: 40/48 = 83.33%

22.5 degrees: 36/48 = 75%

30 degrees: 32/48 = 66.66%

45 degrees: 24/48 = 50%

60 degrees: 16/48 = 33.33%

67.5 degrees: 12/48 = 25%

75 degrees: 8/48 = 16.66%

90 degrees: 0/48 = 0%

Regards,

Declan

Kamal L Rajpal replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 16:55 GMT
Dear Declan Andrew Traill,

2D space can be filled up with squares but not with circles. See figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 on pages 4, 5 and 6. You are calculating the area inside the circle only. I am doing it inside the square. This was the mistake made in 1935. See paragraph 1 on page 11.

The tables on page 10 and 12 are similar.

The page 10 table has been arrived at using 7 squares as below:

No. Fig. Angle Area

1 15c 00 100

2 14c 15 093

3
13c 30 075

4 12c 45 050

5 11c 60 025

6 10c 75 007

7 09c 90 000

The table on page 12 has been arrived at using 9 squares and the precision is to the first decimal place.

Kamal Rajpal

report post as inappropriate

Terry Bollinger wrote on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 19:53 GMT
[NOTE: I inadvertently placed my assessment of your essay under your comment on my essay, so I suspect you have not even seen this yet (and I apologize in advance if you’ve already seen this and just did not choose to comment). Please also pardon the genuinely spontaneous “argh”s, as I actually quite impressed your essay. Finally, I inserted a rather long justification for how “primary...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 20:32 GMT
Dear Terry,

Thank you for your long and very positive comment, even though it is about my past 2012 essay.

I think you have understood my thesis quite well (most don’t seem to realize the meaning of it), though I think a sphere rather than a cube might be more appropriate. Actually there is only one reference frame in the Universe but different objects can have different states of motion with respect to the background phi field. There were no previous versions - this was my first model - I took quite a while thinking about it in various situations and concidering various known facts before sitting down to write and calculate. Indeed computer modeling has been an invaluable tool for checking my model; indeed an essential tool for the next step which was to build a 3D model of matter particles (electron and positron) which fits in perfectly with my 2012 essay ideas. This model can be found here: http://vixra.org/abs/1507.0054

Again, thanks for your support, and no, problems had not seen your comment so thanks for re-posting it here...

Best Regards,

Declan

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 20, 2018 @ 20:35 GMT
Terry,

Auto-correct error at the end of last post:

The word ‘problems’ appeared from the Ether and should not have been inserted into that sentence!

Declan

Terry Bollinger replied on Mar. 2, 2018 @ 01:00 GMT
Declan,

I've discovered that if you make a lot of FQXi comments for a lot of essays, figuring out whether someone has replied can be... tricky, even if you sign up notifications. The notifications do not tell you who added a comment! So my apologies, I only just now found your reply above, even though I looked for one (apparently in the wrong place) a couple of times.

Yes, you are exactly right that a ball is how your space should be described, not a cube. I don't recall why for sure, but I think I said "cube" only to emphasize that you model was using a nicely visualizable 3D space.

Bummer that more folks didn't get your model, though at the same time my own near-dismissal helps me understand why. Yours is a model that you have to dig into pretty deeply before you can start seeing how the transforms work out.

Likely I'll have more to say on this issue later, but for now I'm just playing catch up. I absolutely love that there are no ratings now, just comments! That makes it so much easier for folks just to talk about ideas, if they want to.

And apparently there is no deadline whatsoever for making comments, which is strange. But I looked, and the comments I made a few days ago on an essay thread you created 5 years ago is still there. Wow!

Cheers,

Terry

report post as inappropriate

Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 07:34 GMT
Dear Declan,

Here we are again all together. I enjoyed reading your contribution, which of course is worthy of the highest praise.

“This paper shows that the result can be fully explained by Classical Physics”. Great!

I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 03:46 GMT

Thanks for the positive comment on my essay. I have just read your paper, although admit I skipped over much of the detail, but got the general thesis. It is a very interesting paper, and I agree that matter is comprised of vortices held together (in part) by gravity. I think you would be interested in my paper where I model electrons and positrons as 3D Electromagnetic standing waves: http://vixra.org/pdf/1507.0054v6.pdf

My wave function solutions could work for any mass plugged in - leading to infinite possible particles, except that my suspicion is that only certain masses lead to just the right amount of wave curvature (due to gravitational bending) to allow stable particles to form. Thus only certain particles can exist. So this bending effect of gravity causes certain energy densities to be able to form stable wave function structures. Also I have long suspected that the Universe may have a fractal nature - the repeated application of simple laws building up bigger and bigger structures, but with a similar appearance at different size scales.

Best Regards,

Declan Traill

Christian Corda wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 16:59 GMT
Dear Declan,

Your wrote a very interesting and provocative Essay.

Classical and quantum are strongly connected with the issues of determinism and uncertainty. This discussion goes beyond physics as far as the fields of philosophy. It has also profound implications in the framework of unifications of theories. From a historical point of view, Einstein believed that, in the path to unification of theories, Quantum Mechanics had to be subjected to a more general deterministic theory, which he called Generalized Theory of Gravitation, but he did not obtain the final equations of such a theory. At present, this point of view is partially retrieved by some theorists, starting from the Nobel Laureate G. ’t Hooft. I agree with both of Einstein and ’t Hooft. Hence, I strongly appreciated your Essay and I hope that it could be the starting point of a more general discussion.

In any case, you wrote a nice and entertaining Essay, deserving my highest score.

Maybe you could be interested in my Essay, where I discuss a way to remove a fundamental uncertainty in quantum gravity... with Albert Einstein!

Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

report post as inappropriate

Gordon Watson wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 01:59 GMT
Dear Declan,

As a fellow Aussie, I give top marks to all those (from anywhere) who have-a-good-go. It is thus, for me, so good to see you having-a-real-good-go to understand reality -- via your many publications -- and to find that we share this interest: "in re-constructing ... Quantum Mechanics into a Classical framework that can be understood and visualized using a universal set of...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 03:20 GMT
Dear Gordon,

In answer to your question "what happened to classical energy conservation in each and every interaction?":

Every particle detect or non-detect obeys normal, Classical Physics. Energy conservation is obeyed - why would it not be?

If a particle isn't detected is may be simply absorbed by a molecule in the apparatus or elsewhere.

(Questions: 1, 2, 2a) The...

view entire post

Gordon Watson replied on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 11:39 GMT

Thanks Declan, your prompt reply is appreciated. It's also good to see that we have some agreements; but I won't dwell on them for now. Instead I want to discuss what looks like (in my opinion) a serious point of disagreement.

Please note that I have no wish to discourage you -- quite the contrary -- because I think you have guts...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 20:41 GMT
Gordon,

It’s not just me saying that the Classical prediction is linear, it says so on the Wikipedia page on bells theorem:

See the diagram in the overview section here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem

Regards
,

Declan

Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 13:42 GMT
Dear Declan, …(copied to your and mine)

Thanks for the positive comment on my essay.

I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080

report post as inappropriate

Steven Andresen wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 13:50 GMT
Dear Declan

If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please?

A couple of days in and semblance of my essay taking form, however the house bound inactivity was wearing me. I had just the remedy, so took off for a solo sail across the bay. In the lea of cove, I had underestimated the open water wind strengths. My...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Gordon Watson wrote on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 02:12 GMT
Declan, as foreshadowed above, here's some background on my theory; Gordon

Background to Wholistic Mechanics (WM)

Whereas QM emerged from the UV-catastrophe ca1905, WM emerges from the locality-catastrophe typified by John Bell's dilemma ca1965: ie, seriously ambivalent about AAD, Bell adamantly rejected locality. He later surmised that maybe he and his followers were being...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Declan Andrew Traill replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 02:33 GMT
Gordon,

As I already showed you in my email correspondence including the correlation graph and model code, modeling the EPR experiment using Malus’s law does not give the correct correlation curve.

So whatever your maths shows, if you cannot model it and get the correct correlation curve then it is wrong.

Regards,

Declan Traill

Gordon Watson replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 08:55 GMT
Declan, I've replied below, showing how Malus does give the correct result: and sure that you will spot your simple mistake when you see my equations. Cheers; Gordon

report post as inappropriate

Gordon Watson wrote on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 03:12 GMT
Declan, re the correlation graph that you sent me: please post the graph as an attachment on my essay-thread. I would like to reply in detail with reference to that context. Thanks; Gordon

report post as inappropriate

Gordon Watson replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 08:51 GMT
Declan, this is from my essay thread, in reply to the graph that you emailed me. GW ...............

Declan, thanks for attaching that strange (red-spotted) graph that you emailed to me. From your emails it appears you think it correct and that (somehow) my suggested remedy won't work. I'm hoping what follows (and further discussions, if necessary) may convince you otherwise.

I'm also...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

peter cameron wrote on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 19:12 GMT
Hello Declan,

Pasting in from a thread with Peter Jackson in the comments of essay by Michaele Suisse and myself. Want to wade thru comments on your essay, then come back to offer more:

Peter,

Looked again a couple times at Traill's essay. Perhaps starting to get the connection Terry Bollinger was trying to point out.

From perspective of the geometric wavefunction interaction (GWI) model Michaele and I are working with two essential points relevant to Declan's essay seem to stand out.

1. There exist two different varieties of quantized impedances - scale invariant and scale dependent. Forces associated with invariant impedances can do no work, cannot share energy/information. Resulting motion is perpendicular to direction of applied force. These are the conduits of non-locality. They communicate only the quantum phase of entanglement, not a single measurement observable. Here the GWI approach appears to be in harmony with what Declan shows.

2. What distinguishes quantum from classical is quantum phase. Once one accounts for the fact that phase is not a single measurement observable, from the perspective of our synthesis of geometric wavefunction interactions with quantized impedance networks QM appears 'classical', again in agreement with Declan's conclusion.

Having arrived at this, now feel ready to take a look at Watson, and then yours again. Tho we're not math folks here, Poincare sphere is only slightly familiar to me from Penrose's road to reality.

report post as inappropriate

Kamal L Rajpal wrote on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 15:14 GMT
Dear Declan Andrew Traill,

The tables on page 10 and 12 are similar.

The page 10 table has been arrived at using 7 squares as below:

No. Fig. Angle Area

1 15c 00 100

2 14c 15 093

3
13c 30 075

4 12c 45 050

5 11c 60 025

6 10c 75 007

7 09c 90 000

The table on page 12 has been arrived at using 9 squares and the precision is to the first decimal place.

Kamal Rajpal

report post as inappropriate

richard kingsley nixey wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 01:01 GMT
Declan,

Does your code completely fit the mechanism in Peter Jacksons essay? It took me some time to familiarise myself with it as it includes a number of fresh views and elements, all rather better evidenced and more logical than the original. I hope we're in for that revolution and hope to see you keep working together! I suspect only a strong collaboration will penetrate established views.

I'm giving you top marks for yours as, like Peter's, it's so fundamentally important. I wish I could help as it looks like there's some detailed mathematical or algorithmic back up still needed, unfortunately not my specialism.

Very best of luck in the judging, though from what I've seen in the past it's a bit of an 'old pals' or community benefit excercise, rather opposite to the point of fqXi!

Very well done anyway.

Rich

report post as inappropriate

Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 15:53 GMT
Declan, Richard

I explained the fit to Richard. It's been interesting how few have or have bothered to follow the mechanism. I set out a way ahead on my blog in answer to Gordon. Hope you two can reach agreement.

Andrew Beckwith complains he's been multi 1 bombed as I know you have so do read & support his if you haven't yet.

Very best

P

report post as inappropriate

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 17:15 GMT
Hi,

Have you tried to put it on a Bloch sphere? The slope is important. Is it intermediate?

Ulla Mattfolk

report post as inappropriate

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 17:26 GMT
Also, how is the QM line computed? + uncertainties? entanglements????

report post as inappropriate

John-Erik Persson wrote on Mar. 13, 2018 @ 18:41 GMT
Declan Traill

If you read this you may be interested in my last blog at:

blog


text:
# Surface Area of Cone

Go back to  'Mensuration-Solids'

The total surface area of a cone consists of two parts:

• The curved surface area

• The flat surface area (of the base)

The flat surface area is simply $$\pi {r^2}$$, since the base is circular. What is the curved surface area? To determine that, visualize what would happen if we cut open the cone and roll it out:

We will obtain a circular sector. It would be a good idea to try this activity. Cut out a circular sector from a piece of paper. Then, fold / roll the paper so that the two straight edges align with each other, and you will get a cone.

Note that the radius R of the circular sector is the slant height of the cone. Denote the slant height by  $$l$$. Observe that $$l= \sqrt {{r^2} + {h^2}}$$. Also, the arc length L of the circular sector is the circumference of the cone’s base, which is $$2\pi r$$. Now, the area of the circular sector is

\begin{align}&A = \frac{1}{{2\pi }} \times \frac{L}{R} \times \pi {R^2}\,\,\,\left( {{\rm{why}}?} \right)\\&\,\,\,\,\, = \frac{{LR}}{2} = \frac{{\left( {2\pi r} \right)\left( l \right)}}{2}\\&\,\,\,\,\, = \pi rl\end{align}

This is also the curved surface area of the cone!

To summarize:

• Flat SA= $$\pi {r^2}$$

• Curved SA = $$\pi rl = \pi r\sqrt {{r^2} + {h^2}}$$

• Total SA = $$\pi {r^2} + \pi rl = \pi r\left( {r + l} \right)$$

Mensuration and Solids
Mensuration and Solids
grade 10 | Questions Set 2
Mensuration and Solids
Mensuration and Solids
grade 10 | Questions Set 1

format: plain


text:
First of all, I'm fairly new to Mathematica and the Wolfram Environment in general. If this question has already been asked I'm sorry for the duplicate, but I haven't been able to track down the issue with searches on this site and the web.

I downloaded the AddOn-Package 'Theorema' and in the installation instructions it says that the package can be moved "into one of the locations for standard add-on packages'. In the AddOn folder that comes with the Mathematica installation there are three subdirectories: Applications, ExtraPackages and Packages. Not knowing where to put the Theorema package, I just pasted it into the Packages folder as stated in the installation instruction.

The problem now is, when I open a given .nb notebook file it immediately gives me an error that

the stylesheet TheoremaCore cannot be found by the Wolfram System

even though I have checked and it exists within the Theorema folder.

The second problem is the 'execution' of the Theorema package. The installation instructions say:

...execute the first command in the notebook Needs["Theorema"] by placing the cursor into that cell and hitting Shift+Enter.

However nothing happens when I do that. I also don't know exactly what is meant by "cell".

I hope someone has some kind of advice, thank you in advance.

• Put it in FileNameJoin[{$UserBaseDirectory, "Applications"}] and run Needs["Theorema"], notice the backtick after a. – Kuba Nov 15 '18 at 20:19 ## 1 Answer You should not modify the $$InstallationDirectory$$ of Mathematica. Put it in $UserBaseDirectory instead.

Evaluate

SystemOpen@FileNameJoin[{\$UserBaseDirectory, "Applications"}]
`

to get to the correct location.

The directory structure must look like this:


text:
## New publication in ACS Catalysis on composition dependent alloy electronic structure

| categories: | tags: | View Comments

In this collaborative paper we map out the electronic structure of a Cu-Pd alloy across composition space, and then correlate that electronic structure with the reactivity of the alloy. We experimentally measure the average energy of the filled valence band, and show it is similar to the calculated d-band center. We then show how those measured electronic structure properties correlate with the H2\D2 exchange kinetics. The combination of experiments on composition spread alloy films (CSAF) and theory provides an integrated understanding of alloy reactivity in this system.

@article{gumuslu-2015-correl-elect,
author =       {G. Gumuslu and P. Kondratyuk and J. R. Boes and B. Morreale
and J. B. Miller and J. R. Kitchin and A. J. Gellman},
title =        {Correlation of Electronic Structure With Catalytic Activity:
\ce{H2}-\ce{D2} Exchange Across \ce{Cu_{x}Pd_{1-x} Composition
Space},
journal =      {ACS Catalysis},
volume =       {5},
pages =        {3137-3147},
year =         2015,
doi =          {10.1021/cs501586t},
url =          {https://doi.org/10.1021/cs501586t},
date_added =   {Fri Apr 24 14:47:29 2015},
}


text:
### Pair Of Linear Equations In Two Variables Class 10th Mathematics AP Board Solution

