Topics Top articles New articles Updated articles Top users New users New discussions Top discussions New comments+ New article
Founding CEO of Oxford Quantum Circuits.
As mentioned at www.investmentmonitor.ai/tech/innovation/in-conversation-with-oxford-quantum-circuits-ilana-wisby she is not the original tech person:Did they mean Oxford Sciences Enterprises? There's nothing called "Oxford Science and Innovation" on Google. Yes, it is just a typo oxfordscienceenterprises.com/news/meet-the-founder-ilana-wisby-ceo-of-oxford-quantum-circuits/ says it clearly:
she was finally headhunted by Oxford Science and Innovation to become the founding CEO of OQC. The company was spun out of Oxford University's physics department in 2017, at which point Wisby was handed "a laptop and a patent".
I was headhunted by Oxford Sciences Enterprises to be the founding CEO of OQC.
oxfordquantumcircuits.com/story mentions that the core patent was by Dr. Peter Leek: www.linkedin.com/in/peter-leek-00954b62/
Most notable example: gallium arsenide, see also: gallium arsenide vs silicon.
An important class of semiconductors, e.g. there is a dedicated III-V lab at: École Polytechnique: www.3-5lab.fr/contactus.php
Superconducting qubits are good because superconductivity is macroscopic by 
Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01
Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01Superconducting qubits are regarded as promising because superconductivity is a macroscopic quantum phenomena of Bose Einstein condensation, and so as a macroscopic phenomena, it is easier to control and observe.
This is mentioned e.g. in this relatively early: physicsworld.com/a/superconducting-quantum-bits/. While most quantum phenomena is observed at the atomic scale, superconducting qubits are micrometer scale, which is huge!
Physicists are comfortable with the use of quantum mechanics to describe atomic and subatomic particles. However, in recent years we have discovered that micron-sized objects that have been produced using standard semiconductor-fabrication techniques – objects that are small on everyday scales but large compared with atoms – can also behave as quantum particles.
Basically a precise statement of "quantum entanglement is spooky".
Quantum entanglement is often called spooky/surprising/unintuitive, but they key question is to understand why.
To understand that, you have to understand why it is fundamentally impossible for the entangled particle pair be in a predefined state according to experiments done e.g. where one is deterministically yes and the other deterministically down.
In other words, why local hidden-variable theory is not valid.
How to generate entangled particles:
- particle decay, notably pair production
- for photons, notably: spontaneous parametric down-conversion, e.g.: www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn1sEaw1K2k "Shanni Prutchi Construction of an Entangled Photon Source" by HACKADAY (2015). Estimatd price: 5000 USD.
Bell's Theorem: The Quantum Venn Diagram Paradox by minutephysics (2017)
Source. Contains the clearest Bell test experiment description seen so far.
It clearly describes the photon-based 22.5, 45 degree/85%/15% probability photon polarization experiment and its result conceptually.
It does not mention spontaneous parametric down-conversion but that's what they likely hint at.
Done in Collaboration with 3Blue1Brown.
Question asking further clarification on why the 100/85/50 thing is surprising: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/357039/why-is-the-quantum-venn-diagram-paradox-considered-a-paradox/597982#597982
Bell's Inequality I by ViaScience (2014)
Source. Quantum Entanglement & Spooky Action at a Distance by Veritasium (2015)
Source. Gives a clear explanation of a thought Bell test experiments with electron spin of electron pairs from photon decay with three 120-degree separated slits. The downside is that he does not clearly describe an experimental setup, it is quite generic.Quantum Mechanics: Animation explaining quantum physics by Physics Videos by Eugene Khutoryansky (2013)
Source. Usual Eugene, good animations, and not too precise explanations :-) youtu.be/iVpXrbZ4bnU?t=922 describes a conceptual spin entangled electron-positron pair production Stern-Gerlach experiment as a Bell test experiments. The 85% is mentioned, but not explained at all.Quantum Entanglement: Spooky Action at a Distance by Don Lincoln (2020)
Source. This only has two merits compared to Video 3. "Quantum Entanglement & Spooky Action at a Distance by Veritasium (2015)": it mentions the Aspect et al. (1982) Bell test experiment, and it shows the continuous curve similar to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bell.svg. But it just does not clearly explain the bell test.Quantum Entanglement Lab by Scientific American (2013)
Source. The hosts interview Professor Enrique Galvez of Colgate University who shows briefly the optical table setup without great details, and then moves to a whiteboard explanation. Treats the audience as stupid, doesn't say the keywords spontaneous parametric down-conversion and Bell's theorem which they clearly allude to. You can even them showing a two second footage of the professor explaining the rotation experiments and the data for it, but that's all you get. Superconducting qubits are bad because it is harder to ensure that they are all the same by Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01
Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01This is unlike atomic systems like trapped ion quantum computers, where each atom is necessarily exactly the same as the other.
