Sending it as qbits again requires some classical channel.
The point is: there is no way around sending some information in a channel (or by a method) that transfers it with light speed at max. Thus quantum teleportation can not be used as a means of faster than light communication.
If you want to nitpick you can replace "classical channel" with "a means to transfer classical information (e.g. a pattern of ones and zeroes)". noting that for such an informaion transfer (a) no faster than light transfer is known and (b) FTL would imply violation of causality according to SRT.
My preferred SciFi authors are Iain M. Banks (Culture), C.J. Cherryh (Alliance, Chanur), David Brin (Uplift), Alan Dean Foster (Flinx, Spellsinger), Neal Stephenson. I like Stanislaw Lem and Arkadi and Boris Strugatzki for their unique style. Douglas Adams is a category for himself, as is Terry Pratchett. Films I very much liked are Bladerunner (after P.K. Dick) and Dune (Frank Herbert), Neuromancer (W. Gibson (Cyberpunk)), Enders Game (Orson Scott Card). I also like good fantasy, e.g. Mists of Avalon (Marion Zimmer-Bradley), Earthsea (Ursula.K. Le Guin).
And sure, there are lots of authors not mentioned since I don't have all day.
As evidenced above I really don't care if an author has a penis or a vagina, neither would I care if an author had both or neither. I don't care about an authors skin-, hair-, or eye-colour, ethnic background, lineage, weight or height.
What I care about is the story. Does it interest me, is it well told.
What I definitely don't want: Political correctness bullshit forced down my throat or a "quota" in my fiction.
The ghostbusters reboot debacle is an indicator, that I'm not the only one with that sentiment. And no, not wanting to be fed pc-bullshit has absolutely nothing to do with "misogyny", but very much with not wanting to be served a heap of pure political propaganda with the transparent intention to "educate" the audience.
There's no problem with fiction containing a "message", "1984", "Brave new world" and "Farenheit 451" are prime examples, but most SciFi includes a "vision" how society should or shouldn't be in the future. But it has to be put in a good, enjoyable story, leave me room to think for myself and avoid today's uptight pc bullshit.
The physicists chose to describe their system in a convenient coordinate system, and usually work with very simple systems as well, e.g. those that have only two states like qubits.
Sure one could work with more complex systems, atoms with higher spins or systems of multiple particles, but that would just make everything more complicated, when there's still much to learn from simple systems.
For those of us who don't know enough to really understand it, we can think of it like a cat.
You pull the cat's tail on one end, the cat meows on the other end. Quantum entanglement is exactly like that. Except there is no cat.
No it isn't, because that would mean you could transmit signals by means of quantum entanglement, which you can't.
It's more like: if you look at the lengthwise orientation of the cat and get to see the tail, then the nose must be on the other end and vice versa. But you also might want to look at the crosswise orientation of the cat, and if you get to see the left ear on your side, the right ear must be on the other side. Also the cat has the strange property, that if you know all about the lengthwise orientation you can't know anything at all about the crosswise orientation.
But then cats are strange anyway.
(The above is an old description of radio, often attributed to Einstein. Doesn't sound like Einstein's sense of humor, though.)
Radio is different from quantum entanglement, and for a radio electromagnetic waves replace the cat as signal transmission mechanism.
The question is: why make such an effort when Linux is already there and can be modified to your needs.
One reason may be, that there is something you want to do fundamentally different, so it's easier to start a new project than change the old one to your needs.
Another thing may be that they want to get rid of (L)GPL-Licensed parts in their OS, and that may well be the more important motive here.
It could even be a move to prepare for a proprietary branch (the sources for which they have complete copyrights, i.e. that didn't incorporate patches from outside, can always be licensed under an additional license) and in the long run have a completely closed source OS.
This is just wild speculations since IANAL, but it might be be interesting what lawyers make of the change in licensing.
... what he is doing is most impractical. There are much easier and cheaper methods to get that high or higher, from booking a commercial flight or climbing a mountain to using a weather balloon with a camera. But as a publicity stunt it has maximum effect: Headlines like "Mad man flies his steam powered rocket" will get a lot of attention.
Also the interviews are more about the rocket stuff and the flat earth stuff is just mentioned on the side. How and what he wants to prove isn't even discussed (if it was I didn't see it). So what he is doing is basically a rocket show and the flat earther stuff is just the garnish on top.
