|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 31, 2024 13:21:52 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! It's because the gentleman who invented it was Norwegian.
Marius Sophus Lie ( 17 December 1842 – 18 February 1899)
It's actually pronounced Lee. I thought it was an oriental chap when I first came across it (Li)
Anyway, no hocus pokus here. This is standard maths and is used extensively in particle physics. It's worth seeing a few introductory lectures to get to grips with the basics, but it is one of those things that just has so much maths and so many theories to it. This is why they never mentioned it at school.
Squeezed light is so called because if you look at the spectrum of say a laser beam it will look like Normal distribution because the frequency is the energy of a photon and energy is uncertain. Now when you squeeze it the Normal distribution squeezes into a sharper peak, like shrinking the X-axis. As you shrink one parameter, such as frequency distribution, the corresponding parameter in the uncertainty relation broadens out, so in my example the position of it will be less certain and that would be like stretching the X-axis of the Normal distribution in expected position. You can go the other way as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Feb 1, 2024 10:10:08 GMT
😂Apologies for the misinterpretation of the meaning of Lie Algebra! … more on that later. Tackling these drops … 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 I had a little trouble deciphering the first video here … but it clarified when I watched the Asianometry one below … … one VERY important point that was mentioned at the very beginning of the Adiabatics second video … that you might have missed? … , about “Quantum Systems having internal clocks … like a beating heart” … as you know from my comments about atomic clocks and their sensitivity to changes in gravity and other forces in the Universe … surely we have a Computer System here that is liable to clock errors if it is made smaller, moved, elevated … put aboard a space ship, stuck up a mountain …. So a QC down at sea level will likely be a very different beast, and give a very different result to a QC perched on a mountain top.? … Is that true? Is it true conventional computers that don’t have internal quantum clocks will suffer less Relativity error in that respect? So maybe laptops on the ISS are a better option in the long run eh?? ~ As photons of light are so easily bent by gravity around black holes … so weaker forces might distort these orbital patterns and arrays seen in your first video … altering states eh? 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. www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0yj4hBDUscWith the error correction developed by Shor and Steane … surely a computer …whose strength is scattered photons and randomisation probabilities … is going to lose it’s strength/advantage … over conventional computers … if the data is going to be squeezed and error corrected all along the line ?? Surely that defeats the object of the exercise? … and puts the QC in a sort of intellectual ‘strait-jacket’? … or am I mis-interpreting the word ‘error correction’ here?? Madame Whiplash might approve … but Freedom advocates wanting to push AI boundaries are going to have a problem here. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 1, 2024 18:45:43 GMT
I don't think relativistic effects are a consideration with quantum computers. The Q-bits can suffer from coupling effects. I don't know if you are familiar with the design of high frequency RF circuits, but they can also malfunction due to inductors cross-coupling and imperfections in the components where what is an inductor in real life has a non-zero resistance. Likewise quantum circuits are dependent on the physical layout and engineering to minimise these imperfections. Aside from this, the quantum computers work as the maths say they should work. The quantum transition in a caesium atom is the basis of an atomic clock, so you can see how accurately these things work according to the theory. They are so accurate that I think you can measure the general relativistic effects if you took it up a mountain where the gravity would be ever-so slightly weaker.
