Showing 1–20 of 20 results for author: Rosinger, E E

Extended Tensor Products and Generalization of the Notion of Entanglement

Authors: Andrei Khrennikov, Elemer E. Rosinger

Abstract: Motivated by the novel applications of the mathematical formalism of quantum theory and its generalizations in cognitive science, psychology, social and political sciences, and economics, we extend the notion of the tensor product and entanglement. We also study the relation between conventional entanglement of complex qubits and our generalized entanglement. Our construction can also be used to d… ▽ More Motivated by the novel applications of the mathematical formalism of quantum theory and its generalizations in cognitive science, psychology, social and political sciences, and economics, we extend the notion of the tensor product and entanglement. We also study the relation between conventional entanglement of complex qubits and our generalized entanglement. Our construction can also be used to describe entanglement in the framework of non-Archimedean physics. It is also possible to construct tensor products of non-Archimedean (e.g., $p$-adic) and complex Hilbert spaces. △ Less

Submitted 2 March, 2012; originally announced March 2012.

Comments: Proceedings of AIP, conference Foundations of Probability and Physics 6, Vaxjo, Sweden, June 2011, volume 1424

Journal ref: FOUNDATIONS OF PROBABILITY AND PHYSICS - 6, AIP Conf. Proc., 1424 (2012)

Two Theories of Special Relativity ?

Authors: Elemer E. Rosinger

Abstract: Recently, [3], it was shown that Special Relativity is in fact based on one single physical axiom which is that of Reciprocity. Originally, Einstein, [1], established Special Relativity on two physical axioms, namely, the Galilean Relativity and the Constancy of the Speed of Light in inertial reference frames. Soon after, [4,5], it was shown that the Galilean Relativity alone is sufficient for Spe… ▽ More Recently, [3], it was shown that Special Relativity is in fact based on one single physical axiom which is that of Reciprocity. Originally, Einstein, [1], established Special Relativity on two physical axioms, namely, the Galilean Relativity and the Constancy of the Speed of Light in inertial reference frames. Soon after, [4,5], it was shown that the Galilean Relativity alone is sufficient for Special Relativity. Here it is important to note that, implicitly, three more assumptions have been used on space-time coordinate transformations, namely, the homogeneity of space-time, the isotropy of space, and a mathematical condition of smoothness type. In [3], a boundedness condition on space-time coordinate transformations is used instead of a usual mathematical smoothness type condition. In this paper it is shown that the respective boundedness condition is closely related to a Principle of Transformation Increment Ratio Limitation, or in short, PTIRL, which has an obvious physical meaning. It is also shown that PTIRL is {\it not} a stronger assumption than that of the mentioned boundedness in [3]. Of interest is the fact that, by formulating PTIRL as a physical axiom, the possibility is opened up for the acceptance, or on the contrary, rejection of this physical axiom PTIRL, thus leading to {\it two} possible theories of Special Relativity. And to add further likelihood to such a possibility, the rejection of PTIRL leads easily to effects which involve unlimited time and/or space intervals, thus are not accessible to usual experimentation for the verification of their validity, or otherwise. △ Less

Submitted 16 June, 2010; v1 submitted 14 June, 2010; originally announced June 2010.

Further on Pilot-Wave Theories

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: In [2], a detailed argument is presented on a version of pilot-waves, given by at Theory of Exclusively Local Beables. What the author of [2] considers to be his crucial proposal is described in the title of section 3 as 'complicated, ugly, and highly contrived'. The reason for such a proposal is claimed to be the widespread perception among quantum physicists, according to which 'those sympathe… ▽ More In [2], a detailed argument is presented on a version of pilot-waves, given by at Theory of Exclusively Local Beables. What the author of [2] considers to be his crucial proposal is described in the title of section 3 as 'complicated, ugly, and highly contrived'. The reason for such a proposal is claimed to be the widespread perception among quantum physicists, according to which 'those sympathetic to the pilot-wave ontology no doubt expected that, for a system of N particles moving in three spatial dimensions, the theoretical description would be of N wave-particle pairs - each pair consisting of a point particle guided in some way by an associated wave propagating in 3-space. But Schroedinger's wave function for such an N-particle system was emphatically not a set of N (interacting) waves, each propagating in 3-space. It was, rather, a single wave propagating in the 3N-dimensional configuration space for the system', [2, p. 5]. In the present paper it is argued that the mentioned widespread expectation need not be seen as being betrayed by what actually happens. In particular, the construction in section 3 of [2] may be avoidable. △ Less

Submitted 2 October, 2009; originally announced October 2009.

