from my new book Star Gate under construction
http://lnkd.in/RweG7b

## Wednesday, October 24, 2012

## Thursday, October 18, 2012

This is, in my opinion, more unequivocal statistics evidence for Antony Valentini's "signal nonlocality"

Comment · Just now

Jack Sarfatti http://www.frontiersin.org/Perception_Science/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00390/full

Just now · Remove

Jack Sarfatti http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0203049

Just now · Remove

## Wednesday, October 17, 2012

## Thursday, September 27, 2012

## Monday, September 24, 2012

## Thursday, August 9, 2012

## Monday, August 6, 2012

## Friday, August 3, 2012

I get the same result you get if I do the calculation as follows:

|Alice, Bob> = a0 |AB> + a1 |A'B'>

where |AB> = |A>(x)|B> and |A'B'> = |A'> (x) |B'>

[ and (x) = tensor product ]

density matrix rho = p = |Alice,Bob><Alice,Bob|

p = |a0|^2 |AB><AB| +a0a1*|AB><A'B'| + a1a0*|A'B'><AB|+|a1|^2|A'B'><A'B'|

and consider P(|B>) = P(|AB>) + P(|A'B>) since non-zero overlap of <A|A'> means that state A' has a non-zero probability of actually being A (which is entangled with B and would contribute to P(|B>)...

P(|AB>)=<AB| p |AB> =

|a0|^2<AB|AB><AB|AB> + a0a1*<AB|AB><A'B'|AB>+a1a0*<AB|A'B'><AB|AB>+

|a1|^2 <AB|A'B'><A'B'|AB>

Using [X(x)Y] [Z(x)W] = XZ(x)YW, and assuming <B|B'>=0, all terms except the first will drop out, so

P(|AB>) = |a0|^2

Next, P(|A'B>) = <A'B| p | A'B>

= |a0|^2 <A'B|AB><AB|A'B> + a0a1*<A'B|AB><A'B'|A'B>+a0*a1<A'B|A'B'><AB|A'B>

+|a1|^2<A'B|A'B'><A'B'|A'B>

and similarly, due to orthogonality of B,B', all terms except the first drop out, so I get:

P(|A'B>)=|a0|^2 |<A'|A>|^2

Combining:

P(|B>) = P(|AB>)+P(|A'B>) = |a0|^2 + |a0|^2 <A'|A>|^2

which for the special case of a0 = 1/sqrt(2) is:

P(|B>) = 1/2 [ 1+ |<A|A'>|^2 ]

Previously, I had always reduced p first using tensor-product identities and then projected onto |B>, which I thought was equivalent--I guess the coherent states break some of the equivalencies as we've already discussed."

So at least there is another COMPETENT guy out there who has checked my calculation and gets the same answer.

p = |a0|^2 |AB><AB| +a0a1*|AB><A'B'| + a1a0*|A'B'><AB|+|a1|^2|A'B'><A

and consider P(|B>) = P(|AB>) + P(|A'B>) since non-zero overlap of <A|A'> means that state A' has a non-zero probability of actually being A (which is entangled with B and would contribute to P(|B>)...

P(|AB>)=<AB| p |AB> =

|a0|^2<AB|AB><AB|AB> + a0a1*<AB|AB><A'B'|AB>+a1a0*<AB

|a1|^2 <AB|A'B'><A'B'|AB>

Using [X(x)Y] [Z(x)W] = XZ(x)YW, and assuming <B|B'>=0, all terms except the first will drop out, so

P(|AB>) = |a0|^2

Next, P(|A'B>) = <A'B| p | A'B>

= |a0|^2 <A'B|AB><AB|A'B> + a0a1*<A'B|AB><A'B'|A'B>+a0*a1<

+|a1|^2<A'B|A'B'><A'B'|A'B>

and similarly, due to orthogonality of B,B', all terms except the first drop out, so I get:

P(|A'B>)=|a0|^2 |<A'|A>|^2

Combining:

P(|B>) = P(|AB>)+P(|A'B>) = |a0|^2 + |a0|^2 <A'|A>|^2

which for the special case of a0 = 1/sqrt(2) is:

P(|B>) = 1/2 [ 1+ |<A|A'>|^2 ]

Previously, I had always reduced p first using tensor-product identities and then projected onto |B>, which I thought was equivalent--I guess the coherent states break some of the equivalencies as we've already discussed."

