Category Archives: Quantum Physics
Physics – Measuring the Similarity of Photons – Physics
September 2, 2022• Physics 15, 135
A new optical device measures photon indistinguishabilityan important property for future light-based quantum computers.
L. Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass (1871), illustrated by J. Tenniel; adapted by A. Crespi/Polytechnic University of Milan
L. Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass (1871), illustrated by J. Tenniel; adapted by A. Crespi/Polytechnic University of Milan
Photons can be used to perform complex computations, but they must be identical or close to identical. A new device can determine the extent to which several photons emitted by a source are indistinguishable [1]. Previous methods only gave a rough estimate of the indistinguishability, but the new method offers a precise measurement. The devicewhich is essentially an arrangement of interconnected waveguidescould work as a diagnostic tool in a quantum optics laboratory.
In optical quantum computing, sequences of photons are made to interact with each other in complex optical circuits (see Synopsis: Quantum Computers Approach Milestone for Boson Sampling). For these computations to work, the photons must have the same frequency, the same polarization, and the same time of arrival in the device. Researchers can easily check if two photons are indistinguishable by sending them through a type of interferometer in which two waveguidesone for each photoncome close enough that one photon can hop into the neighboring waveguide. If the two photons are perfectly indistinguishable, then they always end up together in the same waveguide.
For larger sets of photons, this kind of pairwise testing becomes impractical, as it has to be repeated for all possible two-photon combinations. Researchers have devised approximate methods, but they only give upper and lower bounds on the indistinguishability. When you have more than two photons, it is not so easy to assess whether they are identical, says Andrea Crespi from the Polytechnic University of Milan.
Crespi and his colleagues have come up with a simple method to determine the indistinguishability of multiple photons by letting them interact in a highly coordinated array of waveguides. As a first demonstration, the team constructed a system for four photons. They started with a glass slab and used a laser-writing technique to imprint eight high-density tubes for guiding photons through the slab. These waveguides are like an eight-lane freeway for photon drivers who can change lanes at specific points where neighboring lanes touch. For example, lane 2 touches lanes 1 and 3 at specific locations. A similar bridge also connects lanes 1 and 8, so that every lane touches two neighbors.
Using a semiconductor source called a quantum dot, the team repeatedly fed four photons into the odd lanes (1, 3, 5, 7) and recorded which lanes were occupied with a photon at the end of the freeway. Many final lane arrangements were observed, such as (1, 3, 5, 6) and (2, 4, 6, 8). Next the researchers heated one of the lanes with a laser to gradually change its index of refraction, which induced an oscillation in the probabilities for some of the final lane arrangements. These oscillations implied that interference effects were influencing the lane changes.
The team showed theoretically that the amplitude of the oscillations gives the so-called genuine indistinguishability, which is a number from 0 to 1, where 1 corresponds to perfectly identical photons. They found an indistinguishability of 0.8, meaning their system had some imperfections. The researchers also showed that they could make the oscillations disappear by rotating the polarization of one input photonthus making it distinguishable from the others.
The technique can conceivably work with more photons, but the number of measurements needed to see the lane-arrangement variation grows exponentially with the number of photons. So Crespi admits that it would be impractical for future optical computers dealing with 100 photons or more. Still, he foresees their device as a way to troubleshoot a quantum optics experiment when there is some doubt about the indistinguishability of the input photons. Our experiment adds a tool to the toolbox of the quantum optics experimenter, he says.
This paper reports a useful method to diagnose photonic quantum circuits by measuring the multiphoton indistinguishability, an important metric that is very sensitive to experimental imperfections, says quantum information specialist Chao-Yang Lu from the University of Science and Technology of China. Its a very clever interferometer design, says quantum optics expert Wolfgang Lffler from Leiden University in the Netherlands. He is also impressed by the optical system that generates and separates the photon sequence. Getting everything to work together is a major effort, Lffler says.
Michael Schirber
Michael Schirber is a Corresponding Editor forPhysics Magazine based in Lyon, France.
Mathias Pont, Riccardo Albiero, Sarah E. Thomas, Nicol Spagnolo, Francesco Ceccarelli, Giacomo Corrielli, Alexandre Brieussel, Niccolo Somaschi, Hlio Huet, Abdelmounaim Harouri, Aristide Lematre, Isabelle Sagnes, Nadia Belabas, Fabio Sciarrino, Roberto Osellame, Pascale Senellart, and Andrea Crespi
Phys. Rev. X 12, 031033 (2022)
Published September 2, 2022
The rest is here:
Unexplored Quantum Realm to Webb Reveals a Very Weird Alien Planet (The Galaxy Report) – The Daily Galaxy –Great Discoveries Channel
Posted on Sep 1, 2022 in Astrobiology, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Extraterrestrial Life, James Webb Space Telescope, quantum physics, Science, Science News, Space News, Universe
Todays stories from our amazing Universe include Will NASA Beat China to a Giant Radio Telescope on the Moons Far Side to What will Humanitys Legacy to the Universe Be, and much more.
Webb Snaps Its First Image Of An Exoplanet And Its A Very Weird World The unusual world is among the first targets studied by the new space observatory, reports IFL Science. The world in question is called HIP 65426b and its truly puzzling. Previous claims said it shouldnt exist as it doesnt fit our models of exoplanets (planets outside the Solar System), so observations of it are crucial to help astronomers develop better ones.
What will humanitys legacy to the Universe be? The last 70 years have taken us farther than the previous 70,000. But can we accomplish more than creating a record saying, We were here? asks Big Think.
Unexplored Quantum Realm about 3 Billion Times Colder than Deep Space, reports Rice University Japanese and U.S. physicists have used atoms about 3 billion times colder than interstellar space to open a portal to an unexplored realm of quantum magnetism.
NASAs Next Launch Attempt for Artemis I Will Occur September 3Technical glitches and questionable weather forecasts continue to delay liftoff for NASAs landmark lunar mission, reports Scientific American.
NASA Unveils Candidate Landing Sites for Artemis AstronautsWhen humans return to the moon, theyll likely visit one of these 13 regions near the moons south pole, reports Scientific American.
NASA and China Want to Land on the Same Areas on the Moon. They may have to compete for the limited resources on the lunar surface, reports Gizmodo. NASAs Artemis 3 mission has its sights set on the Moons south pole, a particularly valuable area since it may contain water ice in its shadowed regions.
Unobstructed Window on the Cosmos Will NASA Beat China to a Giant Radio Telescope on Moons Far Side? asks The Daily Galaxy. NASA better move fast! In February of 2019, China established the first human-technology landing site on Moons far side that they named The Milky Way Base. China has named the landing site of its Change-4 lunar probe (image landing above) Statio Tianhe after the Chinese name for the Milky Way Galaxy for the first-ever soft landing on the far side of the moon.
The Milky Way An Autobiography of Our Galaxy
Immortal Mystery ObjectEvery Brown Dwarf Ever Created Still Exists, reports The Daily Galaxy. Unlike stars, brown dwarfs cool as they age morphing in their appearance.