##### Question 1.By comparing the ratios  find out whether the lines represented by the following pairs of linear equations intersect at a point, are parallel or are coincident.5x – 4y + 8 = 07x + 6y – 9 = 0Answer:We have,5x – 4y + 8 = 07x + 6y – 9 = 0Here, a1 = 5, b2 = -4, c1 = 8a1 = 7, b2 = 6, c1 = -9∴ ∴ Two line are intersecting with each at a point.Question 2.By comparing the ratios  find out whether the lines represented by the following pairs of linear equations intersect at a point, are parallel or are coincident.9x + 3y + 12 = 018x + 6y – 24 = 0Answer:We have,9x + 3y + 12 = 018x + 6y – 24 = 0Here, a1 = 9, b2 = 3, c1 = 12a1 = 18, b2 = 6, c1 = -24∴ ∴ Both the lines will coincide.Question 3.By comparing the ratios  find out whether the lines represented by the following pairs of linear equations intersect at a point, are parallel or are coincident.6x – 3y + 10 = 02x - y + 9 = 0Answer:We have,6x – 3y + 10 = 02x - y + 9 = 0Here, a1 = 6, b2 = -3, c1 = 10a1 = 2, b2 = -1, c1 = 9∴ ∴ Two line are parallel to each other.Question 4.Check whether the following equation are consistent or inconsistent. Solve them graphically.3x + 2y = 52x -3y = 7Answer:3x + 2y = 5 2x -3y = 7Here, a1 = 3, b2 = 2, c1 = 5a1 = 2, b2 = -3, c1 = 7∴ ∴ two equations are consistent.Question 5.Check whether the following equation are consistent or inconsistent. Solve them graphically.2x - 3y = 84x -6y = 9Answer:2x - 3y = 8 4x -6y = 9Here, a1 = 2, b2 = -3, c1 = 8a1 = 4, b2 = -6, c1 = 9∴ ∴ both lines are inconsistentQuestion 6.Check whether the following equation are consistent or inconsistent. Solve them graphically.9x -10y = 12Answer:9x -10y = 12Here, a1 = , b2 = , c1 = 7a1 = 9, b2 = -10, c1 = 12∴ ∴ both lines are consistentQuestion 7.Check whether the following equation are consistent or inconsistent. Solve them graphically.5x - 3y = 11-10x + 6y = -22Answer:5x - 3y = 11 -10x + 6y = -22Here, a1 = 5, b2 = -3, c1 = 11a1 = -10, b2 = 6, c1 = -22∴ ∴ two lines are consistentQuestion 8.Check whether the following equation are consistent or inconsistent. Solve them graphically.2x + 3y = 12Answer:2x + 3y = 12Here, a1 = , b2 = 2, c1 = 8a1 = 2, b2 = 3, c1 = 12∴ ∴ two equations are consistentQuestion 9.Check whether the following equation are consistent or inconsistent. Solve them graphically.x + y = 52x + 2y = 10Answer:x + y = 5 2x + 2y = 10Here, a1 = 1, b2 = 1, c1 = 5a1 = 2, b2 = 2, c1 = 10∴ ∴ two lines are inconsistentQuestion 10.Check whether the following equation are consistent or inconsistent. Solve them graphically.x - y = 83x + 3y = 16Answer:x - y = 8 3x + 3y = 16Here, a1 = 1, b2 = -1, c1 = 8a1 = 3, b2 = 3, c1 = 12∴ ∴ two lines are inconsistentQuestion 11.Check whether the following equation are consistent or inconsistent. Solve them graphically.2x + y =6 4x - 2y = 4Answer:2x + y = 6 4x - 2y = 4Here, a1 = 2, b2 = 1, c1 = 6a1 = 4, b2 = -2, c1 = 4∴ ∴ two lines are consistentQuestion 12.Check whether the following equation are consistent or inconsistent. Solve them graphically.2x - 2y =2 4x - 4y = 5Answer:2x - 2y = 2 4x - 4y = 5Here, a1 = 2, b2 = 2, c1 = 2a1 = 4, b2 = 4, c1 = 5∴ ∴ two lines are inconsistent.Question 13.Neha went to a ‘sale’ to purchase some pants and skirts. When her friend asked her how many of each she had bought, she answered “The number of skirts are two less than twice the number of pants purchased. Also the number of skirts is four less than four times the number of pants purchased.”Help her friend to find how many pants and skirts Neha bought.Answer:Let the number of pants purchased by Neha be ‘x’ and no. of skirts purchased be ‘y’.Twice the number of pants = 2xFrom the given condition,y = 2x – 2 (I)i.e. number of skirts are 2 less than 2 twice the number of pants.y = 4x – 4 (II)i.e. number of skirts are 4 less than four times the number of pants.Subtracting eq. I from II, we get2x = 2⇒ x = 1So number of pants purchased = 1 and number of skirts = 0Graphical Representation: Question 14.10 students of Class-X took part in a mathematics quiz. If the number of girls is 4 more than the number of boys then, find the number of boys and the number of girls who took part in the quiz.Answer:Let the number of girls and boys in the class be x and y respectivelyAccording to given condition, we have:x + y = 10x-y = 4x + y = 10 ⇒ x = 10-y x-y = 4 ⇒ x = 4 + yFrom the graph it can be observed that the two lines intersect each other at the point (7, 3)So, x = 7 and y = 3Number of Girls = 7;Number of boys = 3Question 15.5 pencils and 7 pens together cost D50 whereas 7 pencils and 5 pens together cost D46. Find the cost of one pencil and that of one pen.Answer:Let the cost of one pencil and one pen be ₹x and ₹y respectively.According to given situation, we have :5x + 7y = 507x + 5y = 465x + 7y = 50 7x + 5y = 46From the graph. It can be observed that the two lines are intersecting each other at (3,5)x = 3 and y = 5Cost of pencil =  3;Cost of pen =  5Question 16.Half the perimeter of a rectangular garden is 36 m. If the length is 4m more than its width, is 36 m. Find the dimensions of the garden.Answer:Let l be the length and b be the breadthl = b + 4l-b = 4Perimeter = 2(l + b)× 2(l + b) = 36 (given)l-b = 4 ……Il + b = 36 ….IIadding eq. I and II⇒ 2l = 40⇒ l =  = 20mSubstitute l = 20 in(1)l-b = 420-b = 4b = 20-4 = 16mLength = 20 mWidth = 16 mQuestion 17.We have a linear equation 2x + 3y-8 = 0. Write another linear equation in two variables such that the geometrical representation of the pair so formed is intersecting lines.Now, write two more linear equations so that one forms a pair of parallel lines and the second forms coincident line with the given equation.Answer:2x + 3y-8 = 03x + 2y-7 = 0(intersecting)2x + 3y + 12 = 0 (parallel lines)4x + 6y-16 = 0 (coincident lines)Question 18.The area of a rectangle gets reduced by 80 sq uints if its length is reduced by 5 units and breadth is increased by 2 units. If we increase the length by 10 units and decrease the breadth by 5 units, the area will increase by 50 sq units. Find the length and breadth of the rectangle.Answer:Let the length be x and breadth be yAccording to question,xy-80 = (x-5)(x + 2)⇒xy-80 = xy + 2x-5y-10⇒-80 + 10 = 2x-5y⇒ 2x-5y = -70 ….I(x + 10)(y-5) = xy + 50⇒ xy-5x + 10y-50 = xy + 50⇒ -5x + 10y = 100⇒ -x + 2y = 20 ….IIMultiplying Eq. II by 22x-5y = -70-2x + 4y = 40-y = -30y = 30substituting y = 30 in eq. II-x + 2× 30 = 20-x = 20-60x = 40length = 40units and breadth = 30 unitsQuestion 19.In X class, if three students sit on each bench, one student will be left. If four students sit on each bench, one bench will be left. Find the number of students and the number of benches in that class.Answer:Let the number no. of students be xLet the number no. of benches be yAccording to given condition, we havex = 3y + 1 ⇒ x-3y = 1 …..Ix = 4(y-1) ⇒ x = 4y-4 ⇒ x-4y = -4 ….IIEquating eq. I and IIx-3y = 1-x + 4y = 4y = 5Substituting y = 5 in eq. Ix-3×5 = 1⇒ x-15 + 1 ⇒x = 16Number of students = 16;Number of benches = 5
###### Exercise 4.3

