Ciro Santilli @cirosantilli 37

Example: Figure "caesium-137 decay scheme"

Modulation basically means encoding data on a carrier wave.

Image that we are at a point in history where spark-gap transmitters can send Morse code.

But now people want to send voice. How to do it?

It would not be practical without modulation: Why can't you send voice without modulation?

This LibreTexts book does have some interest!

For the UCSD Physics 130 course.

Last updated: 2013.

Very good! Goes up to the Dirac equation.

There were apparently some lecture videos at: web.archive.org/web/20030604194654/http://physicsstream.ucsd.edu/courses/spring2003/physics130a/ as pointed out by Matthew Heaney^[ref], .mov files can be found at: web.archive.org/web/*/http://physicsstream.ucsd.edu/courses/spring2003/physics130a/*, but we were yet unable to open them, related:

This is the true key question: what are the most important algorithms that would be accelerated by quantum computing?

Some candidates:

Do you have proper optimization or quantum chemistry algorithms that will make trillions?

Maybe there is some room for doubt because some applications might be way better in some implementations, but we should at least have a good general idea.

However, clear information on this really hard to come by, not sure why.

Whenever asked e.g. at: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/3390/can-anybody-provide-a-simple-example-of-a-quantum-computer-algorithm/3407 on Physics Stack Exchange people say the infinite mantra:

Lists:

At Section "Quantum computing is just matrix multiplication" we saw that making a quantum circuit actually comes down to designing one big unitary matrix.

We have to say though that that was a bit of a lie.

Quantum programmers normally don't just produce those big matrices manually from scratch.

Instead, they use quantum logic gates.

The following are the main reasons for that:

One important area of research and development of quantum computing is the development of benchmarks that allow us to compare different quantum computers to decide which one is more powerful than the other.

Ideally, we would like to be able to have a single number that predicts which computer is more powerful than the other for a wide range of algorithms.

However, much like in CPU benchmarking, this is a very complex problem, since different algorithms might perform differently in different architectures, making it very hard to sum up the architecture's capabilities to a single number as we would like.

The only thing that is directly comparable across computers is how two machines perform for a single algorithm, but we want a single number that is representative of many algorithms.

For example, the number of qubits would be a simple naive choice of such performance predictor number. But it is very imprecise, since other factors are also very important:

Quantum volume is another less naive attempt at such metric.

This is one of the first examples in most quantum field theory.

It usually does not involve any forces, just the interpretation of what the quantum field is.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=zv94slY6WqY&list=PLSpklniGdSfSsk7BSZjONcfhRGKNa2uou&index=2 Quantization Of A Free Real Scalar Field by Dietterich Labs (2019)

Founder: Peter Armstrong

The general idea is publishing entire books with usual copyright, but with gradual updates.

ruboss.com/ documents their stack, a somewhat similar choice to OurBigBook.com as of 2021, notably Next.js. But backend in Ruby on Rails. They actually managed Apollo/GraphQL, which Ciro Santilli would have liked, but din't have the patience for.

The founder/CEO Peter Armstrong www.linkedin.com/in/peterburtonarmstrong/ He looks like a nice guy.

proteins also have a half-life, much like RNA. But it tends to be longer.

The only isotope found on Earth because it occurs as part of the uranium 238 decay chain, i.e., it is not a primordial nuclide.

Interestingly it is a bit less stable than other isotopesL such as Polonium-208 (3 y) and Polonium-209 (124 y), but those aren't in any Earthly radioactive chain so they don't show up on Earth.

Ah, Ciro Santilli was not expecting this. What a unique mixture of humour, technology, politics and bravery. No wonder it was a box flop, there's something good about this film.