from

by

Alejandro Cassini, Leonardo Levinas

Fri Jul 19 2024 12:26:11 (23 hours)

# 1.

arXiv:2407.12960v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We elucidate how different theoretical assumptions bring about radically different interpretations of the same experimental result. We do this by analyzing special relativity as it was originally formulated. Then, we examine the relationship of the theory with the result of the Michelson and Morley experiment. We point out that in diverse a historical context the same experiment can be thought of as providing different conceptualizations of phenomena. This demonstrates why special relativity prevailed over its rival theories. This theory made a new reinterpretation of the experiment by associating it with a novel phenomenon, namely, the invariance of the speed of light, a phenomenon that was not the one originally investigated. This leads us to an understanding of how this experiment could have been interpreted in a completely different historical context.

from

by

Carlo Rovelli, David Wolpert

Fri Jul 19 2024 12:26:10 (23 hours)

# 2.

arXiv:2407.13197v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Are you, with your perceptions, memories and observational data, a Boltzmann brain, namely a fleeting statistical fluctuation out of the thermal equilibrium of the universe? Arguments are given in the literature claiming that this bizarre hypothesis needs to be considered seriously, that all of our data about the past is actually a mirage. We point to a difficulty in these arguments. They are based on the dynamical laws and on statistical arguments, but they disregard the fact that we infer the dynamical laws presupposing the reliability of our data records about the past. Hence the reasoning in favor of the Boltzmann brain hypothesis contradicts itself, relying on the reliability of our data about the past to conclude that that data is wrong. More broadly, it is based on incomplete evidence. Incomplete evidence notoriously leads to false conclusions.

from

by

Taha Sochi

Fri Jul 19 2024 12:26:09 (23 hours)

# 3.

arXiv:2407.13697v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In this article we pay tribute to Herbert Dingle for his early call to re-assess special relativity from philosophical and logical perspectives. However, we disagree with Dingle about a number of issues particularly his failure to distinguish between the scientific essence of special relativity (as represented by the experimentally-supported Lorentz transformations and their formal implications and consequences which we call “the mechanics of Lorentz transformations”) and the logically inconsistent interpretation of Einstein (which is largely based on the philosophical and epistemological views of Poincare). We also disagree with him about his manner and attitude which he adopted in his campaign against special relativity although we generally agree with him about the necessity of impartiality of the scientific community and the scientific press towards scientific theories and opinions as well as the necessity of total respect to the ethics of science and the rules of moral conduct in general.

from

by

Jonte R. Hance, James Ladyman, John Rarity

Fri Jul 19 2024 12:26:08 (23 hours)

# 4.

arXiv:2204.03374v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We explore how one might detect the dynamical quantum Cheshire cat proposed by Aharonov et al. We show that, in practice, we need to bias the initial state by adding/subtracting a small probability amplitude (`field’) of the orthogonal state, which travels with the disembodied property, to make the effect detectable (i.e. if our initial state is $|\uparrow_z\rangle$, we need to bias this with some small amount $\delta$ of state $|\downarrow_z\rangle$). This biasing, which can be done either directly or via weakly entangling the state with a pointer, effectively provides a phase reference with which we can measure the evolution of the state. The outcome can then be measured as a small probability difference in detections in a mutually unbiased basis, proportional to this biasing $\delta$. We show this is different from counterfactual communication, which provably does not require any probe field to travel between sender Bob and receiver Alice for communication. We further suggest an optical polarisation experiment where these phenomena might be demonstrated in a laboratory.

from

by

Pasquale Bosso

Fri Jul 19 2024 12:26:00 (23 hours)

# 5.

arXiv:2407.13235v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Phenomenological models of quantum gravity often consider the existence of some form of minimal length. This feature is commonly described in the context of quantum mechanics and using the corresponding formalism and techniques. Although few attempts at a quantum field-theoretical description of a minimal length has been proposed, they are rather the exception and there is no general agreement on the correct one. Here, using the quantum-mechanical model as a guidance, we propose a first-principle definition of a quantum field theory including a minimal length. Specifically, we propose a two-step procedure, by first describing the quantum-mechanical models as a classical field theory and subsequently quantizing it. We are thus able to provide a foundation for further exploration of the implications of a minimal length in quantum field theory.

from

Tue Jul 16 2024 17:58:51 (3 days)

# 6.

Gao, Shan (2024) On the reality of the quantum state once again: A no-go theorem for psi-ontic models? Foundations of Physics, 54 (52).

from

Tue Jul 16 2024 17:58:12 (3 days)

# 7.

Ladyman, James and Thebault, Karim P Y (2024) Open Systems and Autonomy. [Preprint]

from

Tue Jul 16 2024 17:56:51 (3 days)

# 8.

Gao, Shan (2024) Does Locality Imply Reality of the Wave Function? Hardy’s Theorem Revisited. Foundations of Physics, 54 (44).

from

by

Fernando Quevedo

Tue Jul 16 2024 12:49:28 (3 days)

# 9.

arXiv:2407.10033v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: My personal recollections are presented regarding my interactions with Steven Weinberg and the impact he had in my career from when I was his graduate student until the present.

from

by

Wouter van der Wijngaart

Tue Jul 16 2024 12:49:27 (3 days)

# 10.

arXiv:2407.09567v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This Perspective explores the origins and persistence of recurrent structures and patterns throughout the known Universe. We start with a first fundamental question: 1. Considering that all information consists of patterns in physical structure but not all physical patterns constitute information, what is the fundamental relation between these two? We first explore the materialistic nature of structures and information, detailing how they can form through spontaneous or templated processes and evolve into complex structures, including self-replicators. We posit that all recurring structures emerge either spontaneously de novo or based on underlying information. A main implication is that all information must be understood as both a product and a driver of evolution. We further observe that the three carriers of information underpin the emergence of three main layers of self-organisation: genes coded in DNA for the biological layer, ideas stored in neural structure for the cultural layer, and records written on innate objects for the civilisation layer. This gives rise to two additional questions, which we subsequently address: 2. What can we anticipate about the future development of self-organizing layers given the role of information in their emergence? 3. What is the universality of information and its evolution throughout the Universe? This manuscript aims to offer a fresh perspective and a universal framework for information and the origin of structures by extending and unifying concepts from physics, biology, and information theory.

from

by

Reinhard Folk, Yurij Holovatch

Tue Jul 16 2024 12:49:26 (3 days)

# 11.

arXiv:2405.05703v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Today, the Ising model is an archetype describing collective ordering processes. And, as such, it is widely known in physics and far beyond. Less known is the fact that the thesis defended by Ernst Ising 100 years ago (in 1924) contained not only the solution of what we call now the `classical 1D Ising model’ but also other problems. Some of these problems, as well as the method of their solution, are the subject of this note. In particular, we discuss the combinatorial method Ernst Ising used to calculate the partition function for a chain of elementary magnets. In the thermodynamic limit, this method leads to the result that the partition function is given by the roots of a certain polynomial. We explicitly show that `Ising’s roots’ that arise within the combinatorial treatment are also recovered by the eigenvalues of the transfer matrix, a concept that was introduced much later. Moreover, we discuss the generalization of the two-state model to a three-state one presented in Ising’s thesis, but not included in his famous paper of 1925 (E. Ising, Z.Physik 31 (1925) 253). The latter model can be considered as a forerunner of the now abundant models with many-component order parameters.