Slashdot Mirror

At absolute zero all conductors are super conductors.

No, there are a variety of states, and typically fermions and bosons act differently at absolute zero. Helium-4 becomes a superfluid, it doesn't become a superconductor. Some materials even become perfect insulators.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

In most situations Cooper pairs have nothing to do with entanglement. There are a large number of experiments that involve entanglement without superconductors.

Does that have Quantum entanglement? Don't think it does.

Doesn't matter what you think... anything that involves decay into two particles and is preserving things like angular momentum will produce entangled particles. Undergrad labs use a simple beam splitter and single photon source. There is plenty of discussion of variations of the Stern-Gerlach experiment used to study entanglement. Heck, the original test of Bell's inequality didn't use superconductivity, and you can find a long list of other such experiments on Wikipedia, or in an actual textbook.

A few points from the original research article (in Spanish). One link I found: http://digibug.ugr.es/bitstream/10481/4858/1/18616252.pdf

Perhaps someone with better Spanish skills might like to look at it.

They interviewed 288 kids from 11 schools in the city of Ronda, Málaga province. Rather a small group and only in one city.

They did appear to use some sensible question criteria and evaluation techniques. However, I saw nothing in the paper (I freely admit I skimmed, so it might be there), anything to indicate that any other factors were considered. In addition to University Degrees, economic factors, personal experiences, any number of other things might enter into this.

It's a long way from a definitive research. At best, I'd say it's a possible starting point for more rigorous research on a -much- wider broader base of respondents.

Anyone with better Spanish skills who would like to follow up, please do so.

Do such leaps happen in such evolutionary algorithms ?

All the time apparently. Typically in the evolutionary algorithms I have seen, the solution will march along making only slight improvements for a few generations then, "Boom!", makes a big order of magnitude or greater improvement in one or two generations, then settles down to incremental improvements again.

This page has a good graph of the behavior I'm talking about, as well as some code snippets.

Ah nevermind, there is a story about it directly on the university's website.

Linky
It even has the researcher's email and telephone. I love academia.

For spanish speakers, take a look at

site1
site2

Btw, how many programs try to hack the turing machine? :-D

Yeah, Lakoff does some very interesting work with metaphor. Here's something recent.

It was his research that contributed a lot to the idea that since we (humans) process metaphor and figurative language at the same rate we do literal, non-figurative language, computers should do the same. Big implications for NLP...

1. Mirror 1
2. Mirror 2
3. Mirror 3
4. Mirror 4
5. Mirror 5

1. French