Comments on S Kauffman's paper arxiv:0907.2492

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: Deficiencies in Kauffman's proposal regarding a new way for building scientific theories are pointed out. A suggestion to overcome them, and in fact, independently construct mathematical theories which are beyond the reach of Goedel's incompleteness theorem is presented. This suggestion is based on bringing together recent developments in literature regarding inconsistent mathematics and self-re… ▽ More Deficiencies in Kauffman's proposal regarding a new way for building scientific theories are pointed out. A suggestion to overcome them, and in fact, independently construct mathematical theories which are beyond the reach of Goedel's incompleteness theorem is presented. This suggestion is based on bringing together recent developments in literature regarding inconsistent mathematics and self-referential mathematics. △ Less

Submitted 1 August, 2009; originally announced August 2009.

Special Relativity in Reduced Power Algebras

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: Recently, [10,11], the Heisenberg Uncertainty relation and the No-Cloning property in Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Computation, respectively, have been extended to versions of Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Computation which are re-formulated using scalars in {\it reduced power algebras}, [2-9], instead of the usual real or complex scalars. Here, the Lorentz coordinate transformations, fundament… ▽ More Recently, [10,11], the Heisenberg Uncertainty relation and the No-Cloning property in Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Computation, respectively, have been extended to versions of Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Computation which are re-formulated using scalars in {\it reduced power algebras}, [2-9], instead of the usual real or complex scalars. Here, the Lorentz coordinate transformations, fundamental in Special Relativity, are extended to versions of Special Relativity that are similarly re-formulated in terms of scalars in reduced power algebras, instead of the usual real or complex scalars. The interest in such re-formulations of basic theories of Physics are due to a number of important reasons, [2-11]. Suffice to mention two of them : the difficult problem of so called "infinities in Physics" falls easily aside due to the presence of infinitesimal and infinitely large scalars in such reduced power algebras, and the issue of fundamental constants in physics, like Planck's $h$, or the velocity of light $c$, comes under a new focus which offers rather surprising alternatives. △ Less

Submitted 17 May, 2010; v1 submitted 2 March, 2009; originally announced March 2009.

No-Cloning in Reduced Power Algebras

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: The No-Cloning property in Quantum Computation is known not to depend on the unitarity of the operators involved, but only on their linearity. Based on that fact, here it is shown that the No-Cloning property remains valid when Quantum Mechanics is re-formulated within far wider frameworks of {\it scalars}, namely, one or the other of the infinitely many {\it reduced power algebras} which can re… ▽ More The No-Cloning property in Quantum Computation is known not to depend on the unitarity of the operators involved, but only on their linearity. Based on that fact, here it is shown that the No-Cloning property remains valid when Quantum Mechanics is re-formulated within far wider frameworks of {\it scalars}, namely, one or the other of the infinitely many {\it reduced power algebras} which can replace the usual real numbers $\mathbb{R}$, or complex numbers $\mathbb{C}$. △ Less

Submitted 2 February, 2009; originally announced February 2009.

Mathematical Models in Physics : a Quest for Clarity

Authors: Elemer E. Rosinger

Abstract: The role of mathematical models in physics has for longer been well established. The issue of their proper building and use appears to be less clear. Examples in this regard from relativity and quantum mechanics are mentioned. Comments concerning a more appropriate way in setting up and using mathematical models in physics are presented. The role of mathematical models in physics has for longer been well established. The issue of their proper building and use appears to be less clear. Examples in this regard from relativity and quantum mechanics are mentioned. Comments concerning a more appropriate way in setting up and using mathematical models in physics are presented. △ Less

Submitted 8 April, 2008; v1 submitted 5 April, 2008; originally announced April 2008.

How Far Should the Principle of Relativity Go ?