PDF FILE TO YOUR EMAIL IMMEDIATELY PURCHASE NOTES & PAPER SOLUTION. @ Rs. 50/- each (GST extra)

HINDI ENTIRE PAPER SOLUTION

MARATHI PAPER SOLUTION

SSC MATHS I PAPER SOLUTION

SSC MATHS II PAPER SOLUTION

SSC SCIENCE I PAPER SOLUTION

SSC SCIENCE II PAPER SOLUTION

SSC ENGLISH PAPER SOLUTION

SSC & HSC ENGLISH WRITING SKILL

HSC ACCOUNTS NOTES

HSC OCM NOTES

HSC ECONOMICS NOTES

HSC SECRETARIAL PRACTICE NOTES

2019 Board Paper Solution

HSC ENGLISH SET A 2019 21st February, 2019

HSC ENGLISH SET B 2019 21st February, 2019

HSC ENGLISH SET C 2019 21st February, 2019

HSC ENGLISH SET D 2019 21st February, 2019

SECRETARIAL PRACTICE (S.P) 2019 25th February, 2019

HSC XII PHYSICS 2019 25th February, 2019

CHEMISTRY XII HSC SOLUTION 27th, February, 2019

OCM PAPER SOLUTION 2019 27th, February, 2019

HSC MATHS PAPER SOLUTION COMMERCE, 2nd March, 2019

HSC MATHS PAPER SOLUTION SCIENCE 2nd, March, 2019

SSC ENGLISH STD 10 5TH MARCH, 2019.

HSC XII ACCOUNTS 2019 6th March, 2019

HSC XII BIOLOGY 2019 6TH March, 2019

HSC XII ECONOMICS 9Th March 2019

SSC Maths I March 2019 Solution 10th Standard11th, March, 2019

SSC MATHS II MARCH 2019 SOLUTION 10TH STD.13th March, 2019

SSC SCIENCE I MARCH 2019 SOLUTION 10TH STD. 15th March, 2019.

SSC SCIENCE II MARCH 2019 SOLUTION 10TH STD. 18th March, 2019.

SSC SOCIAL SCIENCE I MARCH 2019 SOLUTION20th March, 2019

SSC SOCIAL SCIENCE II MARCH 2019 SOLUTION, 22nd March, 2019

XII CBSE - BOARD - MARCH - 2019 ENGLISH - QP + SOLUTIONS, 2nd March, 2019

HSC Maharashtra Board Papers 2020

(Std 12th English Medium)

HSC ECONOMICS MARCH 2020

HSC OCM MARCH 2020

HSC ACCOUNTS MARCH 2020

HSC S.P. MARCH 2020

HSC ENGLISH MARCH 2020

HSC HINDI MARCH 2020

HSC MARATHI MARCH 2020

HSC MATHS MARCH 2020

SSC Maharashtra Board Papers 2020

(Std 10th English Medium)

English MARCH 2020

HindI MARCH 2020

Hindi (Composite) MARCH 2020

Marathi MARCH 2020

Mathematics (Paper 1) MARCH 2020

Mathematics (Paper 2) MARCH 2020

Sanskrit MARCH 2020

Sanskrit (Composite) MARCH 2020

Science (Paper 1) MARCH 2020

Science (Paper 2)

MUST REMEMBER THINGS on the day of Exam

Are you prepared? for English Grammar in Board Exam.