So at least there is another COMPETENT guy out there who has checked my calculation and gets the same answer.

## Wednesday, July 25, 2012

|Alice> = |z>A|1>A + |z'>A|0>A trapped ion

|Bob> = |w>B|+>B + |w'>B|->B trapped ion

Entanglement swap the internal trapped ion discrete qubit states, leaving the Glauber coherent states fixed.

|Alice>, |Bob> ----> |Alice'>, |Bob'>

|Alice'> = |z>A|+>B + |z'>A|->B

|Bob'> = |w>B|1>A + |w'>B|0>A

Now, two entanglement signal nonlocality is possible between Alice and Bob.

## Sunday, July 15, 2012

### High Strangeness in 1953

http://stardrive.org/stardrive/index.php/blog/weird-desk-high-strangeness-events-1953-1979-1999.html

## Saturday, July 14, 2012

### Physicists Propose Building a Crystal of Space-Time

Physicists Propose Building a Crystal of Space-Time

JACK SARFATTI shared a LINK.

ABOUT A MINUTE AGO

Physicists Propose Building a Crystal of Space-Time

www.popsci.com

One of the simplest and most common physical objects is your average crystal, a collection of atoms arranged in an orderly, repeating three-dimensional pattern. Salt, snowflakes, and the quartz in your watch are all crystals. Earlier this year, the Nobel laureate and MIT physicist Frank Wilczek prop...

JACK SARFATTI

There is a very intuitive though not simple way to understand the space-time crystal.

1) spontaneous broken symmetry in complex many particle systems. These are quantum phase transitions like when our observable universe is created in the moment of inflation out of the pre-existing unstable false vacuum in which all particles have zero rest mass because the Higgs field had not yet formed. The appearance of the Higgs field is the effect spontaneous broken symmetry in which the post-inflation quantum vacuum of our expanding universe. The quantum vacuum has less symmetry than do the field equations for some of the matter fields.

2) Quantum field theory shows that matter exists in two very different forms - real and virtual. Matter in virtual form lives inside the quantum vacuum briefly popping into and out of existence. We see this indirectly in small shifts of spectral lines of atoms (Lamb shift) and in the Casimir zero point force between two neutral plates. Virtual particles do not transport energy outside the "near field" and they cannot directly cause a counter to click only real particles can do that. The LHC just showed us a real Higgs boson kicked out of the vacuum by the tremendous focused energy of the machine. It's like chipping a small piece of ice out of a huge glacier that is the VIRTUAL Higgs-Goldstone spontaneous broken symmetry field inside the vacuum. There are two kinds of spontaneous broken symmetry particles. The Goldstone particle has zero rest mass like the photon particle of light. The Higgs particle has a finite rest mass now seen at about 125 Gev in the LHC. There may be several Higgs and Goldstone particles. The Higgs and Goldstone particles come in conjugate pairs like the amplitude and phase of a coherent laser beam wave. In fact the Higgs-Goldstone vacuum field is mathematically somewhat similar to a laser beam field with some important differences of course. The mathematics of these general "coherent states" was worked out in the early 1960's by Nobel Laureate Harvard physics professor Roy Glauber. Basically we have a large number of particles all in the same single-particle quantum state although that actual number is uncertain and in the simplest case has a Poisson distribution.This happens not only in lasers but in superconductors and as we see below even in Frank Wilczek's space-time crystal. The difference is that the Higgs vacuum field that itself gives rest masses to the leptons and quarks is made up of huge numbers of VIRTUAL Higgs-Goldstone conjugate particle pairs that form a set of complex numbers z in the polar representation for those of you who know some high school math where z = Rexp(itheta). R is the amplitude and theta is the phase. The massive Higgs particle in real form are quantized vibrations in the amplitude R like you AM radio. The massless Goldstone particles in real form are quantized vibrations in the phase theta of the coherent vacuum field like your FM radio roughly.

