Remove Electronic signature Presentation Now

Thanks for the ATA! I served on 2 Burke Class DDGs.Burke Class DDGs employ several RCS or ‘Radar Cross Section’ reduction methods.First and foremost is that the hull and more especially the superstructure employ shaping techniques to present angles that will bounce or scatter radar return.Placement of equipment on deck is limited or able to be hidden/enclosed. The mast is angled, enclosed and made of aluminum. The 5 inch gun has been modified on later ships to include a reduced RCS turret.Equipment that cannot be placed elsewhere or hidden has special covers made of radar absorbent material. Similarly parts of the superstructure and any infrastructure that cannot be angled use RAM tile. Any of the RAM areas as well as identified hot spots are coated with special RAM paint. For instance the exhaust pipes are painted with a paint similar to what was used on the F117. Later ships removed the exhaust pipes altogether. Collectively these systems are called PCMS or Passive Counter Measures System.The result is a RCS that is about 70 percent smaller than the ships actual size depending up the platform trying to detect it.Aside from RCS reduction an area that is as important is ‘Emissions Control’. You can hide from radar completely and it will not help a bit if your electronic signature gives you away. The Burke Class excels at controlling emissions. Phased Array SPY-1 radars have a virtuous ability to control emissions by being able to digitally dial its echo, meaning the radar doesnt just use max energy all the time like an easily visible spotlight shooting up into a night sky. Burke can turn its radar off altogether and rely on its own electronic sniffing ECM sensors or through Cooperative Engagement and Tactical Databanks use other platforms sensors to get a picture. For example an E-2D Hawkeye is airborne, it can link with the Burke and now the Burke can see what it sees. Burke can even launch weapons using another platforms sensor picture.

Elephant Passing Through The Hole Of A Needle.The relevance of the above line would be clear after going through my answer.I have recently conducted election in the state of Telangana the results of which were announced yesterday (11.12.2018). I worked as Returning Officer of Bhadrachalam (119) constituency (Returning Officer is overall incharge of conducting election in one constituency).The whole process of voting through EVM has so many checks and balances that the chances of manipulating machine and influencing outcome is ZERO. If a machine is tampered at any stage of the election it would be known at the time of polling or counting very easily.Before I go into the technicalities, let me first take you through the journey of EVM in my constituency (Bhadrachalam)Arrival of machines at District HeadquarterAfter the announcement of elections, the EVMs were received from BEL (Bharat Electronics Limited) and were kept in the District Headquarter. All EVMs are stored in Strong Rooms. Every time a strong room is opened or closed the political parties have to be informed first. The entire process has to be videographed and there is a 24x7 surveillance through CCTV and deployment of police force.Arrival of machines in Assembly ConstituencyTill 3 weeks before elections, I had no knowledge of which EVMs will come to Bhadrachalam constituency. The process of allotment of EVMs to a constituency is done through randomization in presence of political parties.After receiving EVMs from the district, the machines were stored in Bhadrachalam EVM Strong Room. Again the entire process of CCTV, informing political party, videography was followed.Just a week before the election, second randomization is done in presence of General Observer and Political Parties where we came to know which machine goes to which Polling Station. For example machine number BCUEH61401 was allotted PS No: 1-Krishnapuram in Wazedu Mandal of Bhadrachalam AC (Assembly Constituency). This list is shared with all political parties.So the possibility that a different machine was used at a polling station is negated. On the day of polling or on the day of counting the political party can easily point out if there is any discrepancy in the ID of machines being used.(The above photo is of the day of randomization where I am explaining the entire process of allotment of machines to the political parties)CommissioningBefore sending machines to Polling Stations, all the machines are verified by casting one vote per candidate in all machines in presence of Political Parties. This is done to make sure that only one vote goes to one candidate.Random SelectionOn the day of commissioning, the political party can randomly select a machine and cast 1000 votes themselves and count the slips from VVPAT to make sure that all machines are correct.Putting sealAll the critical sections of machines are sealed in a way that signatures of all political parties are present on every seal. Each seal has a unique number. If somebody breaks open the seal then it would be known immediately.Day of PollingEvery candidate can appoint 1 Polling Agent Per Polling Station on the day of polling.Polling Agents are given the updated list of Electoral Roll. If you go to a polling station then you will find at least 4–5 polling agents inside the booth along with election staff.Every time a voter comes, the identification of voter is done by all polling agent. This makes sure that there is no impersonation or bogus voting.Mock PollThis is an important part of entire polling process. Before the start of polling the polling agents should cast minimum 50 votes. The results of the mock poll are shown to all political parties and they can tally the results. This makes sure that no re-wiring or re-connection of the circuit has been done and the machine are working normally.All Presiding Officers have to give a certificate that the mock poll was done and the result was tallied.End of PollAt the end of poll, all machines are sealed in front of Polling Agents and they have to mandatorily put their initials on every seal and compartment.Polling Agents are given a record of total votes. So, if at the end of poll 974 votes are cast- a statement of this signed by Presiding Officer is given to political party.Storing Polled EVMsAfter the poll, the EVMs are again stored in Godowns with CCTV, Police Protection. This time the political parties are given an option toPermanently sit in the front of Strong Room 24x7 !There is separate room arranged where Political Parties can see the live feed of Strong Room on large LED screen.These arrangements are made to make sure that no one enters (including District Officials, Returning Officer or any other ECI Official).Once the EVMs are sealed in the strong room, it can only be opened again on the day of counting.Day of CountingOn the day of counting the strong room is again opened in front of Political Parties. When a machine arrives for counting, the following points are verified:Whether the machine belongs to the same polling station? (Can be verified from the list already given to the candidates one week before polling)Whether all seals and tags are present? (Can be verified by seeing the signs of Presiding Officer and all Polling Agents on the day of counting)Whether the number of votes in EVMs is tallied? (Candidates are already given the number of votes casted at every Polling Station at the end of polling)When all the above facts are tallied, the RESULT section of EVM is pressed to know the number of votes cast in favour of one candidate.The result of a machine is not communicated unless the authenticity is certified by all candidates!The result sheet of every machine has signature of all candidates.Random VerificationTo remove all doubts, the political parties can select One Random Polling Station where we have to count the VVPAT slips and tally it with the result shown in the EVM.The points mentioned above are just a glimpse of rigorous process that we follow to ensure transparency.Now I would address the rumours and misconception regarding EVMs.1.EVMs can be hacked so that no matter which button you press the vote will go to same candidateThe chance of above happening is same as an elephant passing through the hole of a needle.On the day of commissioning and polling the political party can themselves cast their votes randomly and verify that the vote has actually gone to the candidate for which they have voted.2.After the polling EVMs can be tampered to cast extra votes.No. Since the number of votes are already communicated to the political party, therefore, if extra votes are cast then it would reflect on the day of counting.After the polling, the Presiding Officer presses the CLOSE button. Once this button is pressed you can not cast extra votes unless CLEAR button is pressed. Guess what, this button is surrounded by 2 unique paper seal containing the signature of both PO and political agents. There is no way you can signNow this button without breaking the seal.The machine also records the time of last vote polled. Every Presiding Officer gives a diary (called Presiding Officer Diary) in which the end time of poll is recorded. If someone tries casting extra votes then there would be a mismatch in the time of closing which can be easily identified on the day of counting.So if you manage to take away polled EVM in your house, it will be of no use!Moreover, with the introduction of VVPATs there is a 2 level check. Political parties can randomly select a machine and ask us to verify all votes cast by counting slips inside VVPAT.The beauty of the election process is that:Every step involves the participation of Political Party. Without their permission and signature no machines can be touched, votes cast or counted.I would like to conclude with the following:The only place where you can fiddle with EVMs is in Lab or in your Mind. There exists no chance of manipulating machines during the entire process of election.Conducting elections is one of the most difficult yet highly gratifying task and I am proud to be a part of this democratic process and working under Election Commission of India.Have more doubts and queries regarding Election Process? Do drop in a comment.Wish to become a future bureaucrat. Read here:71 to 51: My new book by Bhavesh Mishra on 71 to 51: My book for complete preparation strategyEDIT 1:Many people have pointed out instances where EVM machines have shown more votes than was registered.Can it take place?Yes. After doing mock poll (around 50 votes on the day of polling), CLOSE and CLEAR button have to be pressed so that when the actual voting starts the count starts from zero.In very rare cases if a Presiding Officer forgets doing CLEAR then the count will start not from zero but from the mock poll count (say X).Is it a big issue?Not at all. On the day of counting all such EVMs are kept aside and according to the instructions of ECI, the VVPAT slips need to be counted for all such machines. The count of VVPAT slips will definitely tally with the actual number of votes.That’s it!