The main reason quantum computers are being developed is due to the fact that every q-bit you add to the system the computational power doubles. With classical computers the best you can hope for is a linear increase in power as you scale the number of transistors, but in practice we don't often even get that due to the inefficiencies of parallel computing from interprocess communication. |
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Feb 5, 2024 19:45:36 GMT
[Squeezed light is so called because if you look at the spectrum of say a laser beam it will look like Normal distribution because the frequency is the energy of a photon and energy is uncertain. Now when you squeeze it the Normal distribution squeezes into a sharper peak, like shrinking the X-axis. As you shrink one parameter, such as frequency distribution, the corresponding parameter in the uncertainty relation broadens out, so in my example the position of it will be less certain and that would be like stretching the X-axis of the Normal distribution in expected position. You can go the other way as well. So this golden thing that Google rolled out … was this just a small part of what makes a QC work? … Will QC’s ever be sold over the counter and be as small as a laptop? … or are the atomic clock elements and lasers that generate squeezed light going to require too much space and power to squeeze this ‘random scatter’ brain into a box that’s practical and marketable?  Houston … we have a problem … scale and power required … Will this device ever be marketable? … I guess we never imagined Turing’s device being manufactured with so much computing power running on so little electricity … that a kids could afford to put in their pockets … but photons are different and throw up so many extra variables. Is their any point tax-payers investing … especially if it’s a device financial institutions will use to make our money disappear into the Ether? Very much like our investment in CERN did. What benefits did WE get out of that?! You mentioned the atomic clock element will be affected by v. weak gravity variations … how will this affect the computational accuracy of the device? … and the results it spews out? When it comes to electron switching versus photon scattering … maybe there is another way to compute without generating heat or light? Maybe there is a more compact energy saving way to give a quantum leap in processing amongst these rivals….  … that will make Google’s big heavy lumbering energy-draining dinosaur extinct by the end of the year?🤔 … 47 years early than previously calculated! ********** Footnote: [When whistleblower scientists talked about finding no wiring in UFO’s connecting the different elements … was it photon communication or another elemental source particle that made the connections and computations to make these anti-gravity device work?~Disclosure might help these scientists make that leap into the future] |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 5, 2024 20:30:54 GMT
[Squeezed light is so called because if you look at the spectrum of say a laser beam it will look like Normal distribution because the frequency is the energy of a photon and energy is uncertain. Now when you squeeze it the Normal distribution squeezes into a sharper peak, like shrinking the X-axis. As you shrink one parameter, such as frequency distribution, the corresponding parameter in the uncertainty relation broadens out, so in my example the position of it will be less certain and that would be like stretching the X-axis of the Normal distribution in expected position. You can go the other way as well. So this golden thing that Google rolled out … was this just a small part of what makes a QC work? … Will QC’s ever be sold over the counter and be as small as a laptop? … or are the atomic clock elements and lasers that generate squeezed light going to require too much space and power to squeeze this ‘random scatter’ brain into a box that’s practical and marketable? View AttachmentHouston … we have a problem … scale and power required … Will this device ever be marketable? … I guess we never imagined Turing’s device being manufactured with so much computing power running on so little electricity … that a kids could afford to put in their pockets … but photons are different and throw up so many extra variables. Is their any point tax-payers investing … especially if it’s a device financial institutions will use to make our money disappear into the Ether? Very much like our investment in CERN did. What benefits did WE get out of that?! You mentioned the atomic clock element will be affected by v. weak gravity variations … how will this affect the computational accuracy of the device? … and the results it spews out? When it comes to electron switching versus photon scattering … maybe there is another way to compute without generating heat or light? Maybe there is a more compact energy saving way to give a quantum leap in processing amongst these rivals…. View Attachment … that will make Google’s big heavy lumbering energy-draining dinosaur extinct by the end of the year?🤔 … 47 years early than previously calculated! ********** Footnote: [When whistleblower scientists talked about finding no wiring in UFO’s connecting the different elements … was it photon communication or another elemental source particle that made the connections and computations to make these anti-gravity device work?~Disclosure might help these scientists make that leap into the future] was this just a small part of what makes a QC work? … Yes the light source is only one component of the system. According to the Oxford QC team it is the only part of their QC which to date can't be miniatured in a chip. It requires cryogenics as far as I recall.
Will QC’s ever be sold over the counter and be as small as a laptop?
Who can predict the future? There are so many schemes that we jut don't know which one will bear fruit.
… or are the atomic clock elements and lasers that generate squeezed light going to require too much space and power to squeeze this ‘random scatter’ brain into a box that’s practical and marketable?