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: The Principle of Relativity has so far been understood as the {\it covariance} of laws of Physics with respect to a general class of reference frame transformations. That relativity, however, has only been expressed with the help of {\it one single} type of mathematical entities, namely, the scalars given by the usual continuum of the field $\mathbb{R}$ of real numbers, or by the usual mathemati… ▽ More The Principle of Relativity has so far been understood as the {\it covariance} of laws of Physics with respect to a general class of reference frame transformations. That relativity, however, has only been expressed with the help of {\it one single} type of mathematical entities, namely, the scalars given by the usual continuum of the field $\mathbb{R}$ of real numbers, or by the usual mathematical structures built upon $\mathbb{R}$, such as the scalars given by the complex numbers $\mathbb{C}$, or the vectors in finite dimensional Euclidean spaces $\mathbb{R}^n$, infinite dimensional Hilbert spaces, etc. This paper argues for {\it progressing deeper and wider} in furthering the Principle of Relativity, not by mere covariance with respect to reference frames, but by studying the possible covariance with respect to a {\it large variety} of algebras of scalars which extend significantly $\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{C}$, variety of scalars in terms of which various theories of Physics can equally well be formulated. First directions in this regard can be found naturally in the simple Mathematics of Special Relativity, the Bell Inequalities in Quantum Mechanics, or in the considerable amount of elementary Mathematics in finite dimensional vector spaces which occurs in Quantum Computation. The large classes of algebras of scalars suggested, which contain $\mathbb{R}$ and $\mathbb{C}$ as particular cases, have the important feature of typically {\it no longer} being Archimedean, see Appendix, a feature which can prove to be valuable when dealing with the so called "infinities" in Physics. The paper has a Comment on the so called "end of time". △ Less

Submitted 2 January, 2008; v1 submitted 1 October, 2007; originally announced October 2007.

Mathematics and "The Trouble with Physics", How Deep We Have to Go ?

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: The parts contributed by the author in recent discussions with several physicists and mathematicians are reviewed, as they have been occasioned by the 2006 book "The Trouble with Physics", of Lee Smolin. Some of the issues addressed are the possible and not yet sufficiently explored relationship between modern Mathematics and theoretical Physics, as well as the way physicists may benefit from be… ▽ More The parts contributed by the author in recent discussions with several physicists and mathematicians are reviewed, as they have been occasioned by the 2006 book "The Trouble with Physics", of Lee Smolin. Some of the issues addressed are the possible and not yet sufficiently explored relationship between modern Mathematics and theoretical Physics, as well as the way physicists may benefit from becoming more aware of what at present appear to be certain less than fortunate yet essential differences between modern Mathematics and theoretical Physics, as far as the significant freedom of introducing new fundamental concepts, structures and theories in the former is concerned. A number of modern mathematical concepts and structures are suggested for consideration by physicists, when dealing with foundational issues in present day theoretical Physics. Since here discussions with several persons are reviewed, certain issues may be brought up more than one time. For such repetitions the author ask for the kind understanding of the reader. △ Less

Submitted 8 July, 2007; originally announced July 2007.

String Theory: a mere prelude to non-Archimedean Space-Time Structures?

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: It took two millennia after Euclid and until in the early 1880s, when we went beyond the ancient axiom of parallels, and inaugurated geometries of curved spaces. In less than one more century, General Relativity followed. At present, physical thinking is still beheld by the yet deeper and equally ancient Archimedean assumption which entraps us into the limited view of "only one walkable world".… ▽ More It took two millennia after Euclid and until in the early 1880s, when we went beyond the ancient axiom of parallels, and inaugurated geometries of curved spaces. In less than one more century, General Relativity followed. At present, physical thinking is still beheld by the yet deeper and equally ancient Archimedean assumption which entraps us into the limited view of "only one walkable world". In view of that, it is argued with some rather easily accessible mathematical support that Theoretical Physics may at last venture into the Non-Archimedean realms. △ Less

Submitted 15 March, 2007; originally announced March 2007.

Quantum Foundations : Is Probability Ontological ?