- requires intense refrigeration to 15mK in dilution refrigerator. Note that this is much lower than the actual superconducting temperature of the metal, we have to go even lower to reduce noise enough, see e.g. youtu.be/uPw9nkJAwDY?t=471 from Video "Building a quantum computer with superconducting qubits by Daniel Sank (2019)"
- less connectivity, normally limited to 4 nearest neighbours, or maybe 6 for 3D approaches, e.g. compared to trapped ion quantum computers, where each trapped ion can be entangled with every other on the same chip
David Tong's 2009 Quantum Field Theory lectures at the Perimeter Institute by Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01
Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01Lecture notes: Quantum Field Theory lecture notes by David Tong (2007).
By David Tong.
14 1 hours 20 minute lectures.
The video resolution is extremely low, with images glued as he moves away from what he wrote :-) The beauty of the early Internet.
Physics 253a by Sidney Coleman (1986) by Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01
Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01 Richard Feynman Quantum Electrodynamics Lecture at University of Auckland (1979) by Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01
Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01Talk title shown on intro: "Today's Answers to Newton's Queries about Light".
6 hour lecture, where he tries to explain it to an audience that does not know any modern physics. This is a noble effort.
Part of The Douglas Robb Memorial Lectures lecture series.
Feynman apparently also made a book adaptation: QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter. That book is basically word by word the same as the presentation, including the diagrams.
According to www.feynman.com/science/qed-lectures-in-new-zealand/ the official upload is at www.vega.org.uk/video/subseries/8 and Vega does show up as a watermark on the video (though it is too pixilated to guess without knowing it), a project that has been discontinued and has has a non-permissive license. Newbs.
4 parts:This talk has the merit of being very experiment oriented on part 2, big kudos: how to teach and learn physics
- Part 1: is saying "photons exist"
- Part 2: is amazing, and describes how photons move as a sum of all possible paths, not sure if it is relativistic at all though, and suggests that something is minimized in that calculation (the action)
- Part 3: is where he hopelessly tries to explain the crucial part of how electrons join the picture in a similar manner to how photons do.He does make the link to light, saying that there is a function which gives the amplitude for a photon going from A to B, where A and B are spacetime events.And then he mentions that there is a similar function for an electron to go from A to B, but says that that function is too complicated, and gives no intuition unlike the photon one.He does not mention it, but P and E are the so called propagators.This is likely the path integral formulation of QED.On Quantum Mechanical View of Reality by Richard Feynman (1983) he mentions that is a Bessel function, without giving further detail.And also mentions that:where
mis basically a scale factor.
such that both are very similar. And that something similar holds for many other particles.And then, when you draw a Feynman diagram, e.g. electron emits photon and both are detected at given positions, you sum over all the possibilities, each amplitude is given by:summed over all possible Spacetime points.This is basically well said at: youtu.be/rZvgGekvHes?t=3349 from Quantum Mechanical View of Reality by Richard Feynman (1983).TODO: how do electron velocities affect where they are likely to end up? suggests the probability only depends on the spacetime points.Also, this clarifies why computations in QED are so insane: you have to sum over every possible point in space!!! TODO but then how do we calculate anything at all in practice? - Part 4: known problems with QED and thoughts on QCD. Boring.