Webb inspects the heart of the Phantom Galaxy The Phantom Galaxy is around 32 million light-years away from Earth in the constellation Pisces, and lies almost face-on to Earth. This, coupled with its well-defined spiral arms, makes it a favorite target for astronomers studying the origin and structure of galactic spirals.
NASA Webbs First Full-Color Images, Data Are Set to Sound, reports NASATheres a new, immersive way to explore some of the first full-color infrared images and data from NASAs James Webb Space Telescope through sound. Listeners can enter the complex soundscape of the Cosmic Cliffs in the Carina Nebula, explore the contrasting tones of two images that depict the Southern Ring Nebula, and identify the individual data points in a transmission spectrum of hot gas giant exoplanet WASP-96 b.
Object Bigger than Pluto Discovered, Called 10th Planet, reports Robert Roy Britt for Space.com The new object, temporarily named 2003 UB313, is about three times as far from the Sun as is Pluto.
Jupiters true colors pop in new images from NASAs Juno mission, reports Tereza Pultarova for Space.com
1.7 billion years ago, Earth had a natural nuclear reactor Planets can create nuclear power on their own, naturally, without any intelligence or technology. Earth already did: 1.7 billion years ago, reports Big Think.
New telescopes seek the cosmic dark ages Radio astronomers look to far-flung locations to detect low-frequency signals that emanate from the ancient universe, reports Physics Today.
More here:
Physics – A Wire on the Edge – Physics
September 1, 2022• Physics 15, s114
A cold-atom experiment suggests that interactions between particles can induce the coexistence of localized and extended states in a quantum wire.
In a 1D wire, the presence of impurities can halt the flow of any noninteracting particles, a process known as localization. Localized and conducting noninteracting particles cannot coexist in a 1D wire, so these impurities can limit the wires transport capabilities. Now Yunfei Wang from Shanxi University, China, and colleagues show that researchers could get around this localization problem if they instead use interacting particles [1]. The team says that the insights provided by their 1D study could be relevant to 3D systems.
For their experiments, the team created an artificial wire in a synthetic dimension defined by the momentum states of ultracold cesium atoms. They cooled the atoms to 10 nK, a temperature at which the atoms formed a Bose-Einstein condensate. Shining lasers on the atoms induced in the atoms controlled momentum-state changes such that an atom changing momentum states emulated a particle traveling through a wire. The team included impurities in the system by tuning the lasers to produce energy mismatches between the energy states of different atoms. The resulting interactions between atoms echoed the interactions between particles. Finally, by detecting the atoms momenta after experiencing momentum-state changes, the team inferred the analogous particle position in the wire.
The teams measurements show that a wire with interacting particles supports rich quantum transport behavior. Depending on the strength of the interactions and the level of impurities in the wire, it can behave as either a conductor, an insulator, or both, improving the wires transport abilities. The team says that their atom wire is analogous to a disordered optical waveguide. As such they say that their results could help in designing strategies to improve information propagation in photonic lattices.
Martin Rodriguez-Vega
Martin Rodriguez-Vega is an Associate Editor for Physical Review Letters.
Yunfei Wang, Jia-Hui Zhang, Yuqing Li, Jizhou Wu, Wenliang Liu, Feng Mei, Ying Hu, Liantuan Xiao, Jie Ma, Cheng Chin, and Suotang Jia
Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 103401 (2022)
Published September 1, 2022
Read this article:
Quantum physics is on the cusp of an astonishing revolution in low-energy technology Professor Brian Gerardot – The Scotsman
Heterostructures are different layers of atoms stacked on top of each other to form a single structure. They were first proposed in 1959 by the physicist Richard Feynman, who famously asked: What would the properties of materials be if we could arrange atoms just the way we want them?
Over the following decades, researchers developed the ability to engineer the arrangement of atoms through which particles such as electrons (particles of charge) or photons (particles of light) travel.
This allowed scientists to probe, understand, and eventually control the quantum mechanical properties of the particles the behaviour of matter and light creating a toolkit for the technological development of electronics and photonics.
Today, heterostructures are everywhere; they enable technologies such as transistors in computers, solar cells, LED lighting, and lasers. Even the internet would not be possible without use of heterostructures.
Until now, our use of heterostructures has been limited to taking advantage of isolated, individual particles, where their interactions are negligible.
However, if scientists could understand and take control of the interactions between particles within heterostructures, unimagined new technologies will become possible.
Like dancers in a ballet, interacting particles can coordinate their movements in surprising ways. Strongly interacting electrons can: dance together in their place to generate strong magnets; completely stop their journey through a crystal as if frozen to create insulators; or pair up to zoom through a crystal without any resistance to create a superconductor.
Unfortunately, the precise steps in the choreography of interacting particles are tricky to control, and in many cases not even well understood, which prevents their implementation in technologies.
However, an unexpected recent discovery has renewed optimism that this difficult problem can now be tackled.
If two sheets of carbon atoms, called graphene, are placed on top of each other with a relative twist of precisely 1.1 degrees the so-called magic angle an abundance of correlated electron states miraculously appear.
Graphene, the wonder material found in graphite pencil lead, is completely non-magnetic and does not host strongly correlated states. However, when two layers are stacked at the magic angle, it can be switched from insulating to magnetic to superconducting with the use of a tiny battery.
The discovery of these astonishing features is now driving a revolution in our ability to produce, study, and take advantage of heterostructures.
Through these ventures into strongly correlated quantum materials, a whole new generation of low-energy technologies and tools, beyond anything we can currently imagine, becomes ever more likely.
Brian Gerardot is professor at the Institute of Photonics and Quantum Science at Heriot-Watt University, a current chair in emerging technologies at the Royal Academy of Engineering, and a fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. This article expresses his own views. The RSE is Scotland's national academy, bringing great minds together to contribute to the social, cultural and economic well-being of Scotland. Find out more at rse.org.uk and @RoyalSocEd.
Excerpt from:
Protons Contain a Particle That’s Heavier Than the Proton Itself – Popular Mechanics
Protons are particles that exist in the nucleus of all atoms, with their number defining the elements themselves. Protons, however, are not fundamental particles. Rather, they are composite particles made up of smaller subatomic particles, namely two up quarks and one down quark bound together by force-carrying particles (bosons) called gluons.
This structure isnt certain, however, and quantum physics suggests that along with these three quarks, other particles should be popping into and out of existence at all times, affecting the mass of the proton. This includes other quarks and even quark-antiquark pairs.
Indeed, the deeper scientists have probed the structure of the proton with high-energy particle collisions, the more complicated the situation has become. As a result, for around four decades, physicists have speculated that protons may host a heavier form of quark than up and down quarks called intrinsic charm quarks, but confirmation of this has been elusive.
Now, by exploiting a high-precision determination of the quark-gluon content of the proton and by examining 35 years worth of data, particle physics data researchers have discovered evidence that the proton does contain intrinsic charm quarks.
What makes this result more extraordinary is that this flavor of quark is one-and-a-half times more massive than the proton itself. Yet when it is a component of the proton, the charm quark still only accounts for around half of the composite particles mass.
This counter-intuitive setup is a consequence of the weirdness of quantum mechanics, the physics that governs the subatomic world. This requires thinking of the structure of a particle and what can be found within it as probabilistic in nature.
