Quantum Entanglement Takes Navigation Sensors to New Heights

Swan wrote:A recent study in Nature Photonics has revealed that quantum entanglement significantly enhances the precision of sensors that can be used to navigate without GPS

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:A recent study in Nature Photonics has revealed that quantum entanglement significantly enhances the precision of sensors that can be used to navigate without GPS

Awesome! This has been revealed! I was wondering when they were going to get around to revealing this. This couldn't have come at a better time. With all the problems we're experiencing over global economics and egg shortages, we need these breakthroughs in quantum computing to reassure us that help is on the way.

On a personal note, I had a setback at home. I accidentally knocked all my qubits onto the floor and I ended up stepping on a bunch of the ones I couldn't see. I couldn't page them because I had them turned off at the time. If anybody knows where I can get some inexpensive replacements, I'd appreciate it. The gamma-spec/quantum-entangler on my Leatherman hasn't been recalibrated and I just couldn't find any on e-bay. Help!

HarveyH55 wrote:
How do you tell one qubit, to entangle with one specific qubit, and not some random qubit, in a galaxy far, far away?

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
How do you tell one qubit, to entangle with one specific qubit, and not some random qubit, in a galaxy far, far away?

The answer is that for millions of years the human race existed and had no explanation for gravity, partly because gravity was always there just like entanglement, and neither physical process needs your belief to be real.

You may now continue fingerpainting

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
How do you tell one qubit, to entangle with one specific qubit, and not some random qubit, in a galaxy far, far away?

The answer is that for millions of years the human race existed and had no explanation for gravity, partly because gravity was always there just like entanglement, and neither physical process needs your belief to be real.

You may now continue fingerpainting

So qubits, entanglement are faith based. You just joined the cult to supplement your average (generous observation) intelligence. You are totally clueless, and lack the capacity to comprehend.

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
How do you tell one qubit, to entangle with one specific qubit, and not some random qubit, in a galaxy far, far away?

The answer...

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
How do you tell one qubit, to entangle with one specific qubit, and not some random qubit, in a galaxy far, far away?

...deleted Mantra 40a...

So qubits, entanglement are faith based. You just joined the cult to supplement your average (generous observation) intelligence. You are totally clueless, and lack the capacity to comprehend.

Actually...

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
How do you tell one qubit, to entangle with one specific qubit, and not some random qubit, in a galaxy far, far away?

...deleted Mantra 40a...

So qubits, entanglement are faith based. You just joined the cult to supplement your average (generous observation) intelligence. You are totally clueless, and lack the capacity to comprehend.

Actually...

Mantra 40a.

HarveyH55 wrote:So qubits, entanglement are faith based.

IBdaMann wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:So qubits, entanglement are faith based.

I don't find it appropriate to refer to science fiction as "faith-based". It's more appropriate to refer to it as a "suspension of disbelief." Swan, unfortunately, is locked into a permanent disbelief-suspension mode, i.e. he thinks it's all totally real.

FYI, the sci-fi "plot" of the quantum entanglement storyline is that two halves of an elementary particle, when "split" by "researchers" or "scientists," continue to behave identically, like synchronized swimming zombies, regardless of whether the two halves are separated (not physically connected) and independently of how much distance exists between the two halves (with no adherence to either General Relativity or the Inverse Square Law). Which elementary particles? The Writers Guild decided that it would lend greater flexibility leaving that unspecified, so that different authors and different producers could fill in their own preferred particles. For example, the screenwriters at Apple need the plot to revolve around photons. Are there even "halves" of a photon? Is it even possible to "split" a photon? The answer to both questions is that everything is possible in sci-fi.

So when someone begins telling you his/her favorite quantum entanglement story, just find out what elementary particle is the "hero" of the story, and lately, the darker the skin color of the elementary particle, the more likely it is to be a protagonist. The caucasian particles are what usually bring the adversity of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle that must be overcome by more frequent press releases of how researchers have successfully set record times for qubit stability, i.e. easily exceeding all previous records by multiple microseconds.

