Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:2112.00436

Reply to arXiv:2111.13357 ("The Quantum Eraser Non-Paradox'')

Colm P. Bracken, Jonte R. Hance, Sabine Hossenfelder

Published Dec 1, 2021• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In a recent criticism (arXiv:2111.13357) of our paper arXiv:2111.09347, Drezet argues that we have forgotten to consider superpositions of detector eigenstates. However, such superpositions do not occur in the models our paper is concerned with. We also note that no one has ever observed such detector superpositions.
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2112.00436

Related papers

The Quantum Eraser Non-Paradox: a comment on arXiv:2111.09347v1

Aurélien Drezet

This is a short reply to arXiv:2112.00436v1 and arXiv:2111.09347v1 by C. Bracken, J.R. Hance, and S. Hossenfelder. I precise some elements concerning i) the methodology of my previous version of the comment [arXiv:2111.13357v3] to arXiv:2111.09347v1, and ii) why the grand father-paradox (causal loop) presented in their article comes from a prejudice concerning retrocausality not from retrocausality or locality themselves.

arXiv:2111.13357•Nov 26, 2021•0 citations

Reply to “Comment on ‘Single-particle entanglement’ ”

S. J. van Enk

I try to rebut Drezet's arguments [Phys. Rev. A. 74, 026301 (2006)]) against the state $\ensuremath{\mid}0⟩\ensuremath{\mid}1⟩+\ensuremath{\mid}1⟩\ensuremath{\mid}0⟩$ being entangled by agreeing with them. I also address some old arguments repeated by Drezet.

Physical Review A•Aug 21, 2006•33 citations

Reply to Comment on "Quantification of Macroscopic Quantum Superpositions within Phase Space"

Hyunseok Jeong, Minsu Kang, Chang-Woo Lee

Gong points out [quant-ph arXiv:1106.0062] a "direct connection" between our measure [PRL 106, 220401 (2011)] recently proposed to quantify macroscopic quantum superpositions and a previously studied quantity introduced to study classical and quantum chaos. We point out that the two measures are obviously different for some mixed states, and the previous one does not work as a sensible measure to quantify quantum superpositions.

arXiv:1108.0212•Aug 1, 2011•7 citations

Comment on "On Phase Selective Quantum Eraser" (arXiv:1501.00817 [quant-ph])

Luiz Carlos Ryff

In a recent interesting article A. Heuer, G. Pieplow, and R. Menzel discuss a quantum-eraser experiment to investigate the complementarity of wave-like and particle-like behavior of photons. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the very same experimental setup was suggested in a previous paper, and take advantage of this opportunity to examine some aspects of this controversial subject.

arXiv:1509.04673•Sep 15, 2015•1 citation

Reply to Comment on "Quantum Coherence between High Spin Superposition States of Single Molecule Magnet Ni$_4$"

Enrique del Barco, Andrew D. Kent

Here we respond briefly to a comment on our work in arXiv:cond-mat/0405501.

arXiv:cond-mat/0405541•May 23, 2004•1 citation

Reply to "Comment on `Noise, not squeezing, boosts synchronization in the deep quantum regime' "

Wai‐Keong Mok, L. C. Kwek, Hermanni Heimonen

In this reply we clarify the main points of our manuscript and respond to the critique in the Comment arXiv:2002.11514. In particular, we emphasize that our conclusion "squeezing loses effectiveness in the deep quantum regime" does not contradict the previous work arXiv:1801.10383, but instead adds to it, and raises fundamental questions on classifying parameter regimes for quantum synchronization. Moreover, we address the concern brought up on the validity of the master equation in the deep quantum regime, and show that our noise-enhanced synchronization differs from previous literature. Through numerical examples, we also demonstrate that the choice of ansatz, while appearing inconsistent, does not lead to erroneous conclusions. Lastly, we expound on the physics of noise-boosted synchronization, and show that it is indeed a genuine feature unique to the deep quantum regime. However, we note that single photon dissipation is a more accurate term, and will move to using that.

arXiv:2004.08827•Apr 19, 2020•1 citation
Reply to Comment on "Quantum Coherence between High Spin Superposition States of Single Molecule Magnet Ni4_44​"
In this reply we clarify the main points of our manuscript and respond to the critique in the Comment arXiv:2002.11514. In particular, we emphasize that our conclusion "squeezing loses effectiveness in the deep quantum regime" does not contradict the previous work arXiv:1801.10383, but instead adds to it, and raises fundamental questions on classifying parameter regimes for quantum synchronization. Moreover, we address the concern brought up on the validity of the master equation in the deep quantum regime, and show that our noise-enhanced synchronization differs from previous literature. Through numerical examples, we also demonstrate that the choice of ansatz, while appearing inconsistent, does not lead to erroneous conclusions. Lastly, we expound on the physics of noise-boosted synchronization, and show that it is indeed a genuine feature unique to the deep quantum regime. However, we note that single photon dissipation is a more accurate term, and will move to using that.