Who am I ?The one baffling question not only to spiritual seekers but also to Scientific researchers. For example;If human cell comprises of atoms and electrons, it is something like atoms and electrons are reading about them. So Mr.Anonymous, we are a group of electrons studying about ourselves and even in this manner we don’t have complete details of us and yet research is going on, theories will be proposed.Biologically, it asks a different question, which is something like why me. Yeah why am I, why not me you. It discusses the psychological behaviour of the mind, which is solely responsible for our questions. So the question states that why did I get this particular kind of mindset, why not you. Why didn’t this answer come to you as we are having the same chemicals all over the time.Also to speak about your origin,you are a sperm generated by a source which has some organic chemical composition. This organic chemical composition of course matches with the compounds present even in a soil.Finally as you asked spiritually,I like to narrate a story before proceeding spiritually. I feel you did hear about king janaka who is known for his wisdom and knowledge. Once he lost his whole empire, he lost his kingdom, princess, army and everything. In-front of him was rival standing by pointing a sword at janaka. He was completely helpless. And then he suddenly came out of his dreams. He was furious. He want to find out “eh sach hai ki woh sach hai”(which is the truth). In both the scenarios he could feel the same breathe. In both the scenarios he could feel the same sense of touch and everything is same. He asked the same to his guru astavakra.Then astavakra said “you are the truth”. However I did not understand it completely. So the state of mind in which do you actually belong is called “Turiyam”. Which was mentioned by a swamiji in one of his lectures at IIT, which of course inspired me.So keep this story in mind, and get ready for meditation. So you start dismantling each and each, part by part, inch by inch everything. Remove your relationship, thereby remove your name, place yourself in endless space. Now start removing all the objects around you. So do you feel everything perfectly dark in your imagination. If yes, you are wrong. You should not be able to feel even the darkness. So neither dark nor bright, neither empty nor full, neither name nor you and then its perfectly you. It is called the state of “Soonya”, the absolute emptiness. And this is called “The imagination, or illusion”. You are nothing but this so called illusion/maya.Rolling up, you are ayou are a sperm/mitochondriayou are a geneyou are a organic chemical compositionyou are an electronSo finally it’s all you. Didn’t get right. It’s what proposed in Adwaita, which translates “no dual existence”. What it states you are surrounded by you. The organic compound which is present in you has similar chemical composition with different electron signature .Yes you are made up of same fundamental elements, irrespective of living or non-living. Finally its all you. If a group of cells, co-ordinated make you to a living being, we all living beings working together making this earth a mighty living planet/organism and again its you.So its you everywhere who is empty. And this is a paradox

Very much true.The US military has massive power projection, more than any country in the history of man. The US has 11 (CATOBAR/STOBAR) Aircraft Carriers, while the next country has 1 which is, China, Russia, India, UK, and France. Also, the US Carriers are not just regular carriers, they are known as Super Carriers. Which is a term coined by the public to say that these carriers are so large that they exceed the definition of an Aircraft Carrier. Also, the US carriers were designed in the 70’s and countries are now just starting to make designs that could compete with the American Carriers. However, the US just redesigned the carrier and is coming out with the new Gerald R. Ford Class Carrier, which is supposed to be years possibly decades ahead of any other countries design. If you include Helicopter Carriers, and Amphibious Assault ships, that number jumps up to 20, soon to be 22. Then the next highest is tied between Japan and France with 4. My favorite part about the US having so many Aicraft Carriers is that if we divided them up between the major oceans, we could have 4 in each ocean… Crazy. The US carriers are also nuclear powered, they are the only carriers to be nuclear powered besides the French R91 Charles de Gaulle.Note the types of planes on the US Carriers. If you look at the USS Gerald R. Ford, it is fielding 5 different aircraft. 4 planes and 1 helicopter. We will look at the planes. Woden note, the USN has the 2nd largest Air Force in the world, right behind the USAF.First plane- McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet/Super Hornet: The plane is one of the most decorated planes, with thousands of successful missions, while requiring 3x less maintenance and failures than its counterparts. The plane has electronic warfare capabilities, air to air, and air to ground capabilities. Also, has spy and early warning capabilities. It was one of the first aircraft to heavily use multifunction displays, which at the switch of a button allow a pilot to perform either fighter or attack roles or both. The airframe is complex yet so simple, that a 4 man team can remove and install a new F404 engine in 40 minutes. Was also one of the very first 4th generation fighter on an aircraft carrier.Second plane- Northrop Grumman X-47B: This guy will be the very first and only Carrier based Drone. Northrop Grumman intends to develop the prototype X-47B into a battlefield-ready aircraft, the Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) system, which will enter service in the 2020s. So it’ll have strike options and surveillance capabilities.Third plane- Northrop Grumman E-2 Hawkeye: Many countries have AWAC systems or Airborne early warning and control. But only the United States have a Carrier based AWAC system. With the creation of this system, carriers that are hundreds of miles away from the nearest AWAC system, this plane gives the ability for a carrier strike group to potentially detect fifth-generation fighters like the Russian Sukhoi Su-57 and the Chinese Chengdu J-20 and Shenyang J-31 farther out. Also, gives the ability to guide fleet weapons, such as AIM-120 AMRAAM and SM-6 missiles, onto targets beyond a launch platform's detection range or capabilities.Fourth plane- Lockheed Martin F-35C Lightning II: This plane is the first and only carrier based 5th Generation Stealth fighter. The plane is meant as an air superiority fighter and a plane capable of ground support. It also has a very low, almost undetectable, cross section and radar signature. Besides radar stealth measures, the F-35 incorporates infrared signature and visual signature reduction measures. With the addition of a 5th generation stealth fighter, this gives the US military and Navy, the opportunity to do more damage and to have true air superiority over all other aircraft carrier based planes and land based planes. The US, in the event of a war, can now bring 5th gen fighters to the battle without the need of the Air Force against other 4th gen fighters, or possibly the few Chinese or Russian 5th gen fighters.Furthermore, the US have some of the best destroyers on the planet. With the highly acclaimed Arleigh-Burke Class Destroyer, and the brand new, low production Zumwalt Class Destroyer. The US has the most destroyers in the world with about double the next country, with another 4 undergoing sea trials and we are currently building 5 more and have awarded contracts for 5 more. By 2024 the US is expected to have 79 destroyers in service.Zumwalt Destroyer- The Zumwalt class warships are the largest destroyer ever built. The USS Zumwalt has unusual hull design optimized for wave piercing. There is a composite deckhouse. Angular shape minimizes its radar signature. The ship has hidden radar and sensors. The despite its size the USS Zumwalt has a radar signature of a fishing boat. Also it has reduced sound and infrared signature what makes this ship harder to detect. The ship is the First american surface warship to integrate electronic propulsion, it generates enough power to light up a small city. Sound levels of the Zumwalt are comparable with Los Angeles class submarines.Arleigh-Burke Destroyer- These guided missile destroyers entered service with the US Navy in 1991 were the first large US Navy vessel designed to incorporate stealth shaping techniques to reduce radar cross-section. Also these are one of the biggest destroyers in the world that incorporate highly advanced weaponry and systems. Hull profile of the Arleight Burke class signNowly improves seakeeping, permitting high speeds to be maintained in difficult sea states. The AN/SPY-1D phased array radar incorporates signNow advances in the detection capabilities of the AEGIS weapons system, particularly in its resistance to enemy electronic countermeasures. Missile are stored in vertical launch systems, that can also house smaller Evolved Sea Sparrow (ESSM) missiles, Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles, ASROC anti-submarine missiles. For point defense the ships are equipped with two Phalanx Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS). Also there are 324 mm launchers for Mk.46 or Mk.50 torpedoes.Daily dose of freedom right here.Obviously, we can’t forget about the immaculate US submarine fleet. The US has some of the most advanced and quietest submarines. All of them use nuclear propulsion for