The Writers Guild has written into canon that quantum entanglement precedes the occurrence of particle splitting, i.e. the halves of the particle are always acting in unison. Splitting the particle doesn't disrupt that bond. The problem that the Writers Guild faced was explaining how "researchers" and "scientists" could somehow track, contain and ship the halves of the split particles. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle prevents knowledge of position (nevermind that there are no containers for half-particles), so the Writers Guild just wrote off the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle as caucasian particles being ****s. In quantum canon, its just assumed that entangled particle halves behave nicely and go wherever they are instructed.

At this point, you might be wondering "How can anyone 'write' on a half-photon, and how could it possibly be read?" The Writers Guild was pretty sharp here. They invented the fictitious concept of "Superposition 3-D Printers" that use a special "Superposition Toner" that can write on top of itself and keep its layers of toner separate, independent and readable. Amazingly, the toner can be used to write as many values between 0 and 1 inclusively as are desired. It's fantastic. Everybody loves sci-fi! In this case, instead of selling the movie rights, they sell the press releases! Yay!

.

Swan wrote:Says the moron who literally claims that the last ice age was science fiction.

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Says the moron who literally claims that the last ice age was science fiction.

Says the moron who literally claims omniscience of the unobserved, distant past.

Says the moron who literally claims that he can "read" rocks for their life history.

Says the moron who literally believes that "amphibious" doesn't mean "amphibious."

Says the moron who literally believes that gold has no molecules.

Says the moron who literally believes that he has falsified all science created by Albert Einstein.

Says the moron who literally believes that the FBI have some sort of pressing need to interview him.

Says the moron who literally believes every press release that he reads ... because it's on the internet and therefore must be true.

Says the moron who literally believes that a global climate exists, despite remaining unable to unambiguously define it, say what color it is, point to where it is or explain how its parameters can somehow change when it has no parameters.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Says the moron who literally claims omniscience of the unobserved, distant past.

Says the moron who literally claims that he can "read" rocks for their life history.

Says the moron who literally believes that "amphibious" doesn't mean "amphibious."

Says the moron who literally believes that gold has no molecules.

Says the moron who literally believes that he has falsified all science created by Albert Einstein.

Says the moron who literally believes that the FBI have some sort of pressing need to interview him.

Says the moron who literally believes every press release that he reads ... because it's on the internet and therefore must be true.

Says the moron who literally believes that a global climate exists, despite remaining unable to unambiguously define it, say what color it is, point to where it is or explain how its parameters can somehow change when it has no parameters.

Question, do you wash the fingerpaint off your hands before you type?

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
How do you tell one qubit, to entangle with one specific qubit, and not some random qubit, in a galaxy far, far away?

...deleted Mantra 40a...

So qubits, entanglement are faith based. You just joined the cult to supplement your average (generous observation) intelligence. You are totally clueless, and lack the capacity to comprehend.

Actually...

Mantra 40a.

Thank...

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:So qubits, entanglement are faith based.

I don't find it appropriate to refer to science fiction as "faith-based". It's more appropriate to refer to it as a "suspension of disbelief." Swan, unfortunately, is locked into a permanent disbelief-suspension mode, i.e. he thinks it's all totally real.

FYI, the sci-fi "plot" of the quantum entanglement storyline is that two halves of an elementary particle, when "split" by "researchers" or "scientists," continue to behave identically, like synchronized swimming zombies, regardless of whether the two halves are separated (not physically connected) and independently of how much distance exists between the two halves (with no adherence to either General Relativity or the Inverse Square Law). Which elementary particles? The Writers Guild decided that it would lend greater flexibility leaving that unspecified, so that different authors and different producers could fill in their own preferred particles. For example, the screenwriters at Apple need the plot to revolve around photons. Are there even "halves" of a photon? Is it even possible to "split" a photon? The answer to both questions is that everything is possible in sci-fi.

