Monday, April 19, 2021

External Email



 This is the third  delivery for this newsletter. If you and all your colleagues are receiving this information for the first time, it is highly probable that your institution is still blocking my principal domain. It would be better to discuss with the people in charge about this ,,problem” because there are going to be supplementary fees when the license is going to be asked.

On the other hand, it is important that emails are opened in <removed> and not as <removed> software, which makes this delivery possible, can make a correct statistic with people who open the emails only as <removed>

If you open the email in text format, I do not know that you opened the email and I keep sending the same newsletter second or third time to you from other domains. This is annoying for you, but also, time and resource consuming for me..

I am going to excuse myself in advance for those who receive the same newsletter a second time from a completely different reason. If a reader opens the email late, when  the queue for the second delivery is already running, I cannot undo the process of sending.....

Thanks for  your understanding..

There was no time to finish an extensive newsletter about quantum computer so this is an intermezzo, dealing mainly with quantum entanglement.

It is probably one of the most debated topic in science ever.....and it is going to be one of the major fraud ever....

Decades of sterile discussions about the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox (EPR paradox), later other decades of experiments to prove Einstein right or wrong,  the entire quantum computer business, etc. are going to become junk science soon.

As far I was too serious in a lot of newsletters, I think it would be nice to start this newsletter with a story I read long time ago and I recall it from memory:

Once upon the time, in the modern era.....

There was a car traveller through the desert and at a certain moment he encounters a pond of mud in the middle of the road. His first intention was to avoid the pond, but the sand dunes around were to steep.

He was musing: after all, the pond has to be shallow; there is no water source around for hundred kilometres.

In absence of an alternative passage, he tried to pass trough the pond.

To his surprise, not only his car got stuck into the mud, but the the entire front part of the car got quite submersed and, of course, he was forced to get out of the car.

After few hours of waiting, as by chance, a towing truck was passing by and, of course, the traveller asked to pick up his car and transport it to a place to be checked.

The towing truck driver argued that he is busy with something else, but for a consistent tip, he got convinced to change his mind and ,,help” the traveller; you know how the system works! There are offers which cannot be refused....

As far the nearest service shop was at another hundred kilometres distance, on the way, they were discussing all kind of things.

At a certain moment, the traveller made the remark that with that pond in the middle of the road, there must be a lot of work all the year around.

Well, answered the tow car driver, there is a lot of work, but you cannot imagine how much work is necessary to maintain that pond there!

The idea to be spotted remains at any reader level of intelligence...

Not only the modern science, but quite the entire modern society work based on this general pattern. Some are creating a problem, and after that, others are coming to solve the problem. In most of the cases, the problems creators are the same or hand in hand with the problem solvers

The only important thing is that both the problem creators and the problem solvers have to win and by default, the society, as a whole, loses twice.

<Link Removed>

 It is laughable to think that modern society is guided toward progress, spirituality, etc.

The neutrino case and the gravitational waves are such push-and-pull frauds but at medium scale. After the release of the corresponding newsletters, a couple of months ago, the things have become quiet in those fields !

You can't see many of their fanatics popping up with new stunning aberrations lately!

Probably, even the Universe became quiet lately, so they need to close the doors to such fields of research. Closing the doors for those research does not mean the problems are solved and serious gaps remains in the theory! It is curious to see what other imbecilities are advanced to replace the old ones!

The new theory goes further and this newsletter exemplifies a mega fraud and how the up presented pattern has been working in case of the so called quantum computer.

The discussion is also a prophylactic measure in order to prevent that another nobel prize goes for such imbecility.

By sure after the stunning acrobatic of a quantum computer beating any classical supercomputer, the nobel committee has been seriously thinking to reward such performance.

Let us see if they dare to do it …..!

I observed that after releasing a newsletter about a specific topic, some of the information referenced within becomes unavailable on internet; therefore, lately, I include in the newsletter a consistent quotation from any referenced materials in order for the newsletter to have a coherent presentation, just in case the reference becomes unavailable.

The first section starts a broader discussion about the quantum entanglemnet and very important, about its story.....