There are six kinds of quarks in nature, three are lighter than the proton [up, down, and strange quarks] and three are heavier [charm, up, and down quarks], Stefano Forte, NNPDF Collaboration team leader and professor of theoretical Physics at Milan University, tells the Nature Briefing podcast. One would think that only the lighter quarks are inside the proton, but actually, the laws of quantum physics allow also for the heavier quarks to be inside the proton.
Fortethe lead author of a paper published earlier this month in the journal Nature, describing the researchand his team set out to discover if the lightest of these heavier quarks, the charm quark, is present in the proton.
When the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and other particle accelerators smash protons against each other (and other particles, like electrons) at high energies, what emerges is a shower of particles. This can be used to reconstruct the composition of the original particle and the particles that comprised it, collectively known as partons.
Each of these partons carries away a portion of the overall momentum of the systemthe momentum distributionwith this share of momentum known as the momentum fraction.
Forte and colleagues fed 35 years of data from particle accelerators, including the worlds largest and most powerful machine of this kind, the LHC, to a computer algorithm that pieces proton structure back together by looking for a best fit for its structure at high-energies. From here, the team calculated the structure for the proton when it is at rest.
This resulted in the first evidence that protons do indeed sometimes have charm quarks. These are labeled intrinsic because they are part of the proton for a long time and are still present when the proton is at rest, meaning it doesnt emerge from the high-energy interaction with another particle.
You have a chance, which is small but not negligible, of finding a charm quark in the proton, and when you do find one, it so happens that that charm quark is typically carrying about half of the proton mass, Forte says on the podcast. This is quantum physics, so everything is probabilistic.
Romona Vogt is a high-energy physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in California, who wrote a News and Views piece for Nature to accompany the new research paper.
She explains to Popular Mechanics how charm quarks could be connected to proton structure and how the intrinsic charm quark scenario differs from the standard scenario that sees protons comprised of just two up and one down quarks joined by gluons.
Charm quarks come in quark-antiquark pairs in both the standard scenario and the intrinsic charm one, Vogt says. In the standard scenario, a gluon radiates this pairing during a high-energy interaction. Because of the charm quarks mass, it is too heavy to be part of the sea of light up, down, and strange quarks.
This means the charm quark doesnt have a large role when physicists calculate the standard parton momentum distribution functions until momentum reaches a threshold above mass.
Thats very different from the intrinsic charm scenario where the charm distribution carries a large fraction of the proton momentum, Vogt adds. Because in the intrinsic charm quark scenario, the quark-antiquark pair is attached to more than one of the up and down quarks in the proton they travel with. Thats why the charm quarks appear at large momentum fractions.
The proton is more or less empty in this scenario or has a small size configuration because the proton is just up, up, down quarks and charm quark pairs with no other quarks at low momentum fractions in the minimal model of intrinsic charm.
Vogt suggests that the NNPDF Collaborations results could lead other researchers to ask if other quarks could play a role in the composition of protons.
One question these findings might raise is whether or not there are other intrinsic quark scenarios, like intrinsic bottom and intrinsic strangeness, she says.
View post:
Protons Contain a Particle That's Heavier Than the Proton Itself - Popular Mechanics
AWS Takes the Short and Long View of Quantum Computing – HPCwire
It is perhaps not surprising that the big cloud providers a poor term really have jumped into quantum computing. Amazon, Microsoft Azure, Google, and their like have steadily transformed into major technology developers, no doubt in service of their large cloud services offerings. The same is true internationally. You may not know, for example, that Chinas cloud giants Baidu, Alibaba, and Tencent also all have significant quantum development initiatives.
The global cloud crowd tends to leave no technology stone unturned and quantum was no different. Now the big players are all-in. At Amazon, most of the public attention has centered on Braket, its managed quantum services offering that provides tools for learning and access to a variety of quantum computers. Less well-known are Amazons Quantum Solutions Lab, Center for Quantum Computing, and Center for Quantum Networking, the last just launched in June. These four initiatives capture the scope of AWSs wide-ranging quantum ambitions, which include building a fault-tolerant quantum computer.
HPCwire recently talked with Simone Severini, director, quantum computing, AWS, about its efforts. A quantum physicist by training, Severini has been with AWS for ~ four years. He reports to AWSs overall engineering chief, Bill Vass. Noting that theres not much evidence that NISQ era systems will provide decisive business value soon, Severini emphasized quantum computing is a long-term bet. Now is the time for watching, learning, and kicking the tires on early systems.
Amazon Braket provides a huge opportunity for doing that. Customers can keep an eye on the dynamics of the evolution of this technology. We believe theres really not a single path to quantum computing. Its very, very early, right. This is a point that I like to stress, said Severini. I come from academia and have been exposed to quantum computing, one way or another, for over two decades. Its amazing to see the interest in the space. But we also need to be willing to set the right expectations. Its definitely very, very early still in quantum computing.
Launched in 2019, AWS describes Braket as a fully managed quantum computing service designed to help speed up scientific research and software development for quantum computing. This is not unlike what most big quantum computer makers, such D-Wave, IBM and Rigetti also provide.
The premise is to provide all the quantum tools and hardware infrastructure required for new and more experienced quantum explorers to use on a pay-as-you-go basis. Indeed, in the NISQ era, many believe such portal offerings are the only realistic way to deliver quantum computing. Cloud providers (and other concierge-like service providers such Strangeworks, for example) have the advantage of being able to provide access to several different systems.
With Braket, said Severini, Users dont have to sign contracts. Just go there, and you have everything you need to see whats going on [in quantum computing], to program or to simulate, and to use quantum computers directly. We have multiple devices with different [qubit] technologies on the service. The hope is that on one side, customers can indeed keep an eye on the technology on the other side, researchers can run experiments and hopefully contribute to knowledge as well contribute to science.
Braket currently offers access to quantum computers based on superconducting, trapped ion, photonic, and quantum annealers. Presumably other qubit technologies, cold atoms for example, will be added over time.
Interestingly, Braket is also a learning tool for AWS. Its an important exercise for us as well, because in this way, we can envision how quantum computers one day, would really feed a complex, cloud based infrastructure. Today, the workloads on Braket are all experimental, but for us, its important to learn things like security or operator usability, and the management of resources that we do for customers, said Severini. This is quite interesting, because in the fullness of time, a quantum computer could be used together with a lot of other classical resources, including HPC.
On the latter point, there is growing belief that much of quantum computing may indeed become a hybrid effort with some pieces of applications best run on quantum computers and other parts best run on classical resources. Well see. While it is still early days for the pursuit of hybrid classical-quantum computing, AWS launched Amazon Braket Hybrid late year. Heres an excerpt of AWSs description:
Amazon Braket Hybrid Jobs enables you to easily run hybrid quantum-classical algorithms such as the Variational Quantum Eigensolver (VQE) and the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA), that combine classical compute resources with quantum computing devices to optimize the performance of todays quantum systems. With this new feature, you only have to provide your algorithm script and choose a target device a quantum processing unit (QPU) or quantum circuit simulator. Amazon Braket Hybrid Jobs is designed to spin up the requested classical resources when your target quantum device is available, run your algorithm, and release the instances after completion so you only pay for what you use. Braket Hybrid Jobs can provide live insights into algorithm metrics to monitor your algorithm as it progresses, enabling you to make adjustments more quickly. Most importantly, your jobs have priority access to the selected QPU for the duration of your experiment, putting you in control, and helping to provide faster and more predictable execution.
To run a job with Braket Hybrid Jobs, you need to first define your algorithm using either the Amazon Braket SDK orPennyLane. You can also use TensorFlow and PyTorch or create a custom Docker container image. Next, you create a job via the Amazon Braket API or console, where you provide your algorithm script (or custom container), select your target quantum device, and choose from a variety of optional settings including the choice of classical resources, hyper-parameter values, and data locations. If your target device is a simulator, Braket Hybrid Jobs is designed to start executing right away. If your target device is a QPU, your job will run when the device is available and your job is first in the queue. You can define custom metrics as part of your algorithm, which can be automatically reported to Amazon CloudWatch and displayed in real time in the Amazon Braket console. Upon completion, Braket Hybrid Jobs writes your results to Amazon S3 and releases your resources.
The second initiative, Amazon Quantum Solution Lab, is aimed at collaborative research programs; it is, in essence, Amazons professional quantum services group.
They engage in research project with customers. For example, they recently wrote a paper with a team of researchers at Goldman Sachs. They run a very interesting initiative together with BMW Group, something called the BMW Group quantum computing challenge. BMW proposed four areas related to their interests, like logistic, manufacturing, some stuff that related to automotive engineering, and there was a call for a proposal to crowdsource solutions that use quantum computers to address these problems, said Severini.
There were 70 teams, globally, that submitted solutions. I think this is very interesting because [its still early days] and the fact is that quantum computers are not useful in business problems today. They cant [yet] be more impactful than classical computing today. An initiative of this type can really help bridge the real world with the theory. We have several such initiatives, he said.
Building a Fault-Tolerant Computer
Amazons efforts to build a fault-tolerant quantum are based at the AWS Center for Quantum Computing, located in Pasadena, Calif., and run in conjunction with Caltech. We launched this initiative in 2019 but last year, in 2021, we opened a building that we built inside the campus of Caltech, said Severini. Its a state of the art research facility and we are doing research to build an error-corrected, fault tolerant computer, he said.
AWS has settled on semiconductor-based superconducting qubit technology, citing the deep industry knowledge of semiconductor manufacturing techniques and scalability. The challenge, of course, is achieving fault-tolerance. Todays NISQ systems are noisy and error-prone and require near-zero Kelvin temperatures. Severini said simply, There is a lot of scientific challenges still and theres a lot of engineering to be done.
We believe strongly that there are two things that need to be done at this stage. One is improving error rates at the physical level and to invest in material science to really understand on a fundamental level how to build components that have an improvement in with respect to error rates. The second point is [to develop] new qubit architectures for protecting qubits from errors, he said.
This facility includes everything [to do] that. We are doing the full stack. Were building everything ourselves from software to the architecture to the qubits, and the wiring. These are long-term investments, said Severini.
AWS has been relatively quiet in promoting its quantum computer building effort. It has vigorously embraced competing qubit technologies on Braket, and Severini noted that its still unclear how progress will unfold. Some approaches may work well for a particular application but not for others. AWS is tracking all of them, and is including some prominent quantum researchers. For example, John Preskill, the Caltech researcher who coined the term NISQ, is an Amazon Scholar. (Preskill, of course, is fittingly the Richard P. Feynman Professor of Theoretical Physics at the California Institute of Technology.)
Last February, AWS published a paper in PRX Quantum (Building a fault-tolerant quantum computer using concatenated cat codes) which outlines directional thinking. The abstract is excerpted below:
We present a comprehensive architectural analysis for a proposed fault-tolerant quantum computer based on cat codes concatenated with outer quantum error-correcting codes. For the physical hardware, we propose a system of acoustic resonators coupled to superconducting circuits with a two-dimensional layout. Using estimated physical parameters for the hardware, we perform a detailed error analysis of measurements and gates, includingcnotand Toffoli gates. Having built a realistic noise model, we numerically simulate quantum error correction when the outer code is either a repetition code or a thin rectangular surface code.
Our next step toward universal fault-tolerant quantum computation is a protocol for fault-tolerant Toffoli magic state preparation that significantly improves upon the fidelity of physical Toffoli gates at very low qubit cost. To achieve even lower overheads, we devise a new magic state distillation protocol for Toffoli states. Combining these results together, we obtain realistic full-resource estimates of the physical error rates and overheads needed to run useful fault-tolerant quantum algorithms. We find that with around 1000 superconducting circuit components, one could construct a fault-tolerant quantum computer that can run circuits, which are currently intractable for classical computers. Hardware with 18000 superconducting circuit components, in turn, could simulate the Hubbard model in a regime beyond the reach of classical computing.
The latest big piece of Amazons quantum puzzle is the AWS Center for Quantum Networking, located in Boston. AWS says major news about the new center is forthcoming soon. The quantum networking center, said Severini, is focused on hardware, software, commercial and scientific applications. That sounds like a lot and is perhaps in keeping with Amazons ambitious quantum programs overall.
The proof of all these efforts, as the saying goes, will be in the pudding.
Stay tuned.
Feature Image:A microwave package encloses the AWS quantum processor. The packaging is designed to shield the qubits from environmental noise while enabling communication with the quantum computers control systems. Source: AWS
Read the rest here:
AWS Takes the Short and Long View of Quantum Computing - HPCwire
Superdeterminism: To better understand our Universe, ditch the idea of free will – Big Think
Of all the terrible, no good, rotten things that quantum mechanics says, the hardest one to swallow is this: You must give up realism, the belief that something has definite and inherent properties outside of your observing it. There may be a way to salvage realism, but to do so you must sacrifice locality, the idea that things influence one another by direct interaction and the basis for causality. This state of affairs appears forced upon us by our measurements of the physical world. There is, however, a third way. Just be warned: You may like it even less than the first two.
In our everyday world, realism and locality are cornerstone concepts that always hold true. Lets use a simple example. Ill take two scrabble tiles, A and B, and put each in an identical box. I pick one box at random and give it to you, and then you travel to China and open the box. If you open the box, and your tile is A, then you know my box contains the tile B. Thats because A has been in your box all along. Its definitely not because your tile turned into A when you looked at it (which would violate realism) and then reached out to mine from across the world and instantly told it to become B (which would violate localism). By its standard interpretation, quantum mechanics asks you to believe that both of these things occur.
Now, lets say that I generate two particles that are linked by an entangled quantum wave function. Each particle has 50% probability of being in quantum state A, and a 50% chance of being in quantum state B. When measured, one must be A and the other B. Then I somehow trap one in each of the boxes. Quantum mechanics says that inside of its box, each particle exists as partly A and partly B at the same time, but neither one in reality. This time, you travel to a distant star system with your box. When you open it and look inside, the particle will suddenly resolve itself randomly into either state A or state B. Worse still, if thats true, at that same moment the photon in my box is forced to become the other state. If yours is B, then mine instantly becomes A even though its lightyears away.
