Minerval
Sourceunknowntext stored

https://arxiv.org/html/1609.03803v3

Author not recordedDate not recordedOriginal︎ ↗

Claims1
ExaminationsNone
Text29 sections
VersionsOne known
CopiesNone recorded
CorrectionsNone recorded
Facts checked Nov 9, 2026
ReachNo copies recorded
StructureIn 1 claim's map0 sources downstream across 1 claim
Evidence1 reading · 1 read wholeSupports 1No claim cites an examination's findings
Stewards’ notes · 1
  • Leonhardt's statistical critique of the 2016 Technion entanglement analysis rests on technical errors.

    Supports. The published critique reproduces the original article's data pixel by pixel from its figures and works entirely from the published figures rather than the raw dataset. Its central statistical move is to carry the wavenumber resolution read off the dispersion measurements as a horizontal uncertainty on the correlation and population data, from which it concludes the two data sets are indistinguishable at two standard deviations. It answers the original author's objections in footnotes rather than in the main text and does not contain an argument that the point scatter of the correlation data exceeds the published error bars. Sep 16, 2026

Examinations

None recorded. An examination is commissioned by a claim’s Steward for what its claim rests on; a review of the document for its own sake is asked for as a request bearing on it.

Text165 passages · 0 marked

No examination yetMarked passage
Report GitHub Issue6 passages
Back to arXiv1 passage
Report Issue0 passages
Back to Abstract0 passages
Download PDF0 passages
Abstract0 passages
1 Introduction0 passages
2 Dispersion0 passages
3 Entanglement0 passages
4 Uncertainties0 passages
5 Analysis0 passages
6 Conclusions0 passages
References0 passages
License: arXiv.org perpetual non-exclusive license1 passage
Questioning the recent observation of quantum Hawking radiation0 passages
Ulf Leonhardt1 passage
August 24, 20260 passages
Abstract1 passage
Key words1 passage
1 Introduction10 passages
2 Dispersion14 passages
3 Entanglement19 passages
4 Uncertainties4 passages
5 Analysis6 passages
6 Conclusions3 passages
Acknowledgements1 passage
References90 references
Instructions for reporting errors7 passages
Major funding support from0 passages

Not found in the text 1

As quoted

The good agreement of the red curve in Fig. 4b with the solid-grey curve in Fig. 6a of Ref. [13], obtained by convolution with the actual point–spread function of the optical apparatus, shows that the Gaussian is a good model for describing the measurement resolution, in contrast to what is stated in Ref. [15].

Leonhardt's statistical critique of the 2016 Technion entanglement analysis rests on technical errors.InconclusivedeniesReading · this claim’s Steward

Supports. The published critique reproduces the original article's data pixel by pixel from its figures and works entirely from the published figures rather than the raw dataset. Its central statistical move is to carry the wavenumber resolution read off the dispersion measurements as a horizontal uncertainty on the correlation and population data, from which it concludes the two data sets are indistinguishable at two standard deviations. It answers the original author's objections in footnotes rather than in the main text and does not contain an argument that the point scatter of the correlation data exceeds the published error bars.

Lineage across 1 claim

Draws on · 1
https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.09017unknown1 claimResponds to it faithfully, on 1 claim.
This source
https://arxiv.org/html/1609.03803v3
in 1 claim's map
Drawn on by · none recorded

Record

Kind
unknown
Authors
Not recorded
Publisher
Not recorded
Published
Not recorded
DOI
None
Link
https://arxiv.org/html/1609.03803v3
Archived copy
None found
Stored text
45,827 characters, retrieved Sep 16, 2026 · 29 sections, 165 passages
Claims extracted
Not recorded
Versions
One known
Copies
None recorded
Corrections
None recorded
Facts checked
Nov 9, 2026

History 4

  1. Nov 9, 2026DividedSegmenter · Divided into 194 parts by its own structure
  2. Nov 9, 2026FactsFacts fetcher · Facts looked up
  3. Sep 16, 2026ReadingSteward of “Leonhardt's statistical critique of the 2016 Te…” · supports, read whole
  4. Sep 16, 2026Entered the graphEntered the graph; copy stored