Incoherence challenge

As discussed by M. Shapiro and R Brumer in the book Quantum Control of Molecular Processes, there are two general control strategies that can be applied to harness and direct molecular dynamics optimal control and coherent control. The optimal control schemes aim to find a sef of external field parameters that conspire - through quantum interferences or by incoherent addition - to yield the best possible outcome for a specific, desired evolution of a quantum system. Coherent control relies on interferences, constructive or destructive, that prohibit or enhance certain reaction pathways. Both of these control strategies meet with challenges when applied to molecular collisions. 

The work by M. Arndt el al. starts with the description of far-field diffraction experiments with fullerene molecules Cm. Since for larger objects the far-field observations become much more challenging, the authors also study the feasibility of near-field Talbot Lau interferometry with 6Vo. This particular technique allows them to work with a spatially incoherent beam and thus with a much increased count rate. Moreover it has a better wavelength scaling in the grating constant and can potentially be applied to much smaller wavelengths at a reasonable grating constant. 

Now, on Kim s view, a property with no distinctive causal powers is no property at all. If one accepts this principle, then the challenge to the reality of mental properties is quite direct no uniquely mental causal powers, no mental properties. But even if one rejects this principle — and there are some reasons for doing so — the crisis is not averted. The problem is not just that there are no distinctively mental causal powers — the problem is incoherence between the claims made for the nomicity of MR properties and the assumption needed to secure their autonomy. The assumption that, for every MR property, its set of realizer properties is wildly disjunctive has been taken to be crucial to the demonstration that MR properties are irreducible. But how can a property that is nomologically - perhaps necessarily - coextensive with a wildly disjunctive property itself be nomic, a fit property for scientific taxonomies ... 

An obvious challenge for any model is to explain the qualitative difference between in-plane and interplane properties of the cuprates. This difference goes beyond strong anisotropy . For example, while the interplane transport is incoherent, at the same time in-plane properties are at least approximately described by a Drude model. Now that there is evidence that the in-plane and interplane charge dynamics are closely interrelated, any realistic description of a system must accoxmt for this relationship as well as the dramatic contrasts. 

---