important rebuttal of Bennett’s finding, reviewed here: http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/Waiting_SHPMP.pdf ]]>

The short answer to your question is that the classical field is generated by a special kind of quantum state–a coherent state. It has a definite phase but not a definite number of photons. It’s a very strange animal. When there is ‘collapse,’ which occurs by absorption at the receiver, it is into a state with a definite photon number.

]]>In that case, when we enter the classical electromagnetic four potential into the Schrodinger equation, what does it mean? are we assuming that the em field although classical, does not collapse the particle into a definite position because TI allows for the possibility of no collapse? Or does the em field bring the particle into a definite position? ]]>

I read your ‘de Broglie waves as the “Bridge of Becoming”

between quantum theory and relativity’ and have a question. You say “The spatial axis is no more, and no less, than the de Broglie phase wave; and the temporal

axis is no more, and no less, than the de Broglie group wave.”

I have a question: I am looking at de Broglie’s thesis (“On the theory of quanta,” Dissertation. Translated in 2004 by A. F.Kracklauer), FIGURE 1.3.1. It is a Minkowski diagram showing world-lines for a body moving with velocity v = beta multiplied by c. Here, primed axes are spacetime axes fixed in the body and unprimed axes are those of an observer w.r.t whom the body moves in the x-direction. The origins of both frames coincide. The trajectory of the body is a line inclined at an angle less than 45 degrees to the t-axis; this line is also the time axis (t’ axis) for an observer at rest with respect to the body. The slope of ot’ (with ox) has the value 1/beta. The slope of ox’ is beta. De Broglie calls ox’ as symmetrical reflection of ot’ across the bisector of xot. Lines parallel to ox’ are lines of equal ‘phase’ for the observer at rest with the body. He then derives equation 1.3.1 showing that the phase velocity is c/beta; just above that equation, says that the phase advance is in the x-direction. Later on in his thesis, he shows that the velocity of the body is the same as the group velocity of these waves. Since ox is the direction in which the body is moving, it seems to me that de Broglie is saying that the group velocity and the phase velocity have the same direction in the absence of external forces. So although it may be true that the moving body itself is the source of spacetime axes, I do not see how the phase and group velocity which have the same direction can be two independent axes of the spacetime. What am I missing? Thank you in advance for your explanation. ]]>

One question to verify my understanding of your work: Since you seem to say that interactions/transactions of the quantum particle’s wavefunction with absorbers in the measuring device constitute von Neumann’s (VN’s) Process 1, is it correct to suggest that the combined system of the particle and the device never evolves unitarily into a superposition of states following the Schrodinger equation ? After all, the combined system is an open system because the device has an environment. Because of the unitary evolution assumption (by including the brain and the universe), VN had to further assume the involvement of observer’s consciousness in the occurrence of the ‘collapse’, is it not?

]]>