Incompetence is rarely punished in government bureaucracy
Fixed that for you. Seriously, this is the number one reason (in my opinion) why government should be small, and not controlling every aspect of our lives, e.g. health care.
with it the ability to fool the average knowledgeable person has dropped dramatically.
You do realize that some of our greatest minds have been religious throughout human history? Of course that doesn't prove anything, other than the fact that your statement (or rather, what you are implying with it) is nonsense.
It is based in religious belief. I know that's not good enough for you, but I don't care. I'm not trying to convince you, I'm explaining my point of view. By all means, continue mocking my beliefs...
It means we need to come to terms with the fact that humans are animals as any, and experimentation is required.
No, no we don't. I'm sure I'll be modded troll or something, since this is atheist/., but I (and billions of other people) believe humanity was created by God, and we are inherently superior to animals. That of course does not mean animals are worthless; they are God's creations as well. But they are not people.
You're not getting (or intentionally ignoring) my point about the solar neutrino oscillations. This guy clearly either doesn't know what he's talking about, or for some reason isn't trying to convince any actual physicists. Either way, it means he shouldn't be taken seriously, regardless of what he's saying.
I have no opinion on the magnetics going on here. I was pointing our the crackpottery of the first paragraph of your link, and saying that the rest of what he has to say should be ignored based on that (that doesn't mean everything he says is false--if he says 1+1=2 that's still true).
Uh...between well-agreed upon scientific data and interpretation vs one guy's ranting website (who's not a physicist), I'm gonna go with the peer-reviewed literature. This claims to single-handedly see a gaping hole in solar neutrino oscillation experiments, that no physicist sees. That is just screaming CRACKPOT!
As far as the magnetic reconnection issue...well there's no reason to trust (or even read) anything a crackpot like this says.
Most single photon detectors are a reverse biased photodiode. When a photon strikes it, it creates an electron-hole pair, which then collide with other electrons creating more pairs, making an avalanche effect that results in a pulse, indicating a photon. After this pulse, there is some "dead time" before everything is settled down back to its original state. During this dead time, if a photon hits the detector it will not be detected. Typical dead time is about ~50 ns, limiting the device to about 20M counts/second.
Grover's algorithm is the "worst case" scenario in terms of how a quantum computer could search for the solution, but that doesn't mean a faster algorithm can't be found (i.e., Grover's algorithm could be used to factor large numbers, but Shor's algorithm is faster).
Also, and more importantly, AES is not public-key cryptography, so it can't be used to send encrypted information unless the two parties already have a shared key.
No, this is not correct. While it's true that if you put N qubits together in the correct superposition, you can make a state that is "equally spread out" over all 2^N possibilities, you cannot make the computer "favor" the correct one (at least not in the sense you are implying). Using Shor's algorithm you can factor a number in O((log N)^3), which is an exponential improvement to crack RSA. And yes, I am a physicist working on quantum computing.
I would very much like to find the publication of this, or least more details given by the authors if anyone can fine a link.
By the way, Deutsch is a well known physicist, not some crackpot. One of the first problems discovered to be theoretically sped up by a quantum computer is named after him (link).
The second half is already causing problems. When I applied for an REU (research experience for undergraduates) in physics a couple years ago, I noticed that all of the applications specifically said something like "women and minorities encouraged to apply". One of the programs I didn't get in to sent me a little card and asked me to fill out my sex and ethnicity, along with something like "please fill this out so we can make sure we're not making a mistake." They didn't say it quite like that, but did openly admit that their funding forced them to give advantageous consideration to women/minorities. Whether or not this actually changed the outcome of my acceptance I don't know, but still...
"I may not agree with what you're saying, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it!"
Of course, everyone has the right to speak freely. You do not, however, have the right to be heard. This student was trying to exercise the latter right which he did not have.
Slashdot Mirror
I think $826,000,000 will affect anyone's bottom line. Of course who knows what they'll actually end up paying...
Of course not. No one said the hardware would be free.
Incompetence is rarely punished in government bureaucracy
Fixed that for you. Seriously, this is the number one reason (in my opinion) why government should be small, and not controlling every aspect of our lives, e.g. health care.
with it the ability to fool the average knowledgeable person has dropped dramatically.
You do realize that some of our greatest minds have been religious throughout human history? Of course that doesn't prove anything, other than the fact that your statement (or rather, what you are implying with it) is nonsense.
