Thanks, I had to read it a couple times, but that clarifies things (well, that plus remembering a few other items from my QED readings.)
Just to re-state it for my own edification, the gist of it is basically: There are ways to take a measurement on the object that, just going by classical physics, should return result A if the object has 1 quanta of energy, and result B if it has 0 quanta. However, instead the measurement returns result C, which shouldn't even be an option unless you describe the entire thing in quantum mechanics terms and A and B are interfering with one another.
A somewhat inaccurate metaphor would be hitting a cue ball on a pool table into one of three pockets. You're *only* hitting it from either the right or the left, so it should only sink into the right or left pocket, but under the right conditions, we instead see that it ends up in the middle pocket as if the right and left options had both happened and canceled each other out into a third option.
Regarding MWI, you've gone a bit out of my depth, but my understanding is that consciousness (as purely a process embedded within physics) has nothing to do with it any more than a collapsing building does.
Really? That seems unlikely to me... You can't see an object unless it's emitting photons, which automatically means it's being interfered with and thus decohering, right?
ooh ooh! I just came up with an awesome idea to make money! Tell people you have a quantum teleporter that will make a copy of them on another planet, but in reality, it doesn't do anything, but they can't prove it because they can't get to the other planet.
I have a question that I assume has a reasonable answer, just one I've never actually gotten confirmation on.
Once they've placed this object in a quantum state, how do they verify that it's "occupying two states at once?" Do they just measure it and repeat the process several times, and note that it's occasionally at 1 quanta, occasionally at 0, and from that infer that it was in a quantum state up until they measured it?
Second question, while I'm here - am I right in saying that according to the many-worlds interpretation, the universe branches when this object enters a quantum state, and we end up in one of two universes, one where the object has 1 quanta of energy and one where it has 0?
Trying to grok all this "quantum mechanics" stuff:)
The closest thing I recall hearing was the suggestion that if, a few decades from now, the LHC has still yet to be successfully turned on, we should assume that Many Worlds is true, we're in one of the lucky universes, and we'd better stop trying right away.:)
Many of these were amazing - the sheer scale of some of these images never fails to floor me.
The Saturn photo at the end, however, truly sent shivers down my spine at how beautiful it was. Naturally, I was crushed to find that the link to the larger version wasn't working.
Luckily, the copy on APoD works fine. I thought I'd post it here in case someone else, like me, was looking to make a desktop out of this amazing photo.
Yeah, yeah, but Google is a verb now. Try and compete with that, Ask.com.
... what?
Another article on the subject....
on
DNA Origami
·
· Score: 5, Funny
I don't think the article on the Discovery Channel website has any more information, but it does have my favorite quote on the subject..."In a typical reaction, he can make about 50 billion Smiley faces. I think this is the most concentrated happiness ever created."
"It's not for the casual gamer because it's impossible to play on your own. "
Huh? Click LFG in the social menu and in about 10 minutes normally(normally much less) you're grouped. What are you talking about?
I think you missed his point. Some people don't want to play in a group, regardless of whether or not they know the people involved. He was saying that DDO makes it essentially impossible to go on solo adventures, which is going to upset people that prefer that.
And yes, I suppose you could drag this into an argument of "why would you play a MMO if you just wanted to solo all of the time?" I'll leave that for the people who actually play MMOs to debate, though... >_>
When I first clicked on "Read More..." I hit a Slashdot error page that proclaimed "Nothing for you to see here. Move along."
I laughed for a moment, and then realized that I wasn't reading the shortest review of all time. Ah, well. It did sum up the impression I got from the full review fairly effectively.
One thing I'm constantly curious about is the degree to which "false color" should be taken. I understand that the purpose of false-coloring is to enhance details and make certain features visible that would otherwise be imperceptible (outside of the visible band of light, too faint, etc.) but I also want to know what these bodies would actually look like to the naked human eye.
Obviously, processed and filtered images are important, and very fascinating (case in point, many of the gorgeous images of the sun,) but it also diminishes the awe, in my mind, to look at a photo of a nebula or moon and realize, "this is not what it actually looks like."
Am I wrong in guessing that, had this been a Firefox exploit, this particular phase would have been worded more generously? Say, "There is no patch yet"?
I mean, surely something as severe as a JavaScript hack will be as high on Microsoft's list of priorities as it would be on the Mozilla team's...
"Consumers will see cool new features -- imagine four live pictures on a screen at once -- instant channel changes and more options for on-demand video rentals, including high-definition content. Microsoft TV also merges phone services, so incoming messages, e-mail and caller ID can be displayed on users' television screens."