The entanglement idea appeared in science after the publication of the famous Einstein–Podolsky–de Rosen paradox. It was Schrödinger who formulated the concept of entanglement as "to describe the correlations between two particles that interact and then separate, as in the EPR experiment."

Later on, Schrödinger underlined the importance of the concept, and stated:"I would not call [entanglement] one but rather the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics, the one that enforces its entire departure from classical lines of thought.”.

In essence, and in any rational theory of science, the entanglement of particles should not have some special properties. What is the fuss that two particles are interacting and then separate?

If one takes a physics manual and reads about the interaction between two protons, there is no word about entanglement. If one considers the same situation for interactions between electrons, no one is suggesting that such interaction exists.

The photons get entangled? What does it really mean? Are two photons interacting as particle or as waves? The result is a question of optics and there is no need to introduce a new concept.

As it is going to be presented later in details, to think that some atoms or some electric currents get entangled is a crass imbecility even for a laymen....

Atoms can present some physical or chemical types of interactions, and it cannot be another energy of entanglement!!!! Which is doing what?!

In fact, if a pupil in introductory physics read the concept of entanglement defined by Schrödinger, he is going to ask a very simple question:

How much is the entanglement energy?

And what happens to it?

A specialist in the field is going to mumble some incoherent and unintelligible sounds as an answer for this legitimate questions...

By sure the answer offered by a specialist to this simple question is going to be not much differed from the answer offered by an illiterate monkey....

<link Removed>

 A real science cannot go and preach such absurd concept ad infinitum, without trying to characterize it!

There is a lot of philosophy, metaphysics and tons of interpretations about this etheric concept which make no sense at all when the things are correctly analysed.

In order for a pupil to have a clear image of the simplicity of this ,,classical” effect, it is necessary to start with other facts and present some interesting features of electron spin. The Stern-Gerlach experiment is primordial for scratching the root of entanglement problem.

The explanation presented in the newsletter, was developed around 2000-2002, it was published on internet around 2006 and even in a book called atomic structure in 2007. If, at that moment, a lucid mind had analysed the article and the consequences, the quantum theory would have already been in the trash bin of history.

When<Name Removed> affirmed that ,,I think, I can safely say that nobody understand quantum mechanics.”, he was dammed right! It is difficult or impossible to understand an imbecility until it is elucidated.....

Now, when the imbecility has been elucidated, let us see what fanatics are popping up to further support it!

It is high time to see what an army of physicists are doing in order to build the so called quantum computer....

First of all, there is no ,,unique” technology for a quantum computer as in case of classical computer.

Various teams of physicists try to build up an ,,entangled state” starting from different ,,quantum objects”.

Do they really understand what an quantum object is, or if these quantum objects are indeed subject of entanglement?

Let us consider two atoms or to cations. Some are working with ytterbium atoms which are trapped into electric or magnetic fields.

The ytterbium atoms have to be ionized, otherwise they cannot be confined into a certain region of space at least! Neutral atoms are very difficult to be confined and one cannot speak about an entanglement state for neutral atoms....

So they have to be transformed in cations, by stripping out one or even more electrons from the outer electronic shell.

Between these cations there is going to be a repulsive electrostatic interaction which increase when the distance decreases. To think that one can arrange these cations in an entangled state is an imbecility so magnificent that not comparison words are in the existent vocabulary!

Other teams are trying to do some entanglement state for ,,electric” currents in supra conductors.

In the present day science, an electric current is seen as a flow of electrons in a circuit.

Even in case of supraconductors, the main theory assumes the existence of a flow of electrons, but they are travelling as pairs, the so called Cooper pairs.

Of course, if these electrons are travelling as pairs, it would appear feasible to assume that inside one pair there is an ,,entanglement” between two electrons. Yet, there is no possibility to increase the entanglement between two or more pairs of electrons, so the entire endeavour is futile.

What would be the use to have a computer with only two qubits?

The imbecility does not stop here, but there is going to be a detailed discussion in a further newsletter. The loafers in this field, with some abracadabresque interpretations, think they have invented new Maiorana particles and they obtained an interference of electron with itself, etc.

