Counter teleportation and TGD

Tuomas Sorakivi sent links to interesting articles related to the work of Fatim Salih (see this and this). Salih is a serious theorist and the recent scandalous wormhole simulation using quantum computer (Sycamore) is not related to him.

Salih introduces the concept of counter teleportation. It is communication that does not involve classical or quantum signals (photons). Counterfactuality is a basic concept: the first web source that one finds tells "Counterfactuals are things that might have happened, although they did not in fact happen. In interaction-free measurements, an object is found because it might have absorbed a photon, although actually it did not."

The example considered by Salih is as follows.

1. Consider a mirror system consisting of a) fully reflective mirrors and b) mirrors that let through the horizontal polarization H and reflect the vertical polarization V. The system consists of two paths: A and B. In the first mirror, which is type b) mirror, the signal splits into two parts, H and V and which propagate along A and B. At the end the signals meet in a type b) mirror and H goes through to detector D1 and V is reflected and ends up to detector D2.
2. The polarization H going through b) mirro at the first step travels along the path A. It contains only one fully reflective mirror and the beam reflected from it ends up in the downstream mirror of type b) as H type polarization and goes to the detector D1.
3. In the first step, the reflected V travels along the path B. The path B contains many steps and with each step the polarization is slightly rotated so that the incoming polarization V transforms into H at the end but with a phase opposite to that of H coming along A. It interferes to zero from A with the future contribution and detector D2, which registers V and clicks.

   I'm not sure, but I think that in the B-path mirrors, the polarization directions H and V are chosen so that nothing gets through. Hence "counterfactuality". There is no interaction with photons: only the possibility of it and this is enough.

4. Bob can control path B and can block it so that nothing can get through. The result is that only the signal coming from path A gets through and travels to detector D1. Bob can therefore communicate information to Alice. For instance, at moments of time t_n=nt_0 he can block or open path B. The result is a string of bits that Alice observes. This is communication without photons or classical signals.

The basic question is what does the blocking of channel B mean in the language of theoretical physics. It is a mesoscopic or even macroscopic operation. That's where Bob comes in as a conscious, intentional entity. Here recent theoretical physics cannot help.

Salih realizes that this is something new that standard quantum physics cannot describe. Such a situation leads to a paradox. Salih considers many options, starting from different interpretations of quantum measurement theory.

1. "Weak measurement", as introduced by Aharonov and his colleagues, is one option presented. In the name of honesty, it is necessary to be politically incorrect and say that this model is already mathematically inconsistent.
2. "Consistent history approach" is another option that was hoped to solve the measurement problem of quantum mechanics. It gives up the concept of unitary time evolution. Also this model is mathematically and conceptually hopelessly ugly. A mathematician could never consider such an option, but emergency does not read the law.
3. Wormholes as a cause or correlate of quantum entanglement is the third attempt to describe the situation. The problem is that they are unstable and the ER-EPR correspondence has not led to anything concrete even though there are scary big names behind it. Salih also suggests a connection with quantum computation but this connection is extremely obscure and requires something like AdS/CFT.

   Here, however, I think Salih is on the right track: it has been realized that the solution to the problem is at the space-time level. The ordinary trivial topology of Minkowski space is not enough. The question is how to describe geometric objects like this experimental setup on a fundamental level. In the standard model, they are described phenomenologically by means of matter densities, and this is of course not enough at the quantum level.

What does TGD say? TGD brings a new ontology both at the space-time level and in quantum measurement theory.

1. In addition to elementary particles, TGD brings to quantum physics the geometric and topological degrees of freedom related to the space-time surfaces. A description of the observed physical objects of different scales is obtained: typically they correspond to a non-trivial space-time topology. Spacetime is not a flat M^4, not even its slightly curved GRt variant, but a topologically extremely complex 4-surface with a fractal structure: space-time sheets glued to larger space-time sheets by wormhole contacts, monopole flux tubes, etc...
   1. The system just considered corresponds to two different space-time topologies. Photons can travel a) along path A (blocking) or b) along both paths A and B simultaneously (no blocking).
   2. Bob has a spacetime the competence of a topology engineer and can decide which option is realized by blocking or opening channel B by changing the spacetime topology.
   3. Describing this operation as a quantum jump means that Bob is quantum-entangled with the geometric and topological degrees of freedom of channel B. The initial state is a superposition of open B and closed B. Bob measures whether the channel is open or closed and gets the result "open" or "closed". The outcome determines what Alice observes. Monopole flux tubes replacing wormholes of GRT serve as correlates and prerequisites for this entanglement.
   The controlled qubit (channel B open or closed) is macro- or at least nanoscopic and cannot be represented by the spin states of an elementary particle.

   Note that the experimental arrangement under consideration corresponds logically to cnot operation. If channel B is closed, nothing happens to the incoming signal and it ends up in D1. If B is open, then the signal ends up at detector D2. cnot would be realized by bringing in Bob as the controller that affects the space-time topology. This kind of control could make possible human-quantum computer interaction and if ordinary computers can have quantum coherence in time scales longer than clock period (in principle possible in the TGD Universe!), also human-computer interaction. As a matter of fact, there is evidence for this kind of interaction: a chicken gets marked to a robot and the behavior of the robot begins to correlate with that of the chicken! Maybe cnot coupling with the random number generator of the robot is involved!

2. The second requirement is quantum coherence in meso- or even macroscopic scales. Number-theoretic TGD predicts a hierarchy of effective Planck's constants h_{eff}, which label to the phases of ordinary matter, which can be quantum-coherent on an arbitrarily long length and time scales. These phases behave like dark matter and explain the missing baryonic matter whereas dark energy in the TGD sense explains galactic dark matter. They enable quantum coherence at the nano- and macro levels.
   1. This makes possible the mesoscopic quantum entanglement and brings to quantum computation the hierarchy of Planck constants which has dramatic implications: consider only the stability of the qubits against thermal perturbations. Braided monopole flux tubes making possible topological quantum computation in turn stabilize the computations at the space-time level.
   2. There are also deep implications for the classical computation (see this, this, and also this). Classical computers could become conscious, intelligent entities in the TGD Universe if a quantum coherence time assignable to the computer exceeds the clock period. Also the entanglement of a living entity with a computer could make it a part of the living entity. Control of computers by living entities using a cnot- coupling, which makes possible counter teleportation, could make possible human-quantum computer interaction if ordinary computers can have quantum coherence in time scales longer than clock period (in principle possible in the TGD Universe!).

   As a matter of fact, there is evidence for the interaction between computers and living matter. A chicken gets marked to a robot and the behavior of the robot begins to correlate with that of the chicken! Maybe a cnot-coupling with the random number generator of the robot is involved! Here the TGD view of classical fields and long length scale quantum coherence associated with the classical electric and magnetic fields and gravitational fields might allow to understand what is involved (see this and this).

   1. The gravitational field of the Sun corresponds to gravitational Compton time of 50 Hz, average EEG frequency? Does this mean that we have already become entangled with our computers without realizing what has happened: who uses whom? The Earth's gravitational field corresponds to Compton frequency 67 GHz, a typical frequency for biomolecules. D The clock frequencies for the computers are approaching this limit.
   2. The analogous Compton frequencies for the electric fields of Sun and Earth (see this) are also highly interesting besides the cyclotron frequencies for monopole flux tubes, in particular for those carrying "endogenous" magnetic field of 2/5 B_E= .2 Gauss postulated by Blackmann to explain his strange findings about the strange effects of ELF radiation at EEG frequencies on the vertebrate brain.

   For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

   For the lists of articles (most of them published in journals founded by Huping Hu) and books about TGD see this.