Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on May 30, 2013 in EPR paradox | 1 comment

What will the referees say about my local realism paper?

I finally did it.  I submitted a paper to Physical Review A entitled “A local realistic reconciliation of the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox.”  It took me sixteen years!  Back in 1997, when I was moon struck in India, I decided that I could not accept non-locality.  It made no sense to me. Recently I came across the 1693 quote of Isaac Newton whose shoulders I gladly stand upon.  Newton realized that non-locality (Instantaneous-action-at-a-distance) was absurd, and that his theory of gravity must be incomplete:


That gravity should be innate, inherent, and essential to matter, so that one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum, without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking can ever fall into it.

and so I believe that quantum mechanics is incomplete.

In 2006 I got the idea that perhaps spin has structure: two dimensional.  I tried it out thinking the idea was crazy, but everything worked out easily.  That encouraged me. Now I am 100% certain that my spin model is correct, but I also know that the easiest person to fool is me.

I will be on tenterhooks until I hear from the editor because of past experience. My concern is that the paper will be rejected because the referees will “not like it”.  I have heard that before and my response is that I do not like the colour green, so what?  I do not mind objective comments, but subjective rejections are inappropriate in my books.

What a lot of physicists do not like is local realism even though it makes physical sense.  I think that the majority would accept it, but this has been going on since 1925 with no resolution, so most have given up. One cannot blame them; quantum mechanics works so well.

Not only have my papers been rejected, but also I am blacklisted on the quantum archives, ArXiv where so much junk is posted. Why I asked? And the reply from the anonymous moderator was to submit the paper for publication and see what the referees say.  I did, they said they do not like my results. Also presentations at conferences are refused and if you mention local realism, you get pilloried. There is a lot more negativism, even hostility, and my conclusion is that physics is a highly censored and controlled discipline.  Maybe Sheldon on Big Bang Theory epitomizes how physicists view themselves, well not all physicists.

I am, by the way, an interloping chemist. I actually think that not being brought up in physics has helped me see through the EPR paradox, but I can actually concur with the earlier negative responses I got as I blundered onto the field and asked stupid questions like, “What is the mechanism for teleportation?”.  I like David Wick’s book, “The Infamous Boundary”. He stated something like: when you ask a question physicists cannot answer, they look at you in a funny way and make a mental note not to talk to you anymore. That is my experience. Yes, and I moved my grant applications from chemistry to physics in the hope of getting objective responses, but I was told the work was pseudo-science and I lost my grant.  Luckily theorists do not need much money to think.

At the beginning of my obsession with the EPR paradox, I was certainly naïve and had an enormous volume of reading to do. However first impressions are lasting but now my earlier ideas have crystallized and I have an answer that satisfies me.

I do not know how the review will go, but I will post the referee comments here.

1 Comment

  1. Your work is of utmost importance to restore physicality to physics. Perhaps the consequences go even further than you have considered. The quantum physics establishment has lost itself in a never-never land of unscientific philosophy which it holds with un-paralleled fervor. When reason and science are allowed a place again in academia we will make great progress in every area of research.

Post a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *