aqora

Reply to Comment on ‘Quantum principle of relativity’

Andrzej Dragan, ARTUR K. EKERT

We refute criticisms by Del Santo and Horvat towards our paper "Quantum principle of relativity": most of their counterarguments can be dismissed, and the rest provides further evidence to our claims.

New Journal of PhysicsSep 1, 20228 citations

Reply to the comment on "Quantum priniple of relativity"

Andrzej Dragan, ARTUR K. EKERT

We refute criticisms by Del Santo and Horvat towards our paper "Quantum principle of relativity": most of their counterarguments can be dismissed, and the rest provides further evidence to our claims.

arXiv:2206.15247Jun 30, 20220 citations

Reply to the comment on "Quantum principle of relativity"

Andrzej Dragan, ARTUR K. EKERT

We discuss critical remarks raised by Horodecki towards our work on the connection between superluminal extension of special relativity and fundamental aspects of quantum theory.

arXiv:2309.00020Aug 31, 20230 citations

Reply to the Comment on ‘Quantum principle of relativity’

Andrzej Dragan, ARTUR K. EKERT

Abstract We discuss critical remarks raised by Horodecki (2023 arXiv: 2301.07802 [quant-ph]) toward our work on the connection between superluminal extension of special relativity and fundamental aspects of quantum theory.

New Journal of PhysicsNov 27, 20234 citations

Reply to Galilean invariance without superluminal particles

Andrzej Dragan, ARTUR K. EKERT

In a recent comment [arXiv:2112.05658], Grudka and Wójcik object to some of our earlier claims concerning a link between fundamental postulates of quantum theory and special relativity extended to superluminal frames of reference. In this short reply we refute these criticisms.

arXiv:2203.04141Mar 8, 20220 citations

Reply to “Comment on ‘Physics without determinism: Alternative interpretations of classical physics’ ”

Flavio Del Santo, Nicolas Gisin

In this short note we reply to a Comment by Callegaro et al. [Callegaro, Pennecchi, and Bich, Phys. Rev. A 102, 036201 (2020)] that points out some weakness of the model of indeterministic physics that we proposed in our work [Del Santo and Gisin, Phys. Rev. A 100, 062107 (2019)], based on what we named ``finite information quantities'' (FIQs). While we acknowledge the merit of their criticism, we maintain that it applies only to a concrete example that we discussed in our work, whereas the main concept of FIQ remains valid and suitable for describing indeterministic physical models. We hint at a more sophisticated way to define FIQs which, taking inspiration from intuitionistic mathematics, would allow the criticisms in the preceding Comment to be overcome.In this short note we reply to a Comment by Callegaro et al. [Callegaro, Pennecchi, and Bich, Phys. Rev. A 102, 036201 (2020)] that points out some weakness of the model of indeterministic physics that we proposed in our work [Del Santo and Gisin, Phys. Rev. A 100, 062107 (2019)], based on what we named ``finite information quantities'' (FIQs). While we acknowledge the merit of their criticism, we maintain that it applies only to a concrete example that we discussed in our work, whereas the main concept of FIQ remains valid and suitable for describing indeterministic physical models. We hint at a more sophisticated way to define FIQs which, taking inspiration from intuitionistic mathematics, would allow the criticisms in the preceding Comment to be overcome.

arXiv:2009.12284Physical Review ASep 30, 20202 citations

Reply to Comment on ‘Quantum principle of relativity’

Abstract

Related papers

Reply to Comment on ‘Quantum principle of relativity’

Abstract

Related papers