I enjoy the show but wouldn't wait for any scientific results from this.
In some cases testing such "edge cases" may also prove that certain aspects of a theory, how unintuitive they may sound, are necessary for an accurate model of reality. E.g. tests of the bell inequality show, that any theory that describes quantum phenomena must be a nonlocal one.
In quantum physics the approach of following the mathematical theory to its logical conclusion, how weird that may sound, has been quite successful. In any case such speculations make sense to test a theory and see where it leads to. Maybe it'll even lead to possible experimental tests of the theory (although I don't think humanity will have access to a black hole (specifically one that is big enough) to play around with.
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Paradoxon is a good example of following a theory (here quantum mechanics) to it's logical conclusion. Effectively the "paradoxon" exposes the nonlocality of quantum mechanics i.e. it implies "spooky actions at a distance", a picture that clashes with our classical world view. Based on this an experiment was thought up, a test of the "bell inequality". Basically any classical theory that preserves locality should always fulfil the bell inequality. OTOH quantum mechanics predicts a violation of the bell inequality in experiments specifically designed for that purpose. Such experiments then showed a violation of the inequality. This means, that a classical theory (which would include locality) can not explain those experimental results (which are predicted by quantum mechanics).
So the speculations of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen about the strange consequences of quantum mechanic theory led to a fundamental insight about the nature of reality, namely that there are aspects of it that can not be explained by a "classical" theory that includes locality.
So if one wants to test a mathematical description of reality one has to follow the mathematics to its logical conclusions and if possible test if these apply to the real world. Even if such a test is not possible it is often helpful to see what the implications of a mathematical model are. Maybe it leads to a better understanding, uncovers contradictions or shows that a theory is incomplete, but in some cases it can also lead to a deeper understanding of reality.
The first picture that came to my mind were some giant ice sheets covering Europe doing some strange kind of tectonics.
Btw. I'm German, in which both items are spelled "Europa", and it took a few seconds to remember the moon and that the continent would be spelled "Europe" in English.
Of course in terms of Greek mythology it all makes perfect sense...
From the article: He plans to go about a mile â" reaching an altitude of about 1,800 feet â" before pulling two parachutes.
One can easily get to that height (and much more) even in a small plane, providing much better controlled conditions for making photos or measurements. That could be hired for a few hundred bucks at most.
The definition of what is "Russian Propaganda" is pretty flexible, as has been sufficiently demonstrated e.g. in some controversies around the last US-election.
But surely Google engineers will know exactly where to draw the line. And since "Don't be evil" is their motto they can't go wrong, can they?
There is a measurable (e.g. in IQ-tests) quantity, let's call it intelligence, that is strongly correlated with e.g. income, the ability to perform cognitive tasks (other than filling out IQ tests), etc. One can then look at special kinds of intelligence, like linguistic intelligence but it is found that these are strongly correlated with some base quantity. Intelligence is not some internal variable that determines behaviour, it's a measure of cognitive ability.
The assumption, that these findings can be explained by anything as simple as "robust neuron connections" is nonsense, it's like trying to compare different CPUs only based on the electrical properties and type of semiconductor used. If you really want a better explanation, maybe take a look at recent research, otherwise you base your argument on your own ignorance.
Some people think, that the concept of individual (and different) intelligence is somehow "unfair", they don't want to accept reality since it doesn't fit their world view, especially since there are strong hints that it is hereditary.
One could as well claim that there is no such thing as body height and/or that this quantity has no connection at all with the ability to play major league basketball.
That it is easy to draw horror-scenes in syrupy sweet comic style has been known for long enough, a nice example of this is "Happy tree friends". Obviously such and similar content found it's way to the internet, including youtube.
And all this lengthy talk about "delamination of brand and content" indicates, that the author obviously slept through about two decades of availability for all kinds of combinations between well known comic characters with porn, splatter and whatnot.
And wohoo, algorithms can be tricked and there will always be "pranksters" to do that, see what they did to Microsofts Tay AI.
The internet is no Nursery. Being induced to follow a link to tubgirl or goatse (don't search for that if you haven't seen it, just trust me that you don't want to go down that road, what has been seen can not be unseen, you have been warned) is an instructive if unpleasant (for adults) experience. Applying small world theory / Six degrees of separation a few clicks should get you from (m)any place(s) in the internet to (almost) anywhere else. Sure, you can build a safe cul-de-sac, but only if you control all the exits and all the content that gets in it. The moment one starts from some google search all bets are off.