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: It is argued that the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, founded ontologically on the concept of probability, may be questionable in view of the fact that within Probability Theory itself the ontological status of the concept of probability has always been, and is still under discussion. It is argued that the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, founded ontologically on the concept of probability, may be questionable in view of the fact that within Probability Theory itself the ontological status of the concept of probability has always been, and is still under discussion. △ Less

Submitted 24 July, 2010; v1 submitted 2 March, 2007; originally announced March 2007.

Cosmic Contact : To Be, or Not To Be Archimedean ?

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: This is a two part paper which discusses various issues of cosmic contact related to what so far appears to be a self-imposed censorship implied by the customary acceptance of the Archimedean assumption on space-time. This is a two part paper which discusses various issues of cosmic contact related to what so far appears to be a self-imposed censorship implied by the customary acceptance of the Archimedean assumption on space-time. △ Less

Submitted 4 April, 2007; v1 submitted 23 February, 2007; originally announced February 2007.

Further de-Entangling Entanglement

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: A recent general model of entanglement, [5], that goes much beyond the usual one based on tensor products of vector spaces is further developed here. It is shown that the usual Cartesian product can be seen as two extreme particular instances of non-entanglement. Also the recent approach to entanglement in [8] is incorporated in the general model in [5]. The idea pursued is that entanglement is… ▽ More A recent general model of entanglement, [5], that goes much beyond the usual one based on tensor products of vector spaces is further developed here. It is shown that the usual Cartesian product can be seen as two extreme particular instances of non-entanglement. Also the recent approach to entanglement in [8] is incorporated in the general model in [5]. The idea pursued is that entanglement is by now far too important a phenomenon in Quantum Mechanics, in order to be left confined to its present exclusive modelling by tensor products. Once this is realized, it turns out that one can quite easily de-entangle entanglement from tensor products, and in fact, one can do so in a large variety of ways. Within such general settings the issue of entanglement becomes connected with the issue of "System versus Subsystem" in General Systems Theory, where synthesizing subsystems into a system may often be less difficult than identifying subsystems in a system. △ Less

Submitted 10 July, 2008; v1 submitted 22 January, 2007; originally announced January 2007.

From Reference Frame Relativity to Relativity of Mathematical Models : Relativity Formulas in a Variety of Non-Archimedean Setups

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: Galilean Relativity and Einstein's Special and General Relativity showed that the Laws of Physics go deeper than their representations in any given reference frame. Thus covariance, or independence of Laws of Physics with respect to changes of reference frames became a fundamental principle. So far, all of that has only been expressed within one single mathematical model, namely, the traditional… ▽ More Galilean Relativity and Einstein's Special and General Relativity showed that the Laws of Physics go deeper than their representations in any given reference frame. Thus covariance, or independence of Laws of Physics with respect to changes of reference frames became a fundamental principle. So far, all of that has only been expressed within one single mathematical model, namely, the traditional one built upon the usual continuum of the field $\mathbb{R}$ of real numbers, since complex numbers, finite dimensional Euclidean spaces, or infinite dimensional Hilbert spaces, etc., are built upon the real numbers. Here, following [55], we give one example of how one can go beyond that situation and study what stays the same and what changes in the Laws of Physics, when one models them within an infinitely large variety of algebras of scalars constructed rather naturally. Specifically, it is shown that the Special Relativistic addition of velocities can naturally be considered in any of infinitely many reduced power algebras, each of them containing the usual field of real numbers and which, unlike the latter, are non-Archimedean. The nonstandard reals are but one case of such reduced power algebras, and are as well non-Archimedean. Two surprising and strange effects of such a study of the Special Relativistic addition of velocities are that one can easily go beyond the velocity of light, and rather dually, one can as easily end up frozen in immobility, with zero velocity. Both of these situations, together with many other ones, are as naturally available, as the usual one within real numbers. △ Less

Submitted 10 January, 2007; originally announced January 2007.

