Author Archives: Mateus Araújo

Everybody knows how to derive what are the most general operations one can apply to a quantum state. You just need to assume that a quantum operation Is linear. Maps quantum states to quantum states. Still maps quantum states to … Continue reading →

It’s 0, except on the trivial cases where it is 1. But clearly this is the wrong way to formulate the question, as there are interesting things to be said about the probabilities of infinite sequences of coin tosses. The … Continue reading →

Often people ask me why I’m not more open-minded about ideas that defy the scientific consensus. Maybe global warming is just a conspiracy? Maybe Bell’s theorem is in fact wrong? Maybe the EmDrive does provide thrust without using propellant? Maybe … Continue reading →

\[ t=0:00 \] SIMPLICIO: These quantum gravity people! Always claiming that the world is fundamentally discrete! It’s so stupid! INGENUO: Humm why is it stupid? They do have good reasons to think that. SIMPLICIO: But come on, even the most … Continue reading →

One of the most intriguing consequences of Bell’s theorem is the idea that one can do experimental metaphysics: to take some eminently metaphysical concepts such as determinism, causality, and free will, and extract from them actual experimental predictions, which can … Continue reading →

This post is based on discussions with Harvey Brown, Eric Cavalcanti, and Nathan Walk.. After going through two versions of Bell’s theorem, one might hope to be done with it. Well, this was the situation in 1975, and judging by … Continue reading →

Continuing the series on Bell’s theorem, I will now write about its most popular version, the one that people have in mind when they talk about quantum nonlocality: the version that Bell proved in his 1975 paper The theory of … Continue reading →

To continue with the series of “public service” posts, I will write the presentation of Bell’s theorem that I would have liked to read when I was learning it. My reaction at the time was, I believe, similar to most … Continue reading →

To inaugurate this blog I want to talk about Daniela Frauchiger and Renato Renner’s polemical new paper, Single-world interpretations of quantum theory cannot be self-consistent. Since lots of people want to understand what the paper is saying, but do not … Continue reading →

Since I routinely write papers, and I have empirical evidence that they were read by people other than the authors and the referees, I conjecture that people might actually be interested in reading what I write! Therefore I’m starting this … Continue reading →