I see he's still as obnoxious like always. He makes points, though I'm not qualified to say whether they are valid. I wish he could be more restrained.
That said, if someone like David Deutsch publishes such theories with grand predictions, they deserve criticism.
I scanned the paper and I feel like most of the criticism by Motl is more or less justified. They introduce non-standard notation for things that would probably benefit from a treatment within well established mathematical language. For example their discussion of non clonability of "superinformation", whatever that is, could probably be resolved by working within a non-cartesian monoidal category (which is a standard tool in Quantum logic).
Comments
I see he's still as obnoxious like always. He makes points, though I'm not qualified to say whether they are valid. I wish he could be more restrained.
That said, if someone like David Deutsch publishes such theories with grand predictions, they deserve criticism.
I scanned the paper and I feel like most of the criticism by Motl is more or less justified. They introduce non-standard notation for things that would probably benefit from a treatment within well established mathematical language. For example their discussion of non clonability of "superinformation", whatever that is, could probably be resolved by working within a non-cartesian monoidal category (which is a standard tool in Quantum logic).