Comments: "Four pictures? What kind of idiots are they, who needs four pictures at once," "on-demand video rentals? great, another pipeline for Microsoft to start sucking money out of," "messages, email, and caller ID on my screen? too much clutter, Micro$oft!"
Now, imagine it with one key word changed.
"Consumers will see cool new features -- imagine four live pictures on a screen at once -- instant channel changes and more options for on-demand video rentals, including high-definition content. Apple TV also merges phone services, so incoming messages, e-mail and caller ID can be displayed on users' television screens."
Comments: "Four pictures? Hmm, can't say I'd use it myself but I can see people wanting this," "on-demand video rentals? good, they'll probably tie it in to iTunes so it can all go through one smooth source," "messages, email, and caller ID on my screen? leave it to Apple to find a clean, simple way to tie everything together in one package!"
Or even...
"Consumers will see cool new features -- imagine four live pictures on a screen at once -- instant channel changes and more options for on-demand video rentals, including high-definition content. Insert your favorite Linux distro here TV also merges phone services, so incoming messages, e-mail and caller ID can be displayed on users' television screens."
Comments: "Four pictures? all right, that's a good way to manage things," "on-demand video rentals? great, that's just what I need! I'll even stop pirating because the open-source community is finally getting in the action," "messages, email, and caller ID on my screen? so convenient! Why can't those hacks at Micro$oft come up with something like this?"
Hey, I'm having fun with this.
"Consumers will see cool new features -- imagine four live pictures on a screen at once -- instant channel changes and more options for on-demand video rentals, including high-definition content. SCO TV also merges phone services, so incoming messages, e-mail and caller ID can be displayed on users' television screens."
Comments:... well, I think we all know how this one will go.
And personally, I'd just like to add... four screens? Imagine a beowulf cluster...
Slashdot Mirror
Ouch. Okay, I admit it, it seemed clever at the time but in hindsight it may have been a bit mean-spirited.
Thanks, I had to read it a couple times, but that clarifies things (well, that plus remembering a few other items from my QED readings.)
Just to re-state it for my own edification, the gist of it is basically: There are ways to take a measurement on the object that, just going by classical physics, should return result A if the object has 1 quanta of energy, and result B if it has 0 quanta. However, instead the measurement returns result C, which shouldn't even be an option unless you describe the entire thing in quantum mechanics terms and A and B are interfering with one another.
A somewhat inaccurate metaphor would be hitting a cue ball on a pool table into one of three pockets. You're *only* hitting it from either the right or the left, so it should only sink into the right or left pocket, but under the right conditions, we instead see that it ends up in the middle pocket as if the right and left options had both happened and canceled each other out into a third option.
Regarding MWI, you've gone a bit out of my depth, but my understanding is that consciousness (as purely a process embedded within physics) has nothing to do with it any more than a collapsing building does.
Really? That seems unlikely to me... You can't see an object unless it's emitting photons, which automatically means it's being interfered with and thus decohering, right?
ooh ooh! I just came up with an awesome idea to make money! Tell people you have a quantum teleporter that will make a copy of them on another planet, but in reality, it doesn't do anything, but they can't prove it because they can't get to the other planet.
The preferred term is "going to heaven."
I have a question that I assume has a reasonable answer, just one I've never actually gotten confirmation on.
Once they've placed this object in a quantum state, how do they verify that it's "occupying two states at once?" Do they just measure it and repeat the process several times, and note that it's occasionally at 1 quanta, occasionally at 0, and from that infer that it was in a quantum state up until they measured it?
Second question, while I'm here - am I right in saying that according to the many-worlds interpretation, the universe branches when this object enters a quantum state, and we end up in one of two universes, one where the object has 1 quanta of energy and one where it has 0?
Trying to grok all this "quantum mechanics" stuff :)
The closest thing I recall hearing was the suggestion that if, a few decades from now, the LHC has still yet to be successfully turned on, we should assume that Many Worlds is true, we're in one of the lucky universes, and we'd better stop trying right away. :)
Back around 9/11, my sister found a news article talking about how an airplane had hit "The Pentagon, a hexagonal-shaped building..."
This is the Lucasfilm datacenter. That number finds its way into all sorts of Lucas-related material.
...shaking sticks at consoles is exactly what the Wii is all about.
Especially from someone who isn't a lawyer?
Many of these were amazing - the sheer scale of some of these images never fails to floor me. The Saturn photo at the end, however, truly sent shivers down my spine at how beautiful it was. Naturally, I was crushed to find that the link to the larger version wasn't working.