extended range and stealth capabilities. The US has the…Ohio class (18 in commission) – 14 ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), 4 guided missile submarines (SSGNs)- The U.S. Ohio-class submarines, of which 14 are Trident II SSBN, each capable of carrying 24 SLBMs. The first four which were all equipped with the older Trident I missiles have been converted to SSGN's each capable of carrying 154 Tomahawk guided missiles and have been further equipped to support Special OperationsSeawolf class (3 in commission) – attack submarines- The Seawolf class boats were intended to seek and destroy the latest Soviet ballistic missile submarines, such as the Typhoon class and attack submarines such as the Akula class. Seawolf class submarines are arguably the quietest submarines in the world ever constructed. It is exceptionally quiet even at high speeds. Most submarines need to keep their speed down to as little as 5 knots to avoid detection by passive sonar arrays, while the Seawolf class are credited with being able to cruise at 20 kots and still be impossible to locate. A Seawolf at 25 knots makes less noise than an older Los Angeles class submarine tied up alongside the pier. And these came out in 1989.Virginia class (11 in commission, 5 under construction, 2 on order) – fast attack submarines- The Virginia class submarines incorporate newly designed anechoic coating, isolated deck structures and new design of propulsor to achieve low acoustic signature. It is claimed that noise level of the Virginia is equal to that of the Seawolf class. The Virginia class submarines are fitted with 12 vertical launch system (VLS) tubes. These are used to launched Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles with a range of 1 700 km. Also there are four 533-mm torpedo tubes. These are used to fire a total of 26 Mk.48 heavyweight torpedoes and Sub-Harpoon anti-ship missiles. It is the first US submarine to employ a built-in Navy SEAL staging area allowing a team of 9 men to enter and leave the submarine.(Improved) Los Angeles class (34 in commission, 2 in reserve) – attack submarines- The Improved submarines are much quieter. It is described that improved Los Angeles class boats are 7 times quieter than the original Los Angeles class boats. The class features a very potent weapon array, including Mk.48 torpedoes, Sub-Harpoon anti-ship missiles and Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles. Tomahawk missiles can be launched from torpedo tubes of from dedicated vertical launching systems. These boats can operate under ice where the Russian ballistic missile submarines tend to hide.Surfacing of a US Submarine.Let’s move onto the air. While the USN has a quite capable Air Force. But that is dwarfed by the sheer magnitude and strength of the United States Air Force. The Air Force articulates its core missions as air and space superiority, global integrated ISR, rapid global mobility, global strike, and command and control. The USAF flys a multitude of different planes and helicopters. The USAF is the largest Air Force in the world, here is the list of what America flys. Most of these are at the cutting edge of innovation, with two of them being 5th generation stealth fighters. That’s really really good because no other country has an active 5th gen while the US has 2. The USAF also has the largest bomber, tanker, fighter, and transport fleets in the world. The USAF has so many staging areas around the world, that the US can have bombers or any other planes on station, anywhere around the world in a matter of hours.Attack: A-10, AC-130, MQ-1, MQ-9Bomber: B-1B, B-2, B-52HElectronic warfare: E-3, E-8, EC-130Fighter: F-15C, F-15E, F-16, F-22 (5th gen), F-35A (5th gen)Helicopter: HH-60, UH-1NReconnaissance: MC-12, RC-135, RQ-4, RQ-170, U-2, U-28Trainer: T-1, T-6, T-38, T-41, T-51, T-53, TG-16Transport: C-5, C-12, C-17, C-21, C-32, C-37, C-130, C-40, CV-22, VC-25Tanker: KC-10, KC-135Let’s look at the two of my favorite ones and the most technologically advanced planes in the world.F-22 RaptorThe F-22 Raptor air superiority fighter is almost invisible to radars. This aircraft carries a powerful array of weaponry. It is the most advanced and most expensive production fighter aircraft to date. Many of sensors and avionics of this plane remain classified. Engines of the raptor allow the aircraft to supercruise over long ranges, while thrust-vectoring nozzles, combined with a triplex fly-by-wire flight control system, make it exceptionally maneuverable. The highly integrated avionics systems also include a data-link, inertial navigation system with embedded GPS for high-accuracy navigation, and advanced electronic warfare, warning and countermeasures systems. Two central computers manage the automatic switching of the sensors between completely passive and wholly active operation, according to the tactical situation. Artificial intelligence algorithms fuse data from the sensors and present only relevant information to the pilot to reduce workload while at the same time improving tactical awareness. The datalink allows tactical information to be shared with other F-22s. The tech is so special that other countries, not even NATO allies are given the chance to procure the plane.B-2 SpiritThe B-2A Spirit is the silver bullet of US policy, reserved for use against targets of the highest priority. The B-2's stealth characteristics enable the undetected penetration of sophisticated anti-aircraft defenses and to attack even heavily defended targets. This stealth comes from a combination of reduced acoustic, infrared, visual and radar signatures (multi-spectral camouflage) to evade the various detection systems that could be used to detect and be used to direct attacks against an aircraft. Composites are extensively used to provide a radar-absorbent honeycomb structure; the bomber has a minimal IR signature, does not contrail and uses its shielded APQ-181 radar only momentarily to identify a target just before attacking. The onboard DMS is capable of automatically assessing the detection capabilities of identified threats and indicated targets. The DMS will be upgraded by 2021 to detect radar emissions from air defenses to allow changes to the auto-router's mission planning information while in-flight so it can receive new data quickly to plan a route that minimizes exposure to dangers. Also, most of the B-2s are stationed in Missouri, and they are capable of bombing any target in the world despite being in the heart of America.Now for the US ARMYThe US army it self is massive in numbers, coming in at 1.01 million personnel, it self is one of the biggest standing armies in the world, and that's just one branch of the US military. Also, in the US military, it is the largest branch out of them all surpassing any other branch by almost 600,000 personnel. They provide the bulk of security for the US's foreign interests. The mission of the U.S. Army is to fight and win our Nation's wars, by providing prompt, sustained, land dominance, across the full range of military operations and the spectrum of conflict, in support of combatant commanders. Which is mainly air domination and land domination. They mainly engage is conventional warfare, and asymmetrical warfare. The US Army's main responsibilities is preserving the peace and security and providing for the defense of the United States, the Commonwealths and possessions and any areas occupied by the United States, Supporting the national policies, Implementing the national objectives, Overcoming any nations responsible for aggressive acts that imperil the peace and security of the United States. The US Army is also home to some of the most dangerous, prestigious and hardest working special forces teams in the world such as the frontline special force, the Rangers, we also have the green berets and the iconic 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta (Airborne) also known as Delta Force. The US army is thought to be one of the most battle tested and battle proven militaries in the world. With the mobility of the USAF an army QRF can be anywhere on earth in less than 24 hours. The US ARMY uses the M1A2 Abrams tank. One of the most badass, heaviest, fastest, and battle hardened tanks in the world.This tank has incredible technology and armor. Also it has seen combat. It is one of the most feared MBTs. The M1A2 offers signNow protection against all well-known anti-tank weapons. This main battle tank uses advanced armor, reinforced with depleted uranium layers. The M1A2 has signNow level of protection against all known anti-tank weapons. It can also employ counter-IED equipment. The tank is armed with the same 120-mm M256 smoothbore gun as its predecessor. Range of effective fire is in excess of 4 km. This main battle tank is powered by a Honeywell AGT1500 gas turbine engine, developing 1 500 hp. The tank is one of the fastest in the world, clocking in (with no governor) at 60 mph while being THE heaviest tank in the world. As of April of 2018, the US has no combat losses with the Abrams, the Abrams has only been lost due to friendly fire, never to enemy fire.I don’t think I need to explain the marines. Just know that they use the same tech as the Army (with some exceptions) but they are also the main invasion force for the US. And they are badass.The US military signNow is massive with the Aircraft carriers and the 700+ military bases around the world. The US is truly the most powerful military in the world. The fact that they can have a men anywhere in the world in less than 24 hours and being able to bomb any place on earth, just proves how powerful the US military is.