3) A space crystal is a periodic lattice of atoms that forms in a quantum phase transition in which the continuous translational symmetry of the higher temperature gas or liquid is spontaneously broken down to a much smaller discrete crystal group. The phonon is a massless Goldstone particle. The analogous Higgs particle would be a phonon sound wave with an energy gap at infinite wavelength. However, a single phonon is a collective normal mode of all the real atoms that form the crystal lattice. Now real phonons that propagate sound energy have a frequency that is the speed of sound divided by the wavelength. However, virtual phonons do not obey that relationship at all. Indeed, the crystal lattice itself is a Glauber coherent state of a huge uncertain number of VIRTUAL PHONONS all in the same single-phonon quantum state. These particular virtual phonons have zero frequency with finite wavelengths along the three directions of space that are determined by the particular discrete space-crystal group that is not spontaneously broken. A very similar thing happens for electromagnetic photons in the ordinary electrostatic Coulomb field e/r potential energy per unit test charge q in the rest frame of a point charge e where r is the distance between e and q. The longitudinal electrostatic field is a coherent Glauber state of a huge uncertain number of virtual photons of zero frequency with a whole continuum of wavelengths along the three dimensions of space.

4) We now have a unified conceptual framework. The space-time crystal is simply a Glauber coherent state of again virtual phonons but this time with a finite frequency and the same set of discrete wavelengths as in the space-crystal.

JACK SARFATTI shared a LINK.

ABOUT A MINUTE AGO

Physicists Propose Building a Crystal of Space-Time

www.popsci.com

One of the simplest and most common physical objects is your average crystal, a collection of atoms arranged in an orderly, repeating three-dimensional pattern. Salt, snowflakes, and the quartz in your watch are all crystals. Earlier this year, the Nobel laureate and MIT physicist Frank Wilczek prop...

JACK SARFATTI

There is a very intuitive though not simple way to understand the space-time crystal.

1) spontaneous broken symmetry in complex many particle systems. These are quantum phase transitions like when our observable universe is created in the moment of inflation out of the pre-existing unstable false vacuum in which all particles have zero rest mass because the Higgs field had not yet formed. The appearance of the Higgs field is the effect spontaneous broken symmetry in which the post-inflation quantum vacuum of our expanding universe. The quantum vacuum has less symmetry than do the field equations for some of the matter fields.

2) Quantum field theory shows that matter exists in two very different forms - real and virtual. Matter in virtual form lives inside the quantum vacuum briefly popping into and out of existence. We see this indirectly in small shifts of spectral lines of atoms (Lamb shift) and in the Casimir zero point force between two neutral plates. Virtual particles do not transport energy outside the "near field" and they cannot directly cause a counter to click only real particles can do that. The LHC just showed us a real Higgs boson kicked out of the vacuum by the tremendous focused energy of the machine. It's like chipping a small piece of ice out of a huge glacier that is the VIRTUAL Higgs-Goldstone spontaneous broken symmetry field inside the vacuum. There are two kinds of spontaneous broken symmetry particles. The Goldstone particle has zero rest mass like the photon particle of light. The Higgs particle has a finite rest mass now seen at about 125 Gev in the LHC. There may be several Higgs and Goldstone particles. The Higgs and Goldstone particles come in conjugate pairs like the amplitude and phase of a coherent laser beam wave. In fact the Higgs-Goldstone vacuum field is mathematically somewhat similar to a laser beam field with some important differences of course. The mathematics of these general "coherent states" was worked out in the early 1960's by Nobel Laureate Harvard physics professor Roy Glauber. Basically we have a large number of particles all in the same single-particle quantum state although that actual number is uncertain and in the simplest case has a Poisson distribution.This happens not only in lasers but in superconductors and as we see below even in Frank Wilczek's space-time crystal. The difference is that the Higgs vacuum field that itself gives rest masses to the leptons and quarks is made up of huge numbers of VIRTUAL Higgs-Goldstone conjugate particle pairs that form a set of complex numbers z in the polar representation for those of you who know some high school math where z = Rexp(itheta). R is the amplitude and theta is the phase. The massive Higgs particle in real form are quantized vibrations in the amplitude R like you AM radio. The massless Goldstone particles in real form are quantized vibrations in the phase theta of the coherent vacuum field like your FM radio roughly.

