|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 23, 2024 13:43:31 GMT
"Israeli owned MSM"? Examples please... Are you being serious? … 😂🤣… just about all of it is funded and controlled by Jewish bankers. Hollywood, Silicon Valley Internet propaganda, Sky Mudoch industries, Bloomberg, the BBC (covertly managed), Lord Dacre owner of the Mail … who I don’t think is the worst misinformant by a long chalk … I like the D.Mail … in a sort of sado-masochistic way … The Guardian too. … with a bit of extra self-flagilation.😋 Gawd .. go back to college and follow the money … this is an embarrassing question to ask! She is talking shit there. I mean she is being totally negative whilst her examples cherry-pick the scam startups which we all know about anyway. She's not picking a fight with the ones who are serious, because for one I doubt she has the expertise. This area Scott AAronson deals with is a very specialist branch of maths to do with Turing machines and the quantum Turing machine. He is a world-leading expert, so I presented you a proper talented person, and all I got back was a load of diatribe from a woman who seems to have given up on science and become a popular writer on the subject, and very hypocritically misleading the ones who don't know any better. So whose funding Scott … is it people we’ve grown to distrust since 9/11? So Hossenfelder is not qualified and … “Talking shit?” … Or are you just upset another scientific red herring that engineers ‘colossal defunding’ of tax-payers … is being adroitly dismantled and exposed?? … popular she might be … but Sabrina Hossenfelder is more than qualified: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabine_Hossenfelder… and with the background reading and research to have a forthright opinion on this. Naturally certain factions with their snouts in this trough won’t like it. … your failure to speak out enough about the harm and inefficacy of the vaccine programme on this Forum …makes me doubt some of your motivations sometimes … Aaronson appears a shady entity … and isn’t saying anything in your video that suggests he will put his wallet in this ring … and back it all the way. The big issue is when will the Chinese decide to ‘opt out’ and focus money and resources on more beneficial branches of science that really benefits their TRIBE and it’s People. When did British scientists devote 99% of their projects and funding to serving indigenous British Public interests?? … We British People are sick of being scammed by science white elephant projects like CERN …time for change at the top … and who dishes out scientific grant money. Quantum Computing ISN’T a pressing priority now … or in the foreseeable future … it’s currently a scammers paradise … You mathematical hobbyists can pursue it in your spare time, with your own private funding … we tax-payers cannot see any REAL benefits … so WE are opting OUT … and will VOTE OUT any Administrations that pursue this and other white elephant projects like CERN and H2S …. so just understand … … the People will decide … when we get FULL transparency … and true representation in OUR Parliament. … and the People’s needs are satisfied … not the needs of an elite who think they know what’s best for us. Sabrina is our girl … because she delivers a degree of transparency … removes the bullshit, smoke and mirrors scientists and Globalists use as COMMON CURRENCY. ************************ P.S. ..Will check out your video drop when I get a chance. She is not more qualified. She has not studied this area at all and was involved in some other area of physics. The thing is that if she were any good she would still be working in research, not popular science writing, which is what she does now. In fact what she says is a complete distraction and basically wrong and misleading.
The thing is I can see the value in Scott's work, just as I see value in the work of Peter Shor. They have both made notable advances in science, unlike your guide.
As for funding, well that is total hypocrisy. The work she did uses very expensive apparatus, but this work is mostly on the blackboard. I think you are behaving like a bull in a china shop, just randomly smashing things up without seeing the finer distinctions.
I think you are in danger of mistaking bullshit for good and good for bullshit. You did not learn anything from that rant of hers. Scott is a good teacher. I learnt stuff in his presentations. It is a hard subject, but I came away better informed than where I started. I just wish you would have some trust in what I'm saying. I never post anyone talking shit. I find the best examples and you just dismiss them by being misled b a popular writer of little conscience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jan 23, 2024 13:47:12 GMT
Dub, the Ukrainians are fighting against fascists they are lead by a Jew, they are not Nazis.
They are fighting to remain a democracy.
You are supporting a fascist dictatorship and illegal war.
Anyway, what has your pro war pro dictatorship post got to do with computational complexity?
Nothing.
You've dragged another thread off topic.
Care to comment on computational complexity, quantum computing etc?
Quantum states can be more than 0/1 and therefore a lot more information can be encoded.
A quantum computer does not necessarily have to be digital.
It is even possible that a quantum computer could mimic a living brain.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 23, 2024 14:38:22 GMT
There is a third chap worth a mention here. Our very own University of Oxford has made advances in the subject as well, with quantum error correction. The problem we are trying to solve here is a quantum supposition state can degenerate back to the world of classical operation due to the effects of thermal noise and other inaccuracies. This problem is known as decoherence.
You can read the rest of Andrew Steane's work here.
It uses a branch of mathematics called group theory. This is the same group theory that is used to create the standard model of fundamental particles described by the SU(2) group and the SU(3) group. Mathematicians will be pleased here as this is one of the few real applications of a piece of mathematical theory which is so often accused of having no practical applications.
You see this is it. Someone might find some totally theoretical piece of maths and then years or sometimes centuries later it is the exact tool you need to fix your problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Jan 24, 2024 21:11:08 GMT
At the end of the video it shows the various ways of creating boson sampling by the different research groups. It's interesting to note the original paper Aaronson publishes on boson sampling has some hundred pages of formal mathematical proof that boson sampling is hard! I finally got time and watched the above video and took screen shots of key moments where this expert was describing in overview what was possible and impossible, within this field.    There are SERIOUS problems highlighted in these screenshots … that suggest QC’s could be a serious waste of time and resources! (See next post for more screen shots of the above video) What concerns me is when scientists (mathematicians/physicists especially) wrap things up in unnecessary ‘complexity’ to the degree even experts within the field claim to be too dumb to understand what is going on … this makes me smell a rat … and a snake oil salesman. Yes, Aaronson might be a v.bright mathematician at the cutting edge of this field … but so was Einstein … when he posited his Theory of Relativity … most people struggled to grasp a concept that TIME could be elastic … when most of the Public saw TIME as just a human concept … that had no physicality at all. We still persist in that idea … yet we nod sagely because scientists still bully us 100 years later they built atomic clock accurate enough to measure this tiny incremental phenomenon … Time elasticity … We think they built clocks that measured minute changes in gravity and other forces of the Universe likely to f. up an atomic clocks accuracy !… so here we are … still feeling duped. With CERN, again promises were made, “give us billions£££€€€ and we will deliver the key to existence … the elemental particles that will crack the nut of everything … the claims are always exaggerated bullshit … but we, the Public, again defunded and living in more poverty struggle than before …. were duped again by another set of ‘so called “geniuses” … CON MEN is another word for them. Along comes Aaronson … like Einstein … smooth, slick, he weaves his spell, doubles down on the ‘complexity’ and his acolytes pretend to understand it … jump aboard the hype … even though he is telling people which bits are possible, useful, impossible, conceptual … and experimentally, bits are practically insoluble. (see your OP vid) … it’s clear QC is theoretically complex, experimentally expensive and complex at every stage of the process … just at the point the problems seemed insurmountable … and investors were jumping off the hype train … up pops Aaronson with some incredible twist, a short cut to a miracle solution … a Holy Grail moment that sucks everyone back in. Too good to be true?? … a classic snake oil salesman’s hook to get people reaching for their wallets again?? … my intuition smells a rat. Why? …. You only need one element in a new device that doesn’t work … and will never practically EVER work … (too expensive, too big, too prone to failure) … for a Project to fail … be a TOTAL white elephant waste of money. Quantum Computing has a few elements that could be “do or die” … “bank or bust”. Some people need to crawl out of their mathematical Alice in Wonderland rabbit holes for just a minute … and look at those KEY elements VERY CAREFULLY before they push on. If just one element is insurmountable … step out this building … it’s WTC 7 … a Zionist structure that is going to collapse. I don’t know why this talented tribe play these GAMES … sad really. *************** So as a dumb outsider, looking at the overview(you invited us to comment, so here we are) … what smells a bit fishy here that Sabrina Hossenfelder pointed a finger at??🤔 A number of things. You said: Having listened to another talk by this chap it turns out that to run the calculation of the matrix for 40 photons was verified to be correct, but it cost the Chinese $1/2 m to buy the supercomputer time to run it. They have now demonstrated it with 70 photons which is said to have 10^33 parameters. He mentioned the complexity can be reduced to 2^N because as I understand it the matrix is like a Hadamard matrix where you can think of it like for every photon there is an extra dimension added, so the matrix gets very large very fast. The puzzle I have is from his own figures the complexity is grater than 2^N, but for the sake of argument we know it would be greater than 2^30 x $1/2m to run it on a super computer. On the one hand it is rather incredible a set up in a lab with a load of light beams can outperform the best computers we have by such a large amount, but the problem is the problem it solves is not that useful to us. It's not the sort of problem we can incorporate into many computations like we could with say a hardware multiplier where multiplying numbers is the bread and butter of computer work.
To date there have only been two algorithms which are significant in quantum computing, which are the Shor's Algorithm and Grover's algorithm, both of which you could say are more useful in real life computer engineering, but anyway, this is another of this kind to add to the collection. This is like proof of concept. We hope that by fiddling around with something that does work and is not that useful, it may show us the way to create more quantum algorithms and systems. We also have the quantum annealing trick which is far more of a universal quantum computer, but is engineered in a completely different way. Why spend billions … when the problems this thing solves … are not that useful to us … and many can be done using a super computer … WHICH HAS A MEMORY THAT STORES THE RESULTS FOR ANALYSIS Is it true QC’s don’t have a built in memory ?? That stores it’s results? … Wouldn’t that be essential? Useful? DD said: “Sabrina is our girl … because she delivers a degree of transparency … removes the bullshit, smoke and mirrors scientists and Globalists use as COMMON CURRENCY”. ************************ She is not more qualified. She has not studied this area at all and was involved in some other area of physics. The thing is that if she were any good she would still be working in research, not popular science writing, which is what she does now. In fact what she says is a complete distraction and basically wrong and misleading. The thing is I can see the value in Scott's work, just as I see value in the work of Peter Shor. They have both made notable advances in science, unlike your guide. As for funding, well that is total hypocrisy. The work she did uses very expensive apparatus, but this work is mostly on the blackboard. I think you are behaving like a bull in a china shop, just randomly smashing things up without seeing the finer distinctions. I think you are in danger of mistaking bullshit for good and good for bullshit. You did not learn anything from that rant of hers. Scott is a good teacher. I learnt stuff in his presentations. It is a hard subject, but I came away better informed than where I started. I just wish you would have some trust in what I'm saying. I never post anyone talking shit. I find the best examples and you just dismiss them by being misled b a popular writer of little conscience. Some scientists slag off popular science educators on Youtube … claiming they are popularist, not qualified to comment, sold out etc. Some slag Sabrina, Michio Kaku, Thyssen etc and want to keep their ideas hidden buried deep in complex peer-reviewed papers … obscured from clear Public understanding. There view is “give us your f. money … you thick proles … and leave us alone to squander it in this comfortable career … while you toil like slaves in shit”. ….Well the thick slaves are interested … and want to see their money spent on worthwhile projects that give a valuable return for Society … that makes that drudgery working at that Tesco checkout all worth it. It sickens us to see billions spent on Big Bang Theory … only for the Roger Penrose's, Brian Cox’s and many many others … who have made fortunes touring their ideas on lucrative lecture circuits, peddling their books, Theories (Einstein too) … late on in their careers they finally admit … despite insisting their complex MATHS and PROOFS were right again and again …. now finally pure observation/experimentation concludes … they were WRONG. YES, WRONG ABOUT BIG BANG … JWST confirmed WRONG. …. But we don’t get a REFUND … for that wasted jaunt down a maze of deception for decades … we don’t get compensation for being sold a ‘pup’ … FAKE GOODS. When will scientists get sued for their mistakes? … Sued for vaccine harm?? … Sued for leading us up the garden path?? These elitist ‘criminals/murderers’ (in the eyes of some who lost loved ones to vaccine harm) … clearly don’t do compensation. As the Public gets better educated across the board … the snake oil salesmen in science have to really up the mathematical complexity. Aaronson is a master of that. He comes across as a nice guy … and a non-bullshitter to me … like Einstein …. and ok … the Google Sycamore project has made great advances … but … … but then they suddenly drop in the ‘magical’ buzz words to suck the gullible politicians in …. “Quantum Computing could cure cancer, Alzheimers, genetic abnormalities etc etc. … then we get suspicious there’s something fishy going on here. |
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Jan 24, 2024 21:29:02 GMT
More reasons to be cautious …    …. these tie in with my points about your second video. … Will try and watch and Comment on your third video shortly … the work of Shor and Stean. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 26, 2024 16:53:14 GMT
By the way, stay clear of Michio Kaku. He is just the kind you complain about, as in full of bullshit and wrong about most things. He got mixed up with string theory, which has since been seen as a blind alley, but he staked his reputation on it. Shor though is a very smart man. Take a look at his wiki page if you like. He was a top mathematician even as a kid.