[1] PDF format is popularly known as print document format. This creates a virtual printer within operating system to print the document. For offline scanning of document, the PDF format is popular. The importance attached with these program is that you need to have PDFsoftware installed to run these files. If someone sends you PDF file and your computer do not have such software installed then that file is not to be read from there.There are so many PDF softwires available and this article aims to find out the mostly free software or freeware to help readers to choose from variety of options. More and more operating systems are providing built-in facilities for such products. Now-a-days everything comes with PDF formats beginning from circulars, bank statement, insurance statement, tax statement and e-books.That is why there immense important to have the free PDF software installed on computer but the thousand question is which one is to choose from the variety of resources available.Sumatra PDF:Sumatra PDF is available for download to Windows since the times of Windows XP. This program has very low foot print, light on system resources and fast. It is going to perform simple task as well as it is going to perform complex task depending upon you choose from PDFfiles. It is available with installed version as well as standalone portable version in which it does not write to registry.It is available in 64 bit version on Windows. It is available for Windows XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 and 10. It is available for Windows operating system only.signNow Reader DC:It is from signNow and signNow is available for free for users. While installing this software do check for installation of MCAfee security and safe connect.it is a big download of nearing to 120 MB. Yours antivirus software might stop this installation so allow to install it. This software for high=end computing processes.Many features are included with it and for some features you might need it and if you want to have these features then it is better to choose this software. It has mobile version of android and apple operating system. With it you are going to synchronize documents with clouds and yours signature too and everything is going to stay with cloud to access from each and every device.When you first download signNow on Windows, a download manager first downloads and it is small in size and then by opening that download manager signNow software is installed and this is nearer to 120 MB.PDF-Xchange Editor:PDF-Xchange Editor is a smart PDF tools and most functions are free except some complex ones. It is a PDF reader, pdf editor and pdf tools. It can print PDFs, fill the forms created with signNow and can extract images from PDF files. There are some advanced features included in this free version but most of these are not free one is that watermarking of PDFsoftware which is not free.Foxit Reader:Foxit Reader is fast, simple and is there for years. It is available for Windows, Apple and android versions. It can fill forms and save data. Can include and validate electronic signatures. During installation user need to be cautioned not to install so many verities of other software. In order to keep the size of download minimal, the user manual is available for separate download.It is faster than PDF-Xchange Editor. If you are not interested in OCR facilities then Foxit reader is best suited for yours work. Multiple PDF documents when opened all these are opened in tab format and shifting from one tab to the other is easier. From time to time it introduces some new features in order to provide dynamic software development.It allows adding up of multimedia files easier. Collaboration with social media accounts becomes easier with Fixit Reader because of the ease to synchronize with Twitter, Facebook, Evernote and SharePoint. One caution is that Foxit Reader comes bundled with so many other software and toolbar and it is important to not to allow installations of such software during its installation.MuPDF Reader:It is very lightweight PDF Reader. On its first launch it will ask you about to choose from files instead of showing its interface and when the PDF is opened then it shows the exact documents and no toolbar and other interfaces are present. In order to see the interface of MuPDF reader you are going to click on the top left of the visible windows to find it. It provides a cleaner interface and superior look for PDF files.Google Chrome PDF viewer:While browsing for internet whenever you see any PDF and click on it and it will slowly open in another tab of Chrome and you can read it from there or download by clicking the downloadsymbol available there. This setting can be turned and changed out there easily, go to settings of chrome and then advanced and then content settings and then pdf documents, Scroll down and click on PDF documents and from there switch on ‘Download PDF files instead of opening automatically opening them in Chrome’ and this will download PDF files from net to computer.If you want to read PDF files that are stored inside computer, then right click on that files and then open with chrome and your chrome reader will automatically, open pdf files and for this you will not have to install pdf viewers. Similarly, with android if you install Google Drive then you will not need any other third-party PDF apps as Google Drive act as PDF viewer and make it default while opening the first PDF and that is going to make it default.TinyPDF:TinyPDF as the name suggests has very small foot print of PDF reader and it has no string attached. It is only 586k as it is less than one MB. It does not contain no malware, adware, watermarks and no pop Global Home: UPS is completely free. JPEG compression is supported. No ghost script and third-party software included with the installer version. The downside is that it is partially supported on 64-bit computer. Automatic font management is there.There are so many alternatives to use for PDF viewer and if your computer is 64 bit then you can download the 64 bit version of Sumatra PDF and if you want to insert electronic signature then opt for Foxit PDF reader and if you want to have the old and classic PDF reader which is heavier in file composition and not for low end computing purposes then go for signNow and lastly if you do not want to install PDF readers at all then it is better to open it with Google Chrome built in PDF viewer.So, there are many large numbers of option to choose from and if you want to have some complex PDF functions besides the presence of PDF reader you need pdf tools and others then it is best to have PDF-Xchange viewer and so many other option listed here you can choose it from. There are some other alternatives are available which are there to search ad find in internet.This entry was posted in Android Apps on Google Play, Apple Inc., Computer Information Technology, Google, Google Chrome, Information Technology, Internet, Windows 10, Windows 8, Windows XP and tagged signNow, Apple, doPDF, FOXIT READER, free PDF converter, google chrome, image to pdf converter, PDF Password Remover, pdf printer, pdf-xchange, Sumatra PDF A PDF Viewer for Windows, WINDOWS, Windows 8, WINDOWS VISTA, WINDOWS XP, Windows XP SP3 onFootnotes[1] Best Free PDF Writer and Reader

Those who have card readers at home (to be used with ID-cards) or mobile ID (used, among other things, for bank payments) will log in using their ID to a designated website, pick a candidate, click a few mouse clicks, and done.To ensure anonymity of voting, the hardware used for particular elections will then be publicly destroyed after the votes are counted (the electronic votes are normally taken some days before the physical votes, which sort of gives away some voting tendencies in advance). Still, it doesn’t stop the public from ever wondering each time elections come up about the anonymity and possible abuse of the system. Cases have been known where some heads of households would gather all ID cards of the family (especially old grandparents) and vote for whomever they chose.In recent elections, about 30 per cent of all active voters voted electronically. I know some people who never use this option for fear that records may remain. I personally fluctuate between voting electronically (“Meh, too lazy to go outside today”) and physically (“Elections day, come on family, time to do our citizen duty and have a nice walk!”).Update: just received my new ID card this week, and the envelope with the card reminds me when the next elections happen and encourages me not to waste my vote.