Richard Feynman Quantum Electrodynamics Lecture at University of Auckland (1979) uploaded by Trev M (2015)
Source. Single upload version. Let's use this one for the timestamps I guess.- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=2217: photomultiplier tube
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=2410: local hidden-variable theory
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=6444: mirror experiment shown at en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Quantum_electrodynamics&oldid=991301352#Probability_amplitudes
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=7309: mirror experiment with a diffraction grating pattern painted black leads to reflection at a weird angle
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=7627: detector under water to explain refraction
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=8050: explains biconvex spherical lens in terms of minimal times
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=8402: mentions that for events in a series, you multiply the complex number of each step
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=9270: mentions that the up to this point, ignored:but it should not be too hard to add those
- amplitude shrinks down with distance
- photon polarization
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=11697: finally starts electron interaction. First point is to add time of event detection.
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=13704: electron between plates, and mentions the word action, without giving a clear enough idea of what it is unfortunately
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=14467: mentions positrons going back in time, but does not clarify it well enough
- youtu.be/Alj6q4Y0TNE?t=16614: on the fourth part, half is about frontiers in quantum electrodynamics, and half full blown theory of everything. The QED part goes into renormalization and the large number of parameters of the Standard Model
Quantum electrodynamics bibliography by Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01
Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01fafnir.phyast.pitt.edu/py3765/ Phys3765 Advanced Quantum Mechanics -- QFT-I Fall 2012 by E.S. Swanson mentions several milestone texts including:
Quantum particles take all possible paths by Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01
Ciro Santilli 35 Updated 2025-01-10 +Created 1970-01-01As mentioned at: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/212726/a-quantum-particle-moving-from-a-to-b-will-take-every-possible-path-from-a-to-b/212790#212790, classical gravity waves for example also "take all possible paths". This is just what waves look like they are doing.
Pinned article: ourbigbook/introduction-to-the-ourbigbook-project
Welcome to the OurBigBook Project! Our goal is to create the perfect publishing platform for STEM subjects, and get university-level students to write the best free STEM tutorials ever.
Everyone is welcome to create an account and play with the site: ourbigbook.com/go/register. We belive that students themselves can write amazing tutorials, but teachers are welcome too. You can write about anything you want, it doesn't have to be STEM or even educational. Silly test content is very welcome and you won't be penalized in any way. Just keep it legal!
We have two killer features:
- topics: topics group articles by different users with the same title, e.g. here is the topic for the "Fundamental Theorem of Calculus" ourbigbook.com/go/topic/fundamental-theorem-of-calculusArticles of different users are sorted by upvote within each article page. This feature is a bit like:
- a Wikipedia where each user can have their own version of each article
- a Q&A website like Stack Overflow, where multiple people can give their views on a given topic, and the best ones are sorted by upvote. Except you don't need to wait for someone to ask first, and any topic goes, no matter how narrow or broad
This feature makes it possible for readers to find better explanations of any topic created by other writers. And it allows writers to create an explanation in a place that readers might actually find it.
Figure 1. Screenshot of the "Derivative" topic page. View it live at: ourbigbook.com/go/topic/derivative - local editing: you can store all your personal knowledge base content locally in a plaintext markup format that can be edited locally and published either:This way you can be sure that even if OurBigBook.com were to go down one day (which we have no plans to do as it is quite cheap to host!), your content will still be perfectly readable as a static site.
- to OurBigBook.com to get awesome multi-user features like topics and likes
- as HTML files to a static website, which you can host yourself for free on many external providers like GitHub Pages, and remain in full control
Figure 2. You can publish local OurBigBook lightweight markup files to either OurBigBook.com or as a static website.
Figure 3. Visual Studio Code extension installation.
Figure 4. Visual Studio Code extension tree navigation.
Figure 5. . You can also edit articles on the Web editor without installing anything locally. Video 3. Edit locally and publish demo. Source. This shows editing OurBigBook Markup and publishing it using the Visual Studio Code extension.Video 4. OurBigBook Visual Studio Code extension editing and navigation demo. Source. - Internal cross file references done right:
- Infinitely deep tables of contents:
Figure 6. Dynamic article tree with infinitely deep table of contents.Live URL: ourbigbook.com/cirosantilli/chordateDescendant pages can also show up as toplevel e.g.: ourbigbook.com/cirosantilli/chordate-subclade
All our software is open source and hosted at: github.com/ourbigbook/ourbigbook
Further documentation can be found at: docs.ourbigbook.com
Feel free to reach our to us for any help or suggestions: docs.ourbigbook.com/#contact