No, scientists didn’t just “reverse time” with a quantum computer
|
3
points
No, scientists didn’t just “reverse time” with a quantum computer Um. Yes they did. Physicists Just Reversed Time on The Smallest Scale https://www.sciencealert.com/ Physicists Reverse Time Using Quantum Computer https://science.slashdot. Turning back time. Researchers use quantum computer to reverse time https://sciscomedia.co.uk/reverse-time/ Physicists REVERSE time Burritto banned me in his thread, but had this to say to me... The experiment in the article SPECIFICALLY refers to the evolution of the state of an electron within the computer, NOT A FUCKING "COMPUTER PROGRAM". Yet, the programs for creating those circuits are "Qiskit and Cirq" used to manipulate the experiments. The paper also says it is indeed a simulation. So, because BurrittoBrain didn't (isn't capable) read the research paper but instead referred to pop sci internet sites, he once again looks like an ass. A quote from the scientific paper: "Here we show that, while in nature the complex conjugation needed for time reversal is exponentially improbable, one can design a quantum algorithm that includes complex conjugation and thus reverses a given quantum state." These scientists NEVER CLAIMED that they had reversed TIME, contrary to the what hyped up bullshit stories written by asshole journalists tell us. Reversing a quantum state of a particle is not the same as sending it back in time. The physicists tried to change the wave function to the conjugate state, which according to Shrodinger equation, makes it evolve in reverse order, but that doesn't make time go bacwards. And they only succeeded in bringing the wave function back to a similar state, which overlapped only 86% with the initial wave function. The exact classical mechanics analogy is if a billiard ball bounces off a wall and goes backwadrs to where it came from. It is an exact analogy, unlike what some retards think, because of Erenfest's theorem according to which average values of a quantum observable value evolve according to classical mechanics law. Changing a particle's wave function to complex conjugate is an exact analogy of reversing the speed of a classical particle. Burrito wrote this and if anyone can make sense of this insanity well good luck ! Scott Aaronson, director of the Quantum Information Center at the University of Texas at Austin Scott Aaronson is literally a professor of COMPUTER SCIENCE. He is not a physicist and had absolutely no involvement with the experiment under discussion Their stupidity must be very tiring on their mental stability ! So if they didn’t invent time travel, what did these scientists actually do? Think about pressing rewind on a video. That “reverses the flow of time,” in a way. If you’ve never seen it before, it’s kind of neat. It might let you see things—like steam flowing back into a tea kettle or Humpty Dumpty spontaneously assembling from a jumble of broken pieces—that appear to “reverse the arrow of time.” The paper in question describes a quantum-computing version of such a video running in reverse. A closer analogy is a lens, like what one would find in a telescope, a microscope, or eyeglasses. A lens can be used to focus light—“reversing” the dispersal of light that had gone out of focus. The authors of the paper, from the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois, and ETH Zurich, say their technique might be useful for testing quantum programs. This is correct. But it’s a lot less interesting than a time machine. As Scott Aaronson, director of the Quantum Information Center at the University of Texas at Austin, says, “If you’re simulating a time-reversible process on your computer, then you can ‘reverse the direction of time’ by simply reversing the direction of your simulation. From a quick look at the paper, I confess that I didn’t understand how this becomes more profound if the simulation is being done on IBM’s quantum computer.” Other quantum computing experts we spoke to agreed. One, who did not wish to be named, said: “I don’t know how useful this is … it doesn’t mean that these guys made a time machine. They certainly didn’t violate the laws of thermodynamics or the laws of physics.” He added: “This is the type of hype that is going to give quantum computing a bad name.” From Technology Review 3
points
Scott Aaronson, director of the Quantum Information Center at the University of Texas at Austin Scott Aaronson is literally a professor of COMPUTER SCIENCE. He is not a physicist and had absolutely no involvement with the experiment under discussion. OMG, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID??? He’s an authority on the subject at hand you Troll "Quantum computing democritus | Quantum physics, quantum information and quantum computation". Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 2017-09-09. ^ "PHYS771 Quantum Computing Since Democritus". www.scottaaronson.com. Retrieved 2017-09-09. 2
points
A closer analogy is a lens, like what one would find in a telescope, a microscope, or eyeglasses. A lens can be used to focus light—“reversing” the dispersal of light that had gone out of focus. Oh, a "closer analogy" to moving a singular electron back in time to an earlier quantum state of order is "a telescope"??? ROFLMAO. You are an utterly pointlessly stupid Irish dickhead who would sooner scour the web for bad information than take good information from someone you are desperate to create the impression you are more intelligent than. I refer you back to the John Cleese meme I posted earlier. Other quantum computing experts we spoke to agreed Has anybody explained to this astonishingly stupid tool that physicists are the only people qualified to explain quantum mechanics? Computer science has got absolutely nothing to do with this experiment. I've got a friend with a degree in computer science and he knows literally nothing about quantum mechanics. He's a goddamned glorified programmer. Computer science has got absolutely nothing to do with this experiment. Of course, it has everything to do. The pysicists understand physics while the computer scientists understand the computer. Obviously, the physicists have to get the computer scientists involved because that's what they do and that's who the physicists need in order to program and run the simulations. Duh. |