"Illusion" is an interesting choice of words. To acquire the kind of understanding I think you're after, let's back up a bit and see if we can excavate the foundation of this question. Let me start with a quote. “The voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new horizons, but in seeing with new eyes.” ~ Marcel Proust An examination of the double-slit experiment will give us a good introduction to the mystery you have singled out. But to make that examination worthwhile, we need to make sure that we are familiar with an important effect known as interference. [i]Interference applies universally to all interacting waves. A water wave, for instance, can be described as a disturbance in the shape of the water’s surface. This disturbance produces regions where the water level is higher and regions where it is lower than the undisturbed value. The highest part of each ripple is called a peak and the lowest part is called a trough. Typically waves involve periodic succession, peak followed by trough followed by peak and so on. In general, we can define a wavelength as the distance between identical parts of adjacent waves. Measurements from peak to peak, or trough to trough, for example, give the same value for wavelength.Figure 1 Peaks and troughs of wavesWhen waves interact in a medium, they interfere. For example, if we drop two rocks into spatially separated parts of a pond, their waves will interfere when they cross. (Figure 2) When a peak of one wave and a peak of another wave come together, the height of the water rises to a height equal to the sum of the two peaks. Similarly, when a trough of one wave and a trough of another wave cross, the depression of the water's surface dips to the sum of the two depressions. And when a peak of one wave crosses with a trough of another, the (at least partially) cancel each other out. The peak of one wave contributes a positive displacement while the trough of the other wave contributes a negative displacement. If the two waves have equal magnitude, then there will be perfect cancelation and the water's surface will be flat, just as it was before any wave existed.Figure 12-2 Constructive and destructive interference Keeping these rules of interference in mind, let’s turn our attention to light. If we take a laser emitting a single wavelength—a single color, and shine it on a screen that has a slit etched into it (Figure 3), what image should we expect to see on the wall behind the screen? [ii] Classically speaking, we would expect to see a stripe of light on the wall. (Classically means according to our four-dimensional intuition, or the rules of Euclidean geometry.) It turns out that this is what we see. In this sense light’s behavior correlates perfectly with our Euclidean intuition.Figure 12-3 Expected single slit projectionWhat image should we expect to see on the wall if we etch a second slit on our screen and cover the first slit with a black piece of tape? Well, our classical intuitions tell us to expect a line of light projected on the wall, just like we did before, except this line of light should be offset from the first. Again, this is exactly what we see when we perform the experiment. So far all of this is straightforward and conceptually trivial. But as it turns out, we are only one step away from a profound mystery. We discover this mystery by removing the piece of tape. To understand the impact of this mystery, ask yourself: What sort of projection do we expect to see on the wall when both slits are open?Classical intuition tells us that we should see two parallel bands of light on the wall (Figure 4).Figure 4 Expected double slit projectionBut this is where our classical training (our Euclidean intuition) lets us down. This is also where classical mechanics breaks down. When we perform this experiment, something completely counterintuitive happens, contradicting our Euclidean intuitions. A distinct interference pattern is projected on the wall (Figure 5).Figure 5 Actual double slit projection The bright and dark bands produced in this double-slit experiment are telltale signs that light propagates as a wave. [iii] Interference patterns are key signatures of waves. The problem is that this wavelike characteristic directly clashes with our observations of light’s particulate behavior. After all, photons are always found in point-like regions rather than spread out like a wave, and individual photons are always found to have very discrete amounts of energy. When measuring a wave, you would expect to find its energy spread out over a region instead of being concentrated in one location. So how are we supposed to make sense of this observation? What is going on?These diametrically opposed properties of light are verified facts. Contradictory as they may seem, they are here to stay. They have forced us to the seemingly paradoxical conclusion that light is both a wave and a particle. But how can this be? How can it be both? Although many scientists have found thewave-particle duality of light to be conceptually vague and schizophrenic, this description has persisted. In fact, after the wave-particle concept was adopted as an accurate description of light, it was extended to describe electrons and, eventually, all of matter. This transition was nothing short of a revolution.Up until 1910, atoms were simplistically viewed as miniature solar systems with the nucleus making up the “central star” and orbiting electrons being “planets”. [iv] The wave-particle duality of light and matter rejected this view and pointed to a signNowly different architecture for atoms. Of course, this conceptual transition did not take hold over night.In 1924, Prince Louis de Broglie found that in addition to their particle like character, [v] electrons also possessed a wavelike character. In 1927, Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer followed this up by firing a beam of electrons at a piece of nickel crystal, which acted as a barrier analogous to the one used in the double-slit experiment. A phosphor screen recorded the resultant pattern of electrons. [vi] When they examined the screen, they observed an interference pattern just like the one produced in the double-slit experiment, showing that even electrons have wavelike properties.These experiments shook the foundation of physics by threatening the structure of classical mechanics and destroying humanity’s intuitive framework of reality. But it didn’t stop there. The next step was to tune the beam of electrons down so that the electron gun fired just a single electron at a time. Similar experiments were later used with lasers wherein individual photons were fired seconds apart from each other. The results were mind-bending.Completely against expectation these experiments also produced interference patterns over time as the collection of electrons (or photons) continued to build (Figure 6).Figure 12-6 Over time individual photons construct an interference patternThese observations only added to the confusion. Waves are supposed to be a collective property—something that has no meaning when applied to separate, particulate ingredients. (A water wave, for example, involves a large number of water molecules.) So how can a single electron, or a single photon, be a wave? Furthermore, wave interference requires a wave from one place to interact with a wave from another place. So how can interference be relevantly applied to a single electron or photon? While we are considering such questions, we should also ask, if a single electron or photon is a wave, then what is it that is “waving”? [vii]To answer these questions, Erwin Schrödinger proposed that the stuff that makes up electrons might be smeared out in space and that this smeared electron essence might be what waves. If this idea was correct then we would expect to find all of the electron’s properties, spread out over a distance, but we never do. Every time we locate an electron, we find all of its mass and all of its charge concentrated in one tiny, point-like region. Max Born came up with a different idea. He suggested that the wave is actually a probability wave. [viii] Einstein tinkered with a similar idea when he hypothesized that these waves were optical observations that refer to time averages rather than instantaneous values. Inserting a probability wave (also called a state vector, or a wave function) as a fundamental aspect of Nature delivers another blow to our common-sense ideas about how things truly operate. It suggests that experiments with identical starting conditions do not necessarily lead to identical results because it claims that you can never predict exactly where an electron will be in a single instant. You can only define a probability that we will find it over here, or over there, at any given moment. Two situations with the same probabilistic starting conditions, say of a single particle, might not produce the same results, because the particle can be anywhere within that probability distribution. From a classical perspective, the discovery that the microscopic universe behaves this way is absolutely baffling. Nevertheless, it is how we have observed Nature to be.This leads us to a rather interesting precipice. It seems that the map we have been using to chart physical reality somehow dissolves when we look closely at it. The rules of four-dimensional geometry simply fail to accurately map Nature when we examine the smallest scales. Nature doesn’t strictly behave as our old Euclidean map dictates. Stumbling upon this discovery forces us to face a vital question. Is Nature ultimately and fundamentally probabilistic in a way that we may never understand, as many modern physicists have chosen to believe; or, is this probabilistic quality a byproduct of our reduced dimensional representation of Nature?After pondering these questions long and hard, some physicists have come to believe that the tapestry of spacetime is analogous to water: that the smooth appearance of space and time is only an approximation that must yield to a