4 ms·
Best-ever quantum measurement breaks Heisenberg limit
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- awsomesauce 16y agoIs it just me who sees a science title and think "wow", then look at the link to newscientist.com and think "ahh, must be bullshit".
- vain 16y agoi take newscientist with a few grains of salt. I have come across misleading information here. They are not a peer reviewed journal.
- vain 16y agothe link to the nature article http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v471/n7339/full/nature09778.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v471/n7339/full/nature0...
- gsivil 16y agoThe peer review process is broken. This is sad from the perspective that it is not easy to trust anything anymore. But at the same time fortunate because everyone in science has to prepare herself for judging independently the articles that are served by the journals
- elwin 16y agoDon't be confused: this article is not referring to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which limits simultaneous measurements of position and momentum (or other paired quantities). This is about the less famous Heisenberg limit, which describes the measurement of a single parameter in a system of multiple particles.
- Confusion 16y agoSearching for 'Heisenberg limit' also shows that it isn't a very common term: most of the top hits are (indirect) references to this and similar papers.
- yxhuvud 16y agoIn this house we obey the laws of physics!
- td 16y agoFor a minute I thought they were referring to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, in which case this would have been really shocking news (or, more likely, false reporting). This 'Heisenberg limit' seems to be more of a technical issue in quantum measurements (the abstract of the original paper also mentions that previous theoretical work had already hinted at this possibility). Can anybody familiar enough with the subject tell us how impressive this is?