Paper Presentation In Board Exam

How to Score Good Marks in SSC Board Exams

Tips To Score More Than 90% Marks In 12th Board Exam

How to write English exams?

How to prepare for board exam when less time is left

How to memorise what you learn for board exam

No. 1 Simple Hack, you can try out, in preparing for Board Exam

How to Study for CBSE Class 10 Board Exams Subject Wise Tips?

JEE Main 2020 Registration Process – Exam Pattern & Important Dates

NEET UG 2020 Registration Process Exam Pattern & Important Dates

How can One Prepare for two Competitive Exams at the same time?

8 Proven Tips to Handle Anxiety before Exams!


text:
It is currently 21 Sep 2017, 16:35

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# SCPREP

Author Message
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1890

Kudos [?]: 1344 [0], given: 1

Schools: CBS, Kellogg

### Show Tags

07 Feb 2009, 03:31
This topic is locked. If you want to discuss this question please re-post it in the respective forum.

Last Sunday a certain store sold copies of Newspaper A for $1.00 each and copies of Newspaper B for$1.25 each, and the store sold no other newspapers
that day. If r percent of the store's revenues from newspaper sales was from
Newspaper A and if p percent of the newspapers that the store sold were
copies of newspaper A, which of the following expresses r in terms of p?
100p/(125-p)
150p/(250-p)
300p/(375-p)
400p/(500-p)
500p/(625-p)
_________________

Kudos [?]: 1344 [0], given: 1

SVP
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2473

Kudos [?]: 832 [0], given: 19

### Show Tags

07 Feb 2009, 15:08
sondenso wrote:
Last Sunday a certain store sold copies of Newspaper A for $1.00 each and copies of Newspaper B for$1.25 each, and the store sold no other newspapers that day. If r percent of the store's revenues from newspaper sales was from Newspaper A and if p percent of the newspapers that the store sold were copies of newspaper A, which of the following expresses r in terms of p?

A. 100p/(125-p)
B. 150p/(250-p)
C. 300p/(375-p)
D. 400p/(500-p)
E. 500p/(625-p)

a = no. of newspaper a sold
b = no. of newspaper b sold
total = a+b

1. No. of paper sold:

$$\frac{p%}{100}=\frac{a}{a+b}$$

$$b=\frac{100a - pa}{p}$$

2. Sales revenue:

$$\frac{r%}{100}=\frac{a}{a+1.25b}$$

put the value of b in 2.

$$\frac{r%}{100} = \frac{a}{a + \frac{1.25(100a - pa)}{p}$$

solve for r,

$$r = \frac{400p}{500-p}$$

So it is D.

It took lot of time while i was solving but I now realize that its not that much time consuming.
_________________

Gmat: http://gmatclub.com/forum/everything-you-need-to-prepare-for-the-gmat-revised-77983.html

GT

Kudos [?]: 832 [0], given: 19

SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1890

Kudos [?]: 1344 [0], given: 1

Schools: CBS, Kellogg

### Show Tags

07 Feb 2009, 19:27
GMAT TIGER wrote:
sondenso wrote:
Last Sunday a certain store sold copies of Newspaper A for $1.00 each and copies of Newspaper B for$1.25 each, and the store sold no other newspapers that day. If r percent of the store's revenues from newspaper sales was from Newspaper A and if p percent of the newspapers that the store sold were copies of newspaper A, which of the following expresses r in terms of p?

A. 100p/(125-p)
B. 150p/(250-p)
C. 300p/(375-p)
D. 400p/(500-p)
E. 500p/(625-p)

a = no. of newspaper a sold
b = no. of newspaper b sold
total = a+b

1. No. of paper sold:

$${(p%)/100} = {a/(a+b)}$$
$${b = (100a - pa)/p"$$

2. Sales revenue:

$${(r%)/100 = a/(a+1.25b)}$$

put the value of b in 2.
$${(r%)/100} = {a/{(a + 1.25(100a - pa)/p}}$$

solve for r,

$${r = 400p/(500-p)}$$

D. It took lot of time while i was solving but I now realize that its not that much time consuming.

Thanks Tiger, what is that realization? Like your, my way consumes a lot of time
_________________

Kudos [?]: 1344 [0], given: 1

Director
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 855

Kudos [?]: 472 [0], given: 7

### Show Tags

08 Feb 2009, 05:20
1. pick value for the number of A and B, say, 5 and 4.
2. Calculate r and p
3. Replace the value for p in answer choices.
D.

