Think you miss the bigger picture here, in that they are pioneering non silicon based LSI circuits that operate adiabatically (no heat production). This technology could very well be extended to include conventional logic in paralel with their quantum circuitry.
Better be nice to your off-spring. All the years they took off with their juvenile antics and incessant noise they may pay back later if they like you.
... is absolutely possible. That is what the company I work for has been doing for a while now. For commercial entities we market it as social network sentiment analysis.
The technology can tell you immediately how your brand is trending, analyzing twitter feeds, facebook, blogs, web searches etc.
It scales nicely. And yes, we have a very large footprint in DC.
This was actually part of why I left the US. As a consultant it seemed security clearance was becoming more and more important. Not the line of work I was interested in.
Having lived in the EU, US and now Canada I think it's strikingly obvious that the DNC has a "policy (...) far to the right of that found in the EU."
E.g. where else in the Western World do you find a right wing party that wants a completely commercially operated healthcare (mandatory but no public health insurance).
This is simply an untenable position for any Western right wing party outside the US.
No, this does not invalidate the Heisenberg principle because it is done on an ensemble and the measurement is just an average on the statistic that they gather.
This has no bearing on the fundamental validity of the uncertainty principle for a single quantum system. Never quite understood the point of these experiments. But to advertise them in this misleading fashion is just asinine.
Way to go to confuse an already science sceptic pubic.
From you tag line I take it you are of libertarian persuasion.
I'd wish there was a political force that could bundled common goals of liberal and libertarians to the extend that they derive from the word liberty. I.e. personal freedom, no wiretapping, no pointless war on drugs, no expensive interventionalist foreign policy.
And how much more money (inflation adjusted) to you make in comparison to the same work twenty years ago? How much did productivity increase in the same time frame? Where did the extra profit margin go? Do the math.
Old industries are tied to fossil fuel, add to that that liberal policies usually tax billionaires more than liberal ones, and it should be obvious that this is not a level playing field. Really not rocket science.
Fair enough, the importance is obviously in the eye of the beholder.
To me the irony is that Weinberg developed the extension to test for how far QM linearity actually holds without realizing that his model actually allows to recover classical Hamilton mechanics.
Still have to quibble with (b) though. To the extend that this is relevant to recovering the limit form of the Ehrenfest Theorem, it is a new tool for the ongoing effort to fully understand decoherence. That, to me, is breaking new grounds. It may not lead anywhere, but the problem is this tool has not been picked up. If it were to lead somewhere (i.e. the author did propose some novel experimental tests) it'll be indeed extremely relevant.
Please reread my earlier comment. I wasn't refering to his 1985 paper but his more recent work (i.e. not more than a quater century ago) to make these points:
This line of research is still quite active.
The work that I pointed to has been overlooked, although it has been around for quite a while.
Look I love me some Zeh. He and QIS can be credited to really bring back a research focus on decoherence, but these papers actually pre-date Zeh's most recent work and offer a very stringent mathematical framework (that Zeh apparently also isn't aware of).
Hence my posting here. The point is that this is very interesting stuff that essentially has been overlooked.
Can we at least put to bed the notion that decoherence and the correspondence principle are fully understood, as you suggested earlier?
Bag to differ. If you only rely on Wikipedia's entry to the Ehrenfest Theorem you'd think that it always works just fine. But that isn't always the case as pretty much every textbook on QM will point out (e.g. these lecture notes:)
... according to Ehrenfest's theorem, the expectation values of position for this cubic potential will only agree with the classical behaviour insofar as the dispersion in position is negligible (for all time) in the chosen state.
Weinberg's math deforms the Schroedinger equation in the same sense that you could deform Feynman's path integral back to the classical extramal principle. Hence you can recover Hamiltonian mechanics from it, and then the Ehrenfest's Theorem is of course always fully met. The correspondence principle on the other hand is just that: A principle. This however is a full mathematical description of how to get from the Schroedinger equation back to Hamilton mechanics. I.e. it exemplifies the correspondence principle. Care to show me some papers that can do the same?
Slashdot Mirror
Think you miss the bigger picture here, in that they are pioneering non silicon based LSI circuits that operate adiabatically (no heat production). This technology could very well be extended to include conventional logic in paralel with their quantum circuitry.
Have problems parsing your question "Lie you ignored the article?"
Was that supposed to be "Like"?
My point is that conventional super-computing is indeed facing a crisis, but that non CMOS based technologies may save the day.
... I guess you may be excused to think it hit a brick wall. Alternative technology has fortunately already matured, and is commercially available.
Better be nice to your off-spring. All the years they took off with their juvenile antics and incessant noise they may pay back later if they like you.