So when someone begins telling you his/her favorite quantum entanglement story, just find out what elementary particle is the "hero" of the story, and lately, the darker the skin color of the elementary particle, the more likely it is to be a protagonist. The caucasian particles are what usually bring the adversity of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle that must be overcome by more frequent press releases of how researchers have successfully set record times for qubit stability, i.e. easily exceeding all previous records by multiple microseconds.

The Writers Guild has written into canon that quantum entanglement precedes the occurrence of particle splitting, i.e. the halves of the particle are always acting in unison. Splitting the particle doesn't disrupt that bond. The problem that the Writers Guild faced was explaining how "researchers" and "scientists" could somehow track, contain and ship the halves of the split particles. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle prevents knowledge of position (nevermind that there are no containers for half-particles), so the Writers Guild just wrote off the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle as caucasian particles being ****s. In quantum canon, its just assumed that entangled particle halves behave nicely and go wherever they are instructed.

At this point, you might be wondering "How can anyone 'write' on a half-photon, and how could it possibly be read?" The Writers Guild was pretty sharp here. They invented the fictitious concept of "Superposition 3-D Printers" that use a special "Superposition Toner" that can write on top of itself and keep its layers of toner separate, independent and readable. Amazingly, the toner can be used to write as many values between 0 and 1 inclusively as are desired. It's fantastic. Everybody loves sci-fi! In this case, instead of selling the movie rights, they sell the press releases! Yay!

.

Says...

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Says the moron who literally claims omniscience of the unobserved, distant past.

Says the moron who literally claims that he can "read" rocks for their life history.

Says the moron who literally believes that "amphibious" doesn't mean "amphibious."

Says the moron who literally believes that gold has no molecules.

Says the moron who literally believes that he has falsified all science created by Albert Einstein.

Says the moron who literally believes that the FBI have some sort of pressing need to interview him.

Says the moron who literally believes every press release that he reads ... because it's on the internet and therefore must be true.

Says the moron who literally believes that a global climate exists, despite remaining unable to unambiguously define it, say what color it is, point to where it is or explain how its parameters can somehow change when it has no parameters.

Question, do you wash the fingerpaint off your hands before you type?

Look Shirley, you are not supposed to let me get under your skin like I obviously just did.

Do you believe that you are omniscient? I don't, yet I never checked your trailer for any time machines, just like I never checked your tomato patch for any stone-history XML scanners. See Shirley, we only observe a small number of things in our lives, and reality is not determined by our wild sci-fi fantasies.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Says the moron who literally claims omniscience of the unobserved, distant past.

Says the moron who literally claims that he can "read" rocks for their life history.

Says the moron who literally believes that "amphibious" doesn't mean "amphibious."

Says the moron who literally believes that gold has no molecules.

Says the moron who literally believes that he has falsified all science created by Albert Einstein.

Says the moron who literally believes that the FBI have some sort of pressing need to interview him.

Says the moron who literally believes every press release that he reads ... because it's on the internet and therefore must be true.

Says the moron who literally believes that a global climate exists, despite remaining unable to unambiguously define it, say what color it is, point to where it is or explain how its parameters can somehow change when it has no parameters.

Question, do you wash the fingerpaint off your hands before you type?

Look Shirley, you are not supposed to let me get under your skin like I obviously just did.

Do you believe that you are omniscient? I don't, yet I never checked your trailer for any time machines, just like I never checked your tomato patch for any stone-history XML scanners. See Shirley, we only observe a small number of things in our lives, and reality is not determined by our wild sci-fi fantasies.

So you are denying the dinosaurs were once real, just based on the fact that I never saw a live one.

This is clearly schizzo

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Says the moron who literally claims omniscience of the unobserved, distant past.

Says the moron who literally claims that he can "read" rocks for their life history.

Says the moron who literally believes that "amphibious" doesn't mean "amphibious."