Luckily, the copy on APoD works fine. I thought I'd post it here in case someone else, like me, was looking to make a desktop out of this amazing photo.
...whales don't have much in the way of "knuckles."
Yeah, yeah, but Google is a verb now. Try and compete with that, Ask.com.
... what?
I don't think the article on the Discovery Channel website has any more information, but it does have my favorite quote on the subject..."In a typical reaction, he can make about 50 billion Smiley faces. I think this is the most concentrated happiness ever created."
"It's not for the casual gamer because it's impossible to play on your own. "
Huh? Click LFG in the social menu and in about 10 minutes normally(normally much less) you're grouped. What are you talking about?
I think you missed his point. Some people don't want to play in a group, regardless of whether or not they know the people involved. He was saying that DDO makes it essentially impossible to go on solo adventures, which is going to upset people that prefer that.
And yes, I suppose you could drag this into an argument of "why would you play a MMO if you just wanted to solo all of the time?" I'll leave that for the people who actually play MMOs to debate, though... >_>
Well, I don't know about the hyperdrive, but I clicked on the hyperlink in the article and I was immediately on page 2! Amazing!
All this review and no mention of playing on Live.
Unless you count the two paragraphs all about online play.
When I first clicked on "Read More..." I hit a Slashdot error page that proclaimed "Nothing for you to see here. Move along."
I laughed for a moment, and then realized that I wasn't reading the shortest review of all time. Ah, well. It did sum up the impression I got from the full review fairly effectively.
...but Qui-Gon does die and then return from the dead, bringing with him the promise of immortality...
Okay, I give up, I no longer have any idea who's supposed to represent Jesus in the Star Wars movies. Too many conflicting allegories...
One thing I'm constantly curious about is the degree to which "false color" should be taken. I understand that the purpose of false-coloring is to enhance details and make certain features visible that would otherwise be imperceptible (outside of the visible band of light, too faint, etc.) but I also want to know what these bodies would actually look like to the naked human eye.
Obviously, processed and filtered images are important, and very fascinating (case in point, many of the gorgeous images of the sun,) but it also diminishes the awe, in my mind, to look at a photo of a nebula or moon and realize, "this is not what it actually looks like."
"There is no patch,"
Am I wrong in guessing that, had this been a Firefox exploit, this particular phase would have been worded more generously? Say, "There is no patch yet"?
I mean, surely something as severe as a JavaScript hack will be as high on Microsoft's list of priorities as it would be on the Mozilla team's...
Slashdot Comments Random Sampling
... well, I think we all know how this one will go.
"Consumers will see cool new features -- imagine four live pictures on a screen at once -- instant channel changes and more options for on-demand video rentals, including high-definition content. Microsoft TV also merges phone services, so incoming messages, e-mail and caller ID can be displayed on users' television screens."
Comments: "Four pictures? What kind of idiots are they, who needs four pictures at once," "on-demand video rentals? great, another pipeline for Microsoft to start sucking money out of," "messages, email, and caller ID on my screen? too much clutter, Micro$oft!"
Now, imagine it with one key word changed.
"Consumers will see cool new features -- imagine four live pictures on a screen at once -- instant channel changes and more options for on-demand video rentals, including high-definition content. Apple TV also merges phone services, so incoming messages, e-mail and caller ID can be displayed on users' television screens."
Comments: "Four pictures? Hmm, can't say I'd use it myself but I can see people wanting this," "on-demand video rentals? good, they'll probably tie it in to iTunes so it can all go through one smooth source," "messages, email, and caller ID on my screen? leave it to Apple to find a clean, simple way to tie everything together in one package!"
Or even...
"Consumers will see cool new features -- imagine four live pictures on a screen at once -- instant channel changes and more options for on-demand video rentals, including high-definition content. Insert your favorite Linux distro here TV also merges phone services, so incoming messages, e-mail and caller ID can be displayed on users' television screens."
Comments: "Four pictures? all right, that's a good way to manage things," "on-demand video rentals? great, that's just what I need! I'll even stop pirating because the open-source community is finally getting in the action," "messages, email, and caller ID on my screen? so convenient! Why can't those hacks at Micro$oft come up with something like this?"
Hey, I'm having fun with this.
"Consumers will see cool new features -- imagine four live pictures on a screen at once -- instant channel changes and more options for on-demand video rentals, including high-definition content. SCO TV also merges phone services, so incoming messages, e-mail and caller ID can be displayed on users' television screens."
Comments:
And personally, I'd just like to add... four screens? Imagine a beowulf cluster...
Environmentally "sound."
:D
You win.
They must be creatively worn out by now after innovating hard enough to invent the remote control.