... is absolutely possible. That is what the company I work for has been doing for a while now. For commercial entities we market it as social network sentiment analysis.
The technology can tell you immediately how your brand is trending, analyzing twitter feeds, facebook, blogs, web searches etc.
It scales nicely. And yes, we have a very large footprint in DC.
This was actually part of why I left the US. As a consultant it seemed security clearance was becoming more and more important. Not the line of work I was interested in.
Having lived in the EU, US and now Canada I think it's strikingly obvious that the DNC has a "policy (...) far to the right of that found in the EU."
E.g. where else in the Western World do you find a right wing party that wants a completely commercially operated healthcare (mandatory but no public health insurance).
This is simply an untenable position for any Western right wing party outside the US.
You apparently live in a very dangerous place, to be that anxious.
Watched TV lately? Used a GPS? How about looked up a weather report?
If you haven't done any of this lately, then maybe you really don't need satellites.
... the people watching from the outside would die of boredom.
As has been pointed out by numerous posters, the headling must have accidentally been truncated.
The original headline was "North Korea Declares a State of War, yet again".
Obviously /. high editorial standards would never allow for a misleading highly sensationalized headline.
The /. editors want to express their sincere regret for this most uncommon mistake.
Or did Orwell just get it wrong by ten years.
Karma is a bitch.
No, this does not invalidate the Heisenberg principle because it is done on an ensemble and the measurement is just an average on the statistic that they gather.
This has no bearing on the fundamental validity of the uncertainty principle for a single quantum system. Never quite understood the point of these experiments. But to advertise them in this misleading fashion is just asinine.
Way to go to confuse an already science sceptic pubic.
From you tag line I take it you are of libertarian persuasion.
I'd wish there was a political force that could bundled common goals of liberal and libertarians to the extend that they derive from the word liberty. I.e. personal freedom, no wiretapping, no pointless war on drugs, no expensive interventionalist foreign policy.
Saudia Arabia is state sponsor of Wahhabism and supported the spread of madrassas in Pakistan/Afghanistan that teach this radical form of Islam.
There'd be no Taliban nor Al Quaeda if Wahhabism wasn't so influential and well funded.
And how much more money (inflation adjusted) to you make in comparison to the same work twenty years ago? How much did productivity increase in the same time frame? Where did the extra profit margin go? Do the math.
... and rather than getting anything in return you have to buy the Google glasses for $1.5K.
I'd rather try to raise kickstarter funds if I had a cool Google glasses idea.
Surely you met him in person and have in depth first hand impression.
Old industries are tied to fossil fuel, add to that that liberal policies usually tax billionaires more than liberal ones, and it should be obvious that this is not a level playing field. Really not rocket science.
Soro's puts his money where his mouth is, and is not making his contributions untraceable.
... and I say Apple ... let's call the whole thing off.
Fair enough, the importance is obviously in the eye of the beholder.
To me the irony is that Weinberg developed the extension to test for how far QM linearity actually holds without realizing that his model actually allows to recover classical Hamilton mechanics.
Still have to quibble with (b) though. To the extend that this is relevant to recovering the limit form of the Ehrenfest Theorem, it is a new tool for the ongoing effort to fully understand decoherence. That, to me, is breaking new grounds. It may not lead anywhere, but the problem is this tool has not been picked up. If it were to lead somewhere (i.e. the author did propose some novel experimental tests) it'll be indeed extremely relevant.
Please reread my earlier comment. I wasn't refering to his 1985 paper but his more recent work (i.e. not more than a quater century ago) to make these points:
Look I love me some Zeh. He and QIS can be credited to really bring back a research focus on decoherence, but these papers actually pre-date Zeh's most recent work and offer a very stringent mathematical framework (that Zeh apparently also isn't aware of).
Hence my posting here. The point is that this is very interesting stuff that essentially has been overlooked.
Can we at least put to bed the notion that decoherence and the correspondence principle are fully understood, as you suggested earlier?
Bag to differ. If you only rely on Wikipedia's entry to the Ehrenfest Theorem you'd think that it always works just fine. But that isn't always the case as pretty much every textbook on QM will point out (e.g. these lecture notes:)
Weinberg's math deforms the Schroedinger equation in the same sense that you could deform Feynman's path integral back to the classical extramal principle. Hence you can recover Hamiltonian mechanics from it, and then the Ehrenfest's Theorem is of course always fully met. The correspondence principle on the other hand is just that: A principle. This however is a full mathematical description of how to get from the Schroedinger equation back to Hamilton mechanics. I.e. it exemplifies the correspondence principle. Care to show me some papers that can do the same?