3) A space crystal is a periodic lattice of atoms that forms in a quantum phase transition in which the continuous translational symmetry of the higher temperature gas or liquid is spontaneously broken down to a much smaller discrete crystal group. The phonon is a massless Goldstone particle. The analogous Higgs particle would be a phonon sound wave with an energy gap at infinite wavelength. However, a single phonon is a collective normal mode of all the real atoms that form the crystal lattice. Now real phonons that propagate sound energy have a frequency that is the speed of sound divided by the wavelength. However, virtual phonons do not obey that relationship at all. Indeed, the crystal lattice itself is a Glauber coherent state of a huge uncertain number of VIRTUAL PHONONS all in the same single-phonon quantum state. These particular virtual phonons have zero frequency with finite wavelengths along the three directions of space that are determined by the particular discrete space-crystal group that is not spontaneously broken. A very similar thing happens for electromagnetic photons in the ordinary electrostatic Coulomb field e/r potential energy per unit test charge q in the rest frame of a point charge e where r is the distance between e and q. The longitudinal electrostatic field is a coherent Glauber state of a huge uncertain number of virtual photons of zero frequency with a whole continuum of wavelengths along the three dimensions of space.

4) We now have a unified conceptual framework. The space-time crystal is simply a Glauber coherent state of again virtual phonons but this time with a finite frequency and the same set of discrete wavelengths as in the space-crystal.

## Thursday, June 28, 2012

## Tuesday, May 8, 2012

## Sunday, May 6, 2012

## Saturday, May 5, 2012

## Saturday, April 14, 2012

## Thursday, April 12, 2012

### Pelligrini experiment reports over-unity violation of thermodynamic Maxwell Relations

http://stardrive.org/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=80&func=fileinfo&id=162

## Wednesday, April 11, 2012

### Short explanation of "virtual particles"

http://stardrive.org/index.php?option=com_myblog&show=what-are-virtual-particles-.html&Itemid=56

### Hologram Machian Universe as generalized Cauchy theorem?

http://stardrive.org/index.php?option=com_myblog&show=hologram-machian-universe-as-generalized-cauchy-theorem-.html&Itemid=56 hologram universe & Cauchy theorem analogy

### Bernie Gunther - Phillip Kerr's Berlin Noir & The Big Idea

<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/236814.Berlin_Noir" style="float: left; padding-right: 20px"><img alt="Berlin Noir: March Violets; The Pale Criminal; A German Requiem" border="0" src="http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1255744595m/236814.jpg" /></a><a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/236814.Berlin_Noir">Berlin Noir: March Violets; The Pale Criminal; A German Requiem</a> by <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/53936.Philip_Kerr">Philip Kerr</a><br/>

My rating: <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/309976569">5 of 5 stars</a><br /><br />

<br/><br/>

<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/list/8172638-jack">View all my reviews</a>

My rating: <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/309976569">5 of 5 stars</a><br /><br />

<br/><br/>

<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/list/8172638-jack">View all my reviews</a>

## Tuesday, April 10, 2012

### LONDON APRIL 10, 2012 ENTANGLEMENT SIGNALS?

I suppose this may be considered a rear-guard action leaving no stone unturned in the general belief in no-entanglement signaling in the sense of papers of Adrian Kent even though papers by Antony Valentini suggest otherwise. Of course, orthodox micro-quantum theory does not allow stand-alone entanglement signals no one denies that. The issue is whether orthodox quantum theory is the final complete theory of reality. Einstein did not think so. General quantum theory would be to orthodox quantum theory the way general relativity is to special relativity. Experiments by Libet, Radin, Bierman, Bem and others seem to provide evidence for entanglement signaling in mental activity. Roger Penrose discusses early experiments by Libet in his books. The discovery of dark energy accelerating the universe’s expansion is evidence for retro-causality when combined with the t’Hooft-Susskind hologram conjecture. Yakir Aharonov’s post-selected destiny state vector weak measurement quantum theory though not having stand-alone entanglement signaling is easily extended to include it. John Cramer has proposed an experiment to test for Wheeler-Feynman “transactional" back from the future influences. Henry Stapp. Jorge Berger has shown how Glauber macro-quantum coherent state Landau-Ginzburg emergent Higgs-Goldstone order parameters have nonlinear non-unitary local dynamics violating the linear unitarity of micro-quantum theory. The Vitiello-Freeman brain dynamics is an example of what Berger is talking about. Indeed, P.W. Anderson’s emergent “More is different” must be taken more seriously. Einstein’s gravity as curvature itself in the tetrad/spin-connection Cartan formalism seems to be a spontaneous broken emergent c-number Higgs-Goldstone post-inflation “vacuum superconductor” field with residual local de-Sitter conformal gauge group symmetry.

## Saturday, March 31, 2012

## Thursday, March 29, 2012

## Wednesday, March 21, 2012

## Sunday, March 18, 2012

## Friday, March 16, 2012

## Thursday, March 15, 2012

### 'Designer' graphene makes its debut - physicsworld.com

'Designer' graphene makes its debut - physicsworld.com

Also

Begin forwarded message:

From: JACK SARFATTI <adastra1@mac.com>

Subject: Fwd: [Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars] Re: My original density matrix trace calculation for the entanglement signal still looks OK

Date: March 15, 2012 11:06:48 AM PDT

To: Ruth Elinor Kastner <rkastner@umd.edu>

Cc: David Kaiser <dikaiser@mit.edu>, Saul Paul Sirag <sirag@mindspring.com>

Ruth Fig 16 clearly shows phase control that can be used to modulate a message

The issue is the time order between the modulation and the detection

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: JACK SARFATTI <Sarfatti@PacBell.net>

Date: March 15, 2012 2:49:09 AM PDT

To: JACK SARFATTI <adastra1@me.com>

Subject: [Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars] Re: My original density matrix trace calculation for the entanglement signal still looks OK

Reply-To: Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars@yahoogroups.com

This is not a pre-post selected correlation but a local signal without a classical signal key to unlock it like in quantum teleportation.

The 2003 Rev Mod Phys paper by Leibfried on trapped ions has the entanglement coherent phase signal I calculated in general in my three talks 10-1-11 DARPA-NASA Star Ship Orlando Hilton, 11-1-11 SLAC APS Stanford University, & 2-27-12 Boston APS. However, both the sender and receiver are Siamese Twins, i.e. the phase coherent center of mass motion of the trapped ion as the sender and an internal qubit of the same ion as the receiver. Nevertheless, orthodox quantum theory says the signal output of the qubit should be uncontrollable random noise 1/2 in proper units. In fact there is a non-random signal in the real data that obeys my general equation! So it's a first step. We may need to use quantum teleportation to get the sender and receiver spatially separated - another problem. Also, even if the sender and receiver are on the same ion can the sender act back from the future on the receiver as in the brain presponse reported by several independent people Libet -> Radin -> Bierman -> Bem.

Therefore, it still looks to me that the Born probability rule breaks down completely for entangled Glauber states as I originally said.

So I still expect that the results below are actual LOCAL data not correlation computations. However, Ruth is correct we need to check with the people who did the experiment.

On Mar 15, 2012, at 12:39 AM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

I just quickly checked it with pencil and paper - it looks OK

Will do it in detail in math type in morning with every term shown

On Mar 14, 2012, at 11:30 PM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

That would explain it I agree if I find that I made an error in the trace calculation. However, their paper is quite complicated and this key point is not obvious. I will contact them after I have a chance to digest more of it. I only saw it for the first time yesterday.

On Mar 14, 2012, at 11:20 PM, Ruth Elinor Kastner wrote:

Yes I do think there is a post-selection going on and their graph just reconstructs the data using the correlations.

But I would ask the authors to be sure. RK

________________________________________

From: JACK SARFATTI [sarfatti@pacbell.net]

Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 2:16 AM

To: Ruth Elinor Kastner

Subject: Re: Leibfried trapped ions Rev Mod Phys 2003

On Mar 14, 2012, at 10:58 PM, Ruth Elinor Kastner wrote:

Thanks Jack. It looks like the detection method has to image the ions ('detect the ion itself") and this would probably project them into a definite motional state, i.e. collapse the coherent state into a Fock state. This is analogous to detecting an electron in a position sense: you lose all information about its momentum. This would imply that you need to do a correlation analysis: each detected internal state lines up with a definite (i,e no longer coherent) state of motion of the ion in the trap.

I don't know this for sure but it's my impression from the article. This might be something that the authors could confirm or deny.

