Particle Wave Duality and Subjective Truth

a reply to: NorEaster

No. They're not using the words wrong.

Definition of qubit:

In quantum computing, a qubit/ˈkjuːbɪt/ or quantum bit is a unit of quantum information—the quantum analogue of the classical bit. A qubit is a two-state quantum-mechanical system, such as the polarization of a single photon: here the two states are vertical polarization and horizontal polarization. In a classical system, a bit would have to be in one state or the other, but quantum mechanics allows the qubit to be in a superposition of both states at the same time, a property which is fundamental to quantum computing.

The reporters even included a definition of qubit in the article so people like you couldn't accuse them of not knowing what a qubit was:

But in a quantum system, "qubits" are stored in a so-called "superposition state" in which they can be both 1s and 0 at the same time - enabling them to perform multiple calculations simultaneously.

The two definitions match up.

They held a qubit in a state of 1 and 0 at the same time (superposition) for 39 minutes.

"Qubits" of information encoded in a silicon system persisted for almost 100 times longer than ever before.

Superposition definition from wikipedia (again):

Quantum superposition is a fundamental principle of quantum mechanics that holds that a physical system—such as an electron—exists partly in all its particular theoretically possible states (or, configuration of its properties) simultaneously

Qubit. Superposition. 39 minutes. 1 and 0 at same time. This is what happened. This is what they reported.

originally posted by: smithjustinb
a reply to: NorEaster

No. They're not using the words wrong.

Definition of qubit:

In quantum computing, a qubit/ˈkjuːbɪt/ or quantum bit is a unit of quantum information—the quantum analogue of the classical bit. A qubit is a two-state quantum-mechanical system, such as the polarization of a single photon: here the two states are vertical polarization and horizontal polarization. In a classical system, a bit would have to be in one state or the other, but quantum mechanics allows the qubit to be in a superposition of both states at the same time, a property which is fundamental to quantum computing.

The reporters even included a definition of qubit in the article so people like you couldn't accuse them of not knowing what a qubit was:

But in a quantum system, "qubits" are stored in a so-called "superposition state" in which they can be both 1s and 0 at the same time - enabling them to perform multiple calculations simultaneously.

The two definitions match up.

They held a qubit in a state of 1 and 0 at the same time (superposition) for 39 minutes.

"Qubits" of information encoded in a silicon system persisted for almost 100 times longer than ever before.

Superposition definition from wikipedia (again):

Quantum superposition is a fundamental principle of quantum mechanics that holds that a physical system—such as an electron—exists partly in all its particular theoretically possible states (or, configuration of its properties) simultaneously

Qubit. Superposition. 39 minutes. 1 and 0 at same time. This is what happened. This is what they reported.

I understand all of this, but what I'm trying to explain here is that (as your description of superposition states) imposing an entangled relationship onto quibits (which is what this experiment claims to have accomplished) can't achieve a result where each entangled ion (quibit, if you will, in this case, since this is what these scientists are assigning these ions to be in this application) "exists partly in all its particular theoretically possible states". No ion in this specific entanglement is free to be in any state other than the state that is imposed upon it as a direct result of being in that imposed entanglement with every other phosphorus ion that is also part of that mass entanglement.

The entanglement itself forces all involved ions to be frozen into a specific state relative to each other ion within that entanglement. If not - if any ion is free to be in all possible states - then that ion (the one that is free to exist in a state of superposition) is not part of the mass entanglement. It can't be. The entanglement itself - by definition - restricts each involved ion to one, and only one state.

This is the whole point of quantum entanglement as applied to the mechanics of quantum computing. One quibit is affected directly, and all entangled quibits are then simultaneously affected in a predetermined, controlled manner. No linear cause-effect delays. All effects are instantaneous, and therefore much faster and more exact.

Superposition is all possible states being expressed virtually - in this case, only 2 possible states - by every quibit. That's exactly the opposite of what bases the engineering concept of quantum computing, as it involves entangled quibits; regardless of whether they employ photons or phosphorus ions as the material items that will serve as the quibits.

a reply to: anonentity

That is an interesting theory and if consciousness is in reality a energy/matter wave then could it also not be theorized that observation and conscious thought waves would distort other waves and energies (gravitaional?) so as to have matter form in specific patterns (shared reality) which scientific measurement could record? Perhaps we are god-like, in that, we are said to be made in God's image.

originally posted by: Ninipe
a reply to: anonentity

No offense, but get over yourself. WTF? You don't really believe the whole universe and everything in it only exists because of you, do you? There is a word for the condition you're suffering from: god-complex.

I've found that 5 religions are undeniable (meaning cannot by science be proven false) one other belief maybe proven false but so far has not been. (as far as I have seen) This is that the collective we, which is us - all of us collectively, have decided upon, created and maintain this reality we call the universe. Since god is called the creator and this belief is stating that we are the co-creators you maybe right, but it means you too are suffering the complexities of being god.

a reply to: InTheLight

Interesting video .The effort of the observer affecting the uncertainty of the timeline. You don't have to exist in the environment of three dimensional space, observing it as such creates the reality. In fact in reality, their might be no such thing as three dimensional space, what we perceive as the local environment might be a model that works, among the many other probabilities.