Explain this sort of thing to a smart non-physicist, and they will instinctually recoil in disbelief. Its the natural reaction of an observant mind. After all, nothing in our everyday lives ever works in this way. This revulsion isnt limited to non-physicists. No less a physicist than Albert Einstein himself hated the idea and made famous attempts to disprove it. In 1935 Einstein, along with his colleagues Podolsky and Rosen, published a famous paper declaring that if localism is true, then quantum mechanics must be incomplete. This would mean that the quantum states really did exist before observation, but the theory wasnt good enough to predict them. Physicist John Bell then expanded upon this work to deduce that locality might possibly be salvaged, but only by giving up realism. Or realism might be salvaged, but only by giving up locality. Yikes.
Experimental physicists were able to work out methods to test Bells ideas in the laboratory. Unfortunately, these and other experiments have always found that the ugly predictions of quantum mechanics hold true. This is generally taken to mean that locality or realismor both!are not true in quantum mechanics. There are few ways out of this dilemma.
Subscribe for counterintuitive, surprising, and impactful stories delivered to your inbox every Thursday
One of these escape routes is the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. This subject has been extensively described in popular science and science fiction. Roughly speaking, each time a probabilistic quantum state is resolved into one of two choices, two new universes are split off, one for each choice. In this way, an unimaginably vast number of universes spring into being every nanosecond. Its an interesting idea, but there is zero evidence that its true.
Another way out is superdeterminism.
Regular old vanilla determinism is the idea that the universe runs like clockwork, with each event triggering the next in a cascade of perfect predictability. If you knew the state of the universe at one instant, you could theoretically predict everything that would ever happen in the future. This idea can appeal to some peoples desire for order and certainty. For many others, its philosophically depressing.
Superdeterminism is a technical term for a specific application of determinism, postulating that there is no statistical independence between a measurer, with his detector interacting with the particle to measure it, and the particle itself. In other words, the universe is so thoroughly deterministic that it will force any seemingly random, freely made measurement to produce some value correlated to other measurements.
Applied to the problem of quantum strangeness, superdeterminism says that the state of one particle does not magically control the state of the other from far away. Each particles state can be given to it via interaction with the detector, coordinated by complete determinism across the Universe. Superdeterminism thus saves localism. Because superdeterminism dictates the state of each particle, even at great distances, it implies that the Universe knows what the states are. In this way, it can save realism at the same time. The quantum particles had some real state all along that was hidden from quantum mechanics. Like many worlds, it is highly speculative and the subject of intense scientific argument and criticism.
Giving up the assumption of free will to save our other cherished beliefs about causality and physical realism is a huge price to pay. For now, we dont know how to experimentally test for superdeterminism in a comprehensive way. Some partially relevant experiments have not found evidence for it. Philosophically its still a terrible choice for most of us: give up understanding the world or give up free will. Its no wonder that even many professional physicists dont like to embrace quantum mechanics. Its dirtiest trick of all is forcing us to collapse into one of these unfortunate philosophical states.
Continue reading here:
Superdeterminism: To better understand our Universe, ditch the idea of free will - Big Think
IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE22) Reveals Program Covering 250+ Hours of Quantum Computing Research,…
Quantum computing breakthroughs and solutions are explored via presentations, workshops, tutorials, panels, keynotes, and exhibitions
LOS ALAMITOS, Calif., Aug. 30, 2022 /PRNewswire/ --The IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE22), today unveils its action-packed 2022 conference program for the upcoming five-day event taking place 18 - 23 September 2022, live at the Omni Interlocken Hotel in Broomfield, Colorado, and virtually. Bridging the gap between the science of quantum computing and the development of the industry behind it, attendees at IEEE Quantum Week will experience a dynamic program set to deliver cutting-edge developments in quantum research, practice, applications, education, and training.
IEEE Quantum Week 2022, will take place from 18-23 September 2022, live at the Omni Interlocken Hotel in Broomfield, Colorado, as well as virtually. Attendees will learn about and experience cutting-edge developments in quantum research, practice, applications, education, and training. Registration Is Open Now.
Registration is open for IEEE Quantum Week at https://web.cvent.com/event/41315fca-fab0-4847-8bcd-ca0e07d2c849/summary.
The third annual IEEE Quantum Week will deliver five dynamic days of programming that includes 9 world-class keynote speakers, over 23 exciting exhibits, 25 workforce-building tutorials, 16 community-building workshops, 70+ technical paper presentations, 60 innovative posters, 13 stimulating panels, and Birds-of-a-Feather sessions.
"IEEE Quantum Week is a unique gathering for a broad and diverse community of researchers, developers, end users, and learners, spanning academia, industry, and government to bridge the gap between theory and practice," said Greg Byrd, QCE22 general chair. "We're thrilled to provide a space where partnerships can be forged, ultimately leading to quantum-based solutions to the most challenging problems. All are welcome to learn, contribute, and lead in this dynamic, exciting world of quantum computing and engineering."
IEEE Quantum Week 2022's keynote speakers are:
Chris Monroe Co-founder and Chief Scientist, IonQ, and Gilhuly Family Presidential Distinguished Professor, Duke University
Stephanie Wehner Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Professor in Quantum Information, TU Delft
Mercedes Gimeno-Segovia VP of System Architecture, PsiQuantum
Fred Chong Seymour Goodman Professor, University of Chicago, and Chief Scientist for Software, ColdQuanta
Ilyas Khan Founder, Cambridge Quantum, and CEO, Quantinuum
Anna Grasselino Senior Scientist, Fermilab
Katie Pizzolato Director, IBM Quantum Strategy and Applications Research
Michael J. Biercuk CEO and Founder, Q-CTRL, and professor of quantum physics and technology, University of Sydney
Wim van Dam Principal Researcher, Microsoft Quantum Systems group
Story continues
Visit IEEE Quantum Week to download the conference program, see the full list of speakers and abstracts, and view all event news including sponsors and exhibitors.
Register here to be a part of IEEE Quantum Week 2022.
The IEEE Quantum Week 2022 Registration Package includes virtual access to IEEE Quantum Week as well as on-demand access to all recorded events until 30 November 2022. The IEEE Quantum Week schedule will take place during Mountain Daylight Time (MDT).
IEEE Quantum Week 2022 is co-sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society, IEEE Communications Society, IEEE Council of Superconductivity, IEEE Future Directions Quantum Initiative, IEEE Photonics Society, IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Society, IEEE Electronics Packaging Society, IEEE Signal Processing Society, IEEE Electron Device Society, and IEEE Consumer Technology Society.
About the IEEE Computer Society
The IEEE Computer Societyis the world's home for computer science, engineering, and technology. A global leader in providing access to computer science research, analysis, and information, the IEEE Computer Society offers a comprehensive array of unmatched products, services, and opportunities for individuals at all stages of their professional careers. Known as the premier organization that empowers the people who drive technology, the IEEE Computer Society offers international conferences, peer-reviewed publications, a unique digital library, and training programs.
About the Technical Council on Software Engineering
The IEEE Computer Society Technical Community on Software Engineering (TCSE) encourages the application of engineering methods and principles to the development of computer software and works to increase professional knowledge of techniques, tools, and empirical data to improve software quality. TCSE cosponsors conferences, including the International Conference on Software Engineering, and several informal workshops every year.
