Nick Herbert takes a look at a Chinese paper on Bell's theorem.

Right. Their English is hard to read of course. In any case new angle (pun intended) on your earlier schemes. Won't hurt to take a look.

A note on Kaiser's Ch 9.

OK key assumption for no-cloning an unknown arbitrary quantum state is linearity.

Linearity is broken in coherent states. They are eigenstates of non-Hermitian operators and obey a nonlinear even non-unitary Landau-Ginzburg equation that cannot be second quantized to regain the linearity needed for no-cloning.

Also Glauber's point about spontaneous emission noise for the 1-photon Fock states is of no consequence for coherent states.

And of course they are not orthogonal.

And from Sanders we know coherent states can be entangled.

There is still your point about modulation - are the non-zero overlaps controllable from one end of the system? This would mean "parameter dependence" not included in Bell's inequality math.

So, there still are loose-ends on the limits of Stapp's theorem. It clearly applies in orthodox situations.

Furthermore, near field optics (Physics Today July 2011) violated the Heisenberg microscope resolution limit. What does that do to QM?

In addition

This week in Physics — July 11, 2011
    Viewpoint: Questioning the rules of the game
?aslav Brukner, Physics 4, 55 – Published July 11, 2011
Can quantum theory be derived from more fundamental principles?
     

But they assume no signaling from the future as a postulate - not helpful.

From: nick herbert <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
To: JACK SARFATTI <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Sent: Mon, July 11, 2011 9:22:22 AM
Subject: Re: Nick take a look at this new Bell paper from China (FLASH, QUICK?)

Clever Chinese.

Will look at paper but don't see how this will work.

Transforms task of distinguishing CUP from PUP light
(PUP = plane-unpolarized light)
to task of distinguishing CUP from PUP* light
where PUP* is rotated plane-unpolarized light.


On Jul 10, 2011, at 12:31 PM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0906.0279v5

a new way to attempt a variation on QUICK & FLASH?

This sounds familiar.

"In order to discriminate between the two hypotheses, we must seek a material that can exhibit different effects when circularly and linearly polarized photons pass through it respectively. Note that the usual method of inserting a quarter-wave plate cannot be used here since the photons in one optical path may have two rotation directions. So we make use of roto-optic effect (or Faraday effect) to distinguish between circularly and linearly polarized photons. This is because a linearly polarized photon can be regarded as the combination of left-handed and right-handed circularly polarized components. When it passes through a roto-material, the velocities of the two components are different according to Fresnel’s roto-optic theory. Then there exists a phase shift between the two components. The polarization plane of the photon will rotate and the quantum state will change. As a circularly polarized photon passes through the roto-material, its polarization quantum state will not change since it has only one rotation direction."