So don't let your five year old roam the internet unattended, you wouldn't let that kid stumble through some typical metropolis at night either.
So some Canadian parties claim a monopoly on "democratic" positions and want to ban anything and anyone contradicting their views.
The censoring is outsourced to private companies like Facebook to circumvent pesky anti-censoring laws. That has the additional benefit, that there is no constitutional oversight and no address for anyone wronged by out of hand censoring.
This authoritarian approach is justified with talk of "Fake-News" and "Hate-Speech", but what it comes down to is censoring of unwanted political viewpoints or even uncomfortable truths. A few hand picked extreme cases are presented to justify implementing censorship.
Here is a nice wired article, how Facebook "learned" to do "the right thing (TM)" ahead of German elections: https://www.wired.com/story/fa... In Germany a law threatening up to 50M fines to companies like Facebook was rushed through legislation just before elections. It's not hard to imagine how FB in response will crack down on anything deemed "politically incorrect".
And please spare me the "private companies can do as they like" drivel. Companies like Facebook and Google are nowadays at the hub of information flow. It's ridiculous to make a big deal about the alleged "Russians" influence on public opinion and elections by means of RT and a few bots, but turn a blind eye when FB or google push a political agenda (either of their own accord or because they are instrumentalized by political parties).
Slashdot Mirror
ed!
A piece of string wouldn't work, since the path is more than half way around the globe.
Sending it as qbits again requires some classical channel.
The point is: there is no way around sending some information in a channel (or by a method) that transfers it with light speed at max. Thus quantum teleportation can not be used as a means of faster than light communication.
If you want to nitpick you can replace "classical channel" with "a means to transfer classical information (e.g. a pattern of ones and zeroes)". noting that for such an informaion transfer (a) no faster than light transfer is known and (b) FTL would imply violation of causality according to SRT.
My preferred SciFi authors are Iain M. Banks (Culture), C.J. Cherryh (Alliance, Chanur), David Brin (Uplift), Alan Dean Foster (Flinx, Spellsinger), Neal Stephenson. I like Stanislaw Lem and Arkadi and Boris Strugatzki for their unique style. Douglas Adams is a category for himself, as is Terry Pratchett. Films I very much liked are Bladerunner (after P.K. Dick) and Dune (Frank Herbert), Neuromancer (W. Gibson (Cyberpunk)), Enders Game (Orson Scott Card). I also like good fantasy, e.g. Mists of Avalon (Marion Zimmer-Bradley), Earthsea (Ursula .K. Le Guin).
And sure, there are lots of authors not mentioned since I don't have all day.
As evidenced above I really don't care if an author has a penis or a vagina, neither would I care if an author had both or neither. I don't care about an authors skin-, hair-, or eye-colour, ethnic background, lineage, weight or height.
What I care about is the story. Does it interest me, is it well told.
What I definitely don't want: Political correctness bullshit forced down my throat or a "quota" in my fiction.
The ghostbusters reboot debacle is an indicator, that I'm not the only one with that sentiment. And no, not wanting to be fed pc-bullshit has absolutely nothing to do with "misogyny", but very much with not wanting to be served a heap of pure political propaganda with the transparent intention to "educate" the audience.
There's no problem with fiction containing a "message", "1984", "Brave new world" and "Farenheit 451" are prime examples, but most SciFi includes a "vision" how society should or shouldn't be in the future. But it has to be put in a good, enjoyable story, leave me room to think for myself and avoid today's uptight pc bullshit.
The physicists chose to describe their system in a convenient coordinate system, and usually work with very simple systems as well, e.g. those that have only two states like qubits.
Sure one could work with more complex systems, atoms with higher spins or systems of multiple particles, but that would just make everything more complicated, when there's still much to learn from simple systems.
Quantum teleportation requires a "classical" channel.
This is also described in the WP-Article. I wonder if you really need to transfer 2 classical bits per qubit though.
There are some quantum computer simulators out there with which one can "simulate" quantum teleportation.
E.g. http://algassert.com/quirk has a ready teleportation example under "Menu" with which one can play around.
For those of us who don't know enough to really understand it, we can think of it like a cat.
You pull the cat's tail on one end, the cat meows on the other end. Quantum entanglement is exactly like that. Except there is no cat.