About the IEEE Communications Society
The IEEE Communications Society promotes technological innovation and fosters the creation and sharing of information among the global technical community. The Society provides services to members for their technical and professional advancement and forums for technical exchanges among professionals in academia, industry, and public institutions.
About the IEEE Council on Superconductivity
The IEEE Council on Superconductivity and its activities and programs cover the science and technology of superconductors and their applications, including materials and their applications for electronics, magnetics, and power systems, where the superconductor properties are central to the application.
About the IEEE Electron Device Society
The IEEE Electron Device Society (EDS) fosters the professional growth of its members by satisfying their need for easy access to and exchange of technical information, publishing, education, and recognition, enhancing public visibility in the field of electron devices. The EDS field of interest includes all electron- and ion-based devices, in their classical or quantum states, using environments and materials in their lowest to highest conducting phase, in simple or engineered assembly, interacting with and delivering photo-electronic, electro-magnetic, electromechanical, electro-thermal, and bio-electronic signals.
About the IEEE Electronics Packaging Society
The IEEE Electronics Packaging Society is the leading international forum for scientists and engineers engaged in the research, design, and development of revolutionary advances in microsystems packaging and manufacturing.
About the IEEE Future Directions Quantum Initiative
IEEE Quantum is an IEEE Future Directions initiative launched in 2019 that serves as IEEE's leading community for all projects and activities on quantum technologies. IEEE Quantum is supported by leadership and representation across IEEE Societies and OUs. The initiative addresses the current landscape of quantum technologies, identifies challenges and opportunities, leverages and collaborates with existing initiatives, and engages the quantum community at large.
About the IEEE Photonics Society
The IEEE Photonics Society forms the hub of a vibrant technical community of more than 100,000 professionals dedicated to transforming breakthroughs in quantum physics into devices, systems, and products to revolutionize our daily lives. From ubiquitous and inexpensive global communications via fiber optics to lasers for medical and other applications, to flat-screen displays, to photovoltaic devices for solar energy, to LEDs for energy-efficient illumination, there are myriad examples of the Society's impact on the world around us.
About the IEEE Signal Processing Society
The IEEE Signal Processing Society is an international organization whose purpose is to advance and disseminate state-of-the-art scientific information and resources, educate the signal processing community, and provide a venue for people to interact and exchange ideas. The Signal Processing Society is a dynamic organization that is the preeminent source of signal processing information and resources to a global community.
About the IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Society
The IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Society encompasses the management sciences and practices required for defining, implementing, and managing engineering and technology. Specific topics of interest include, but are not limited to, technology policy development, assessment, and transfer; research; product design and development; manufacturing operations; innovation and entrepreneurship; program and project management; strategy; education and training; organizational development and human behavior; and transitioning to management.
About the IEEE Consumer Technology Society
The IEEE Consumer Technology Society is an organization within the IEEE that strives for the advancement of the theory and practice of electronic engineering and of the allied arts and sciences with respect to the field of consumer electronics and the maintenance of high professional standing among its members. The Society has long been the premier technical association in the consumer electronics Industry. The Society is truly international; its publications and presentations are authored by researchers from countries throughout the world.
Cision
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ieee-international-conference-on-quantum-computing-and-engineering-qce22-reveals-program-covering-250-hours-of-quantum-computing-research-technologies-developments-and-training-301614217.html
SOURCE IEEE Computer Society
See more here:
The big difference between physics and mathematics – Big Think
To an outsider, physics and mathematics might appear to be almost identical disciplines. Particularly at the frontiers of theoretical physics, where a very deep knowledge of extraordinarily advanced mathematics is required to grasp even cutting-edge physics from a century ago curved four-dimensional spacetimes and probabilistic wavefunctions among them its clear that predictive mathematical models are at the core of science. Since physics is at the fundamental core of the entire scientific endeavor, its very clear that theres a close relationship between mathematics and all of science.
Yes, mathematics has been incredibly successful at describing the Universe that we inhabit. And yes, many mathematical advances have led to the exploration of new physical possibilities that have relied on those very advances to provide a mathematical foundation. But theres an extraordinary difference between physics and mathematics that one of the simplest questions we can ask will illustrate:
I bet you think you know the answer, and in all honesty, you probably do: its 2, right?
I cant blame you for that answer, and its not exactly wrong. But theres much more to the story, as youre about to find out.
A ball in mid-bounce has its past and future trajectories determined by the laws of physics, but time will only flow into the future for us. While Newtons laws of motion are the same whether you run the clock forward or backward in time, not all of the rules of physics behave identically if you run the clock forward or backward, indicating a violation of time-reversal (T) symmetry where it occurs.
Take a look at the above time-lapse image of a bouncing ball. One look at this tells you a simple, straightforward story.
Travel the Universe with astrophysicist Ethan Siegel. Subscribers will get the newsletter every Saturday. All aboard!
This is, quite reasonably, the story youd tell yourself of whats going on.
But why, may I ask, would you tell yourself that story rather than the opposite: that the ball begins on the right side, moving leftward, and that it gains energy, height, and speed after each successive bounce on the floor?
In Newtonian (or Einsteinian) mechanics, a system will evolve over time according to completely deterministic equations, which should mean that if you can know the initial conditions (like positions and momenta) for everything in your system, you should be able to evolve it, with no errors, arbitrarily forward in time. In practice, due to the inability to know the initial conditions to truly arbitrary precisions, this is not true.
The only answer youd likely be able to give, and you may find it dissatisfying even as you give it, is your experience with the actual world. Basketballs, when they bounce, lose a percentage of their initial (kinetic) energy upon striking the floor; youd have to have a specially prepared system designed to kick the ball to higher (kinetic) energies to successfully engineer the alternate possibility. Its your knowledge of physical reality, and your assumption that what youre observing is aligned with your experiences, that lead you to that conclusion.
Similarly, look at the diagram, above, that shows three stars all orbiting around a central mass: a supermassive black hole. If this were a movie, instead of a diagram, you could imagine that all three stars are moving clockwise, that two move clockwise while one moves counterclockwise, that one moves clockwise and two move counterclockwise, or that all three move counterclockwise.
But now, ask yourself this: how would you know whether the movie were running forward in time or backward in time? In the case of gravity just as in the case of electromagnetism or the strong nuclear force youd have no way of knowing. For these forces, the laws of physics are time symmetric: the same forward in time as they are backward in time.
Individual protons and neutrons may be colorless entities, but the quarks within them are colored. Gluons can not only be exchanged between the individual gluons within a proton or neutron, but in combinations between protons and neutrons, leading to nuclear binding. However, every single exchange must obey the full suite of quantum rules, and these strong force interaction are time-reversal symmetric: you cannot tell whether the animated movie here is shown moving forward or backward in time.
Time is an interesting consideration in physics, because while the mathematics offers a set of possible solutions for how a system will evolve, the physical constraint that we have time possesses an arrow, and always progresses forward, never backward ensures that only one solution describes our physical reality: the solution that evolves the system forward in time. Similarly, if we ask the opposite question of What was the system doing in the lead-up until the present moment? the same constraint, that time only moves forward, enables us to choose the mathematical solution that describes how the system was behaving at some prior time.