more fundamental framework when considering ultramicroscopic scales. As far as I can tell, however, up until now this point has only been entertained abstractly. Geometrically resolving a molecular structure for space might resolve our greatest quantum mechanical mysteries, but as of yet, no one has taken that final step. No one has developed a self-consistent picture from this geometric insight. No one has moved beyond the mathematical suggestion that spacetime is analogous to water, or interpreted the theoretical quanta of space as being physically real. Consequently, a framework that enables conceptualization of what is meant by the “molecules” or “atoms” of spacetime has not been developed.Eight decades of meticulous experiments have confirmed the predictions of quantum mechanics based on this wave function, or probability wave, description with amazing precision. “Yet there is still no agreed-upon way to envision what quantum mechanical probability waves actually are. Whether we should say that an electron’s probability wave is the electron, or that it’s associated with the electron, or that it’s a mathematical device for describing the electron’s motion, or that it’s the embodiment of what we can know about the electron is still debated.” [ix]Although quantum mechanics describes the universe as having an inherently probabilistic character, we don’t experience the effects of this character in our day-to-day lives. Why is this? The answer, according to quantum mechanics, is that we don't see quantum events like a chair being here now and then across the room in the next instant, because the probability of that occurring, although not zero, is absurdly miniscule. But what exactly makes the probability for large things to act, as electrons do, so small? At what scales do such effects become important? And, why should the macroscopic universe be so different from the microscopic universe?As if these newly uncovered characteristics of reality weren’t obscure enough, quantum physicists conceptually fuddle things further by suggesting that without observation things have no reality. They claim that until the position of an electron is actually measured the electron has no definite position. Before it is measured, the position exists only as a probability, and then suddenly, through the act of measuring, the electron miraculously acquires the property of position.Einstein acutely recognized the absurdity of this claim. When approached with this conjecture, he famously quipped, “Do you really believe that the moon is not there unless we are looking at it?” [x] To him everything in the physical world had a reality independent of our observations. Measurements that suggested otherwise were mere reflections of the incompleteness by which we currently map and comprehend physical reality. To many quantum physicists, however, the unobserved Moon’s existence became a matter of probability. To them, a discoverable, complete map of physical reality, with the ability to resolve an underlying determinism, became nothing more than a myth—a romantic dream.The mathematical projection of quantum mechanics can be statistically matched with our four-dimensional observations, but when it comes to a conceptual explanation of those observations, it completely lets us down. Intuitive explanations cannot be gleaned from a framework of physical reality that is assumed to be fundamentally probabilistic. By definition, randomness blurs causality. This vague description of physical reality keeps us from grasping a deeper truth by allowing what should be the most basic of concepts to drip into a realm of nonsense.As an example of the confusion that stems from swallowing the standard quantum mechanical interpretation “guts, feathers, and all,” consider the fact that a probabilistic treatment of quantum mechanics leads us to the conclusion that the double-slit experiment can be explained by assuming that a photon actually takes both paths. We can combine the two probability waves emerging from both slits to statistically determine where a photon will land on a screen. The result mimics an interference pattern.According to this, we can explain interference patterns by assuming that one photon somehow always manages to go through both slits, but is this really what is going on? Does a photon really travel along both paths? Can this count as an explanation if we have no coherent sense of what it means? You might notice that if we were to design our experiment with three slits, then we would have to consider whether or not the photon really travels all three routes. This question can be extended for as many slits as you like, but the fundamental conceptual problem remains the same.In order to solve this mystery, you may suggest that we place detectors in front of the slits to determine if the photons are actually going through both slits, or just one. When we do this, we always find that individual photons pass through one slit or the other—never both. But, when we measure the position of individual photons we no longer get an interference pattern and so the question retains its ambiguity. Some have taken this to mean that the act of observation forces wave properties to collapse into a particle, but how and why this theoretical collapse occurs still lacks explanation.Because probability waves are not directly observable and because photons (and electrons) are always found in one place or another when measured, we might be tempted to think that probability waves might not be real—that they were never really there. If that is true, then how are the interference patterns created? Surely these probability waves exist, but in what sense? What are they referencing? Why is it that whenever we know which path the photon takes, we get a classical image instead of an interference pattern? How does the detection of a photon, or an electron, change its behavior?To date, these questions have yet to be resolved. In fact, more clever experiments designed to solve these questions have only deepened the mystery. For example, let’s perform the double-slit experiment again, but this time let’s place devices in front of the slits, which mark (but do not stop or detect) the photons before they pass through the slits. This marking allows us to examine the photons that strike the screen and subsequently determine which slit they passed through. Thus we only gain knowledge of which path the photon takes after the path has been completed. For some reason, however, when we do this we find that the photons do not build up an interference pattern. They form a classical image (Figure 4).Once again, it seems that “which-path” information inhibits us from probing these ghostly waves. But is it really the fact that we gain the ability to determine which path a photon goes through—independent of when we gain that information—that disrupts the interference pattern? Or does our marking of the photon somehow disrupt its interference potential?To explore this question, we perform what’s known as the quantum eraser experiment. We start with the same set up we just described. Then we place another device between each slit and the screen, which completely removes the mark from the photon. We already know that the marked photons project a classical image. Will an interference pattern reemerge if we remove the effects of this mark—if we lose the ability to extract the which-path information?When we perform this experiment the interference pattern does return (Figure 7). Does this mean that photons somehow choose how to act, based on our knowledge of them? Or does it imply something even stranger—that the photons are always both particles and waves simultaneously? How are we to understand either conclusion?Figure 12-7 An interference pattern Another curiosity of Nature is known as the photoelectric effect. Philipp Lenard first discovered this effect through controlled experiments in 1900. When light shines on a metal surface, it causes electrons to be knocked loose and emitted. Knowing this, Lenard designed an experiment that allowed him to control the frequencyof the incoming light. During the experiment, he increased the frequency of the light—moving from infrared heat and red light to violet and ultraviolet. Greater frequencies caused the emitted electrons to speed away with more kinetic energy. After discovering this, Lenard reconfigured his experiment to allow him to control the intensity of the incoming light. He used a carbon arc light that could be made brighter by a factor of 1,000.Because both experiments involved increasing the amount of incoming light energy he expected to have identical results. In other words, because the brighter, more intense light had more energy, Lenard expected that the electrons emitted would have more energy and speed away faster. But that’s not what happened. Instead, the more intense light produced more electrons, but the energy of each electron remained the same. [xi]In response to these experiments Einstein suggested that light is composed of discrete packets called photons. Under this assumption, light with higher frequency would cause electrons to be emitted with more energy, and light with higher intensity, that is, a higher quantity of photons, would result in emission of more electrons—just as we observe.The problem with this solution (a solution that is now universally accepted among physicists) is that it doesn’t provide us with a clear description for what the light quanta are. Why does light come in quantized packets? Near the end of his life Einstein lamented over this problem in a letter to his dear friend Michele Besso. He wrote, “All these fifty years of pondering have not brought me any closer to answering the question, what are light quanta?” [xii] It’s been another fifty years and we seem as confused as ever over how it is that light is quantized into little discrete packets called photons.In the midst of these enigmas lies the uncertainty principle, which states that knowledge of certain properties inhibits knowledge of