masteranza

8 ms·

31.
by masteranza 6y ago
Exactly. ELI5 is that quantum teleportation is (sadly) a marketing phrase. It is 2020 and such phrases as "teleported an object" are simply a mischief.
32.
by masteranza 6y ago
Routine Feat? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZExWeqHajLg
33.
Cantor was Wrong: debunking the infinite set hierarchy(vitalik.ca)
12 points by masteranza 6y ago|15 comments
34.
by masteranza 6y ago
Anyone installing it on older Macs? Catalina had an improved performance compared with Mojave on my MBA 2013, but I'm hesitant about Big Sur.
35.
by masteranza 6y ago
1. Why is your account just 2 weeks old? 2. Apparently the testimony is based on the story told by who are trying hard to get their sentences reduced. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/06/25/assa
36.
by masteranza 6y ago
Predicted by Luboš: https://motls.blogspot.com/2020/05/may-11th-12th-could-be-gr...
37.
by masteranza 6y ago
It sounds like the author might have been better off turning into science than technology.
38.
by masteranza 7y ago
The example the author provided is too trivial to convince me to use lean.
39.
by masteranza 7y ago
You’re correct. Good point.
40.
by masteranza 7y ago
To take a perfectly rational conclusion and call it sexist is quite a deriding trick, isn’t it? You’d need to try really hard to disprove different interest of men and women, as literature suggests differences from a very young age, even be
41.
by masteranza 7y ago
From quite long time ago women are accepted to universities. Yet to prove your point about "law being fixed long time ago" you refer to news from few months ago.
42.
by masteranza 7y ago
You're right about one thing "patriarchal BS". The theory that there should be more women at some particular job sector has now reached a tipping point where it no longer makes sense because it is non-disprovable. Really, is
43.
by masteranza 7y ago
At the moment the problem of superseding ordinary computers still looks like one of technical/engineering nature. If achieving this is not possible even in principle it could lead to some new developments. There are some people conside
44.
by masteranza 7y ago
Indeed, you're correct. I don't know if someone put it like this intentionally or not, but looking at the number of people who jumped into the incorrect conclusion, it has the same effect as misleading headline.
45.
by masteranza 7y ago
Also a physicist here, this is correct. Some details for anyone interested https://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.2483.pdf
46.
by masteranza 7y ago
Doesn't change the fact that it is misleading. "No single X cause" sounds as if it has no basis in X.
47.
by masteranza 7y ago
Indeed. Not only can one get a glance of a unique perspective of one of the founding fathers, but also a lot of important facts not covered in many other textbooks. One of such facts are the low heat capacities of atoms that do not fit any
48.
by masteranza 8y ago
Except that you've got the point completely upside down! At first people didn't believe in heliocentrism because it used circular orbits, and instead used to believe that the universe is better described from the geocentric point
49.
by masteranza 8y ago
There's no need for anyone to read her book, because it's just a pile of garbage written by someone who doesn't have a clue about modern physics. Hossenfelder is an armchair physicist who failed in her discipline and started
50.
by masteranza 8y ago
You're point is valid, yet I still find it very unlikely. At some point after numerous tries you might even start fooling yourself (and others). I'll give the guy a chance though.
51.
by masteranza 8y ago
I've already tested this 6 years ago with a friend. We had this idea that it could be possible by putting our skulls close together. We've tried a variety of techniques from thinking about a specific number from 1-10, one of us vi
52.
by masteranza 8y ago
Yep, if you're still using Mendeley, you should move to Zotero immediately. I have used Papers app for some time, but they've worked on the desktop app way too long after their merge with ReadCube and now I'm happy with my fr
53.
by masteranza 8y ago
It seems like you've really missed the crucial part. The whole point is to have a theory which will mirror the relations of objects in the world not the objects themselves . The former leads to truth, the latter is silly. All th
54.
by masteranza 8y ago
Well, I'm always enthusiastic when I see such new developments and I'm certainly going to read through it later in the evening. That being said, I'm also more skeptical whether this has a chance to work, especially if it&#x27
55.
by masteranza 8y ago
Except, that most scientists (physicists that I know) who independently checked the issue seem to agree with Lubos.
56.
by masteranza 8y ago
So which facts did he get wrong exactly? Sure, it may looks so, but so far everything I've read on this blog is correct.
57.
by masteranza 8y ago
Also much more on methane in particular: https://motls.blogspot.com/search?q=methane
58.
by masteranza 8y ago
Not saying we shouldn't pay attention when some estimates are wrong, but perhaps it's not the best idea to take an alarmist's attitude: https://motls.blogspot.com/2018/06/hansens-testimony-30th-an...
59.
by masteranza 8y ago
With all fairness don't you think this is not really time-crystal formation in the strict sense (those have been shown to be impossible), but rather an analogue to a "forced" crystal formation? I.e. the direct analogue would
60.
by masteranza 11y ago
That's a good piece of advice, although it always bothered me to create flashcards. I create cloze flashcards from notebooks of my knowledge: https://github.com/masteranza/MathematicaAnki

More ›