Kudos [?]: 472 [0], given: 7

SVP
Joined: 07 Nov 2007
Posts: 1795

Kudos [?]: 1033 [0], given: 5

Location: New York

### Show Tags

08 Feb 2009, 21:10
sondenso wrote:
Last Sunday a certain store sold copies of Newspaper A for $1.00 each and copies of Newspaper B for$1.25 each, and the store sold no other newspapers
that day. If r percent of the store's revenues from newspaper sales was from
Newspaper A and if p percent of the newspapers that the store sold were
copies of newspaper A, which of the following expresses r in terms of p?
100p/(125-p)
150p/(250-p)
300p/(375-p)
400p/(500-p)
500p/(625-p)

assume p = 100% then r should be 100%

only B and D left.

say p = 50% then r = 50*100/(50+50*1.25) = 100/2.25 = 400/9

This possible only in D case.
_________________

Smiling wins more friends than frowning

Kudos [?]: 1033 [0], given: 5

Re: SCPREP   [#permalink] 08 Feb 2009, 21:10
Display posts from previous: Sort by


text:
# 带翅膀的猫

## 时光荏苒，我们一直都在

• ### LeetCode刷题（Easy Rank）：766. Toeplitz Matrix

5月前  •   •   •   44  •

### Question:

A matrix is Toeplitz if every diagonal from top-left to bottom-right has the same element.Now given an M x N matrix, return True if and only if the matrix is Toeplitz.

• ### LeetCode刷题（Easy Rank）：747. Largest Number At Least Twice of Others

5月前  •   •   •   23  •

### Question:

In a given integer array nums, there is always exactly one largest element.Find whether the largest element in the array is at least twice as much as every other number in the array.

• ### LeetCode刷题（Easy Rank）：746. Min Cost Climbing Stairs

5月前  •   •   •   22  •

### Question:

On a staircase, the i-th step has some non-negative cost cost[i] assigned (0 indexed).

• ### LeetCode刷题（Easy Rank）：724. Find Pivot Index

5月前  •   •   •   36  •

### Question:

Given an array of integers nums, write a method that returns the “pivot” index of this array.

• ### LeetCode刷题（Easy Rank）：717. 1-bit and 2-bit Characters

5月前  •   •   •   25  •

### Question:

We have two special characters. The first character can be represented by one bit 0. The second character can be represented by two bits (10 or 11).


text:
## Wednesday, June 13, 2018

### Profile your code in Jupyter notebook/lab

We discussed using profiler to profile your code and find out where it is slow in the previous blog, and but you need to run from command line. Today, we will have a look of the profile code in jupyter notebook. Note that, if you haven’t installed ‘line_profiler’, install it first:
pip install line_profiler

Let’s first define some functions to calculate random things. There are three functions that calling one by one.
def square_the_value(x, y):

return a**2

z = 0
for i in range(1000):
z += x
for j in range(1000):
z += y

return z

def calculate_my_value(x, y):

a = x + y
b = x - y

print(square_the_value(a, b))

calculate_my_value(1, 2)

994009000000

Now we want to have an idea of which part of the code running fast and which part running slow. We could use the line_profiler to do the job. First, we need to load the extension:
%load_ext line_profiler

Let’s profile the top level function that we run. We can see that we use ‘%lprun’, which basically run the line_profiler, the ‘-f’ flag is to tell it which function or method we want to profile, and the calculate_my_value(1, 2) is the real statement that we want to run:
%lprun -f calculate_my_value calculate_my_value(1, 2)

994009000000

Timer unit: 1e-06 s

Total time: 0.295409 s
Function: calculate_my_value at line 16

Line #      Hits         Time  Per Hit   % Time  Line Contents
==============================================================
16                                           def calculate_my_value(x, y):
17
18         1          3.0      3.0      0.0      a = x + y
19         1          1.0      1.0      0.0      b = x - y
20
21         1     295405.0 295405.0    100.0      print(square_the_value(a, b))

Now we could see that the line_profiler give us the time to run each line, and what’s the percentage of this line takes. We could see that the last line used all the time. We can continue to profile the last time by entering into the square_the_value function:
%lprun -f square_the_value calculate_my_value(1, 2)

994009000000

Timer unit: 1e-06 s

Total time: 0.39605 s
Function: square_the_value at line 1

Line #      Hits         Time  Per Hit   % Time  Line Contents
==============================================================
1                                           def square_the_value(x, y):
2
3         1     396048.0 396048.0    100.0      a = add_1000_times(x, y)
4
5         1          2.0      2.0      0.0      return a**2

Similarly, we could profile the add_1000_times function to figure out which line really takes all the time:
%lprun -f add_1000_times calculate_my_value(1, 2)

994009000000

Timer unit: 1e-06 s

Total time: 0.829793 s

Line #      Hits         Time  Per Hit   % Time  Line Contents
==============================================================


text:
GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 09 Dec 2018, 16:02

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

## Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in December
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
2526272829301
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
303112345
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### Free GMAT Algebra Webinar

December 09, 2018

December 09, 2018

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Attend this Free Algebra Webinar and learn how to master Inequalities and Absolute Value problems on GMAT.
• ### Free lesson on number properties

December 10, 2018

December 10, 2018

10:00 PM PST

11:00 PM PST

Practice the one most important Quant section - Integer properties, and rapidly improve your skills.

# A machine is made up of two components, A and B. Each component either

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 51035
A machine is made up of two components, A and B. Each component either  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2018, 01:32
00:00

Difficulty:

15% (low)

Question Stats:

82% (01:02) correct 18% (01:14) wrong based on 45 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A machine is made up of two components, A and B. Each component either works or fails. The failure or non-failure of one component is independent of the failure or non-failure of the other component. The machine works if at least one of the components works.

If the probability that each component works is $$\frac{2}{3}$$, what is the probability that the machine works?

A. $$\frac{1}{9}$$

B. $$\frac{4}{9}$$

C. $$\frac{1}{2}$$

D. $$\frac{2}{3}$$

E. $$\frac{8}{9}$$

_________________
CEO
Status: GMATINSIGHT Tutor
Joined: 08 Jul 2010
Posts: 2709
Location: India
GMAT: INSIGHT
WE: Education (Education)
Re: A machine is made up of two components, A and B. Each component either  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2018, 03:23
1
Bunuel wrote:
A machine is made up of two components, A and B. Each component either works or fails. The failure or non-failure of one component is independent of the failure or non-failure of the other component. The machine works if at least one of the components works.

