Version 1
: Received: 27 February 2019 / Approved: 28 February 2019 / Online: 28 February 2019 (11:29:00 CET)
Version 2
: Received: 15 March 2019 / Approved: 19 March 2019 / Online: 19 March 2019 (10:41:14 CET)
Version 3
: Received: 13 June 2019 / Approved: 17 June 2019 / Online: 17 June 2019 (09:57:08 CEST)
How to cite:
Cornwall, R. Further Proofs for the 1-Photon PathEntanglement Communications Scheme. Preprints2019, 2019020267. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201902.0267.v1
Cornwall, R. Further Proofs for the 1-Photon PathEntanglement Communications Scheme. Preprints 2019, 2019020267. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201902.0267.v1
Cornwall, R. Further Proofs for the 1-Photon PathEntanglement Communications Scheme. Preprints2019, 2019020267. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201902.0267.v1
APA Style
Cornwall, R. (2019). Further Proofs for the 1-Photon PathEntanglement Communications Scheme. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201902.0267.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Cornwall, R. 2019 "Further Proofs for the 1-Photon PathEntanglement Communications Scheme" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201902.0267.v1
Abstract
The author had previously set out devices to communicate over space-like intervals, with a full proof for the 2-photon device and only a partial proof for the 1-photon device. The 2-photon device exploits entangled pairs; the 1-photon device utilises path-entanglement. The 1-photon device is fully analysed, then similarities (and differences) are drawn to the 2-photon device to show the holes in the No-communications Theorem: the creation operators representing the sum of paths through the device can be mapped outside the device and quantum state reduction/measurement is a space-like operation. Furthermore, global phase factors indicating causal delay are removed by the operation anyway.
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment:
Editor, please leave comment.
Version 3 of this paper is much tidied up, shortened (no appendicii now) and the maths sorted out near the end. It reads well now and clinches the argument.
Commenter:
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Version 3 of this paper is much tidied up, shortened (no appendicii now) and the maths sorted out near the end. It reads well now and clinches the argument.