5614

So do you want an academic book about the physical structure of computers? Or something like an introduction to programming? Or about using Linux? I think your post is too vague for me to really know how to reply! You can get books which are a basic introduction to computers and how to use them. But after that they really get more specific (generally). So what is it you want? You may end up buying a few different books to give you a bigger overview. That is, buying a few books on specific topics, rather than getting one book about everything. That is because each topic normally fills up a book, the only time there's really room to fit two topics in one book is either a very big book or in very little detail.

The two sentences seem, to me, to have the same meaning. So are you commenting on a grammatical error? If so I think you're correct, it should be your way around. Although the meaning is still fundementally the same. [edit] tree: on that link I gave: http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/rmext04/92andwed/pf_quant.html#Q30 you only want to read the section titled: The EPR Paradox and Bell's Inequality Principle. I mean you can read the rest of it, but it's not relevant.

You might want to read this: http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/rmext04/92andwed/pf_quant.html#Q30 The short story is that Einstein said that QM was wrong. He said there must be "hidden variables" which goes against QM. His argument is called the EPR paradox. The solution to the paradox is Bell's Theorem or Bell's Inequality. Bell thought this up as a thought experiment, he never thought it would be experimentally proven. Bell set up an inequality (ie. some calcuation is bigger than some value) and said that if his inequality was correct then there were hidden variables. Bells Inequality has been tested experimentally many times and every (reliable) time it has been violated. That is Bell's Inequality is wrong, meaning there are not hidden variables. This, thus, disproves Einstein's claim that hidden variables must exist. Einstein was dead long before all these solutions were discovered. "[bell's inequality says:] No physical theory of local hidden variables can ever reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics" -- wikipedia That means that no theory which involves hidden variables will give the same predictions as QM. Since the predictions of QM are correct (and hidden variable theory cannot agree with QM) the predictions of hidden variable theory must be incorrect, as is the theory. I don't think most of that post is what you're looking for, but that link (top of my post) should help you.

I feel mean and I really respect those trying to get WiSci to become a big hit, but IMHO wikipedia is God and it's not even worth trying to recreate it. This is very similar to my view on the whole Google vs MSN vs Yahoo.... Google rules, MSN and Yahoo are wasting their time. So sure, I've read that ws and wp have slightly different aims, but I say we should contribute to the already vast wp rather than try and create a new version aka ws. If you think wp is missing something then talk to the wp admins about it, create new pages with the "missing" information. I just feel that if I wanted info from a wiki I would go to wp. The only thing that would change that would be if ws was bigger. Bigger than the (at time of posting) 1,257,648 (only English) pages offerred by wp... it just won't happen.

I'm guessing my definition of "computer" is quite lenient in this case. In 1999 there was a QC that could count to 4: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/1999/quantum-0714.html http://www.trnmag.com/Stories/2004/040704/Sturdy_quantum_computing_demoed_040704.html (look at the 4th para)... it's a prototype that can "execute a quantum search algorithm despite environment noise". This only has 4 qubits, so whether one could classify it as a computer is questionable. But then again that is why I said: "They're still quite slow running, but they are working research prototypes" meaning they might be useless at the moment, but they're being developed and worked on. These are the raw foundations. And I do agree with you two, some people say they are not possible or are far too complex to ever become more powerful than their electrical counterparts. This: http://www.trnmag.com/Stories/052301/Light_computer_runs_quantum_algorithm_052301.html team of researchers questioned whether it would be possible to build a QC and so developed a "Q"C which worked on light or electromagnetic radiation. Researchers at IBM proved (using a QC) that 5*3=15 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/12/20/MN46203.DTL In 2005 "A scalable quantum computer chip for atomic qubits was built for the first time by researchers at the University of Michigan, offering hopes for making a practical quantum computer using conventional semiconductor manufacturing technology" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_quantum_computing#2005 (can't find any other link to it, it's the bottom bullet point of 2005) A 12 qubit QC has been made "Despite decoherence, the researchers reached a 12-coherence state and decoded it using liquid state nuclear magnetic resonance quantum information processors": http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/05/060508164700.htm the abstract is here: http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=PRLTAO000096000017170501000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=Yes And as I posted last week in the News forum a new 2D ion trap, which is an important breakthrough for the QC experimentalists, has been developed: http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/dn9502-flat-ion-trap-holds-quantum-computing-promise.html So I suppose that is right, although with the most recent 12 qubit it is getting slightly bigger. I'm not sure about the "severe restrictions" regarding the latest prototypes.