Says the moron who literally believes that gold has no molecules.

Says the moron who literally believes that he has falsified all science created by Albert Einstein.

Says the moron who literally believes that the FBI have some sort of pressing need to interview him.

Says the moron who literally believes every press release that he reads ... because it's on the internet and therefore must be true.

Says the moron who literally believes that a global climate exists, despite remaining unable to unambiguously define it, say what color it is, point to where it is or explain how its parameters can somehow change when it has no parameters.

Question, do you wash the fingerpaint off your hands before you type?

Look Shirley, you are not supposed to let me get under your skin like I obviously just did.

Do you believe that you are omniscient? I don't, yet I never checked your trailer for any time machines, just like I never checked your tomato patch for any stone-history XML scanners. See Shirley, we only observe a small number of things in our lives, and reality is not determined by our wild sci-fi fantasies.

So you are denying the dinosaurs were once real, just based on the fact that I never saw a live one.

This is clearly schizzo

Are you saying your religion is 'schizzo'?
Perhaps you don't know what the word means.

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Says the moron who literally claims omniscience of the unobserved, distant past.

Says the moron who literally claims that he can "read" rocks for their life history.

Says the moron who literally believes that "amphibious" doesn't mean "amphibious."

Says the moron who literally believes that gold has no molecules.

Says the moron who literally believes that he has falsified all science created by Albert Einstein.

Says the moron who literally believes that the FBI have some sort of pressing need to interview him.

Says the moron who literally believes every press release that he reads ... because it's on the internet and therefore must be true.

Says the moron who literally believes that a global climate exists, despite remaining unable to unambiguously define it, say what color it is, point to where it is or explain how its parameters can somehow change when it has no parameters.

Question, do you wash the fingerpaint off your hands before you type?

Look Shirley, you are not supposed to let me get under your skin like I obviously just did.

Do you believe that you are omniscient? I don't, yet I never checked your trailer for any time machines, just like I never checked your tomato patch for any stone-history XML scanners. See Shirley, we only observe a small number of things in our lives, and reality is not determined by our wild sci-fi fantasies.

So you are denying the dinosaurs were once real, just based on the fact that I never saw a live one.

This is clearly schizzo

Are you saying your religion is 'schizzo'?
Perhaps you don't know what the word means.

Lots...

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Says the moron who literally claims omniscience of the unobserved, distant past.

Says the moron who literally claims that he can "read" rocks for their life history.

Says the moron who literally believes that "amphibious" doesn't mean "amphibious."

Says the moron who literally believes that gold has no molecules.

Says the moron who literally believes that he has falsified all science created by Albert Einstein.

Says the moron who literally believes that the FBI have some sort of pressing need to interview him.

Says the moron who literally believes every press release that he reads ... because it's on the internet and therefore must be true.

Says the moron who literally believes that a global climate exists, despite remaining unable to unambiguously define it, say what color it is, point to where it is or explain how its parameters can somehow change when it has no parameters.

Question, do you wash the fingerpaint off your hands before you type?

Look Shirley, you are not supposed to let me get under your skin like I obviously just did.

Do you believe that you are omniscient? I don't, yet I never checked your trailer for any time machines, just like I never checked your tomato patch for any stone-history XML scanners. See Shirley, we only observe a small number of things in our lives, and reality is not determined by our wild sci-fi fantasies.

So you are denying the dinosaurs were once real, just based on the fact that I never saw a live one.

This is clearly schizzo

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Says the moron who literally claims omniscience of the unobserved, distant past.

Says the moron who literally claims that he can "read" rocks for their life history.

Says the moron who literally believes that "amphibious" doesn't mean "amphibious."

Says the moron who literally believes that gold has no molecules.

Says the moron who literally believes that he has falsified all science created by Albert Einstein.

Says the moron who literally believes that the FBI have some sort of pressing need to interview him.

Says the moron who literally believes every press release that he reads ... because it's on the internet and therefore must be true.

