Twitter | Pretraživanje | |
michael_nielsen
Searching for the numinous. Co-purveyor of
21.306
Tweetovi
3.412
Pratim
50.257
Osobe koje vas prate
Tweetovi
michael_nielsen 10 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @michael_nielsen
I am quite puzzled by this. I half wonder if I've simply messed up in relating Q and S, but I've checked the calculation twice, and I don't see it.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 10 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @michael_nielsen
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 10 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @michael_nielsen
This is well short of the maximal violation (Q = 2 sqrt(2) ~ 2.8). But AFAICT the Aspect experiment uses polarization angles that should give the maximal violation What gives? Have I goofed? Or am I missing something? Is it the cryptic remark about solid angles & efficiencies?
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 10 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @michael_nielsen
The more commonly stated form of the CHSH inequality is Q := E(AC)+ E(BC) + E(BD) - E(AD) <= 2, where A, B etc are the observables for the polarization (values +- 1). By my calculation, Q = 2+4S, so the experimental value in Aspect corresponds to Q ~ 2.404.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 10 h
A question for people who know about Bell inequalities: in the 1982 Aspect paper they present them in this form (a version of the CHSH inequality), with an experimental value (& violation) of S = 0.101
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @daveinstpaul
Alright, did that. Thanks for the suggestion!
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @ptraughber
Thanks!
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 2. velj
A few days ago someone DM'ed me, then immediately deleted their account. Since then, Twitter randomly does this (despite the fact that I've read the DM). Anyone know how to get this bug fixed? Small, but irritating.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @bohmian_rhapsdy
Nationalization very rarely results in healthy competitive marketplaces.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @michael_nielsen
Of course, in 1992 it was reasonable publishers hadn't yet figured out new business models. Nowadays, things have changed s'what, due to the work by open access & science advocates, but scientific publishing is still slow-moving for reasons described here:
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 2. velj
(ht Scott Aaronson)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @zooko @soonaorlater
No idea. Though I vaguely recall seeing an interview (maybe on YT?) with Murray where he talks about the same phenomenon. Perhaps Crichton crystallized the thought after talking with MGM? I certainly know what you mean about some ppl having a big impact in a short time!
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @jasoncrawford
TBC: I enjoyed your thread a lot!!! I also completely disagree with it :-)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @jasoncrawford
I was shocked to have venture capital explained to me, properly, the other day, and to understand the design it represented, and how it solves various problems with older models. And that it's then been a platform for other financial innovation (the Yale model; YC; other expts).
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @jasoncrawford
I believe almost all of finance is yet to be discovered. Non-abelian currencies are an example. Dominant assurance contracts. Quadratic voting for public goods. Virtualized corporations. Etc etc etc; it's easy to generate infinitely many ideas. Most won't work, but some will.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @zooko @soonaorlater
A tiny bit. Someone from whom I learned a lot, despite only ever really interacting three times.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @zooko @soonaorlater
You have a healthier attitude than that attributed to (the great) Murray Gell-Mann: "If I've seen further it's because I'm surrounded by dwarves." [I liked Murray, but I've heard it too often not to believe that quote.]
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @jasoncrawford
Curious, have you seen non-Abelian currencies anywhere? If I give you X dollars, then immediately after you give me Y dollars, it's the same as if we'd done it in reverse order. If you use a non-Abelian group, this is not true.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 31. sij
Odgovor korisniku/ci @troofzero
Yes! The first two sentences of that paragraph are what really make the passage for me. Just beautiful.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
michael_nielsen 31. sij
Odgovor korisniku/ci @C4COMPUTATION
That's delightful 😀 I suspect I read it about 3x as often as I tweet it. More nerd sniping: I cannot read a snippet from the Susan Sontag interview in PR without reading the entire thing. I _must not_ link to it now, or I'll just have to reread it again...
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"