The Oxford link I left is an overview of error correction. Quantum errors are the reason right now that large quantum computers can not be built.There is some work at Oxford where they are trying to integrate photonics on a chip. There is quite a lot of work worldwide in building classical photonic chips to the point now that some I think are in production, but Oxford is going one step further and trying to develop a quantum computer in this way. The way you do it is analogous to an electronic circuit where you have various types of electronic components like capacitors, resistors, inductors, diodes, transistors and so on, but the optical version. These would be like cavity resonators for creating laser light, Hadamard gates, Mach–Zehnder interferometers, the Kerr effect and non-linear optics. In fact it makes the old electronics look simple by comparison. To get the quantum version working where you have entangled states you feed it with something called squeezed light. Check wiki on this as it is a very weird thing indeed and comes about due to the uncertainty principle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Jan 27, 2024 8:55:40 GMT
[By the way, stay clear of Michio Kaku. He is just the kind you complain about, as in full of bullshit and wrong about most things. He got mixed up with string theory, which has since been seen as a blind alley, but he staked his reputation on it. Yes, I will check that Shor drop out … give me a couple more days to render a reply. ******* Even I noticed Michio Kaku has his blind spots … and should be grilled over them. I’m not qualified at all to do that. 😋 P.S.… check my new SETI Institute/Arecibo Message thread … you might enjoy the distraction. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 27, 2024 13:09:00 GMT
[By the way, stay clear of Michio Kaku. He is just the kind you complain about, as in full of bullshit and wrong about most things. He got mixed up with string theory, which has since been seen as a blind alley, but he staked his reputation on it. Yes, I will check that Shor drop out … give me a couple more days to render a reply. ******* Even I noticed Michio Kaku has his blind spots … and should be grilled over them. I’m not qualified at all to do that. 😋 P.S.… check my new SETI Institute/Arecibo Message thread … you might enjoy the distraction. I'm not one who has ever listened to him, but his name came up as one of the top scammers on a video talking about exactly what you mention regarding conference bullshitters. There are a lot of them about and their viewcount on YT can go into the millions, but these type are a complete waste of time. I thought on the otherhand Scott's videos are a bit more technical so it will ease you into the way mathematicians really do this stuff and how one should approach it. QM has some really quirky features. It uses linear algebra, which you really ought to learn so this stuff makes sense. If you ever wondered why we were taught matrices at school, this is the reason. They are used extensively. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 28, 2024 19:18:53 GMT
By the way, two other people this chap thinks are bullshitters are Stephen Wolfram's New kind of Science and Roger Penrose and his cosmological model.
In brief the problems are that with Wolfram's model of the universe he is simply making it up as he goes along. For example to make it show general relativity he configured it in such a way as to show that result, and similarly with Penrose he makes huge assumptions without any apparent concern. Indeed what I heard was Wolfram's grand theory was able to predict fundamental constants to 10 decimal places correctly, but if it turned out the model was engineered to give those numbers then we don't get anything to reassure us it is correct. Scott goes into much more detail on why what they say is bullshit, but the thing I found with Wolfram is he makes these claims and I'm hanging on waiting fro some proof and the proof never arrives, so it is interesting he seems to think the same way. Always be careful when confronting wordsmiths because the ones with the big gobs are often the ones who don't produce the results, and conversely the ones who produce results aren't very good speakers, such as Peter Shor. Well what I mean is Peter Shor would never be the kind you would have on prime time TV. He is of interest only to a very narrow group of mathematicians. I loved what he said about Feynman though. That was very well observed! The man that can never be wrong and why that was.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 28, 2024 22:03:09 GMT
You might like to look at some simulations of the quantum wave function.
This is a simple hydrogen atom with different quantum states.