Says the moron who literally believes that a global climate exists, despite remaining unable to unambiguously define it, say what color it is, point to where it is or explain how its parameters can somehow change when it has no parameters.

Question, do you wash the fingerpaint off your hands before you type?

Look Shirley, you are not supposed to let me get under your skin like I obviously just did.

Do you believe that you are omniscient? I don't, yet I never checked your trailer for any time machines, just like I never checked your tomato patch for any stone-history XML scanners. See Shirley, we only observe a small number of things in our lives, and reality is not determined by our wild sci-fi fantasies.

So you are denying the dinosaurs were once real, just based on the fact that I never saw a live one.

This is clearly schizzo

You are totally ignorant... Dinosaurs are real, some still alive. Saw some almost three weeks ago, down at the lake. Google 'living fossils' sometime, and see a list of other critters, plants and trees.

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Says the moron who literally claims omniscience of the unobserved, distant past.

Says the moron who literally claims that he can "read" rocks for their life history.

Says the moron who literally believes that "amphibious" doesn't mean "amphibious."

Says the moron who literally believes that gold has no molecules.

Says the moron who literally believes that he has falsified all science created by Albert Einstein.

Says the moron who literally believes that the FBI have some sort of pressing need to interview him.

Says the moron who literally believes every press release that he reads ... because it's on the internet and therefore must be true.

Says the moron who literally believes that a global climate exists, despite remaining unable to unambiguously define it, say what color it is, point to where it is or explain how its parameters can somehow change when it has no parameters.

Question, do you wash the fingerpaint off your hands before you type?

Look Shirley, you are not supposed to let me get under your skin like I obviously just did.

Do you believe that you are omniscient? I don't, yet I never checked your trailer for any time machines, just like I never checked your tomato patch for any stone-history XML scanners. See Shirley, we only observe a small number of things in our lives, and reality is not determined by our wild sci-fi fantasies.

So you are denying the dinosaurs were once real, just based on the fact that I never saw a live one.

This is clearly schizzo

You are totally ignorant... Dinosaurs are real, some still alive. Saw some almost three weeks ago, down at the lake. Google 'living fossils' sometime, and see a list of other critters, plants and trees.

Into the Night wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Says the moron who literally claims omniscience of the unobserved, distant past.

Says the moron who literally claims that he can "read" rocks for their life history.

Says the moron who literally believes that "amphibious" doesn't mean "amphibious."

Says the moron who literally believes that gold has no molecules.

Says the moron who literally believes that he has falsified all science created by Albert Einstein.

Says the moron who literally believes that the FBI have some sort of pressing need to interview him.

Says the moron who literally believes every press release that he reads ... because it's on the internet and therefore must be true.

Says the moron who literally believes that a global climate exists, despite remaining unable to unambiguously define it, say what color it is, point to where it is or explain how its parameters can somehow change when it has no parameters.

Question, do you wash the fingerpaint off your hands before you type?

Look Shirley, you are not supposed to let me get under your skin like I obviously just did.

Do you believe that you are omniscient? I don't, yet I never checked your trailer for any time machines, just like I never checked your tomato patch for any stone-history XML scanners. See Shirley, we only observe a small number of things in our lives, and reality is not determined by our wild sci-fi fantasies.

So you are denying the dinosaurs were once real, just based on the fact that I never saw a live one.

This is clearly schizzo

You are totally ignorant... Dinosaurs are real, some still alive. Saw some almost three weeks ago, down at the lake. Google 'living fossils' sometime, and see a list of other critters, plants and trees.

The word 'dinosaur' first appeared in the English lexicon in 1841. The word was coined by Sir Richard Owen using the Greek deinos (which itself stemmed from the Latin 'dire'), meaning 'terrible', and sauros or 'lizard'.

Any terrible lizard is a dinosaur. That would include the Komodo dragon, crocodiles, and alligators.

Dinosaurs are alive today.