Not only this, but they split the Cooper pairs in single electrons and with some manipulation they think that electrons are getting entangled again....

They are not aware that splitting a Cooper pair means the supraconducting state has to be destroyed; otherwise these teams have to receive a nobel prize for obtaining the supraconductivity in a conductor based on ,,classical” flow of individual electrons.

I wonder if these people have basic knowledge about so called classical electomagnetism ….

When the field is flooded with money, the only thing which is going to remain for the future so far, is the single atom transistor ….

This is an achievement, and the Australian team has to be congratulated for this achievement; but, the rest of the work, even for this team is worthless.....

<Link Removed>

Someone is going to think that if the entanglement for mass particles is not so credible, by sure entanglement between photons has to be !

The simple question to which any fanatic of quantum theory has to find a consistent answer is very simple: what interaction can someone admit between two photons in order to arrive to an entangled state....?

Have you seen a simple article in more than a century from the advent of quantum theory which deals with this topic?

I found none, but an army of imbeciles are popping up all the time and discuss about entanglement, EPR paradox, how Einstein was wrong and Bohr right, etc etc.

From the perspective of the new proposed theory, there is nothing to discuss because the entanglement phenomena as accepted in present quantum theory has no real existence.

The data are quite simple from a conceptual point of view, but at a simple analysis, this data rule out the entire quantum mechanics before even thinking at entanglement.

So, a laser beam is directed to a peculiar crystal. Most of the photons from laser beam are going to interact with crystal atoms in the expected way: absorption, refraction, excitation and decay to the ground state with re-emission of energy..

Yet, some crystals have a peculiarity Occasionally, a photon from beam is grabbed and two photons of equal energies are re-emitted. The summation of energy for these two re-emitted photons is equal with the initial energy of a photon in the beam and usually these two photons have different polarization: one is polarized vertically and the other horizontally.

There is no consistent explanation for this ,,effect” and for any common sense mind this effect is ruling out the entire quantum mechanic and here is why.....

Quantum theory, allow for a photon of higher energy to be absorbed by an atom, an electron is going to jump on an ,,longer” excited state and return back to the ground state in two steps.

From the excited state, the electron needs a time Dt2 to release the first photon. The electron arrives on a intermediate state (sometimes they are called meta stable state) and it needs another time Dt3 to release the second photon.

As far the photons are emitted successively with a certain interval of time between them, it is obvious that such photons cannot be entangled.

In order to have an entanglement, a new effect has to take place in this case and from the excited state, the electron has to emit two photons, at once, and the electron has to return directly in the ground state.

Well, such situation looks fine for the entanglement phenomena, but it rules out the basic concepts of quantum theory.

As Bohr postulated, and this postulate was later incorporated in the quantum theory, the change in an electron’s energy as it makes a quantum jump from one orbit to another is always accompanied by the emission or absorption of a photon.

Well, in our case there are two photons emitted during a single quantum jump and the situation gets even more complicated: one is polarized vertically and the other horizontally; depending on the crystal they can have the same energy or even different energies, etc.....

So, quantum fanatics have to choose: which is which....

If entanglement is real, then quantum foundation has to be ruled out....

If quantum theory is correct, then, there is no entanglement between photons....

Let us see which of these two options is going to be more convenient for quantum fanatics!!

Please be aware that spontaneous down and up conversions are real optical effects and they need a new framework in order to get a consistent explanation.

These new effects can get a consistent explanation only in case of a corpuscular nature of light.

The basic foundation of corpuscular nature of light was already written into a book published in 2008.

The second section, which is still incomplete, makes a overview for the quantum computer field.

A new postulate is presented here, but his exemplification is going to be made in a near future.

Postulate: Nature is neither digital nor quantum, but analogue.

The last section is a copy carbon from the previous newsletter (Old game, same scene, new actors and figureheads….), because it is important for people to get in touch with the expected unexpected...

If you want to contact me please try to use the email contacts on <Link removed> webpage. Most of the time the emails are blocked or bounced so you have to insist until you get a confirmation.

The link to this newsletter:

<Link Removed>


<Name Removed>

<Link Removed>