A General Scheme of Entanglement

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: Entanglement is a well known fundamental resource in quantum information. Here the following question is addressed : which are the deeper roots of entanglement that may help in its better understanding and use ? The answer is that one can reproduce the phenomenon of entanglement in a far more general and simple way, a way that goes much beyond the usual one which is limited to the framework of t… ▽ More Entanglement is a well known fundamental resource in quantum information. Here the following question is addressed : which are the deeper roots of entanglement that may help in its better understanding and use ? The answer is that one can reproduce the phenomenon of entanglement in a far more general and simple way, a way that goes much beyond the usual one which is limited to the framework of tensor products of vector spaces. In this general approach to entanglement presented here - and much unlike in the particular setup of tensor products of vector spaces - the spaces involved can be rather arbitrary sets, just as in the case of Cartesian products. In particular, they need not even have any algebraic structure. Thus they do not have to be vector spaces, groups or even semigroups. △ Less

Submitted 12 November, 2008; v1 submitted 10 January, 2007; originally announced January 2007.

Theories of Physics and Impossibilities

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: The role of impossibilities in theories of Physics is mentioned and a recent result is recalled in which Quantum Mechanics is characterized by three information-theoretic impossibilities. The inconvenience of the asymmetries established by such impossibilities is pointed out. The role of impossibilities in theories of Physics is mentioned and a recent result is recalled in which Quantum Mechanics is characterized by three information-theoretic impossibilities. The inconvenience of the asymmetries established by such impossibilities is pointed out. △ Less

Submitted 21 December, 2005; originally announced December 2005.

Solving Problems in Scalar Algebras of Reduced Powers

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: Following our previous work, we suggest here a large class of algebras of scalars in which simultaneous and correlated computations can be performed owing to the existence of surjective algebra homomorphisms. This may replace the currently used traditional computations in which only real or complex scalars are used, or occasionally, nonstandard ones. The usual real, complex, or nonstandard scala… ▽ More Following our previous work, we suggest here a large class of algebras of scalars in which simultaneous and correlated computations can be performed owing to the existence of surjective algebra homomorphisms. This may replace the currently used traditional computations in which only real or complex scalars are used, or occasionally, nonstandard ones. The usual real, complex, or nonstandard scalars are included in the mentioned large class of algebras. Such simultaneous and correlated computations offer a depth of insight which has so far been missed when only using the few traditional kind of scalars. △ Less

Submitted 24 August, 2005; originally announced August 2005.

An omission in Special Relativity

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: In Special Relativity there are infinitely many equivalence classes of frames of reference. In each such class every two frames of reference move uniformly with respect to one another. It appears that the following questions have never been asked : 1) In which of such equivalence classes of frames of reference is Special Relativity supposed to hold ? 2) How can we identify such a class, and do s… ▽ More In Special Relativity there are infinitely many equivalence classes of frames of reference. In each such class every two frames of reference move uniformly with respect to one another. It appears that the following questions have never been asked : 1) In which of such equivalence classes of frames of reference is Special Relativity supposed to hold ? 2) How can we identify such a class, and do so theoretically or empirically ? △ Less

Submitted 6 May, 2005; originally announced May 2005.

Where and how does it happen ?

Authors: Elemer E Rosinger

Abstract: It has for ages been a rather constant feature of thinking in science to take it for granted that the respective thinking happens in realms which are totally outside and independent of all the other phenomena that constitute the objects of such thinking. The imposition of this divide on two levels may conflict with basic assumptions of Newtonian and Einsteinian mechanics, as well as with those i… ▽ More It has for ages been a rather constant feature of thinking in science to take it for granted that the respective thinking happens in realms which are totally outside and independent of all the other phenomena that constitute the objects of such thinking. The imposition of this divide on two levels may conflict with basic assumptions of Newtonian and Einsteinian mechanics, as well as with those in Quantum Mechanics. It also raises the question whether the realms in which thinking happens have no any other connection with the realms science deals with, except to host and allow scientific thinking. △ Less

Submitted 10 August, 2007; v1 submitted 5 May, 2005; originally announced May 2005.

Two problems in Classical Mechanics

Authors: E. E. Rosinger

Abstract: A problem about the present structure of dimensional analysis, and another one about the differences between solids and fluids are suggested. Both problems appear to have certain foundational aspects. A problem about the present structure of dimensional analysis, and another one about the differences between solids and fluids are suggested. Both problems appear to have certain foundational aspects. △ Less

Submitted 9 July, 2004; originally announced July 2004.