Slashdot Mirror

Was hoping there was someone who could shed some photons on the question of how does this work?

Then again, maybe if I just setup the question, continuously flirting with the "Submit" button, the answer will appear?

Digg has a better link: http://www.physorg.com/news11087.html
From the article, it looks like I'll need to be nested within some optical interferometers before my "Submit" program will use counterfactual computation.

"We also showed theoretically how to obtain the answer without ever running the algorithm, by using a 'chained Zeno' effect."

Oh wait, this is just in "theory".

Never mind, nothing to see here.

My formal discipline is as an artist, so let me handle the explaining.

Uncertainty means you can't know a quantum particles location and speed absolutely. When you fix the position, the speed is unknown -- but you can make estimates and predictions of some reliability.

I'm pretty sure the "cloning" means transferring a quantum state. Say like spin direction -- you can know the speed and the clone the spin to another quantum particle by means of entanglement. Entanglement is a fancy word meaning; "hanging out for a while, and then getting kind of click-ish." Like teenagers that smoke, quantum particles tend to go along to get along. If a water molecule hangs on on a piece of glass and another hangs out around a rusty nail -- at the quantum level, there will be a difference where all the quantum structures of the water that hung out on the glass are different -- sort of in phase with the glass, because "tuning" to the glass molecule takes less energy. Much like coming out of a metal deth concert will make a persons head vibrate -- because not moving to the beat could leave bruises. Rock concerts and physics have been known to be entangled for many years now.

Now you could cheat Heisenberg (not nature, she hates that) and clone a quantum property and test that of the original and clone another and test another property -- this can get you speed, location, spin and area code of a particle that likes it's privacy -- just not from the same source and not with perfect accuracy -- thus preserving the egos of Physicists who like to say; "you can't violate the uncertainty principle." If you ever want to start a fight at a geek mixer, just start violating a principle.

Quantum tunneling is a more accurate name than teleportation but Quatum Teleportation has better marketing value and that keeps the money rolling in. Stupid testosterone laden spooks love to give physicists money and dream of being able to pop into anywhere through teleportation unannounced. And where goes the money, there goes the spin, right? Or maybe it's quantum immigration -- never mind. It just means "poof" it was here and it changed into something we don't know about, and then "poof" it is elsewhere -- because we don't want to violate anymore laws of nature or think too hard, we'll just say it teleported. The main problem with Quantum Teleportation was that it is a newish concept, and Douglas Adams didn't get a chance to make fun of it. I kind of get the idea that Physicists think that you force the teleportation by giving a quantum thingy a choice between violating a physics law and thus being insulting, or going "poof" -- always a slave of fashion, the particle goes "poof." My main problem with Quantum physics is trying to understand what folks don't understand yet about the Universe, and then based on those misconceptions, how would 5 blind physicists describe an Elephant. That's how you get the Charmed Quark and the uncertainty principle. It's the same reason Doctors call that swelling in your lungs that makes you cough Broncitis, because they don't want to say; "your lungs are swelly and irritated" and then charge you money for something you knew before spending an hour in the waiting room and paying a bunch of money. A Charmed Quark is different from a Boson -- but they are likely the same thingy, just kind of in a different mood.

By the way -- I'm so happy that Quantum Strings are getting less trendy, aren't you? The old boys are on the right track now with vacuum vortices and the aether. Or do we not believe that right now? See, just being able to see how the universe works at a fundamental level, and how everything pulled itself into creation is a lot easier than understanding this Quantum physics stuff. But I digress...

So, I haven't read the articlehttp://www.physorg.com/news10924.html so it may be possible to explain it-- because, due to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, you can not both study Quantum Physics, and explain it to others at the same time.

since RIT has been doing 26nm. http://www.physorg.com/news10755.html

The statement...

"No scientist I know will go within 10 feet of that heaping pile."

...leads to...

Let me say "physorg sucks".

... not the other way around.

"And look at all the ads."

Yes they look like they are selected by google and amazon robots, AI has a long way to go! If you want a real laugh go to any serious article anywhere on the web that has the word "evolution" and google ads.

"Search physorg a bit - you'll see bullshit like alien crash landings and various other nonsense."

Well I found articles referencing "alien" and many of the top hit were respectable articles about spitzer, hubble, etc. Couldn't find any on "alien crash", searching the readers comments provided plenty of fantasy as it would on slashdot.

I wonered for a second what other "nonesense" I could search for? I pictured an average "science, space and technology" section at the newsagent, "UFO" flashed eveywhere, three hits (one a dupe!).

PhysOrg is kinda like the "science, space and technology" section, the one big difference is that they invite general comments and would love to hear from specialists. If that seems to much effort then just rate the article or post an intelligent critisim/rebuttal. Bitching on another nerd site when these options are open to you is just crass and immature.

People are not born with the philosophy and method of science magically imprinted, much less the detail involved in graduate studies, this is doubly true for arts majors such as journalists (who BTW will pick the shit out of my scribbles).

In short, unless you have some scientific training everything from UFO's to spacetime sounds equally plausible, it's all appears to be some "smart guy's" opinion. Case in point: The slashdot summary for TFA makes an incorrect interpretation, as a heap of QM nerds have clearly pointed out. Sites like slashdot and PhysOrg are all about the discussion, if "scientists" don't go to the "lions den" and participate in "popular science", what chance do journalists have?

... taking off your sandals and striking yourselfon the head until you bleed:

http://www.physorg.com/news10978.html

Warmer than a Hot Tub: Atlantic Ocean Temperatures Much Higher - Scientists have found evidence that tropical Atlantic Ocean temperatures may have once reached 107F (42C)--about 25F (14C) higher than ocean temperatures today and warmer than a hot tub.

Ooops.. and that was normal back then? With oceans like that how much ice do you think was floating in them?

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/vars un.html

Mike Flaugher: It is my personal belief that with the beginning of Sunspot Cycle 23, we MAY be entering into a period of climate disturbance similar to that in the early 1800's, and POSSIBLY like that of the three major disturbances of the last millennium, the Wolf, Sporer and Maunder Minimums. The latter possibility we will not know with certainty for several decades. Solar Cycle 23, however, appears at this time poised to begin a major downshift in solar levels which may well cause reactions in the stratosphere and, through mechanisms now being studied as illustrated in some of the articles above, a series of reactions in the lower atmosphere. I believe that the manifestation of these changes may soon be felt as a shifting of weather patterns of moisture, dryness, and temperature.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/ne ws/2004/07/18/wsun18.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/18/i xnewstop.html

Global warming has finally been explained: the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years, according to new research. Dr Sami Solanki, the director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany, who led the research, said: "The Sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures.

"The Sun is in a changed state. It is brighter than it was a few hundred years ago and this brightening started relatively recently - in the last 100 to 150 years."

Ooops. How are we going to turn down the Sun?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period

The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) or Medieval Climate Optimum was an unusually warm period during the European Medieval period, lasting from about the 10th century to about the 14th century. It has been argued a better name would be the Medieval Climatic Anomaly. The MWP is often involved in contentious discussions of global warming and the greenhouse effect.

Ooops. We've obviously already have been there - much to the chagrin of one or the other faction trying to justify social change by predicting dire climatic consequences. These factions - as the Wikipedia goes on - of course are hard at work trying to find ways to paint the current warming trend as something novel and unique even in view of literally rock-solid past evidence. The Wikipedia is another btw another good starting point for the debate between the global cooling/warming factions and the CO2 doomsday prophets.

While we're at it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_Climatic_Opt imum

Some more warming in timeframe of 9000 to 5000 years B.P (Before present, before 1950 CE that is):

The Holocene Climate Optimum was a warm period during roughly the interval 9,000 to 5,000 years B.P.. This event has also been known by many other names, including: Hypisthermal, Altithermal, Climatic Optimum, Holocene Optimum, Holocene Thermal Maximum, and Holocene Megathermal.

Temperature variations during the

I found this article that basically talks about what I just posted

http://www.physorg.com/news10956.html

Cold Fusion is real:

http://www.physorg.com/news3938.html

http://www.macromedia.com/go/gnavtray_cfmx_home

We are getting closer. There is a special holographic processing engine developed by Light Blue Optics which converts a standard composite video signal into high-quality 2D holographic video, in real time. Apparently the technology is prime for being cheap. It is not yet powerful enough to run 3D but is a huge step in that direction.

Not sure how this affects your point, but it turns out that cold fusion actually does exist.

Fusion is up in the air at the moment, nuclear will work if you ever get round the environmentalists,

Yeah, because those damn environmentalists wield so much power and have so much money, why they're practically running the US government!

and wind and tidal power can provide about 5%.

That's nonsense. Slashdot ran an article on this just recently. Global wind power in class 3 areas alone could generate 72 terawatts which is 60 times global consumption. Class 3 wind turbines are financially comparable to brown coal. North America has the greatest number of class 3 areas in the world.

But let's not stop at wind power. A home with solar panels for hot water (not the expensive, dirty and inefficient photovoltaic) saves 50% on heating costs. The panels pay for themselves in 5 years and have a 25 year lifetime. They are maintenance free (they are effectively just black plastic pipes behind glass sheets) and easy to repair when damaged (simple plumbing that a home handyman could do).

But let's not stop at solar and wind power. Changing your light bulbs from incandescent to energy efficient flouros will save 75% on lighting costs. Modern flouros are compact, come in a variety of shapes, only need to be changed once every 5-10 years, degrade slowly rather than blowing suddenly at inconvenient times, and have equivalent candela output to a 75W incandescent.

But let's not stop at solar power and wind power and energy efficiency. Your SUV gets 10MPG yet a comfortable Subaru Legacy has equivalent seating and storage but gets 33MPG. Your average driver will save between $750 and $1250 per year while simultaneously slashing their automobile oil consumption by two thirds. That's financially sensible and enviromentally friendlier.

The solutions are here right now. You need to stop waiting for the magic silver bullet like fusion, or blaming "environmentalists" for preventing fission, or wondering why you're spending $2000+ per year on fuel for your gargantuan SUV, and simply start using the technology that is here right now and is economical right now and is practical right now. You can make the difference right now.

If that were the case, we'd better tell the permafrost that it should stay frozen. Because, if you haven't heard, it is melting right now.

And if you ask if that is bad, well, scientists estimate that fourteen percent of the worlds carbon is stored in permafrost. Fourteen percent of ALL carbon, not only of the CO2 and methane in the atmosphere. And it is mostly in the form of methane, which upon release, would increase the greenhouse effect considerably. See also positive feedback loop.

This was actually published a couple months ago: http://www.physorg.com/news8616.html

Maybe we should start calling it "Slashdot: Olds for Nerds"

Because you can....and trying out different ways to cool down a computer may one day lead to a better solution than noisy fans. I just ran across another method people are trying to cool down graphics chips using Liquid Metal.

I don't think it will make sense to even talk about "your computer," in the future, since there will be so goddamn many of them, all over the place, including within your body.

I think it's likely that they'll have amorphous size, and be divisible and recombinable. I wouldn't speculate on the storage medium. For example, have you heard of "Millipede?" There are so many data storage options being explored right now, and there's a lot of room for diversity. Looking 20 to 30 years down the line; Who knows what we'll be doing? I think it's safe to say it's not going to be what we're doing right now, though.

I think the key thing to note, is that our technologies will be ubiquitous, and massively networked.

You connect a hard drive to your personal network, and it'll be available everywhere. It's won't be all segmented, like it is right now.

http://www.physorg.com/news2786.html

According to that article it also has clicky keys. Woowoo. Anyway, nothing to consign my lovely type-M IBM keyboard (bless it's blucking spring innards) to the trash for.

hey, the article in this post looks soooo similar to the article in Friday's post "Radiation Robot Makes Troops Safer".
That is they problem with robots; you teach the trick once, and there they go repeating it forever!

And not just human that show this preference for toys.

http://www.physorg.com/news8902.html

Studies have shown that even monkeys of either gender show a pronounced and measurable preference for what we generally consider 'boys' and 'girls' toys.

the U.S. needs to wake up. its way deeper than what they think http://www.physorg.com/news8992.html

"India still constitutes less than one or two percent of the world software and related service markets. The total revenues of the entire software industry in India amount to less than a third of Microsoft revenues." Vibhu Srinivasan

Microsoft will be opening 500 retail centers in eight Indian cities over the next six months, targeting home users and small business.

The focus will be on the convenience of the OEM install, Win MCE 2005, Windows media, games, mature small business applications, etc. Everything the middle class likes about Windows.

There will be partnerships with OEMs and retail finance. Microsoft India finds retail & SMEs hot

'...so why don't the Microsofts and Sonys of the world just implement it in future consoles, if only to shut up the cries of "won't someone think of the children?!"'

Good question, and the answer is that all of the big three have already announced that there will be parental controls for their systems. In the case of the X360 it is supposedly even backwards-compatible to X-Box games although I don't know if that's been thoroughly tested yet. For reference:

X360: http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000283051379/
PS3: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7001215012
Revolution: http://www.physorg.com/news8644.html

Unfortunately I doubt this will shut anyone up. Remember, we have an election next year and so far almost all of the biggest supporters of these bills (both the state bills and Clinton's FEPA) have announced that they are 'considering' a run for the democratic presidential nomination in '08.

Since the /. editors altered the original link, here's the one i provided:

http://physorg.com/news8527.html

Hope that's not slashdotted now.
(And no, don't use coral caché on this, let's get even at their annoying ads ;-) )

This is "stuff that matters" because...?

There are better articles out there.

The main reason 2005 was choosen. Have you {{{hugged}}} your local physicists this year?

http://www.physorg.com/news3700.html

Now that's what I'm talking 'bout

H2 is BS.

Here's a link to a site with a drawing of the ape, and he looks just like you guessed, a big fat barrel of a gorilla.

http://www.physorg.com/news7950.html

The AOL founder quit, too!

Here's the link

http://www.physorg.com/news7308.html

Thad

In the 1980s, the United States accounted for about 40 percent of the science papers published in the world. The European Union accounted for 32.3 percent, and the Asia Pacific region 13 percent.

However, by 2004, the EU accounted for 38 percent of the total number of papers; the United States 33.3 percent; and the Asia Pacific region 25.3 percent, according to a study published in Science Watch, the newsletter of Thomson Scientific.

http://www.physorg.com/news5531.html

Here is the link to the Article the Parent Submitted. Note that at the bottom of the page, it says that the posted was not the original article, and links to the original - which was the one that the Slashdot editor used.

Curious coincidence, neh? An application that needs a low power, multicore design and here somebody steps up to the plate and says "sure, we can do that."

Go ahead, wack me with an "off topic" - but cold fusion is real. Money is rapidly going back into CF after many years of black-balling scientists from the community who would even mention CF. Go research caviture bubble cold fusion - its the cutting edge right now and may just sweep the world in a few years. For starters, read this article on Perdue's recent findings... http://www.physorg.com/news5130.html

From a different article:

"A second significant difference, according to Rosenthal, is that it should be considerably easier to use the magic-sized quantum dots to make an "electroluminescent device" - a light source powered directly by electricity - because they can be used with a wider selection of binding compounds without affecting their emissions characteristics. Other research groups have reported stimulating quantum dots to produce light by applying an electrical current. Of course, those produced colored light. So, one of the projects at the top of Rosenthal's list is to duplicate that feat with magic-sized nanocrystals to see if they will produce white light when electrically stimulated."

The PMSNBC article doesn't get into much detail. There's a better source here.

That study is somewhat old hat. Have a look here and you'll see that the mechanism is now understood.

In short, you can make toxic, or non-toxic buckyballs. The more bits you dangle on the outside of the buckyballs, the less toxic they become. Nanomachine designers will be aware of this and act accordingly.

Vik :v)

The most comprehensive climate model to date of the continental United States predicts more extreme temperatures throughout the country and more extreme precipitation along the Gulf Coast, in the Pacific Northwest and east of the Mississippi.

> Last time I looked the US was the 1st on the list of scientific
> papers published by countries with more than 60% of the papers.

Then you must not have looked since about 1960. As of 2005, the US published only 33% of world science papers, significantly less than the EU (38%) and only half again more than Asia-Pacific (25%). source, more detail

What's interesting to note is that the EU's share of world publications has increased by almost 20% in the last 20 years (from 32%) and Asia's by almost 100%, but the USA's has fallen by almost 20% (from 40% to 33%).

In other words, the US has been losing its tech edge for at least the last 20 years.

It will raise, you forgot that liquid salted water vs ice is not the same than liquid non-salted water vs ice. Go back to school and do the maths. Or just visit a page explaining how to do the experiment with salted water and ice

The displays can obtain their energy from printable batteries, which are already available. Because they last only a few months, this solution is only feasible for merchandise with high throughput rates or short-use durations. It may also prove feasible to use printed antennas as a local energy source. They would receive pulses from a transmitter in the shelf and convert the pulses into electricity.

Not the best picture but you get the idea... http://www.physorg.com/news7177.html

The blogs of thirteen-year-old girls are examples of the recently discovered negative information. If more young girls can be encouraged to write this will actually reduce Google's workload.

Says who and why? Says the US government, repeatedly.

http://www.physorg.com/news6901.html
http://www.internetnews.com/xSP/article.php/355468 6

This is all only the latest even in a long history of similar events.

I wonder if you saw this one? : Defective carbon nanotubes

The lightning neutrons that RenoX referred to are here: http://www.physorg.com/news6674.html

I have also worked with BF3 neutron detectors around high electrical fields, and I have also seen noise effects on the detector. In my experience, the counts which were caused by electrical disturbance only occurred during nearby spark-out incidents. If you were working indoors without high electrical fields present, it is most likely that your spikes were caused by the lightning neutrons, and not by the electrical effects. This of course, presumes that the neutron events that DYAIZA saw were not actually broadband noise events. My Russian is rusty, so I haven't checked out the original paper to see if that might be the case.