If the probability that each component works is $$\frac{2}{3}$$, what is the probability that the machine works?

A. $$\frac{1}{9}$$

B. $$\frac{4}{9}$$

C. $$\frac{1}{2}$$

D. $$\frac{2}{3}$$

E. $$\frac{8}{9}$$

Method 1:

Machine works if atleast one component works i.e. we get the following cases for machine to work

Case 1: First Component works and Second Fails = Probability = (2/3)*(1/3) = 2/9

Case 2: First Component Fails and Second Works = Probability = (1/3)*(2/3) = 2/9

Case 3: First Component works and Second Works = Probability = (2/3)*(2/3) = 4/9

Total Probability = (2/9)+(2/9)+(4/9) = 8/9

Method 2:

Probability of machine to work = 1 - Probability of machine to fail to wrk

i.e. Probability of machine to work = 1 - Probability of Both components failing = 1- (1/3)*(1/3) = 1- (1/9) = 8/9

Hope this helps!!!
_________________

Prosper!!!
GMATinsight
Bhoopendra Singh and Dr.Sushma Jha
e-mail: info@GMATinsight.com I Call us : +91-9999687183 / 9891333772
Online One-on-One Skype based classes and Classroom Coaching in South and West Delhi
http://www.GMATinsight.com/testimonials.html

ACCESS FREE GMAT TESTS HERE:22 ONLINE FREE (FULL LENGTH) GMAT CAT (PRACTICE TESTS) LINK COLLECTION

##### General Discussion
Director
Joined: 20 Feb 2015
Posts: 796
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Re: A machine is made up of two components, A and B. Each component either  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2018, 01:37
Bunuel wrote:
A machine is made up of two components, A and B. Each component either works or fails. The failure or non-failure of one component is independent of the failure or non-failure of the other component. The machine works if at least one of the components works.

If the probability that each component works is $$\frac{2}{3}$$, what is the probability that the machine works?

A. $$\frac{1}{9}$$

B. $$\frac{4}{9}$$

C. $$\frac{1}{2}$$

D. $$\frac{2}{3}$$

E. $$\frac{8}{9}$$

A works but B doesn't = 2/3*1/3=2/9
B works but A doesn't = 2/9
both A and B work = 2/3*2/3=4/9
p(machine works) = sum of above = 2/9 + 2/9 + 4/9 = 8/9
Intern
Joined: 14 Aug 2014
Posts: 13
Location: India
GMAT 1: 660 Q50 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q51 V30
GMAT 3: 720 Q51 V35
Re: A machine is made up of two components, A and B. Each component either  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2018, 03:37
The only case in which machine will not work : Both A and B fail

Probability that machine will work = 1 - Probability of both A and B failing

Probability of A failing = 1 - 2/3 = 1/3

Probability of B failing = 1 - 2/3 = 1/3

Probability of both A and B failing = (1/3)*(1/3) = 1/9

Probability that machine will work = 1 - 1/9 = 8/9
Re: A machine is made up of two components, A and B. Each component either &nbs [#permalink] 14 Aug 2018, 03:37
Display posts from previous: Sort by


text:
# Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [build] Problems with VC14 and MSPDB140.DLL (was: [testing][teeks] MSVC-14 errors about MSPDB140.DLL)
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-08-10 15:22:11

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 9:35 PM, Andrey Semashev
<andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Vladimir Prus <vladimir.prus_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Tom,
>>
>> On 28-Jul-15 3:44 AM, Tom Kent wrote:
>>
>>> Looking at the boost-build code, this batch file is created in
>>> build/src/tools/msvc.jam:744. This file will create the temp file in
>>> question by grabbing the output of a run of the visual studio environment
>>> setup routine (i.e. C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio
>>> 14.0\vc\vcvarsall.bat amd64). However, for the msvc-14.0 /
>>> case, it seems that it is combining the 32 bit and 64 bit variables into
>>> one causing this issue (and other variables that shouldn't be set by the
>>> amd64 run, such as FrameworkVersion32 and FrameworkVersion64...just
>>> running
>>> the above command only sets FrameworkVersion64).
>>>
>>> Is it possible that build is running the 32 bit variable file, then
>>> running
>>> the 64 bit instance?
>>
>>
>> local original-vars = [ SPLIT_BY_CHARACTERS [ SHELL set ] : "\n"
>> ] ;
>> local new-vars = [ SPLIT_BY_CHARACTERS [ SHELL "\$(setup-script)
>> \$(setup-options)>nul && set" ] : "\n" ] ;
>> local diff-vars = [ set.difference \$(new-vars) :
>> \$(original-vars) ] ;
>>
>> So we should be capturing the changes that the particular setup script does
>> to environment; it's not obvious
>> why this would start to fail with VS 14 - adding
>>
>> ECHO \$(diff-vars) ;
>>
>> after the above lines might be illuminating. I'm installing VS 14 now, but
>> it might take a day till
>> I get to debug.
>
> I have tried to add this echo and indeed it outputs the broken Path
> already. Also, I tried to print %PATH% from the console (VS2015 x86
> x64 Cross Tools Command Prompt) and it also has the %DevEnvDir% path
> first there.
>
> I inspected the vcvarsx86_amd64.bat script which sets up the
> environment and I can see that in line 62 it indeed inserts
> %DevEnvDir% before the paths to the compilers, so we have our culprit.
> The question is what do we do about it?

I created a Connect ticket about it: