Yes, but what if they put some really icky radar swallowing paint on their drone? Since all the military tech is top secret I cannot know the dreck that it may contain. I prefer the familiar horrors.
The labels are meaningless, probably most self-identified progressives would also identify as individualists. The fact that you keep grasping for them shows me how deeply ingrained this idea of a one dimensional political spectrum seems to be.
It effectively prevents Americans from coming together to champion common causes that cut across this divide e.g. fighting the ever increasing surveillance, the pointless war on drugs, overseas military adventures that have no benefits to the average American, and a financial industry that has become a drag rather than an enabler for the productive economic sectors.
Your language betrays that you are still fully caught up in the bipartisan world-view, which is nothing but a chimera to keep the peasants quarreling amongst themselves.
Indeed, the understanding of decoherence has fortunately made great strides since Bohr and Heisenberg coined the Copenhagen Interpretation, and we have a much better understanding of how the interference 'dissipates'.
You are exactly putting the focus on the remaining most intriguing puzzle, why do we experience a single reality? I.e. only see one moon, as Einstein put it. To me it seems there's a deep link between decoherence and entropy lurking in there, something, that despite all the QIS progress, we still don't quite capture.
But quantum decoherence is, i.e. how the wave nature is actually suppressed in our macroscopic world.
QM offers up the Ehrenfest theorem to explain how we get there, but this theorem is not completely consistent. So gaining an experimental leg up on this process, that the Copenhagen Interpretation just swept under the rug as 'Quantum State Collapse', is what makes experiments with ever larger quantum systems so interesting.
You are certainly correct, but my comment was intended to be tongue in cheek. If you read lab press releases they already always pull rather flimsy 'visions' out of their exterior orifice to generate excitement. So with this law sufficiently broadened, now they just have to do the same up front as well.
It's a totally bogus, pointless law, but vague as it is, at this point probably not too damaging any more.
One of the earlier papers that supported their claim of actual quantum annealing is linked and discussed at this blog post.
D-Wave's publication list is too long at this point in order to give a synopsis here, but there are many blogs that follow this story, so it really isn't that hard to get a more up-to-date picture.
Since the other commenter just gives a link: Let's summarize:
Since hydrogen burns upward most people fell to death in the Hindenburg inferno. Yet, 'till this day it colores the perception of hydrogen as a terribly dangerous fuel.
Given how many here retell stories of how they've been driven of contributing to Wikipedia, I conclude that as a social experiment Wikipedia has failed.
If they don't change course then Wikipedia is already dead and just keeps on with a zombie shuffle until the entries are so dated and irrelevant that they will be passed by.
For all those who's entries have been deleted I submit the speedydelete site to get your work back.
It's a real religion and interesting cultural phenomenon, as long as the articles as factual and objectively written, they are a valuable contribution.
And not I am not a pagan, but belong to the far larger community of would be editors who were driven off.
Yes, I concur, same experience here. Submitted a biographical stub once on an Australian media personality and theoretical physicist who published in several high profile journals.
He had the same name us some UK rugby athlete and it bothered me that Wikipedia seemed to value athletes over accomplished scientists.
Article got deleted for lack of notability. Guess what, I am not going to write another Wikipedia entry.
Slashdot Mirror
The US government should have seized all of their American assets and forced them into bankruptcy.
No company deserves to survive a screw-up of this magnitude.
Exactly! Let's be open minded here.
Yes, but what if they put some really icky radar swallowing paint on their drone? Since all the military tech is top secret I cannot know the dreck that it may contain. I prefer the familiar horrors.
Not too worried about our CANDU reactors. They ever so often spell some tritium but given the seize of the lake not really too much of a concern.
I get my freshwater from there.
Boy, you sure like your labels. So I am a postmodernist now? Well, I guess there's a first for everything. I've been called worse :-)
Whatever. No idea what brought this on, but you are apparently stuck in your world view.
The labels are meaningless, probably most self-identified progressives would also identify as individualists. The fact that you keep grasping for them shows me how deeply ingrained this idea of a one dimensional political spectrum seems to be.
It effectively prevents Americans from coming together to champion common causes that cut across this divide e.g. fighting the ever increasing surveillance, the pointless war on drugs, overseas military adventures that have no benefits to the average American, and a financial industry that has become a drag rather than an enabler for the productive economic sectors.
It's not about the labels but the left/right dichotomy. It is BS.
Your language betrays that you are still fully caught up in the bipartisan world-view, which is nothing but a chimera to keep the peasants quarreling amongst themselves.
Yes, but sheep that labour under the illusion that they are sheepdogs are still a sad sight to behold.
Indeed, the understanding of decoherence has fortunately made great strides since Bohr and Heisenberg coined the Copenhagen Interpretation, and we have a much better understanding of how the interference 'dissipates'.
You are exactly putting the focus on the remaining most intriguing puzzle, why do we experience a single reality? I.e. only see one moon, as Einstein put it. To me it seems there's a deep link between decoherence and entropy lurking in there, something, that despite all the QIS progress, we still don't quite capture.
But quantum decoherence is, i.e. how the wave nature is actually suppressed in our macroscopic world.
QM offers up the Ehrenfest theorem to explain how we get there, but this theorem is not completely consistent. So gaining an experimental leg up on this process, that the Copenhagen Interpretation just swept under the rug as 'Quantum State Collapse', is what makes experiments with ever larger quantum systems so interesting.
You are certainly correct, but my comment was intended to be tongue in cheek. If you read lab press releases they already always pull rather flimsy 'visions' out of their exterior orifice to generate excitement. So with this law sufficiently broadened, now they just have to do the same up front as well.
It's a totally bogus, pointless law, but vague as it is, at this point probably not too damaging any more.
Just say it'll help with quantum computing some day, that's what all the cool kids do.
What most people don't realize is that nuclear waste can be treated to render it harmless more quickly. And it can be done with a sub-critical reactor design.
I don't understand how you can call yourself an environmentalist and not be in favor of this technology.
Wished I had mod points to give you. This is exactly the issue at hand, and the confusion on display in this thread is very discouraging.
To get an idea how much faster you could get around if the US had proper no speed limit highways like the German Autobahn.
(That said I don't condone reckless driving on roads that aren't built for that speed.)
One of the earlier papers that supported their claim of actual quantum annealing is linked and discussed at this blog post.
D-Wave's publication list is too long at this point in order to give a synopsis here, but there are many blogs that follow this story, so it really isn't that hard to get a more up-to-date picture.
Since the other commenter just gives a link: Let's summarize:
Since hydrogen burns upward most people fell to death in the Hindenburg inferno. Yet, 'till this day it colores the perception of hydrogen as a terribly dangerous fuel.
Given how many here retell stories of how they've been driven of contributing to Wikipedia, I conclude that as a social experiment Wikipedia has failed.
If they don't change course then Wikipedia is already dead and just keeps on with a zombie shuffle until the entries are so dated and irrelevant that they will be passed by.
For all those who's entries have been deleted I submit the speedydelete site to get your work back.
It's a real religion and interesting cultural phenomenon, as long as the articles as factual and objectively written, they are a valuable contribution.
And not I am not a pagan, but belong to the far larger community of would be editors who were driven off.
Yes, I concur, same experience here. Submitted a biographical stub once on an Australian media personality and theoretical physicist who published in several high profile journals.
He had the same name us some UK rugby athlete and it bothered me that Wikipedia seemed to value athletes over accomplished scientists.
Article got deleted for lack of notability. Guess what, I am not going to write another Wikipedia entry.
Seth Lloyd references an earlier paper by Scott Aaronson but not the excellent, recent one, that tackled this subject heads-on.
OK, that makes more sense.
The jury is certainly still out on that.