I'd love to run a simulation in MATLAB, download torrents, listen to music and play games at the same time. Today I can't, without noticeable slowdown.
I didn't have the issue of storing the password in mind when I wrote my answer. I don't know if there is any really good method for tackling this problem. I would imagine that storing a picture password would be identical to storing a text one from a security perspective (regardless of if it's the weights of a neural network, an XML table, or something else).
However, that doesn't seem to be what this method is adressing. The main points appear to be that a picture password is much harder to brute force or (probably) guess than a text one.
I'd imagine a neural network would be trained to recognise the drawing. Even if you draw a little wrong, you will get the same output from the network (e.g. "Access granted").
That sounds strange. I would think that if you know the position of an electron, e.g. "in stream one", it can't be position-entangled with an electron you know is in stream two. In other words, measuring the position of one electron shouldn't give any new information, because you already know where it is, e.g. you have no superposition of waves to break down. Or am I misunderstanding you?
Well, in order for a characteristic to be entangled, there must be a superposition of the two wavefunctions. If you have a stream with position-entangled electron pairs AB, you can't make the A:s go to the left and the B:s to the right without losing entanglement, because then you have broken down the wavefunction, and defined the position of the A:s as "to the left" and the B:s as "to the right".
Maybe by "energetic", they mean "containing energy"...
...which would also be rather dumb, because a photon containing no energy wouldn't be a photon (well, infinite wavelength... there must be some law of nature drawing a line there).
You yourself say that "light" can mean (1) visible EM radiation, and (2) EM radiation. Thus, saying microwave radiation is "light" is correct. Anyway, the speed limit is the same, so in this context it doesn't matter at all.
Simplified, when you have two entangled electrons and measure the spin along an axis of the first, the second one immediately takes on the opposite spin of the first.
But you don't know what spin you are going to get by measuring the electron; because it is made of two entangled wavefunctions it's pure chance which one is going to show up. Thus, you have no control over which spin the second electron has, and thus you can't transmit any information using this phenomena.
However, you DO know the spin of the second electron, a fact that can be used. For example, you can create potentially unbreakable ciphers using Quantum Cryptography.
Am I mistaken, or is it the old group velocity vs. velocity error again? One thinks it's about time the quantum physicists learn basic wave mechanics, especially as various scientists have made similarly incorrect faster-than-light claims several times now.
It will be a long time before battery packs small enough to carry are powerful enough to power a laser capable of doing more than damage people's eyesight.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't understand. Could you use a car analogy?
Mod parent up for plausible explanation.
You may want to switch of the rapid fire-mode for your "."-key.
I'd love to run a simulation in MATLAB, download torrents, listen to music and play games at the same time. Today I can't, without noticeable slowdown.
A lot of links to useless pages will clutter the articles down and making it harder to find information that is more likely to be relevant.
Whoosh.
Wait, that should only be used if the original joke was funny. My bad.
In other words, you are accelerating at a maximum rate of 0.000181092593 m/s^2. Good luck getting anywhere. (-:
I didn't have the issue of storing the password in mind when I wrote my answer. I don't know if there is any really good method for tackling this problem. I would imagine that storing a picture password would be identical to storing a text one from a security perspective (regardless of if it's the weights of a neural network, an XML table, or something else).
However, that doesn't seem to be what this method is adressing. The main points appear to be that a picture password is much harder to brute force or (probably) guess than a text one.
It's just a really small picture.
I'd imagine a neural network would be trained to recognise the drawing. Even if you draw a little wrong, you will get the same output from the network (e.g. "Access granted").
Oh great. A "how many slashdot jokes can we fit in a series of subsequent replies"-competition.
Yes. Did you understand what you just read?
Crap. Didn't get the link right. http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/08/21/dark.matter/index.html
I agree with the GP that you really have been living under a rock. Dark matter exists.
Welcome back to reality. A cup of tea?
Kind of the same genre though. Always something.
Nope. It's like radio, except from now on you can select the songs you want to hear yourself. Viva la Revolution!
If you still want to listen, just use one of the free proxy servers on the net.
For example: Pandora Proxy
That sounds strange. I would think that if you know the position of an electron, e.g. "in stream one", it can't be position-entangled with an electron you know is in stream two. In other words, measuring the position of one electron shouldn't give any new information, because you already know where it is, e.g. you have no superposition of waves to break down. Or am I misunderstanding you?
Do you have a link to the paper you mentioned?
Well, in order for a characteristic to be entangled, there must be a superposition of the two wavefunctions. If you have a stream with position-entangled electron pairs AB, you can't make the A:s go to the left and the B:s to the right without losing entanglement, because then you have broken down the wavefunction, and defined the position of the A:s as "to the left" and the B:s as "to the right".
Maybe by "energetic", they mean "containing energy"...
...which would also be rather dumb, because a photon containing no energy wouldn't be a photon (well, infinite wavelength... there must be some law of nature drawing a line there).
You yourself say that "light" can mean (1) visible EM radiation, and (2) EM radiation. Thus, saying microwave radiation is "light" is correct. Anyway, the speed limit is the same, so in this context it doesn't matter at all.
You're thinking of the EPR Paradox.
Simplified, when you have two entangled electrons and measure the spin along an axis of the first, the second one immediately takes on the opposite spin of the first.
But you don't know what spin you are going to get by measuring the electron; because it is made of two entangled wavefunctions it's pure chance which one is going to show up. Thus, you have no control over which spin the second electron has, and thus you can't transmit any information using this phenomena.
However, you DO know the spin of the second electron, a fact that can be used. For example, you can create potentially unbreakable ciphers using Quantum Cryptography.
Am I mistaken, or is it the old group velocity vs. velocity error again? One thinks it's about time the quantum physicists learn basic wave mechanics, especially as various scientists have made similarly incorrect faster-than-light claims several times now.
It will be a long time before battery packs small enough to carry are powerful enough to power a laser capable of doing more than damage people's eyesight.
Woosh!
Woosh!