Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Nuclear weapons? (Score 4, Informative) 42

by Jamu (#48437443) Attached to: CERN Releases LHC Data
No. Even though it's called CERN. The research is very much sub-nuclear. And although the energies are higher, this also means the particles involved decay quickly. Similarly in nature, they're created with high energies, but don't last long. The A-bomb relies on the natural abundance of uranium or plutonium. These are unstable elements that can be triggered into decaying in a chain reaction. The particles at the LHC need a lot of energy to create, and they decay quickly. It's been suggested they could make an anti-matter bomb. You'd need to use a lot more energy making the anti-matter than would be released in the bomb. Anti-matter is hard to store: it will interact with any matter destructively. No one can make anti-matter in enough quantity. Even if they could, and despite the great energy efficiencies, plutonium and uranium is so much more practical, along with some fusion fuel, that the relatively low energy efficiencies of a nuclear bomb, isn't a problem.

Comment: Re:umm.. what? (Score 1) 150

by Jamu (#48265607) Attached to: Researchers At Brown University Shattered a Quantum Wave Function

How about if I don't look, but the cat does?

The state consists of a superposition of the cat looking at itself, and it being dead.

Or how about instead of a cat, we put you in the box.

The state consists of a superposition of you seeing an alive cat, and you seeing a dead cat.

Are you alowed [sic.] to look at yourself or does it only work if I do it?

If you do it, it's a superposition. If I do it the cat is either dead of alive.

What if we're both in the box?

The cat is either dead or alive.

Maybe Computer Science should be in the College of Theology. -- R. S. Barton