Consider what this means, then: even given the laws that describe a system, and the conditions that the system possesses at any particular moment, the mathematics is capable of offering multiple different solutions to any problem that we can pose. If we look at a runner, and ask, When will the runners left foot strike the ground? were going to find multiple mathematical solutions, corresponding to the many times their left foot struck the ground in the past, as well as many times their left foot will strike the ground in the future. Mathematics gives you the set of possible solutions, but it doesnt tell you which one is the right one.
Having your camera anticipate the motion of objects through time is just one practical application of the idea of time-as-a-dimension. For any set of conditions that will be recorded throughout time, its plausible to predict when a certain set of conditions will arise, and find multiple possible solutions in the past and future.
But physics does. Physics can allow you to find the correct, physically relevant solution, whereas mathematics can only give you the set of possible outcomes. When you find a ball in mid-flight and know its trajectory perfectly well, you have to turn to the mathematical formulation of the physical laws that govern the system to determine what happens next.
You write down the set of equations that describe the balls motion, you manipulate and solve them, and then you plug in the specific values that describe the conditions of your particular system. When you work the mathematics that describe that system to its logical conclusion, that exercise will give you (at least) two possible solutions as to precisely when-and-where it will hit the ground in the future.
One of those solutions does, indeed, correspond to the solution youre looking for. It will tell you, at a particular point in the future, when the projectile will first strike the ground, and what its positions will be in all three spatial dimensions when that occurs.
But there will be another solution that corresponds to a negative time: a time in the past where the projectile would also have struck the ground. (You can also find the 3D spatial position of where that projectile would be at that time, if you like.) Both solutions have equal mathematical validity, but only one is physically relevant.
This image shows the parabolic trail left by a rocket after launch. If you would simply calculate the trajectory of this object, assuming no further engine firings after launch, youd get multiple solutions for where/when it would land. One solution is correct, corresponding to the future; the other solution is mathematically correct but physically incorrect, corresponding to a time in the past.
Thats not a deficiency in mathematics; thats a feature of physics, and of science in general. Mathematics tells you the set of possible outcomes. But the scientific fact that we live in a physical reality and in that reality, wherever and whenever we make a measurement, we observe only one outcome teaches us that there are additional constraints beyond what mere mathematics provides. Mathematics tells you what outcomes are possible; physics (and science in general) is what you use to pick out which outcome is (or was, or will be) relevant for the specific problem youre trying to address.
In biology, we can know the genetic makeup of two parent organisms, and can predict the probability with which their offspring will inherent a certain combination of genes. But if these two organisms combine their genetic material to actually make an offspring organism, only one set of combinations will be realized. Furthermore, the only way to determine which genes actually were inherited by the child of the two parents would be to make the critical observations and measurements: you have to gather the data and determine the outcome. Despite the myriad of mathematical possibilities, only one outcome actually occurs.
An Irish immigrant (center) waiting next to an Italian immigrant and her children at Ellis Island, circa 1920. The womans children each possess 50% of her DNA, but specifically which 50% is present in each childs genetic makeup varies not only from child-to-child, but must be observed and measured, explicitly, to correctly determine which of all the possible outcomes actually occurred.
The more complicated your system, the more difficult it becomes to predict the outcome. For a room filled with large numbers of molecules, asking What fate will befall any one of these molecules? becomes a practically impossible task, as the number of possible outcomes after only a small amount of time passes becomes greater than the number of atoms in the entire Universe.
Some systems are inherently chaotic, where minuscule, practically immeasurable differences in the initial conditions of a system lead to vastly different potential outcomes.
Other systems are inherently indeterminate until theyre measured, which is one of the most counterintuitive aspects of quantum mechanics. Sometimes, the act of performing a measurement to literally determine the quantum state of your system winds up changing the state of the system itself.
In all of these cases, mathematics offers a set of possible outcomes whose probabilities can be determined and calculated in advance, but only by performing the critical measurement can you actually determine which one outcome has actually occurred.
Trajectories of a particle in a box (also called an infinite square well) in classical mechanics (A) and quantum mechanics (B-F). In (A), the particle moves at constant velocity, bouncing back and forth. In (B-F), wavefunction solutions to the Time-Dependent Schrodinger Equation are shown for the same geometry and potential. The horizontal axis is position, the vertical axis is the real part (blue) or imaginary part (red) of the wavefunction. These stationary (B, C, D) and non-stationary (E, F) states only yield probabilities for the particle, rather than definitive answers for where it will be at a particular time.
This takes us all the way back to the initial question: what is the square root of 4?
Chances are, you read that question, and the number 2 immediately popped into your head. But thats not the only possible answer; it could have been -2 just as easily. After all, (-2) equals 4 just as surely as (2) equals 4; theyre both admissible solutions.
If I had gone further and asked, What is the fourth root (the square root of the square root) of 16? you could have then gone and given me four possible solutions. Each of these following numbers,
when raised to the fourth power, will yield the number 16 as the mathematical answer.
This graph shows the function y = x. Note that there are two possible solutions on the y-axis for every value of x. Two of those solutions correspond to x = 4: y = 2 and y = -2. Both solutions are, mathematically, equally valid. But theres only one physical Universe that we inhabit, and each physical problem must be considered individually to determine which of these solutions is physically relevant.
But in the context of a physical problem, there will only be one of these many possible solutions that actually reflects the reality we inhabit. The only way to determine which one is correct is either to go out and measure reality and pick out the physically relevant solution, or to know enough about your system and apply the relevant physical conditions so that youre not simply calculating the mathematical possibilities, but that youre capable of choosing the physically relevant solution and rejecting the non-physical ones.
Sometimes, that means we have multiple admissible solutions at once that are all plausible for explaining an observed phenomenon. It will only be through the obtaining of more, superior data that rules out certain possibilities while remaining consistent with others that enables us to determine which of the possible solutions actually remain viable. This approach, inherent to the process of doing science, helps us make successively better and better approximations to our inhabited reality, allowing us to tease out what is true about our Universe amidst the possibilities of what could have been true in the absence of that critical data.
NASAs Curiosity Mars Rover detected fluctuations in the methane concentration of Marss atmosphere seasonally and at specific locations on the surface. This can be explained via either geochemical or biological processes; the evidence is not sufficient to decide at present. However, future missions, such as Mars Sample Return, may enable us to determine whether fossilized, dormant, or active life exists on Mars. Right now, we can only narrow down the physical possibilities; more information is required to determine which pathway accurately reflects our physical reality.
The biggest difference between physics and mathematics is simply that mathematics is a framework that, when applied wisely, can accurately describe certain properties about a physical system in a self-consistent fashion. However, mathematics is limited in what it can achieve: it can only give you a set of possible outcomes sometimes weighted by probability and sometimes not weighted at all for what could occur or could have occurred in reality.
Physics is much more than mathematics, however, as no matter when we look at the Universe or how we look at it, there will be only one observed outcome that has actually occurred. Mathematics shows us the full set of all possible outcomes, but its the application of physical constraints that allows us to actually determine what is true, real, or what actual outcomes have occurred in our reality.