China already has an optical basic quantum computer on the market. I think it is mainly for experimenters, but they are selling. D-wave has sold a few.
Right now the only QCs in operation are for solving certain types of problem, as in formerly they are said not to be Turing complete. However when combined with standard computers which are Turing complete, one can find useful applications. The idea being touted right now is to make these into computer services on the cloud.
Houston … we have a problem … scale and power required …
The difference between an electron and a photon is the photon is not charged so it does not interact with the surrounding matter to convert its energy to thermal energy of the transmission medium. Since they don't generate heat in this way they don't need a lot of power to run.
Is their any point tax-payers investing … especially if it’s a device financial institutions will use to make our money disappear into the Ether?
Very much like our investment in CERN did.
What benefits did WE get out of that?!
The benefits often come a lot later on. The laser is a classic example of something which started life without any practical uses and now is used everywhere and continues to find new applications. QM is very applicable to microchip design and there is a new type of memory out using spin-transfer torque en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin-transfer_torque
You mentioned the atomic clock element will be affected by v. weak gravity variations … how will this affect the computational accuracy of the device? … and the results it spews out?
The clocks accord with the theory of general relativity, so it is further confirmation. I heard the only thing thought to be more accurate is the spin of a quasar. It's the time itself that changes speed as g changes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Feb 6, 2024 8:58:46 GMT
Thanks for answering those questions succinctly. 1) The benefits often come a lot later on. The laser is a classic example of something which started life without any practical uses and now is used everywhere and continues to find new applications. QM is very applicable to microchip design and there is a new type of memory out using spin-transfer torque en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin-transfer_torque*********** 2) DD : You mentioned the atomic clock element will be affected by v. weak gravity variations … how will this affect the computational accuracy of the device? … and the results it spews out? BVL reply: The clocks accord with the theory of general relativity, so it is further confirmation. I heard the only thing thought to be more accurate is the spin of a quasar. It's the time itself that changes speed …as g changes. 1) Did you catch this interesting Nimtz experiment I dropped on my SETI discussion? Has this effect been confirmed by other labs? … or has the experiment dropped into the Black Ops area of research restriction? If superfast Quantum Tunnelling communication is real … is it a Spin-transfer torque effect through solids that makes this super rapid transfer of data possible? If gases in the H2 band transmit data 4.7 times the speed of light … and lasers can generate a spin-transfer torque effect through Space … do QC’s combine these two observations together to make a device much faster? ************ 2) TIME is an artificial human construct … TIME is metronomic and a Constant variable progressing FORWARDS measured by flawed clocks we design. An artificial FALSE summation guessing the age of the Universe. Gravity doesn’t change TIME … it just changes the speed these flawed clocks tick … at an atomic level. I think some scientists need to realise that the speed of light isn’t a Constant … it can be bent and ‘sent the long way round’ by GRAVITY … Laser measuring devices too are made inaccurate by gravity variations, I imagine?? Didn’t Black Hole observations and Space Lensing observations confirm that?? Aren’t Dark Matter effects also at play here? I’m puzzled why scientists still think Time is real … and elastic? [Isn’t all this pretty obvious? … just through observation? … You don’t need Mathematics to manipulate the Truth and tell you any different on this … ] |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 6, 2024 14:37:14 GMT
Thanks for answering those questions succinctly. 1) The benefits often come a lot later on. The laser is a classic example of something which started life without any practical uses and now is used everywhere and continues to find new applications. QM is very applicable to microchip design and there is a new type of memory out using spin-transfer torque en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin-transfer_torque*********** 2) DD : You mentioned the atomic clock element will be affected by v. weak gravity variations … how will this affect the computational accuracy of the device? … and the results it spews out? BVL reply: The clocks accord with the theory of general relativity, so it is further confirmation. I heard the only thing thought to be more accurate is the spin of a quasar. It's the time itself that changes speed …as g changes. 1) Did you catch this interesting Nimtz experiment I dropped on my SETI discussion? Has this effect been confirmed by other labs? … or has the experiment dropped into the Black Ops area of research restriction? If superfast Quantum Tunnelling communication is real … is it a Spin-transfer torque effect through solids that makes this super rapid transfer of data possible? If gases in the H2 band transmit data 4.7 times the speed of light … and lasers can generate a spin-transfer torque effect through Space … do QC’s combine these two observations together to make a device much faster? ************ 2) TIME is an artificial human construct … TIME is metronomic and a Constant variable progressing FORWARDS measured by flawed clocks we design. An artificial FALSE summation guessing the age of the Universe. Gravity doesn’t change TIME … it just changes the speed these flawed clocks tick … at an atomic level. I think some scientists need to realise that the speed of light isn’t a Constant … it can be bent and ‘sent the long way round’ by GRAVITY … Laser measuring devices too are made inaccurate by gravity variations, I imagine?? Didn’t Black Hole observations and Space Lensing observations confirm that?? Aren’t Dark Matter effects also at play here? I’m puzzled why scientists still think Time is real … and elastic? [Isn’t all this pretty obvious? … just through observation? … You don’t need Mathematics to manipulate the Truth and tell you any different on this … ] You would do well to watch a course on general relativity. It uses tensors, and the basic idea is you have a metric tensor that bends the space-time continuum in the presence of gravity.
It all works in 4 dimensions: 3 spacial and one of time.
You can imagine the sort of thing in 2D where you have the surface of the earth. Rather than map onto a flat plane, the earth's surface is curved, so the metric tensor describes the shape it curves onto, like a sphere in the my example.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Feb 7, 2024 1:05:08 GMT
Thanks for answering those questions succinctly. 1) Did you catch this interesting Nimtz experiment I dropped on my SETI discussion? Has this effect been confirmed by other labs? … or has the experiment dropped into the Black Ops area of research restriction? If superfast Quantum Tunnelling communication is real … is it a Spin-transfer torque effect through solids that makes this super rapid transfer of data possible? If gases in the H2 band transmit data 4.7 times the speed of light … and lasers can generate a spin-transfer torque effect through Space … do QC’s combine these two observations together to make a device much faster? ************ 2) TIME is an artificial human construct … TIME is metronomic and a Constant variable progressing FORWARDS measured by flawed clocks we design. An artificial FALSE summation guessing the age of the Universe. Gravity doesn’t change TIME … it just changes the speed these flawed clocks tick … at an atomic level. I think some scientists need to realise that the speed of light isn’t a Constant … it can be bent and ‘sent the long way round’ by GRAVITY … Laser measuring devices too are made inaccurate by gravity variations, I imagine?? Didn’t Black Hole observations and Space Lensing observations confirm that?? Aren’t Dark Matter effects also at play here? I’m puzzled why scientists still think Time is real … and elastic? [Isn’t all this pretty obvious? … just through observation? … You don’t need Mathematics to manipulate the Truth and tell you any different on this … ] You would do well to watch a course on general relativity. It uses tensors, and the basic idea is you have a metric tensor that bends the space-time continuum in the presence of gravity. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_tensorIt all works in 4 dimensions: 3 spacial and one of time. You can imagine the sort of thing in 2D where you have the surface of the earth. Rather than map onto a flat plane, the earth's surface is curved, so the metric tensor describes the shape it curves onto, like a sphere in the my example. Our Universe is 3-Dimensional … and all the Laws in it are governed by that fact. Scientists calling Time “the 4th Dimension” is a falsity … Time is conceptual … and so is the 4th Dimension. Whatever Time you take to move from A> B … You are always in 3 dimensional space … never in a fourth or other dimension … unless you drop out of the physical Universe through a gravitational wormhole possibly into a multiverse of some sort running on a different progressive metronomic forward progressing timeline. This timeline is not elastic … Does that make sense … as an explanation of conceptual Time? Space-Time doesn’t make TIME real … it is still only an idea of human imagination. It has no physicality … therefore it cannot be elastic. Hope this helps. Concepts cannot take on dimensional properties. |
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Feb 7, 2024 1:23:18 GMT
