Quantum Energy Teleportation Between Spin Particles in a Gibbs State

Energy in a multipartite quantum system appears from an operational perspective to be distributed to some extent non-locally because of correlations extant among the system's components. This non-locality allows users to transfer, in effect, locally accessible energy between sites of different system components by local operations and classical communication (LOCC). Quantum energy teleportation is a three-step LOCC protocol, accomplished without an external energy carrier, for effectively transferring energy between two physically separated, but correlated, sites. We apply this LOCC teleportation protocol to a model Heisenberg spin particle pair initially in a quantum thermal Gibbs state, making temperature an explicit parameter. We find in this setting that energy teleportation is possible at any temperature, even at temperatures above the threshold where the particles' entanglement vanishes. This shows for Gibbs spin states that entanglement is not fundamentally necessary for energy teleportation; correlation other than entanglement can suffice. Dissonance-quantum correlation in separable states-is in this regard shown to be a quantum resource for energy teleportation, more dissonance being consistently associated with greater energy yield. We compare energy teleportation from particle A to B in Gibbs states with direct local energy extraction by a general quantum operation on B and find a temperature threshold below which energy extraction by a local operation is impossible. This threshold delineates essentially two regimes: a high temperature regime where entanglement vanishes and the teleportation generated by other quantum correlations yields only vanishingly little energy relative to local extraction and a second low-temperature teleportation regime where energy is available at B only by teleportation.

Pesiqta Rabbati: a text-linguistic and form-analytical analysis of the rabbinic homily

Pesiqta Rabbati is a unique homiletic midrash that follows the liturgical calendar in its presentation of homilies for festivals and special Sabbaths. This article attempts to utilize Pesiqta Rabbati in order to present a global theory of the literary production of rabbinic/homiletic literature. In respect to Pesiqta Rabbati it explores such areas as dating, textual witnesses, integrative apocalyptic meta-narrative, describing and mapping the structure of the text, internal and external constraints that impacted upon the text, text linguistic analysis, form-analysis: problems in the texts and linguistic gap-filling, transmission of text, strict formalization of a homiletic unit, deconstructing and reconstructing homiletic midrashim based upon form-analytic units of the homily, Neusner’s documentary hypothesis, surface structures of the homiletic unit, and textual variants. The suggested methodology may assist scholars in their production of editions of midrashic works by eliminating superfluous material and in their decoding and defining of ancient texts.

INVESTIGATION OF INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE AS A PREDICTOR OF TRAUMATIC EYE INJURIES

Eye injuries are a large societal problem in both the military and civilian sectors. Eye injury rates are increasing in recent military conflicts, and there are over 1.9 million eye injuries in the United States civilian sector annually. In order to develop a better understanding of eye injury risk, several previous studies have developed eye injury criteria based on projectile characteristics. While these injury criteria have been used to estimate eye injury potential of impact scenarios, they require that the mass, size and velocity of the projectile are known. It is desirable to develop a method to assess the severity of an eye impact in environments where it would be difficult or impossible to determine these projectile characteristics. The current study presents a measurement technique for monitoring intraocular pressure of the eye under impactloading. Through experimental tests with a custom pressure chamber, a subminiature pressure transducer was validated to be thermally stable and suitable for testing in an impact environment.Once validated, the transducer was utilized intraocularly, inserted through the optic nerve, to measure the pressure of the eye during blunt-projectile impacts. A total of 150 impact tests were performed using projectiles ranging from 3.2 mm to 17.5 mm in diameter. Investigation of the relationship between projectile energy and intraocular pressure lead to the identification of at least two distinct trends. Intraocular pressure and normalized energy measurements indicated a different response for penetrating-type globe rupture injuries with smaller diameter (d < 1 cm)projectiles, and blunt-type globe rupture injuries with larger diameter (d > 1 cm) projectiles. Furthermore, regression analysis indicates that relationships exist between intraocular pressureand projectile energy that may allow quantification of eye injury risk based on pressure data, and also that intraocular pressure measurements of impact may lead to a better understanding of thetransition between penetrating and blunt globe rupture injury mechanisms.

Must We Forgive?: Exploring the Limits and Possibilities of Forgiveness and Resentment

Conflict has marked civilization from Biblical times to the present day. Each of us, with our different and competing interests, and our desires to pursue those interests, have over time wronged another person. Not surprisingly then, forgiveness is a concern of individuals and groups¿communities, countries, religious groups, races¿yet it is a complex idea that philosophers, theologians, political scientists, and psychologists have grappled with. Some have argued that forgiveness is a therapeutic means for overcoming guilt, pain, and anger. Forgiveness is often portrayed as a coping mechanism¿how often we hear the phrase, ¿forgive and forget,¿ as an arrangement to help two parties surmount the complications of disagreement. But forgiveness is not simply a modus vivendi; the ability to forgive and conversely to ask for forgiveness, is counted as an admirable trait and virtue. This essay will explore the nature of forgiveness, which in Christian dogma is often posited as an unqualified virtue. The secular world has appropriated the Christian notion of forgiveness as such a virtue¿but are there instances wherein offering forgiveness is morally inappropriate or dangerous? I will consider the situations in which forgiveness, understood in this essay as the overcoming of resentment, may not be a virtue¿when perhaps maintaining resentment is as virtuous, if not more virtuous, than forgiving. I will explain the various ethical frameworks involved in understanding forgiveness as a virtue, and the relationship between them. I will argue that within Divine Command Theory forgiveness is a virtue¿and thus morally right¿because God commands it. This ethical system has established forgiveness as unconditional, an idea which has been adopted into popular culture. With virtue ethics in mind, which holds virtues to be those traits which benefit the person who possesses them, contributing to the good life, I will argue unqualified forgiveness is not always a virtue, as it will not always benefit the victim. Because there is no way to avoid wrongdoing, humans are confronted with the question of forgiveness with every indiscretion. Its limits, its possibilities, its relationship to one¿s character¿forgiveness is a concern of all people at some time if for no other reason than the plain fact that the past cannot be undone. I will be evaluating the idea of forgiveness as a virtue, in contrast to its counterpart, resentment. How can forgiveness be a response to evil, a way to renounce resentment, and a means of creating a positive self-narrative? And what happens when a sense of moral responsibility is impossible to reconcile with the Christian (and now, secularized imperative of) forgiveness? Is it ever not virtuous to forgive? In an attempt to answer that question I will argue that there are indeed times when forgiveness is not a virtue, specifically: when forgiveness compromises one¿s own self-respect; when it is not compatible with respect for the moral community; and when the offender is unapologetic. The kind of offense I have in mind is a dehumanizing one, one that intends to diminish another person¿s worth or humanity. These are moral injuries, to which I will argue resentment is a better response than forgiveness when the three qualifications cannot be met.