Spin with Hyper-helicity.

Bryan Sanctuary

doi:10.20944/preprints202301.0571.v1

Comment 1

Received: 2 March 2023
Commenter: Mark Hadley
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.

Comment: The main result of this paper is eq 17. It is wrong. That is not how you combine distributions.
The preceding equations 9 and 15 and are also most peculiar. The correlation functions depend on the absolute value of the angles not their differences. If both arms are at zero degrees (eq 9) the correlation is - 1, but if both are still perfectly aligned but at 60 degrees the correlation is 0.25. Considering that this change could be just a relabeling of the axis, it is not a physically sensible equation. One must conclude that the equation is wrong, the source is not isotropic or both.

+ Respond to this comment

Response 1 to Comment 1

Received: 3 March 2023
Commenter:

Bryan Sanctuary

The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.

Comment: By stating Eq.(17) is wrong, Hadley is rejecting on of the most well established formulas of Geometric Algebra which is that a dyadic of Pauli spin matrices has a symmetric, (i=j) and and antisymmetric part (i not equal j). This is given in Eq,(10) which he cannot assail. His statement that Eq.(17) is wrong and unsupportable.

He also fails to grasp that the two contributions of that equation are complementary properties of spin that combine to give the observed results. He states combining them is wrong, but fails to say how the seminal Eq.(10) is also wrong.

Stating that Eq.(9) and (15) are peculiar is subjective, unclear and unsupported. He should realize that Eq.(9) uses the same mathematics commonly found in well-know papers, such as (Greenberger, D. M., Horne, M. A., Shimony, A., & Zeilinger, A. (1990). Bell’s theorem without inequalities. American Journal of Physics, 58(12), 1131-1143.) If I am wrong, then so are they. The results are the same too. The difference is the inclusion of coherence which makes the difference.

Hadley appears not to understand how to work out the step-by-step evaluation of coherence given in Eq.(15). His comments appear contrived and of no real relevance to the work.

Not displayed online.

Please leave your comment to this article below.

Mathematical equations can be typed in either LaTeX formats \\[ ... \\] or $$ ... $$, or MathML format <math> ... </math>. Try the LaTeX or MathML example.

Type equation:

Preview:

Copy equation into message below

Close menu

Please click a symbol to insert it into the message box below:

Please enter the link here:

Optionally, you can enter text that should appear as linked text:

Copy link into message below

Please enter or paste the URL to the image here (please only use links to jpg/jpeg, png and gif images):

Copy image into message below

Type author name or keywords to filter the list of references in this group (you can add a new citation under Bibliography):

No existing citations in Discussion Group

Wikify editor is a simple editor for wiki-style mark-up. It was written by MDPI for Sciforum in 2014. The rendering of the mark-up is based on Wiky.php with some tweaks. Rendering of mathematical equations is done with MathJax. Please send us a message for support or for reporting bugs.

Please declare any conflicts of interest you may have with this paper, financial or otherwise.

I do not have a conflict of interest

I would like to declare a conflict of interest

Display my name on the website

Captcha

Renew

I accept the following conditions:

Comments must follow the standards of professional discourse and should focus on the scientific content of the article. Insulting or offensive language, personal attacks and off-topic remarks will not be permitted. Comments must be written in English. Preprints reserves the right to remove comments without notice. Readers who post comments are obliged to declare any competing interests, financial or otherwise.

Spin with Hyper-helicity.

Abstract

Keywords

Subject

Comments (2)