Your Metric Tensor equations are just a mathematical way of describing movement or change in the Universe … by putting an arbitrary scale on that change … mapping that change … It doesn’t make ‘t’ in that equation a dimensional entity. … because wherever you view the object … at whatever the speed you are going … it’s 3 dimensions only change due to gravity and other forces … Time never changes in metronomic constancy … 1 conceptual second, minute, hour … will always be the same … only faulty clocks make Time appear elastic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 7, 2024 17:37:03 GMT
Your Metric Tensor equations are just a mathematical way of describing movement or change in the Universe … by putting an arbitrary scale on that change … mapping that change … It doesn’t make ‘t’ in that equation a dimensional entity. … because wherever you view the object … at whatever the speed you are going … it’s 3 dimensions only change due to gravity and other forces … Time never changes in metronomic constancy … 1 conceptual second, minute, hour … will always be the same … only faulty clocks make Time appear elastic. With an atom you can solve it so that you can predict the exact energy of the transition and therefore you can get a theoretical prediction of time because frequency is proportional to energy.
There was someone on YT the other day who set up a laser interferometer that was so accurate that the measured length depended on where he was in the room due to the gravitational change in the mass of his own body. It was one of the most impressive home experiments I've seen done, but he had to do it in a house many miles away from traffic which causes vibrations. |
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Feb 8, 2024 7:43:21 GMT
Your Metric Tensor equations are just a mathematical way of describing movement or change in the Universe … by putting an arbitrary scale on that change … mapping that change … It doesn’t make ‘t’ in that equation a dimensional entity. … because wherever you view the object … at whatever the speed you are going … it’s 3 dimensions only change due to gravity and other forces … Time never changes in metronomic constancy … 1 conceptual second, minute, hour … will always be the same … only faulty clocks make Time appear elastic. [With an atom you can solve it so that you can predict the exact energy of the transition and therefore you can get a theoretical prediction of time because frequency is proportional to energy. There was someone on YT the other day who set up a laser interferometer that was so accurate that the measured length depended on where he was in the room due to the gravitational change in the mass of his own body. It was one of the most impressive home experiments I've seen done, but he had to do it in a house many miles away from traffic which causes vibrations. Yes, I agree it’s an impressive experiment … and illustrates the fact minute fluctuations in gravity greatly affect the accuracy of atomic clocks. … making them unreliable timepieces. Are you coming around to the fact that Time is a conceptual forward progressive metronomic constant? You seem to be dodging my point here a bit … wiggling and squirming to avoid grabbing this Relativity bull by the horns?! 🤔 All evidence of Time elasticity demonstrated so far to prove Einstein’s Theory of Relativity could have just been Universal Forces (like gravity/dark energy/planetary momentum etc) creating inaccuracies at an atomic level … on atomic clock mechanisms. Agreed?…🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 8, 2024 16:53:56 GMT
[With an atom you can solve it so that you can predict the exact energy of the transition and therefore you can get a theoretical prediction of time because frequency is proportional to energy. There was someone on YT the other day who set up a laser interferometer that was so accurate that the measured length depended on where he was in the room due to the gravitational change in the mass of his own body. It was one of the most impressive home experiments I've seen done, but he had to do it in a house many miles away from traffic which causes vibrations. Yes, I agree it’s an impressive experiment … and illustrates the fact minute fluctuations in gravity greatly affect the accuracy of atomic clocks. … making them unreliable timepieces. Are you coming around to the fact that Time is a conceptual forward progressive metronomic constant? You seem to be dodging my point here a bit … wiggling and squirming to avoid grabbing this Relativity bull by the horns?! 🤔 All evidence of Time elasticity demonstrated so far to prove Einstein’s Theory of Relativity could have just been Universal Forces (like gravity/dark energy/planetary momentum etc) creating inaccuracies at an atomic level … on atomic clock mechanisms. Agreed?…🤔 It's just irrelevant to the thread. The thread is about mathematics and how to make computations more efficient. Quantum mechanics already incorporates relativity into its system. This goes back to Dirac and Quantum Field Theory
Here is an overview.
In particular, this is one way to do it: The Klein–Gordon equation
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Mar 7, 2024 18:37:01 GMT
Yes, I agree it’s an impressive experiment … and illustrates the fact minute fluctuations in gravity greatly affect the accuracy of atomic clocks. … making them unreliable timepieces. Are you coming around to the fact that Time is a conceptual forward progressive metronomic constant? You seem to be dodging my point here a bit … wiggling and squirming to avoid grabbing this Relativity bull by the horns?! 🤔 All evidence of Time elasticity demonstrated so far to prove Einstein’s Theory of Relativity could have just been Universal Forces (like gravity/dark energy/planetary momentum etc) creating inaccuracies at an atomic level … on atomic clock mechanisms. Agreed?…🤔 It's just irrelevant to the thread. The thread is about mathematics and how to make computations more efficient. Quantum mechanics already incorporates relativity into its system. This goes back to Dirac and Quantum Field Theory Here is an overview. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_quantum_mechanicsIn particular, this is one way to do it: The Klein–Gordon equation en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klein%E2%80%93Gordon_equationApologies for the late reply … was locked out all my threads for 2 weeks … and took a while to decide if being on a Forum moderated by a stupid word filter was worth my time and energy … well, slowly getting back into catching up on some discussions … In reply: More deflection from answering a simple question … about timing accuracy … related to high speed calculations where timing is so critical …. Time is the essence of all this … and is not off-topic. If quantum computers and their mathematical efficiency is going to be compromised by minute changes in gravity, and forces affecting atomic clocks and the speed of photons …. then you are wasting your time pursuing these types of calculations … in these types of hyper-sensitive machines …. that will constantly be bugged by mechanical inaccuracies. It’s not hard to see these projects are another colossal waste of money … a massive distraction … at a serious time when precious science public funding should be used to re-stabilise our Earth’s ecosystem instead … and reaching out to more intelligent civilisations in our Universe … not duped by Einstein’s Relativity bunkum. QC’s are a waste of precious resources … and deep down … I think you know it. Dinosaur projects litter our history … only stupid people wake up too late to change course, before a Country’s finances are blown on crap like this. The Public is happy with the heat generated by conventional computers working with AI software … the QC project is surplus to requirements. Birmingham Councillors deserve stringing up for wasting millions on another computer white elephant project. …. the H2S of Tory/Labour waste. … Computers with hyped benefits aren’t interesting anymore. I’ll let Sabine shoot down in flames the mathematical fantasists who think QC’s give a distinct advantage … …. Love the bit near the end where she sarcastically says … maybe 10,000 years worth of mathematical calculations in SillyCon Valley are the equivalent of 5 minutes calculation in China! 😂🤣 … Brilliant.👍 |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Mar 7, 2024 19:01:38 GMT
Apologies for the late reply … was locked out all my threads for 2 weeks … and took a while to decide if being on a Forum moderated by a stupid word filter was worth my time and energy … well, slowly getting back into catching up on some discussions … In reply: More deflection from answering a simple question … about timing accuracy … related to high speed calculations where timing is so critical …. Time is the essence of all this … and is not off-topic. If quantum computers and their mathematical efficiency is going to be compromised by minute changes in gravity, and forces affecting atomic clocks and the speed of photons …. then you are wasting your time pursuing these types of calculations … in these types of hyper-sensitive machines …. that will constantly be bugged by mechanical inaccuracies. It’s not hard to see these projects are another colossal waste of money … a massive distraction … at a serious time when precious science public funding should be used to re-stabilise our Earth’s ecosystem instead … and reaching out to more intelligent civilisations in our Universe … not duped by Einstein’s Relativity bunkum. QC’s are a waste of precious resources … and deep down … I think you know it. Dinosaur projects litter our history … only stupid people wake up too late to change course, before a Country’s finances are blown on crap like this. The Public is happy with the heat generated by conventional computers working with AI software … the QC project is surplus to requirements. Birmingham Councillors deserve stringing up for wasting millions on another computer white elephant project. …. the H2S of Tory/Labour waste. … Computers with hyped benefits aren’t interesting anymore. I’ll let Sabine shoot down in flames the mathematical fantasists who think QC’s give a distinct advantage … …. Love the bit near the end where she sarcastically says … maybe 10,000 years worth of mathematical calculations in SillyCon Valley are the equivalent of 5 minutes calculation in China! 😂🤣 … Brilliant.👍 I'm quite familiar with timing issues in digital circuits and it is something that has to be considered in the design. Crystal oscillators drift with temperature but it is OK in a computer because you drive everything from the same clock and you divide the frequency down to what you want using binary dividers. Delays can be experienced in the gates themselves, so you have to factor that in, and if you want to equalise timing you can do it on the PCB by adjusting the length of the tracks, which is common in circuits > 1 GHz. On the chip level the main quantum effect which screws it up is quantum tunnelling. This kicks in at about 5nm. This is why we have the integration density limit we have. The workaround currently being exploited is to have multi-layer chips. A Chinese firm claims to have a chip which incorporates 256 layers. I think that is still in the lab, but the general technology is going to shift that way for sure. The effects of gravity on caesium clocks can only be seen due to the incredible accuracy of these clocks. It is because we have this technology we can now confirm Einstein's general theory of relativity. |
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Mar 8, 2024 5:46:47 GMT
[quote timestamp="1709836621" source="/post/214514/thread" author=" Dubdrifter"I'm quite familiar with timing issues in digital circuits and it is something that has to be considered in the design. Crystal oscillators drift with temperature but it is OK in a computer because you drive everything from the same clock and you divide the frequency down to what you want using binary dividers. Delays can be experienced in the gates themselves, so you have to factor that in, and if you want to equalise timing you can do it on the PCB by adjusting the length of the tracks, which is common in circuits > 1 GHz. On the chip level the main quantum effect which screws it up is quantum tunnelling. This kicks in at about 5nm. This is why we have the integration density limit we have. The workaround currently being exploited is to have multi-layer chips. A Chinese firm claims to have a chip which incorporates 256 layers. I think that is still in the lab, but the general technology is going to shift that way for sure. The effects of gravity on caesium clocks can only be seen due to the incredible accuracy of these clocks. It is because we have this technology we can now confirm Einstein's general theory of relativity. It’s possible that much of the work being done trying to make the conceptual nature of QC’s work … will be useful when applied in future devices more useful to Humanity … www.newscientist.com/article/2420137-google-launches-5m-prize-to-find-actual-uses-for-quantum-computers/?utm_source=nsnew&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nsnew_070324&utm_term=Newsletter%20NSNEW_WeeklyAs things stand … your blowing £££$$$€€€¥¥¥ billions on a white elephant with few practical uses … Nice concept and hype … shame about Reality and Practicality. This field is struggling to deliver … and like many ideas with the word ‘quantum’ attached … people appear to be getting lost in the MATHS … and detached from hard facts and real possibilities. …. It appears one of science’s biggest problem now is the great Relativity Hoax … thinking Time has elasticity … when it’s nature is purely conceptual. The secrets of the Universe are pointing away from the 100 year dead end Theory of Relativity. Light and other wavelength particles are likely jumping instantly through the Dark Matter holes of our Physical Universe … everything has space in it … and I’m guessing this and gravity flexes the time errors in your hyper-sensitive atomic clocks. The lesson to learn here is … don’t build devices with poor stability. Clocks or Computers. |
|
