Caroline H Thompson
http://freespace.virgin.net/ch.thompson1
July 31st, 2000
I discovered the basic facts of the EPR experiments - the importance of the "loopholes" at the end of 1993. In 1995 I became one of the few people in the world to have actually read Alain Aspect's PhD thesis. It was in French, which may perhaps have restricted its readership.
I regret to say that my years of effort in publicising the loopholes, writing to experimenters, presenting papers at conferences, attempting to get articles published in "establishment" journals, has had little visible effect. Only this week I found the New Scientist reporting on the speed of transport of "quantum information", with no mention of the fact that nobody has yet established that there is such a thing! [I wrote to them.] Nevertheless, I cannot believe that my efforts have been entirely in vain. From time to time I have been told that they are appreciated, in a way - that they realise that it is a good thing that someone checks up on them! If only they would do something about it, stop publishing exaggerated reports, keep a check on those sensationalist journalists, and, perhaps most important of all, stop corrupting the minds of our young physics students with this rubbish!
Anyway, among "dissidents" my ideas are going down very well indeed. My talk at the Storrs NPA conference this June was received with enthusiasm, at least some of which I hope was based on genuine understanding. I receive messages of encouragement from visitors to my site about once or twice a week. Considering that I do not have a special "comments" facility, this is not bad!
But what I need is a manager. I am conducting a campaign, but this does not come naturally to me. I'm just a person with a story that I feel compelled to tell.
The story, as you may have realised, is that there is no evidence for any quantum weirdness: quantum entanglement of separated particles just does not happen. This means that the theoretical basis for quantum computing and encryption is null and void. It does not necessarily follow that the research being done under this heading is entirely worthless, but it does mean that the funding for it is being received under false pretences. It is not surprising that the recipients of that funding are on the defensive. I'm afraid they need to find another way to justify their work, and they have not yet picked up the various hints I have tried to give them. There are interesting correlations that they can use. It just happens that they are ordinary ones, not quantum ones, better described using variations of classical theory than quantum optics.
Why do I seem to be almost alone telling this tale? There are in fact many others who know the same basic facts about those Bell test loopholes, though perhaps very few who have even tried to understand the real correlations that are at work in the PDC experiments. I am almost alone because, I strongly suspect, nobody employed in the establishment dares openly to challenge entanglement, for fear of damaging not only his own career but those of his friends. People outside the establishment tend to lack time, money or maybe that last final element of confidence: they do not have the facilities to check the realist hypotheses experimentally.
Now if some person of influence could just happen to take an interest ....