RK

Also

Begin forwarded message:

From: JACK SARFATTI <adastra1@mac.com>

Subject: Fwd: [Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars] Re: My original density matrix trace calculation for the entanglement signal still looks OK

Date: March 15, 2012 11:06:48 AM PDT

To: Ruth Elinor Kastner <rkastner@umd.edu>

Cc: David Kaiser <dikaiser@mit.edu>, Saul Paul Sirag <sirag@mindspring.com>

Ruth Fig 16 clearly shows phase control that can be used to modulate a message

The issue is the time order between the modulation and the detection

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: JACK SARFATTI <Sarfatti@PacBell.net>

Date: March 15, 2012 2:49:09 AM PDT

To: JACK SARFATTI <adastra1@me.com>

Subject: [Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars] Re: My original density matrix trace calculation for the entanglement signal still looks OK

Reply-To: Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars@yahoogroups.com

This is not a pre-post selected correlation but a local signal without a classical signal key to unlock it like in quantum teleportation.

The 2003 Rev Mod Phys paper by Leibfried on trapped ions has the entanglement coherent phase signal I calculated in general in my three talks 10-1-11 DARPA-NASA Star Ship Orlando Hilton, 11-1-11 SLAC APS Stanford University, & 2-27-12 Boston APS. However, both the sender and receiver are Siamese Twins, i.e. the phase coherent center of mass motion of the trapped ion as the sender and an internal qubit of the same ion as the receiver. Nevertheless, orthodox quantum theory says the signal output of the qubit should be uncontrollable random noise 1/2 in proper units. In fact there is a non-random signal in the real data that obeys my general equation! So it's a first step. We may need to use quantum teleportation to get the sender and receiver spatially separated - another problem. Also, even if the sender and receiver are on the same ion can the sender act back from the future on the receiver as in the brain presponse reported by several independent people Libet -> Radin -> Bierman -> Bem.

Therefore, it still looks to me that the Born probability rule breaks down completely for entangled Glauber states as I originally said.

So I still expect that the results below are actual LOCAL data not correlation computations. However, Ruth is correct we need to check with the people who did the experiment.

On Mar 15, 2012, at 12:39 AM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

I just quickly checked it with pencil and paper - it looks OK

Will do it in detail in math type in morning with every term shown

On Mar 14, 2012, at 11:30 PM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

That would explain it I agree if I find that I made an error in the trace calculation. However, their paper is quite complicated and this key point is not obvious. I will contact them after I have a chance to digest more of it. I only saw it for the first time yesterday.

On Mar 14, 2012, at 11:20 PM, Ruth Elinor Kastner wrote:

Yes I do think there is a post-selection going on and their graph just reconstructs the data using the correlations.

But I would ask the authors to be sure. RK

________________________________________

From: JACK SARFATTI [sarfatti@pacbell.net]

Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 2:16 AM

To: Ruth Elinor Kastner

Subject: Re: Leibfried trapped ions Rev Mod Phys 2003

On Mar 14, 2012, at 10:58 PM, Ruth Elinor Kastner wrote:

Thanks Jack. It looks like the detection method has to image the ions ('detect the ion itself") and this would probably project them into a definite motional state, i.e. collapse the coherent state into a Fock state. This is analogous to detecting an electron in a position sense: you lose all information about its momentum. This would imply that you need to do a correlation analysis: each detected internal state lines up with a definite (i,e no longer coherent) state of motion of the ion in the trap.

I don't know this for sure but it's my impression from the article. This might be something that the authors could confirm or deny.

RK

## Saturday, March 10, 2012

## Friday, March 9, 2012

## Wednesday, March 7, 2012

## Monday, March 5, 2012

## Friday, March 2, 2012

## Friday, February 24, 2012

## Monday, February 20, 2012

## Saturday, February 18, 2012

## Tuesday, February 14, 2012

## Thursday, February 9, 2012

## Tuesday, February 7, 2012

## Monday, January 30, 2012

## Saturday, January 28, 2012

## Thursday, January 26, 2012

## Wednesday, January 25, 2012

## Friday, January 20, 2012

## Thursday, January 19, 2012

## Monday, January 16, 2012

## Thursday, January 5, 2012

## Tuesday, January 3, 2012

## Sunday, January 1, 2012

Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)