Very nice posts mooeypoo

I totaly disagree. Political action would take a long time and even then it would be as effective at getting the soldiers back alive as it is from stopping Iran from continuing its weapons programme, ie. totaly ineffective. Lebanese government have not done anything for years, why would anything change now Hezbollah has become more active? Also the importance of the Lebanese government in this whole situation is somewhat questionable. It is more about Hezbollah and the like and where they get their orders from ie. Syria & Iran. Meanwhile nations including: UK, USA, Italy, Germany, France, Turkey, Greek & Spain have/are evacuation their citizens from Lebanon: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5184134.stm Can I just ask; what are 10,000 Britons, 25,000 Americans and 20,000 French people doing in Lebanon???

I haven't heard anything about the soldiers. Got a source?

What sounds far out about quantum computers? I haven't read the 8 pages... is it the actual content of that report you don't like (think is "far out") or the whole idea of quantum computers. Because quantum computers are real. They have working prototypes. They're still quite slow running, but they are working research prototypes.

ecoli, my bad, you did mention about Haifa... Yep. And this is the whole reason this keeps coming back. As long as groups like Hamas and Hezbollah exist they will aim to destroy Israel. As they cannot be totally destroyed by the military and politics doesn't work... what is there left to do? Israel can try to kill leaders and destroy HQs, and politicians put them under political pressure. It will all die down for a bit (like it has the past few months), but sooner or later violence will flare up again, as it is now. Meanwhile two British Navy ships, HMS Illustrious and HMS Bulwark, will, within the next 24 hours, be departing for Lebanon. I think with the intention of safely evacuating UK citizens. Could be interesting seeing as there are Israeli warships in the water and the port to Lebanon is destroyed. And Korea have already rejected the new resolutions passed by the UN. World seems a pretty screwed up place!

No one seems to have yet mentioned that there are rockets falling on Haifa, a major city in Israel. Latest news is that Israel have deployed Patriot interceptor missiles (anti-ballistic missiles) within the city. I was watching the news the other day and, as always, they were interviewing loads of different people showing both points of view, there was one that I think is worth mentioning, just because no one seems to even be considering this: The guy (can't remember who, some ambassador or something) said that he remember how Israel has reacted in the past, taking control of vast areas of land. In 1982 Israel went as far as to capture Beirut, the capital of Lebanon. Comparatively, said this person on TV, Israel have shown restraint this time. Otherwise, like said in the original post, I'm wondering whether this will spread to Syria and Iran. Nearest it has got to that is the recent attacks near the Lebanon-Syrian border. And as for whether this is all justified... well, who can say? It is pretty big reaction. But then the sudden kidnapping of several soldiers on two fronts is pretty big (especially as the region seemed to be a bit more peaceful/stable recently). One could also argue that this has been building up for a while. One could also argue that Israel will go "all-out" for a few days before giving in to political pressure and stopping. No one knows. I want to know what would happen if all the kidnapped Israeli soldier were returned, unharmed, to Israel. Sadly I don't think, realistically, this is a likely scenario. So how can/will this end?