With regards to cold fusion, I used to hang out on sci.physics.fusion back in the day, when cold fusion was still fairly controversial and Jones, Blue, Mallove, and others would discuss their experiments. I have always thought that the interstitial energy explanation was the correct one, and I think it should be brought up whenever cold fusion is discussed. The claims of excess energy never seemed to take into account the energy of putting the hydrogen into the interstices, and the process of doing this was always the bugaboo when discussions of "If it works, why don't you build an engine" came up.

I do think that using the so-called "cold fusion" process as an energy storage mechanism could be interesting.

Actually, there is life, even in the arid parts of the Atacama: http://www.physorg.com/news3396.html
It's one of the areas where they are testing probes that they later intend to send to Mars, because it's one of the hardest places in the world to find life. But it is there, even in the absence of water.

It was on NANOG recently - lemme check - yup!

Article: http://www.physorg.com/news6940.html
Actual Paper: http://netlab.caltech.edu/pub/papers/Doyle-topolog y-PNAS-0508.pdf

And, to clarify and correct myself, it looks like they are claiming that the internet is not scale-free. Which is not quite the same thing as being power-law, but is generally related.

Your link refers to last year Nobel. This is for this year: Physorg 2005 Nobel Prize in Physics

Ooops- wrong link...
Try this one instead.
My bad. Need more coffee.

PhysOrg has a pretty good rundown of the physics involved in the discoveries. Worth a look...

"How could you control their reproduction so that they don't clog your veins or saturate your organs?"

My advice would be to put the sci-fi book down and realize that nanotech does not equal grey goo of death. Nanotech could be as simple as slapping some RNA together into a form that pentrates only cancer cells and turns off their reproduction. It could be functionalizaing a carbon nanotube to pentrate only cancern cells and then heating them up a little and causing the cell to explode. Nanotechnology is NOT capable of reproducing machines any time in the near future. Hell, we can't even build machines that do anything yet, much less build ones that reproduce. If you find a nanostructure that kills cancer and doesn't harm the rest of the body, you just keep pumping it into the person until the cancer is gone. No need to pump grey goo of death into you.

Put down the Sci-fi books people, and read a nice science journal or technology website. If you want to read about some real nanotech cures on the way, take a peek at these.

http://www.dastoronline.com/media/paper330/news/20 05/08/12/Diversions/The-Vice.Geek.Presents.carbon. Nanotubes.And.Us.The.Curing.Cancer.Edition-967818. shtml
http://www.physorg.com/news6474.html

They have to keep the charade going. Fuel Cells were the "switch" in the "bait & switch" con Automakers played to get out of California's Zero Emission Vehicle mandate. The California Air Resource Board wanted automakers to sell Batery Electric Vehicles (BEV). GM was going all-out to meet the mandate, but then GM's visionary engineers got kicked out, and then they spent some $600 million lobbying against ZEV.

"We can't do BEV 'cause the batteries aren't good enough and people won't want a car that they can't instant-refill. But Hydrogen! Hydrogen is just like gasoline, except it's clean! Never mind that there's no efficient or economical way to get hydrogen, advances in 30 or 40 years will make it possible!"

Of course, now that ZEV is DeaD, battery technology has advanced to the point where an "instant" re-charge is possible...

See Perspectives on Fuel Cell and Battery Electric Vehicles, and this mailing list post on GM's coming demise ("good riddance").

CARB's Fuel Cell Detour on the Road to Zero Emission Vehicles

An article from earlier in the year attests to how land use can affect if it will act as a sink or source. http://www.physorg.com/news3857.html

Another article from the same site shows how studies of the Amazon river basin reveal that carbon emissions from the Amazon river are younger than previous thought http://www.physorg.com/news5471.html

Really what comes about from these articles and others is that we still don't have a complete picture. While it is great press to claim we can simulate the earth and predict things like global warming and cooling we still run into the fact we don't know all the variables. Yes man contributes but how much? Indirect methods are revealed by how land use affected CO2 emissions and absorption.

I do think that what the Earth is doing on its own in regards to CO2 emissions should not be weighed against how well we reduce our own emissions. Granted the changes in the planet may seemingly undo what we accomplish we still improve our ecosystem by reducing OUR effect on it.