Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Why is nobody talking about the potential (Score 1) 206

There's no way to communicate FTL this way, as you can only observe. For quantum secure communication, take one each of lots of entangled particles, and measure them in order as you need randomness to encrypt your message. Send it. Only the person with the entangled particles can determine what the randomness was. It's something like a high-tech one-time pad, except that it can't be copied without knowing how you're measuring the particles, and if it's copied it's destroyed. A message can be intercepted, but it can't be intercepted without the recipient's knowledge.

Comment Re:Is quantum mechanics a theory? (Score 1) 206

The difference between quantum mechanics and just any convenient probabilistic bucket is that it has excellent predictive value. Using the known principles of quantum mechanics, we can calculate what we'll observe in all sorts of experiments, and the experimental agreement is extremely good.

As it happens, there's a lot of numbers that are vital in making these predictions, and there's a lot of them with no obvious relation to each other, which look completely arbitrary. In science, when we learn something, it usually leaves more questions. That's what makes it fun.

Comment Re:Is quantum mechanics a theory? (Score 1) 206

Gravity is inertia through curved spacetime. It happens that mass has a local effect on spacetime that distorts geodesics.

And now, all together...

What's inertia, and why does it happen like that? What's spacetime? What does it really mean for spacetime to be curved? Why does mass curve spacetime? What is mass?

You can get at least partial answers to some of these if you ask somebody who knows more than I do, of course.

Comment Re:Wait, physics doesn't work either? (Score 1) 206

You can get a very limited idea of entanglement by thinking of two envelopes, one red card, and one black card. If you put one card in each envelope, you've got envelopes entangled in the sense that if you open one you know the color of the card in the other, wherever it may be.

Now, we figure that we can open the envelopes in different ways with different but related results (if we open them at the bottom, the cards change color, and if we open right along a side it's random which card is which color, and it gets more complicated), that we can open the envelopes differently (one at the top and one at the side, for example), and that we can influence the probabilities by opening the envelopes in certain ways that aren't explained by the original state of one black and one red. This is where it gets complicated.

Comment Re:Wait, physics doesn't work either? (Score 1) 206

Locality doesn't work. These experiments can be done with electrons, and we can measure the spin. If one electron has spin up, the other will have spin down if measured along the same axis. If the measurement axes are different, you can calculate how likely one electron is to have spin down if the other measures as spin up based on assumptions. It turns out that the observed probabilities don't match the ones you'd get if they had what you'd expect if the relation was based on locality. Look up Bell's theorem.

Comment Re:History repeats. (Score 1) 82

I loved that movie.

However, it was about a bunch of actors thrown into a situation their characters on a long-canceled TV show should be in, who eventually figured out how to use their own abilities to win. You can't have character development like that in a typical TV show. The stupid parts of the ship that were created just to match things in bad episodes were fun, but that wouldn't last long before they'd either exhausted the possibilities or more than filled the ship with idiotic sets.

Unless they're going to do something like the Galaxy Quest TV show in the movie, which looked fairly mediocre.

Comment Re:PBS show of cellphone cancer recently (Score 1) 433

Haven't watched too many documentaries, have we? Some contain lies, some don't actually have falsehoods but are misleading (Fahrenheit 911 had no actual untruths I caught, but there was deception), some are made with the best intentions and wind up wrong.

Comment Re:Wait until the next step... (Score 1) 433

Ever tried to get Social Security to admit you're disabled, as long as you're not missing something obvious? I've got a relative who tried to get listed as disabled by an obviously crippling chronic disease that has no known cure, and it wasn't easy.

Also, I really don't want to have to live on SS disability payments. I much prefer having more money than that.

Comment Re:When The Lunatics Take Over The Asylum (Score 1) 433

Hint: it's easier to get somebody who's depressed on pills than on exercise. I'd recommend starting with drugs and talk therapy and getting the patient into exercise more gradually.

If you look back historically, you'll find that lots of people had melancholia, so it's not a new thing. We don't know how much of the working classes were depressive, because as far as I know nobody bothered to survey and record. At times, the working classes had incredible alcoholism problems, which suggests depression to me. We do know that it's possible to be physically active and depressive (when it hit me hard I was walking briskly about five miles a day). Also, if exercise is as effective as drugs, well, we know that the drugs, while useful, don't just cure depression.

I see no reason to believe that a simpler life with more manual labor would effectively cure depression.

Also, eating more citrus fruit will cure scurvy. Does that mean scurvy isn't a real thing?

It was kinda like stuffing the wrong card in a computer, when you're stickin' those artificial stimulants in your arm. -- Dion, noted computer scientist