No it isn't, because that would mean you could transmit signals by means of quantum entanglement, which you can't.
It's more like: if you look at the lengthwise orientation of the cat and get to see the tail, then the nose must be on the other end and vice versa. But you also might want to look at the crosswise orientation of the cat, and if you get to see the left ear on your side, the right ear must be on the other side. Also the cat has the strange property, that if you know all about the lengthwise orientation you can't know anything at all about the crosswise orientation.
But then cats are strange anyway.
(The above is an old description of radio, often attributed to Einstein. Doesn't sound like Einstein's sense of humor, though.)
Radio is different from quantum entanglement, and for a radio electromagnetic waves replace the cat as signal transmission mechanism.
The humor sounds more like Feynman.
And in that context "massive" probably just means "has mass", i.e. inertia is of central importance.
Apparently the slashdot submitter misinterpreted "massive" to implicate scale as in "really heavy".
Of course 10^12 Atoms is quite a step up from single atoms or simple molecules.
I mean, if genetics isn't a game of chance, then what is?
Their explanation is, that this was a PR-Stunt.
Make of it what you will.
The question is: why make such an effort when Linux is already there and can be modified to your needs.
One reason may be, that there is something you want to do fundamentally different, so it's easier to start a new project than change the old one to your needs.
Another thing may be that they want to get rid of (L)GPL-Licensed parts in their OS, and that may well be the more important motive here.
See here how the android website argues for other licenses than LGPL for User space apps:
https://source.android.com/set...
It could even be a move to prepare for a proprietary branch (the sources for which they have complete copyrights, i.e. that didn't incorporate patches from outside, can always be licensed under an additional license) and in the long run have a completely closed source OS.
This is just wild speculations since IANAL, but it might be be interesting what lawyers make of the change in licensing.
... what he is doing is most impractical. There are much easier and cheaper methods to get that high or higher, from booking a commercial flight or climbing a mountain to using a weather balloon with a camera. But as a publicity stunt it has maximum effect: Headlines like "Mad man flies his steam powered rocket" will get a lot of attention.
Also the interviews are more about the rocket stuff and the flat earth stuff is just mentioned on the side. How and what he wants to prove isn't even discussed (if it was I didn't see it). So what he is doing is basically a rocket show and the flat earther stuff is just the garnish on top.
I enjoy the show but wouldn't wait for any scientific results from this.
In some cases testing such "edge cases" may also prove that certain aspects of a theory, how unintuitive they may sound, are necessary for an accurate model of reality. E.g. tests of the bell inequality show, that any theory that describes quantum phenomena must be a nonlocal one.
In quantum physics the approach of following the mathematical theory to its logical conclusion, how weird that may sound, has been quite successful. In any case such speculations make sense to test a theory and see where it leads to. Maybe it'll even lead to possible experimental tests of the theory (although I don't think humanity will have access to a black hole (specifically one that is big enough) to play around with.
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Paradoxon is a good example of following a theory (here quantum mechanics) to it's logical conclusion. Effectively the "paradoxon" exposes the nonlocality of quantum mechanics i.e. it implies "spooky actions at a distance", a picture that clashes with our classical world view. Based on this an experiment was thought up, a test of the "bell inequality". Basically any classical theory that preserves locality should always fulfil the bell inequality. OTOH quantum mechanics predicts a violation of the bell inequality in experiments specifically designed for that purpose. Such experiments then showed a violation of the inequality. This means, that a classical theory (which would include locality) can not explain those experimental results (which are predicted by quantum mechanics).
So the speculations of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen about the strange consequences of quantum mechanic theory led to a fundamental insight about the nature of reality, namely that there are aspects of it that can not be explained by a "classical" theory that includes locality.
So if one wants to test a mathematical description of reality one has to follow the mathematics to its logical conclusions and if possible test if these apply to the real world. Even if such a test is not possible it is often helpful to see what the implications of a mathematical model are. Maybe it leads to a better understanding, uncovers contradictions or shows that a theory is incomplete, but in some cases it can also lead to a deeper understanding of reality.
... no one should use products or services from Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Google, Facebook, ...
This recommendation smacks of good old protectionism, and if the US want to play it that way I'm sure other countries will follow suit.
Everyone pays how much he wants, only if someone makes specific promises (and why should anyone do so?) he will be held to that.