That handset thing, sounds good fun & interactive etc. I don't know how much it will actually teach, but it will, as you say, wake people up, get there attention and allows you to check they know the answer. It sounds a good idea for checking people are awake and know the answer, not as a teaching tool by itself. One of my chemistry teachers likes to make a few students stand up and e.g. pretend to be a lattice. Making tall people pair up and short people pair up, representing how larger anions for a stable lattice with larger cations and smaller anions with smalled cations. It sounds a bit childish and, to me, it doesn't stick in my head, but it is certainly a good way to get the theory across, I then remember the theory (not the 'practical') - but the practical in itself is an easy way to portray a message. And don't make homework too hard. Make the start as easy as is sensible, then get slightly harder and then make the hardest an optional, something to look over and think about and to do if the student wants, something which really stretches you and gives room for thought. Also a nice interesting experiment never goes a miss. For example when learning about electromagnetism you can make a standard electromagnet, place a metal loop thing around it so when you turn the electromag on the ring jumps off. Now if you place the ring in liquid nitrogen it cools down -> lower resistance -> (simplified) it jumps higher. This might be obvious, but I was a bit shocked at quite how much the height difference was. I was expecting it to go higher. But not that high and not that quickly. It was an interesting ending to a lecture. And sure you can quote this, but you will have to check with my lawyer regarding the legal implications! PS. Feel free to quote - no strings attached!

It looked quite a strong headbutt. I wanna know what was said, not what all these lip readers say and the players deny, I wanna know! And I agree with Severian, despite what others say, Italy deserved to win.

I like it all generally. Maybe you don't need a "Submit News" link on the homepage. Also you don't need a link to the homepage on the homepage! I also use the member list. Maybe we could get a link to the calendar as well. I occasionally look at that to see if there are any birthdays coming up! I feel bad saying this, but IMO I don't feel we need to promote WiSci more. It's a great idea and all, but just like I dislike MSN Search for trying to be a Google (which it will never be), I don't like WiSci for trying to be a wikipedia, which I feel it will never be. That Member Spotlight thing was alright, if people are willing then go for it! Maybe if we could somehow get only the headlines (ie. no body) of the News articles we could fit more into a space. If we shortened the Active Topics and combine that with only using headlines (which will hyperlink to the articles) we could fit a lot into a small space. Finally someone mentioned the links should be smalled. Whilst I see where you are coming from I like them the size they are. They're big, easy to see and obvious - as I use them more than anything else on the homepage I like them that way.

Yeah sure, no rush!

Quantum computers (QC) are one step closer to mass production due to the development of a 2 dimensional ion trap. Ion traps are a core part of a QC. They seem to be the best way of making qubits (quantum bits, equivalent of an electrical bit). They work by trapping super-cooled ions in an electric field, lasers can then be used to manipulate the ions, changing their quantum state. The advantage of these new traps is that it's easy to manufacture lots of them, so many traps could be connected to make a quantum chip. The device has been successful when tested with magnesium ions, the next test is to make sure the trap works with ions more suitable for QCs. http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/dn9502-flat-ion-trap-holds-quantum-computing-promise.html

Avast offers what you mentioned, herme3. That is also one of many advantages a "boot time scan", as offered by Avast, has over traditional scans.

Maybe. I voted Copenhagen because I don't think there's currently anything better. Whilst I didn't think this when I voted, I don't think I would have gone for "other". It is voting for something, we don't know what, which might be discovered somewhere, sometime, by someone, maybe. Maybe something "new and better" will be discovered/developed, but until then Copenhagen seemed a fairly "safe bet" as it were.

Pastaland!

Well, at least Italy won the world cup so you got the sweepstake at your work! (was just reading your blog)

Err, firstly you format. Then you instal winXP and do it the proper way! How does the network manager compare to XP? (I haven't used Vista yet, a good comparison would be useful!) Well at least I've got that duck off my conscience, now I can sleep in peace!

Yep TimbaLanD. I wanna know what was said to Zidane that made him do that. Congrats to: Italy and: 5614, blike, Cloud, Dak, ecoli, Forensicmad, herpguy, insane_alien, Pangloss, pHoToN_gUrL, Schrodngr's_cat, scicop, Severian, The Thing, The_simpsons, YT2095 Unlucky: France and: Aardvark, Atheist, Djuan, GutZ, olifhar, ONH, reor, srh, swansont, TimbaLanD, why?

Yep. Einstein was wrong twice, that I'm aware of. Firstly when he disagreed with QM and secondly when he said that E=mc² does not mean mass can be converted into energy. This second error was disproved during his lifetime. However he died before, what he thought was an error with QM, was shown to actually be correct.

And it's 1-1 at half time