other complimentary properties. For example, the more accurately we determine the position of an electron, the less we can determine its momentum, and vise versa.Heisenberg tried to explain the uncertainty principle by appealing to the observer effect; claiming that it was simply an observational effect of the fact that measurements of quantum systems cannot be made without affecting those systems. [xiii] Since then, the uncertainty principle has regularly been confused with the observer effect. [xiv] But the uncertainty principle is not a statement about the observational success of current technology. It has nothing to do with the observer effect. It highlights a fundamental property of quantum systems, a property that turns out to be inherent in all wave-like systems. [xv] Uncertainty is an aspect of quantum mechanics because of the wave nature it ascribes to all quantum objects.If our current description of quantum mechanics is fundamental, if there is nothing beneath the state vector—a claim that defines the heart of the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics—then this uncertainty principle may be a sharp enough dagger to kill our quest for an intuitive understanding of physical reality. The corrosive power of the uncertainty principle, when mixed with our current paradigm, is poignantly illustrated by an old story involving Niels Bohr. According to the story, Bohr was once asked what the complementary quality to truth is. After some thought he answered—“clarity.” [xvi] Unlike classical mechanics, which describes systems by specifying the positions and velocities of its components, quantum mechanics uses a complex mathematical object called a state vector (also called the wave function [xvii]) to map physical systems. Interjecting this state vector into the theory enables us to match its predictions to our observations of the microscopic world, but it also generates a relatively indirect description that is open to many equally valid interpretations. This creates a sticky situation, because to “really understand” quantum mechanics we need to be able to specify the exact status of and to have some sort of justification for that specification. At the present, we only have questions. Does the state vector describe physical reality itself, or only some (partial) knowledge that we have of reality? “Does it describe ensembles of systems only (statistical description), or one single system as well (single events)? Assume that indeed, is affected by an imperfect knowledge of the system, is it then not natural to expect that a better description should exist, at least in principle?” [xviii] If so, what would this deeper and more precise description of reality be?To explore the role of the state vector, consider a physical system made of Nparticles with mass, each propagating in ordinary three-dimensional space. In classical mechanics we would use Npositions and N velocities to describe the state of the system. For convenience we might also group together the positions and velocities of those particles into a single vector V, which belongs to a real vector space with 6N dimensions, called phase space. [xix]The state vector can be thought of as the quantum equivalent of this classical vector V. The primary difference is that, as a complex vector, it belongs to something called complex vector space, also known as space of states, or Hilbert space. In other words, instead of being encoded by regular vectors whose positions and velocities are defined in phase space, the state of a quantum system is encoded by complex vectors whose positions and velocities live in a space of states. [xx]The transition from classical physics to quantum physics is the transition from phase space to space of states to describe the system. In the quantum formalism each physical observable of the system (position, momentum, energy, angular momentum, etc.) has an associated linear operator acting in the space of states. (Vectors belonging to the space of states are called “kets.”) The question is, is it possible to understand space of states in a classical manner? Could the evolution of the state vector be understood classically (under a projection of local realism) if, for example, there were additional variables associated with the system that were ignored completely by our current description/understanding of it?While that question hangs in the air, let’s note that if the state vector is fundamental, if there really isn’t a deeper-level description beneath the state vector, then the probabilities postulated by quantum mechanics must also be fundamental. This would be a strange anomaly in physics. Statistical classical mechanics makes constant use of probabilities, but those probabilistic claims relate to statistical ensembles. They come into play when the system under study is known to be one of many similar systems that share common properties, but differ on a level that has not been probed (for any reason). Without knowing the exact state of the system we can group all the similar systems together into an ensemble and assign that ensemble state to our system. This is done as a matter of convenience. Of course, the blurred average state of the ensemble is not as clear as any of the specific states the system might actually have. Beneath that ensemble there is a more complete description of the system’s state (at least in principle), but we don’t need to distinguish the exact state in order to make predictions. Statistical ensembles allow us to make predictions without probing the exact state of the system. But our ignorance of that exact state forces those predictions to be probabilistic.Can the same be said about quantum mechanics? Does quantum theory describe an ensemble of possible states? Or does the state vector provide the most accurate possible description of a single system? [xxi]How we answer that question impacts how we explain unique outcomes. If we treat the state vector as fundamental, then we should expect reality to always present itself in some sort of smeared out sense. If the state vector were the whole story, then our measurements should always record smeared out properties, instead of unique outcomes. But they don’t. We always measure well-defined properties that correspond to specific states. Sticking with the idea that the state vector is fundamental, von Neumann suggested a solution called state vector reduction (also called wave function collapse). [xxii] The idea was that when we aren’t looking, the state of a system is defined as a superposition of all its possible states (characterized by the state vector) and evolves according to the Schrödinger equation. But as soon as we look (or take a measurement) all but one of those possibilities collapse. How does this happen? What mechanism is responsible for selecting one of those states over the rest? To date there is no answer. Despite this, von Neumann’s idea has been taken seriously because his approach allows for unique outcomes.The problem that von Neumann was trying to address is that the Schrödinger equation itself does not select single outcomes. It cannot explain why unique outcomes are observed. According to it, if a fuzzy mix of properties comes in (coded by the state vector), a fuzzy mix of properties comes out. To fix this, von Neumann conjured up the idea that the state vector jumps discontinuously (and randomly) to a single value. [xxiii] He suggested that unique outcomes occur because the state vector retains only the “component corresponding to the observed outcome while all components of the state vector associated with the other results are put to zero, hence the name reduction.” [xxiv]The fact that this reduction process is discontinuous makes it incompatible with general relativity. It is also irreversible, which makes it stand out as the only equation in all of physics that introduces time-asymmetry into the world. If we think that the problem of explaining uniqueness of outcome eclipses these problems, then we might be willing to take them in stride. But to make this trade worthwhile we need to have a good story for how state vector collapse occurs. We don’t. The absence of this explanation is referred to as the quantum measurement problem.Many people are surprised to discover that the quantum measurement problem still stands. It has become popular to explain state vector reduction (wave function collapse) by appealing to the observer effect, asserting that measurements of quantum systems cannot be made without affecting those systems, and that state vector reduction is somehow initiated by those measurements. [xxv] This may sound plausible, but it doesn’t work. Even if we ignore the fact that this ‘explanation’ doesn’t elucidate howa disturbance could initiate state vector reduction, this isn’t an allowed answer because “state vector reduction can take place even when the interactions play no role in the process.” [xxvi] This is illustrated by negative measurements or interaction free measurements in quantum mechanics.To explore this point, consider a source, S, that emits a particle with a spherical wave function, which means its values are independent of the direction in space. [xxvii] In other words, it emits photons in random directions, each direction having equal probability. Let’s surround the source by two detectors with perfect efficiency. The first detector D1should be set up to capture the particle emitted in almost all directions, except a small solid angle θ, and the second detector D2 should be set up to capture the particle if it goes through this solid angle (Figure 8).Figure 8 An interaction-free measurement When the wave packet describing the wave function of the particle signNowes the first detector, it may or may not be detected. (The probability of detection depends on the ratio of the subtended angles of the detectors.) If the particle is detected by D1 it disappears, which means that its state vector is projected onto a state containing no particle and an excited detector. In this case, the second detector D2will never record a particle. If the particle isn’t detected by D1 then D2 will detect the particle later. Therefore, the fact that the first detector has not recorded the particle implies a reduction of the wave function to its component contained within θ, implying that the second detector will always detect the particle later. In other words, the probability of detection by D2 has been greatly enhanced by a sort of “non-event” at D1. In short, the wave function has been reduced without any interaction between the particle and the first measurement apparatus.Franck Laloë notes that this illustrates that “the essence of quantum measurement is something much more subtle than the often invoked ‘unavoidable perturbations of the measurement apparatus’ (Heisenberg microscope, etc.).” [xxviii] If state vector reduction really takes place, then it takes place even when the interactions play no role in the process, which means that we are completely in the dark about how this reduction is initiated or how it unfolds. Why then is state vector reduction still taken seriously? Why would any thinking physicist uphold the claim that state vector reduction occurs, when there is no plausible story for how or why it occurs, and when the assertion that it does occur creates other monstrous problems that contradict central tenets of physics? The answer may be that generations of tradition have largely erased the fact that there is another way to solve the quantum measurement problem.Returning to the other option at hand, we note that if we assume that the state vector is a statistical ensemble, if we assume that the system does have a more exact state, then the interpretation of this thought experiment becomes straightforward; initially the particle has a well-defined direction of emission, and D2records only the fraction of the particles that were emitted in its direction.Standard quantum mechanics postulates that this well-defined direction of emission does not exist before any measurement. Assuming that there is something beneath the state vector, that a more accurate state exists, is tantamount to introducing additional variables to quantum mechanics. It takes a departure from tradition, but as T. S. Eliot said in The Sacred Wood, “tradition should be positively discouraged.” [xxix] The scientific heart must search for the best possible answer. It cannot flourish if it is constantly held back by tradition, nor can it allow itself to ignore valid options. Intellectual journeys are obliged to forge new paths.So instead of asking whether of not wave-particle duality is an illusion, perhaps we should ask whether wave-particle duality implies that the state vector is the most fundamental description of a quantum mechanical system, or if a deeper level description exists? That's an open question, and at the moment there are many possible answers — interpretations of quantum mechanics that are equally aligned with the empirical evidence. What's your answer?For more on this topic, and to discover how pilot-wave theory is elucidated by the assumption that the vacuum is a superfluid, see Einstein's Intuition, available in black and white softcover, full color softcover, full color hardcover, an iBook, and as an audiobook.[i] The discussion on interference and the double-slit experiment that follows is further developed by Brian Greene, (2004). The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space, Time and the Texture of Reality. New York: Knopf, pp. 84–84. Greene’s discussion was used as a general guide here.[ii] In order to show diffraction (a fuzzy border of light on the projected image) the slit must have a width that does not greatly exceed the wavelength of the color of the light that we have chosen.[iii] Light’s wave nature was first revealed in the mid-seventeenth century through experiments performed by the Italian scientist Francesco Maria Grimaldi, and was later expanded upon by experiments performed in 1803 by the physician and physicist Thomas Young. (1807). Interference of Light; Alan Lightman. A Sense Of The Mysterious. pp. 51–52, 71.[iv] Before the “planetary model” of the atom, physicists pictured the atom being a plum-shaped blob (the nucleus) with tiny protruding springs that each had an electron stuck to its end. When the atom absorbed energy it was thought that these electrons would jiggle (oscillate) on the ends of their springs. Consequently, any atom that was above its ground state of energy was understood to be an “excited atomic oscillator,” This depiction of the atom wasn’t overthrown until 1900. At that point in history the physical existence of atoms was still controversial. It was replaced by the planetary model, which in turn was replaced by the electron cloud model we use today—a model that was initiated in 1910 and was secured by 1930. Gary Zukav. The Dancing Wu Li Masters, pp. 49–50.[v] Electrons can be individually counted and you can individually place them on a drop of oil and measure their electric charge. Richard Feynman. (1988). QED, The Strange Theory of Light and Matter. Princeton University Press, p. 84.[vi] According to de Broglie’s doctoral thesis all matter has corresponding waves. The wavelength of the “matter waves” that “correspond” to matter depends upon the momentum of the particle. Specifically, , which falls into an important group of equations along with Planck’s equation ) and the ever famous . (λ, pronounced “lambda,” stands for wavelength, h is Planck’s constant, and pronounced ‘nu’ represents the frequency of a photon) From this equation we are told to expect that when we send a beam of electrons (something we might traditionally think of as a stream of particles) through tiny openings, like the spacing between atoms in a piece of nickel crystal, the beam will diffract, just like light diffracts. The only requirement here is that the spacing between the atoms of the material must be as small, or smaller, than the electron’s corresponding wavelength—just like the slits in our double-slit experiment. When we perform the experiment, diffraction and therefore interference, occurs exactly as wave mechanics predicts.[vii] Part of the problem here is that in keeping with our four-dimensional intuition we tend to assume a particle aspect in the double-slit experiment without accounting for nonlocality. By doing this we are technically violating Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and missing the bigger picture.[viii] M. Born. (1926). Quantenmechanik der Stossvorgänge. Zeitschrift für Physik 38, 803–827; (1926). Zur Wellenmechanik der Stossvorgänge. Göttingen Nachrichten 146–160.[ix] Brian Greene. (2004), p. 91.[x] Albert Einstein quoted in Einstein by Walter Isaacson.[xi] Walter Isaacson. Einstein, pp. 96–97.[xii] Ibid.[xiii] Werner Heisenberg. The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory, p. 20.[xiv] Masano Ozawa. (2003). Universally valid reformulation of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle on noise and disturbance in measurement. Physical Review A 67 (4), arXiv:quant-ph/0207121; Aya Furuta. (2012). One Thing Is Certain: Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle Is Not Dead. Scientific American.[xv] L. A. Rozema, A. Darabi, D. H. Mahler, A. Hayat, Y, Soudagar, & A. M. Steinberg. (2012). Violation of Heisenberg’s Measurement—Disturbance Relationship by Weak Measurements. Physical Review Letters 109 (10).[xvi] Steven Weinberg. Dreams Of A Final Theory, p. 74.[xvii] For a system of spinless particles with masses, the state vector is equivalent to a wave function, but for more complicated systems this is not the case. Nevertheless, conceptually they play the same role and are used in the same way in the theory, so that we do not need to make a distinction here. Franck Laloë. Do We Really Understand Quantum Mechanics?, p. 7.[xviii] Franck Laloë. Do We Really Understand Quantum Mechanics?, p. xxi.[xix] There are 6N dimensions in this phase space because there are N particles in the system and each particle comes with 6 data points (3 for its spatial position (x, y, z) and 3 for its velocity, which has x, y, zcomponents also).[xx] The space of states (complex vector space or Hilbert space) is linear, and therefore, conforms to the superposition principle. Any combination of two arbitrary state vectors and within the space of states is also a possible state for the system. Mathematically we write where & are arbitrary complex numbers.[xxi] Franck Laloë. Do We Really Understand Quantum Mechanics?, p. 19.[xxii] Chapter VI of J. von Neumann. (1932). Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik, Springer, Berlin; (1955). Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Princeton University Press.[xxiii] It might be useful to challenge the logical validity of the claim that something can “cause a random occurrence.” By definition, causal relationships drive results, while “random” implies that there is no causal relationship. Deeper than this, I challenge the coherence of the idea that genuine random occurrences can happen. We cannot coherently claim that there are occurrences that are completely void of any causal relationship. To do so is to wisk away what we mean by “occurrences.” Every occurrence is intimately connected to the whole, and ignorance of what is driving a system is no reason to assume that it is randomly driven. Things cannot be randomly driven. Cause cannot be random.[xxiv] Franck Laloë. Do We Really Understand Quantum Mechanics?, p. 11.[xxv] Bohr preferred another point of view where state vector reduction is not used. D. Howard. (2004). Who invented the Copenhagen interpretation? A study in mythology. Philos. Sci. 71, 669–682.[xxvi] Franck Laloë. Do We Really Understand Quantum Mechanics?, p. 28.[xxvii] This example was inspired by section 2.4 of Franck Laloë’s book, Do We Really Understand Quantum Mechanics?, p. 27–31.[xxviii] Franck Laloë. Do We Really Understand Quantum Mechanics?, p. 28.[xxix] T. S. Eliot. (1921). The Sacred Wood. Tradition and the Individual Talent.