Where this shows a far more complex structure
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Jan 29, 2024 12:42:14 GMT
I dived into your Shor video which popped up the interest of the NSA(spy agencies) in this field … and showed why the Finance Industry was seriously interested in using QC’s. I’m guessing the former because they see them as a severe Homeland security threat - having the potential to crack open every cryptographic private system on the Planet better than Snowden/Assange/Manning etc ….the latter because QC offers unlimited opportunities for financial fraud … like conventional computers did … Devices that arguably clearly ruined the reputation of the Banking/Financing and Accounting Industries since electronic calculators were invented … now billions££$$€€¥¥ can be more easily stolen at the press of a delete/send/enter button!🤔 Yes, QC’s clearly dress up number crunching to incredible levels of complexity no human mind can challenge. Who will step up and declare the results as plain WRONG?? It would be the Davros ‘superbrain’ in the room … so expensive … and draining on human resources … what ever we fed it … would be gobbled up, disappear and the Money Men would ALL be able to buy their own island and DUMB like Branson, Bezos and Zuckerberg …. and we tax-payers will be penniless trying to survive a 2,000 year nuclear winter. Apologies for being super pessimistic and cynical. … but we have had so much dubious sh*t thrown at us recently … and this definitely smells like more of it! Like Cosmologists (Penrose and Co.), Relativity Theorists, CERN scientists etc … mathematicians are now trying to be the new Gods of complexity - inventing with more physicists that have declared war on Humanity - a machine that Shor initially states has no capacity of error correction?? - and other experts say it can’t store data in memory?? … care to share how you read the results of random scatter computation? … and check the error corrections?🤔 I waded through your 24 page Steane paper(maths is a foreign language I hate, tbh) … but I tried my v. best in the time available to try pick out essential FACTS from what looked like deliberate or convenient obsfucation🤫) … and ended up with the concern whether matrixes with built in qubit error correction will deliver billions of perfect calculations without one error … and whether that expense was really necessary to use such machines to run Amazon Prime’s distribution centre logistics? That’s the issue here … relevance to a real requirement … why have a QC … just to deliver my anti-Green garbage product that will damage the Planet so much faster? … Why? … as I said earlier … what is the point of all this ‘faster’ and ‘more this and that’ … when 95% of humans with BRAINS may soon be “getting a life” and completely opting out of devices and computers anyway. Gadgets and tech is killing us now … we sensible ones will soon be “dechipping” … and HUMAN BEINGS who believe in Humanity …will soon be more aware and rejecting the human chipping potential these same scientists gave the Western neo-Totalitarian Deep State. The Oxford link I left is an overview of error correction. Quantum errors are the reason right now that large quantum computers can not be built.There is some work at Oxford where they are trying to integrate photonics on a chip. There is quite a lot of work worldwide in building classical photonic chips to the point now that some I think are in production, but Oxford is going one step further and trying to develop a quantum computer in this way. The way you do it is analogous to an electronic circuit where you have various types of electronic components like capacitors, resistors, inductors, diodes, transistors and so on, but the optical version. These would be like cavity resonators for creating laser light, Hadamard gates, Mach–Zehnder interferometers, the Kerr effect and non-linear optics. In fact it makes the old electronics look simple by comparison. To get the quantum version working where you have entangled states you feed it with something called squeezed light. Check wiki on this as it is a very weird thing indeed and comes about due to the uncertainty principle.
Sabina pointed out a whole load of other reasons besides quantum errors why QC’s are struggling at the moment … and I highlighted a few in the screen shots I dropped. Photonic chips and this field sounds interesting … I will look at your last two videos shortly … and check out squeezed light. But where is the Memory … and Read Out screen in this whole process … where the results spew out randomly … and we actually SEE a solution? All I’m seeing is pretty illusory at the moment. Google built something that looks mysterious and impressive … explain to me data in and data out … and how it works inside? … then we can grasp if tax-payers should invest in something of dubious benefit we can never own … or carry in our pockets! We are sick of paying for tech just a ruling elite use to make our lives a misery. We’ve seen a lot of that garbage lately (since 9/11). By the way, two other people this chap thinks are bullshitters are Stephen Wolfram's New kind of Science and Roger Penrose and his cosmological model. In brief the problems are that with Wolfram's model of the universe he is simply making it up as he goes along. For example to make it show general relativity he configured it in such a way as to show that result, and similarly with Penrose he makes huge assumptions without any apparent concern. Indeed what I heard was Wolfram's grand theory was able to predict fundamental constants to 10 decimal places correctly, but if it turned out the model was engineered to give those numbers then we don't get anything to reassure us it is correct. Scott goes into much more detail on why what they say is bullshit, but the thing I found with Wolfram is he makes these claims and I'm hanging on waiting fro some proof and the proof never arrives, so it is interesting he seems to think the same way. Always be careful when confronting wordsmiths because the ones with the big gobs are often the ones who don't produce the results, and conversely the ones who produce results aren't very good speakers, such as Peter Shor. Well what I mean is Peter Shor would never be the kind you would have on prime time TV. He is of interest only to a very narrow group of mathematicians. I loved what he said about Feynman though. That was very well observed! The man that can never be wrong and why that was. Most scientists and the Religious EVIL that controls them are “making it up as they go along” … and they use and manipulate mathematical complexity (talking in ‘foreign tongues’ behind our backs) in order to fool the Public and lead Humanity down numerous “Alice in Wonderland” rabbit hole dead ends … filled to the brim with high levels of bullshit. Looking at Quantum Computers … and digging into it to the best of my v.limited abilities … I see far better qualified top academic scientific wordsmiths are pointing out serious flaws to progress in this field … which make perfect sense to me. Maybe it is wise not to get too caught up in the excitement? … You don’t want to nail your colours to a mast like Michio Kaku and Penrose did … who got LOST IN THE MATHS … and fell to Earth with a bump when they found a REALITY OUT THERE IN OBSERVABLE DATA. Surely their mistake was going too deep into number crunching creative gymnastics? … regions where the minus sign convinces delusional people there is Reality in less than ZERO. The PHYSICAL WORLD’S REALITY STOPS AT ZERO … don’t you agree, Baron? If today’s mathematicians are not continually cross-checking their formulae have relevance to to OUR Physical Reality … and are not removing data that is less than ZERO from their calculations .. then these results will only ever be ethereal/conceptual and theoretical … and will have no relevance in OUR Universe … a physical world held rigid and fluid by REAL MATTER, electricity and other forces. Intangible unknowns are interesting … but only really concern the average tax-payer when they DIE. We don’t want to pay for intangible unknowns while we are alive … life is too short … and too much of a financial struggle already … let Globalists and their scientific poodles pay for QC’s and their intangible research. Scientists did ‘deceptive gymnastics’ with Big Bang, and the mRNA vaccine, CERN was a white elephant we want a refund on … and hopefully Relativity will soon FINALLY be completely debunked? … who knows?🤔 ******************* …P.S. Give me a couple of days to dig into ‘squeezed light’ … all this maths complexity dropped in the lap in one week is a bit taxing! … trying to keep other important discussions going on … and a life outside this Forum … ahem! … 😂 … Luckily this Forum format (Quotes and all) gives flexibility to drop in at leisure … ?? ahhh leisure! … will QC’s take more of that away from us?🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 29, 2024 13:19:02 GMT
Yes I grant you that this is a lot of stuff and each concept really needs time to get to grips with. A few points in the above. I think to date Shor's Algorithm has been shown to give prime factors in numbers up to about 15 000 according to the last I read in wiki, so it is no where near the modern 1024 bit key lengths one might use in a secure system today. Looking at the post office security encryption on Horizon, that used 64 bit keys and was said to present a possible security flaw due to brute force cracking. So as computers get faster the secure systems have simply increased the key length to accommodate. Shor's algorithm though is significant in the more theoretical sense that it was the fist of its kind, demonstrating that it is possible to reduce complexity as a proof of concept, much like the boson sampling is a proof of concept. Now Shor's algorithm is joined by others, so he's a kind of pioneer if you like. With error correction I must admit I have not had the time to read the entire PDF i posted, but got the general gist of what he was proposing. There is a very clever trick employed in error correction which actually take advantage of a quantum property rather than sees it as a problem. The idea is that as you send the signal further it degrades, but because states are quantised, if you apply some system to reconfigure the signal before the signal degrades enough to flip state then it never will. One reason why this is important is if you are sending entangled photons down a fibre optic line to create 100% secure communication. You need a similar thing to what we have today with repeater stations. By the way, my experience is most people working in physics are serious and doing a good and honest job. The ones with millions of hits on YT are the bullshitters. I know you won't like hearing this, but my observation is the non-bullshit types use blackboards and reams of maths. The bullshit types are the ones who will never show a single equation unless it is E = mc^2 for fear their audience would run off and never be seen again, like a phobia of equations. What I'm trying to do here is show those who are doing an honest job. If you feel they are difficult to understand then you are not the only one. This subject has many crazy concepts to grasp.
Regarding photonics, the best source I have for all things to do with chips is Asianometry. I've got a video here on the subject and you will find others if you look on his channel.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Jan 30, 2024 13:02:42 GMT
Isn’t it the Quantum Theorists who dived so deep into the Maths … that came unstuck? … they lost sense of Reality … that applied to the Physical Universe.
Surely that was where it all went wrong for Physics in some areas?
Working with equations and concepts that were no longer REAL.
LESS THAN ZERO … MINUS VALUES …. Do you get my drift?
When your language(maths) loses true meaning … becomes detached from the observable/experimentally testable … you are going to get in trouble, mate … It matters not who is a good clear communicator on Youtube … that can sell logic best … It’s who has the soundest common sense. … and doesn’t resort to jumping obstacles with leaps of imagination.
I fear QC is doing a fair bit of that … I would climb out the rabbit hole a little … and take a fresh look where the bridges are broken … and recognise what might be impossible …
Like mRNA vaccines … Dr Robert Malone was wise enough to see the flaw in his own work earlier than most … and he stepped back from the void that is destroying reputations as we speak.
Public confidence in medicine is broken now … if elitists climb out the bubble … and talk to ordinary people … you will know that … more than most.
**********
Still not made time to check those drops yet … and your new link …( I see my alien discussions/Disclosure as more important than QC tbh! )…🤔
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 30, 2024 14:18:29 GMT
Isn’t it the Quantum Theorists who dived so deep into the Maths … that came unstuck? … they lost sense of Reality … that applied to the Physical Universe. Surely that was where it all went wrong for Physics in some areas? Working with equations and concepts that were no longer REAL. LESS THAN ZERO … MINUS VALUES …. Do you get my drift? When your language(maths) loses true meaning … becomes detached from the observable/experimentally testable … you are going to get in trouble, mate … It matters not who is a good clear communicator on Youtube … that can sell logic best … It’s who has the soundest common sense. … and doesn’t resort to jumping obstacles with leaps of imagination. I fear QC is doing a fair bit of that … I would climb out the rabbit hole a little … and take a fresh look where the bridges are broken … and recognise what might be impossible … Like mRNA vaccines … Dr Robert Malone was wise enough to see the flaw in his own work earlier than most … and he stepped back from the void that is destroying reputations as we speak. Public confidence in medicine is broken now … if elitists climb out the bubble … and talk to ordinary people … you will know that … more than most. ********** Still not made time to check those drops yet … and your new link …( I see my alien discussions/Disclosure as more important than QC tbh! )…🤔 Yes indeed, maths is very strange. If you want to look at some advanced highly abstract maths and see how it solves a simple to understand problem then this video will give you a taste of how one goes about it. See the second half which works through the solution.
What category theory is , is a top level generalisation of maths. This is employing the trick of isomorphism where two different systems share the same general properties, like commutativity, associativity.
Another area of maths used by physicists a lot is Lie algebra which employs isomorphisms to solve problems. For example a geometric system can be isomorphic to some algebraic system, so if the problem you are trying to solve is in one system, you can solve the system that is isomorphic to it. I've been watching this guy on Lie algebra.
It takes a time to get your head around it, so don't worry if it does not all make sense to start with, it doesn't for most people!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Jan 31, 2024 11:02:57 GMT
Another area of maths used by physicists a lot is Lie algebra which employs isomorphisms to solve problems. For example a geometric system can be isomorphic to some algebraic system, so if the problem you are trying to solve is in one system, you can solve the system that is isomorphic to it. I've been watching this guy on Lie algebra. I’ll give it a look … but am I surprised Physics is in turmoil because of LIE Algebra??🤔 Surely it is what it suggests on the tin?! … but you’re right … they call them ‘Trust’ hospitals .. and ‘$mart’ phones … so any buzz word to suck the gullible in eh? 😂🤣 Imagine the conversation at DUMBS Headquarters …. << “Quantum” … hmmm …yeh,🤔 … that sounds super scientific and mysterious … they’ll throw ££€€$$$billions at that … before they can FINALLY work out our LIE algebra is another 😎😎‘rabbit-hole’ of BS. >> [Cue: evil cackle]😂 Tackling your squeezed photons now … I’m on it …. …. …. …. [Is a single photon elemental …? Can you squeeze it smaller? … I will find out shortly … probably a photon stream is getting “squeezed” … that sounds more like what this might be about … … going there now … reply coming when I’ve processed … (human computer at work here - low energy … totally Green, low demand on Planetary resources … super slow in comparison to QC and conventional computers …but methodical.👍😄] Day 1 …. 0 Day 2 …. 0 Day 3 …. 0 ….. answer coming shortly … hope it’s worth the wait! |
|