Oh wait, for rich people and big corporations it's exactly like that!
The first picture that came to my mind were some giant ice sheets covering Europe doing some strange kind of tectonics.
Btw. I'm German, in which both items are spelled "Europa", and it took a few seconds to remember the moon and that the continent would be spelled "Europe" in English.
Of course in terms of Greek mythology it all makes perfect sense ...
... so obviously one has to pay more to get a laptop less the Intel Management Engine.
It makes total sense.
From the article:
He plans to go about a mile â" reaching an altitude of about 1,800 feet â" before pulling two parachutes.
One can easily get to that height (and much more) even in a small plane, providing much better controlled conditions for making photos or measurements. That could be hired for a few hundred bucks at most.
Even cheaper: climb a mountain.
The definition of what is "Russian Propaganda" is pretty flexible, as has been sufficiently demonstrated e.g. in some controversies around the last US-election.
But surely Google engineers will know exactly where to draw the line.
And since "Don't be evil" is their motto they can't go wrong, can they?
... and the totalitarian climate that comes with it.
There is a measurable (e.g. in IQ-tests) quantity, let's call it intelligence, that is strongly correlated with e.g. income, the ability to perform cognitive tasks (other than filling out IQ tests), etc. One can then look at special kinds of intelligence, like linguistic intelligence but it is found that these are strongly correlated with some base quantity. Intelligence is not some internal variable that determines behaviour, it's a measure of cognitive ability.
The assumption, that these findings can be explained by anything as simple as "robust neuron connections" is nonsense, it's like trying to compare different CPUs only based on the electrical properties and type of semiconductor used. If you really want a better explanation, maybe take a look at recent research, otherwise you base your argument on your own ignorance.
Some people think, that the concept of individual (and different) intelligence is somehow "unfair", they don't want to accept reality since it doesn't fit their world view, especially since there are strong hints that it is hereditary.
One could as well claim that there is no such thing as body height and/or that this quantity has no connection at all with the ability to play major league basketball.
That it is easy to draw horror-scenes in syrupy sweet comic style has been known for long enough, a nice example of this is "Happy tree friends". Obviously such and similar content found it's way to the internet, including youtube.
And all this lengthy talk about "delamination of brand and content" indicates, that the author obviously slept through about two decades of availability for all kinds of combinations between well known comic characters with porn, splatter and whatnot.
And wohoo, algorithms can be tricked and there will always be "pranksters" to do that, see what they did to Microsofts Tay AI.
The internet is no Nursery. Being induced to follow a link to tubgirl or goatse (don't search for that if you haven't seen it, just trust me that you don't want to go down that road, what has been seen can not be unseen, you have been warned) is an instructive if unpleasant (for adults) experience. Applying small world theory / Six degrees of separation a few clicks should get you from (m)any place(s) in the internet to (almost) anywhere else. Sure, you can build a safe cul-de-sac, but only if you control all the exits and all the content that gets in it. The moment one starts from some google search all bets are off.
So don't let your five year old roam the internet unattended, you wouldn't let that kid stumble through some typical metropolis at night either.
So some Canadian parties claim a monopoly on "democratic" positions and want to ban anything and anyone contradicting their views.
The censoring is outsourced to private companies like Facebook to circumvent pesky anti-censoring laws. That has the additional benefit, that there is no constitutional oversight and no address for anyone wronged by out of hand censoring.
This authoritarian approach is justified with talk of "Fake-News" and "Hate-Speech", but what it comes down to is censoring of unwanted political viewpoints or even uncomfortable truths. A few hand picked extreme cases are presented to justify implementing censorship.
Here is a nice wired article, how Facebook "learned" to do "the right thing (TM)" ahead of German elections:
https://www.wired.com/story/fa...
In Germany a law threatening up to 50M fines to companies like Facebook was rushed through legislation just before elections. It's not hard to imagine how FB in response will crack down on anything deemed "politically incorrect".
And please spare me the "private companies can do as they like" drivel. Companies like Facebook and Google are nowadays at the hub of information flow. It's ridiculous to make a big deal about the alleged "Russians" influence on public opinion and elections by means of RT and a few bots, but turn a blind eye when FB or google push a political agenda (either of their own accord or because they are instrumentalized by political parties).
The protesters aren't phony.
According to the article these "Russian Troll factories" supported real protesters.