The City of London is an obscene thing. Its existence goes against the will of the greater part of society. All it takes is one glance to see how it is but a bunch of corruption. See e.g.: The Spiders' Web: Britain's Second Empire.
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.
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
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 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.- Compiler toolchains generate and read ELF files.
- Operating systems read and run ELF files.
- Specialized libraries. Examples:
It is a bit hard to decide if those people are serious or not. Sometimes it feels scammy, but sometimes it feels fun and right!
Particularly concerning is the fact that they are not a not-for-profit entity, and it is hard to understand how they might make money.
Charles Simon, the founder, is pretty focused in how natural neurons work vs artificial neural network models. He has some good explanations of that, and one major focus of the project is their semi open source spiking neuron simulator BrainSimII. While Ciro Santilli believes that there might be insight in that, he also has doubts if certain modules of the brain wouldn't be more suitable coded directly in regular programming languages with greater ease and performance.
FutureAI appears to be Charles' retirement for fun project, he is likely independently wealthy. Well done.
- www.aitimejournal.com/interview-with-charles-simon-ceo-and-founder-futureai
- 2022 raised 2 million USD:
- youtu.be/ivbGbSx0K8k?t=856 general structure of the human brain 86B total, matching number of neurons in the human brain, with:
- 14B: brainstem
- 16B: neocortex
- 56B: cerebelum
- www.youtube.com/watch?t=1433 some sequencing ideas/conjectures
First published by Fourier in 1807 to solve the heat equation.
Appears to be an unsolved physics problem. TODO why? Don't they all fit into the Standard Model already? So why is strong force less unified with electroweak, than electromagnetic + weak is unified in electroweak?
Unlisted articles are being shown, click here to show only listed articles.