If you can remember that the square root of 4 isnt always 2, but is sometimes -2 instead, you can remember the difference between physics and mathematics. The latter can tell you all the possible outcomes that could occur, but what elevates something to the realm of science, rather than pure mathematics, is its connection to our physical reality. The answer to the square root of 4 will always be either 2 or -2, and the other solution will be rejected by a means that mathematics alone can never fully determine: on physical grounds, alone.
Go here to read the rest:
The big difference between physics and mathematics - Big Think
What Makes the Human Brain Unique to How Quantum Physicists are Looking for Alien Life (Planet Earth Report) – The Daily Galaxy –Great Discoveries…
Todays stories include Quantum Theory of Consciousness Challenged to Is Life on Earth the Standard Model for the Universe to The 50 Million-Year-Old Treasures of Fossil Lake, and much more.
What makes the human brain different? Yale study reveals clues What makes the human brain distinct from that of all other animals including even our closest primate relatives? In an analysis of cell types in the prefrontal cortex of four primate species, Yale researchers identified species-specific particularly human-specific features, they report Aug. 25 in the journal Science.
Seven Million Years Ago, the Oldest Known Early Human Was Already Walking, reports The Smithsonian. Analysis of a femur fossil indicates that a key species could already move somewhat like us.
Extraterrestrial Life Is Earth the Standard Model for the Universe? asks The Daily Galaxy. By the end of this century, says astrophysicist Martin Rees, we should be able to ask whether or not we live in a multiverse, and how much variety of the laws of physics its constituent universes display. The answer to this question, says Rees, will determine how we should interpret the biofriendly universe in which we live (sharing it with any aliens with whom we might one day make contact).
Unfathomable Abodes of Life? Water Worlds of the Milky WayBefore life appeared on land some 400 million years ago, all life on Earth including the mind evolved in the sea. Astronomers have recently conjectured that blue exoplanets with endless oceans may be orbiting many of the Milky Ways one trillion stars, reports The Daily Galaxy.
What Drives Galaxies? The Milky Ways Black Hole May Be the Key--What Drives Galaxies? The Milky Ways Black Hole May Be the Key. Supermassive black holes have come to the fore as engines of galactic evolution, but new observations of the Milky Way and its central hole dont yet hang together, reports Quanta.
Quantum theory of consciousness put in doubt by underground experiment, reports Physics World. A controversial theory put forward by physicist Roger Penrose and anesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff that posits consciousness to be a fundamentally quantum-mechanical phenomenon has been challenged by research looking at the role of gravity in the collapse of quantum wavefunctions.
How quantum physicists are looking for life on exoplanets, reports Northeastern University. News@Northeastern spoke to Gregory Fiete, a physics professor at Northeastern, about some of the broad applications of quantum research, from developing renewable energy sources and building more powerful computers, to advancing humanitys quest to discover life beyond the solar system.
The Plan to Look for Life on VenusWithout NASA--A private group of scientists and rocket engineers might be the first to find signs of extraterrestrial life on the second planet from the sun, reports The Daily Beast.
After Millennia of Agricultural Expansion, the World Has Passed Peak Agricultural Land, reports Dr. Hannah Ritchie for Singularity HubHumans have been reshaping the planets land for millennia by clearing wildlands to grow crops and raise livestock. As a result, humans have cleared one-third of the worlds forests and two-thirds of wild grasslands since the end of the last ice age.
The 50 Million-Year-Old Treasures of Fossil Lake In a forbidding Wyoming desert, scientists and fortune hunters search for the surprisingly intact remains of horses and other creatures that lived long ago, reports The Smithsonian..
Drought Exposes Dinosaur Tracks in Texas--The 113-million-year-old footprints were largely made by the carnivorous Acrocanthosaurus, reports The Smithsonian. A severe drought in Texas has revealed 113-million-year-old dinosaur tracks in Dinosaur Valley State Park. The prints are usually covered by the Paluxy Riverthe last time they were visible was in the year 2000, according to BBC News.
Doppelgngers Dont Just Look AlikeThey Also Share DNANew research finds genetic and lifestyle similarities between unrelated pairs of virtual twins, reports the Smithsonian. People with very similar faces also share many of the same genes and lifestyle traits, according to a new paper published Tuesday in the journal Cell Reports.
Shape of human brain has barely changed in past 160,000 years An analysis of fossils suggests changes in the shape of the braincase during human evolution were linked to alterations in the face, rather than changes in the brain itself, reports New Scientist.
Humanity Is Woefully Unprepared for a Major Volcanic Eruption, reports Gizmodo. When the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Haapai volcano erupted in Tonga on January 15, the result was devastation. The eruption literally blew up an island, caused mass flooding in the surrounding areas, coated whole communities in a thick layer of ash, and took out telecommunications for weeks. Yet in that eruption, we got lucky, according to a new commentary article .
Scientists discovered a 5 million-year-old time capsule buried in Antarctica--Its an ice core with bubbles containing remains of ancient Earth atmosphere, reports ZME Science.
When will Chinas population peak? It depends who you ask--Data show the country is facing a demographic crisis, with an aging population and young couples having fewer children, reports Nature.
MIT professor wrongfully accused of spying for China helps make a major discovery Gang Chen, who was cleared after a lengthy DOJ investigation, said he is stepping away from federally funded research because of anxieties around being racially profiled, reports NBC.
Reconstructing ice age diets reveals an unraveling web of lifeWhile about 6% of land mammals have gone extinct in that time, we estimate that more than 50% of mammal food web links have disappeared, said ecologist Evan Fricke, lead author of the study. And the mammals most likely to decline, both in the past and now, are key for mammal food web complexity, reports Rice University.
Why Thinking Hard Wears You OutConcentrating for long periods builds up chemicals that disrupt brain functioning, reports Scientific American.
Tiny Caribbean crustaceans and their bioluminescent mating displays are shining new light on evolution, reports Science. No bigger than a grain of sand, ostracods abound in fresh and saltwater. They are very cute but also sort of bizarrelike a cross between a crab and a tiny spaceship, says Timothy Fallon, an evolutionary biochemist at the University of California (UC), San Diego.
The Biggest Offshore Wind Farm in the World Will Be Fully Online This Month, reports Singularity Hub. A massive offshore wind project has been underway off the coast of England for over four years. Construction of Hornsea One started in January 2018, and generated its first power a year and a half later. Meanwhile, construction of neighboring Hornsea Two got underway, with that site first coming online last December.
Eye movements in REM sleep mimic gazes in the dream world, reports the University of California, San Francisco. When our eyes move during REM sleep, were gazing at things in the dream world our brains have created, according to a new study by researchers at UC San Francisco. The findings shed light not only into how we dream, but also into how our imaginations work.
Curated by The Daily Galaxy Editorial Staff
The Galaxy Report newsletter brings you twice-weekly news of space and science that has the capacity to provide clues to the mystery of our existence and add a much needed cosmic perspective in our current Anthropocene Epoch.
Yes, sign me up for my free subscription.
Recent Galaxy Reports:
More: