On the alleged simplicity of impure proof

Roughly, a proof of a theorem, is “pure” if it draws only on what is “close” or “intrinsic” to that theorem. Mathematicians employ a variety of terms to identify pure proofs, saying that a pure proof is one that avoids what is “extrinsic,” “extraneous,” “distant,” “remote,” “alien,” or “foreign” to the problem or theorem under investigation. In the background of these attributions is the view that there is a distance measure (or a variety of such measures) between mathematical statements and proofs. Mathematicians have paid little attention to specifying such distance measures precisely because in practice certain methods of proof have seemed self- evidently impure by design: think for instance of analytic geometry and analytic number theory. By contrast, mathematicians have paid considerable attention to whether such impurities are a good thing or to be avoided, and some have claimed that they are valuable because generally impure proofs are simpler than pure proofs. This article is an investigation of this claim, formulated more precisely by proof- theoretic means. After assembling evidence from proof theory that may be thought to support this claim, we will argue that on the contrary this evidence does not support the claim

Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics

The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that many authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier (1824), Tyndall (1861), and Arrhenius (1896), and which is still supported in global climatology, essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system. According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist. Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology and in a widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation. In this paper the popular conjecture is analyzed and the underlying physical principles are clarified. By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 degrees Celsius is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.Comment: 115 pages, 32 figures, 13 tables (some typos corrected

Fundamental limits on quantum dynamics based on entropy change

It is well known in the realm of quantum mechanics and information theory that the entropy is non-decreasing for the class of unital physical processes. However, in general, the entropy does not exhibit monotonic behavior. This has restricted the use of entropy change in characterizing evolution processes. Recently, a lower bound on the entropy change was provided in the work of Buscemi, Das, and Wilde [Phys. Rev. A 93(6), 062314 (2016)]. We explore the limit that this bound places on the physical evolution of a quantum system and discuss how these limits can be used as witnesses to characterize quantum dynamics. In particular, we derive a lower limit on the rate of entropy change for memoryless quantum dynamics, and we argue that it provides a witness of non-unitality. This limit on the rate of entropy change leads to definitions of several witnesses for testing memory effects in quantum dynamics. Furthermore, from the aforementioned lower bound on entropy change, we obtain a measure of non-unitarity for unital evolutions

Open questions in utility theory

Throughout this paper, our main idea is to explore different classical questions arising in Utility Theory, with a particular attention to those that lean on numerical representations of preference orderings. We intend to present a survey of open questions in that discipline, also showing the state-of-art of the corresponding literature.This work is partially supported by the research projects ECO2015-65031-R, MTM2015-63608-P (MINECO/ AEI-FEDER, UE), and TIN2016-77356-P (MINECO/ AEI-FEDER, UE)