It is based in religious belief. I know that's not good enough for you, but I don't care. I'm not trying to convince you, I'm explaining my point of view. By all means, continue mocking my beliefs...
It means we need to come to terms with the fact that humans are animals as any, and experimentation is required.
/., but I (and billions of other people) believe humanity was created by God, and we are inherently superior to animals. That of course does not mean animals are worthless; they are God's creations as well. But they are not people.
No, no we don't. I'm sure I'll be modded troll or something, since this is atheist
So the parts of the world that are developed and wealthy have a larger internet presence than the third world countries? I am shocked, shocked I say.
Ones I bought 6 months ago have a warm up period.
Not really. They're more expensive and have a "warm up" period. Though in terms of environmentally friendliness, I agree.
And the guy on the street corner saying the end is near might be right. Sometime a crackpot is just a crackpot.
You're not getting (or intentionally ignoring) my point about the solar neutrino oscillations. This guy clearly either doesn't know what he's talking about, or for some reason isn't trying to convince any actual physicists. Either way, it means he shouldn't be taken seriously, regardless of what he's saying.
I have no opinion on the magnetics going on here. I was pointing our the crackpottery of the first paragraph of your link, and saying that the rest of what he has to say should be ignored based on that (that doesn't mean everything he says is false--if he says 1+1=2 that's still true).
Uh...between well-agreed upon scientific data and interpretation vs one guy's ranting website (who's not a physicist), I'm gonna go with the peer-reviewed literature. This claims to single-handedly see a gaping hole in solar neutrino oscillation experiments, that no physicist sees. That is just screaming CRACKPOT!
As far as the magnetic reconnection issue...well there's no reason to trust (or even read) anything a crackpot like this says.
It's good to be in a well-funded research group :)
I don't think I did...did I say something wrong? Photomultiplier tubes are another type of single photon detector, but I was describing an APD.
Most single photon detectors are a reverse biased photodiode. When a photon strikes it, it creates an electron-hole pair, which then collide with other electrons creating more pairs, making an avalanche effect that results in a pulse, indicating a photon. After this pulse, there is some "dead time" before everything is settled down back to its original state. During this dead time, if a photon hits the detector it will not be detected. Typical dead time is about ~50 ns, limiting the device to about 20M counts/second.
Grover's algorithm is the "worst case" scenario in terms of how a quantum computer could search for the solution, but that doesn't mean a faster algorithm can't be found (i.e., Grover's algorithm could be used to factor large numbers, but Shor's algorithm is faster).
Also, and more importantly, AES is not public-key cryptography, so it can't be used to send encrypted information unless the two parties already have a shared key.
No, this is not correct. While it's true that if you put N qubits together in the correct superposition, you can make a state that is "equally spread out" over all 2^N possibilities, you cannot make the computer "favor" the correct one (at least not in the sense you are implying). Using Shor's algorithm you can factor a number in O((log N)^3), which is an exponential improvement to crack RSA. And yes, I am a physicist working on quantum computing.
I would very much like to find the publication of this, or least more details given by the authors if anyone can fine a link.
By the way, Deutsch is a well known physicist, not some crackpot. One of the first problems discovered to be theoretically sped up by a quantum computer is named after him (link).
Next up: the beef market has been terribly devastated by the popularity of McDonald's restaurants.
Well yeah. You think that's real meat they put in those things?
The second half is already causing problems. When I applied for an REU (research experience for undergraduates) in physics a couple years ago, I noticed that all of the applications specifically said something like "women and minorities encouraged to apply". One of the programs I didn't get in to sent me a little card and asked me to fill out my sex and ethnicity, along with something like "please fill this out so we can make sure we're not making a mistake." They didn't say it quite like that, but did openly admit that their funding forced them to give advantageous consideration to women/minorities. Whether or not this actually changed the outcome of my acceptance I don't know, but still...
"I may not agree with what you're saying, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it!"
Of course, everyone has the right to speak freely. You do not, however, have the right to be heard. This student was trying to exercise the latter right which he did not have.
Who cares what the entire field of climate science agrees on
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,176495.shtml
What I took away from your rant is you want people to believe man-made global warming is real so you can punish the evil corporations.
Very good points, what I would have posted if I weren't too lazy :)