Re: Quantum mystics

Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

I just watched a talk by Anton Zeilinger, professor of physics
at the university of Vienna, and 2022 Nobel laureate, about
quantum effects and entanglement.
 
I feel a rant bubbling up!
 
The guy is a mystic, a fraud! He pretended to demonstrate that
light consists of particles by showing a little box that starts
clicking, like a Geiger counter, when exposed to light. Even if
the little box really did detect light, that means nothing! Light
*detection* is quantized, yes, but that does not imply that light
itself is so too.
 
He attempted to convince the public that entanglement means that
the results of measurements made at two remote places come out
identically, and without any time delay. That's just not true,
but he didn't even give a hint of how this really works. He did
not mention that you have to make *correlated* measurements to
detect entanglement. For that, you need to communicate *what*
measurement is to be made at each location, and that implies
that you either prescribe the exact measurement in advance or
select a subset of the results after the fact. Either way, this
skews the data.
 
He's in it for the money and the fame. Grrr. And he's one of
many, too.
 
Jeroen Belleman
 

One of many over the years, starting with Bohr. Among the others are David
Bohm, Fritjof Capra, and Brian Josephson.

They’re distinguished from the mechanistic materialist majority merely by
being wrong in the opposite direction.

Almost all physicists make horrible philosophers, some worse than others.
It’s an occupational hazard.

When Tommy’s mum doesn’t make him clean up his own room because he’s so
smart, Tommy needs an unusually level head to avoid becoming a conceited
ass.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs  Principal Consultant  ElectroOptical Innovations LLC /
Hobbs ElectroOptics  Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics