Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

fnub577 t1_iyh1208 wrote

This was just a computer simulation, not anything real

15

barrone1000 t1_iyh4g45 wrote

Probably why it says 'simuate' in the title and in several places in the article...?

To be fair its not a good piece, it's clickbait and doesn't really explain the experiment. The work had two purposes: to explore Leonard Susskind's idea that quantum entanglement and the wormholes in General Relativity are somehow the same thing; and to test some ideas on whether it would be (theoretically) possible to stabilise a wormhole long enough to travel through one.

2

TopGullSenior t1_iyt5sg0 wrote

Probably why it says 'simuate' in the title and in several places in the article...?
To be fair its not a good piece, it's clickbait and doesn't really explain the experiment. The work had two purposes: to explore Leonard Susskind's idea that quantum entanglement and the wormholes in General Relativity are somehow the same thing; and to test some ideas on whether it would be (theoretically) possible to stabilise a wormhole long enough to travel through one.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^this^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

1

Ransome62 t1_iyh5m9u wrote

Inside a quantum computer. Not a regular computer. So although you are kinda right, it's a bit more complex than just a computer simulation. Quantum computers are nothing like a regular computer.

For instance, a normal computer uses 1s and 0s to do its calculations. In a Quantum computer a 1 can also be a 0, and a 0 can be a 1 or vice-versa. Or they can be both a 1 and a 0 at the same time.

−1

Deyln t1_iyh7wy8 wrote

So they claimed it made one but didn't; but also simultaneously?

I personally think the computer type is only slightly relevant in that it provides a different mathematical base.

1

TopGullSenior t1_iyt5jsu wrote

So do we think they are going to stop there? Who gives someone the right to possibly rupture space and time in the future on behalf of the entire solar system? I'm scared of this. It's like Elon Musk's destruction of the astronomical study of the night sky on steroids.

1

Ransome62 t1_iyt8i0i wrote

First of all whoever downvoted my previous comment is a ducking idiot who dosent understand basic science. 🙄

Secondly what does Elon have to do with this.

You are just looking for a fight. Grow up. Byeeeeee

1

TopGullSenior t1_iytqosw wrote

https://www.thedailybeast.com/spacexs-starlink-is-making-life-hell-for-astronomers-but-telescopes-on-the-moon-could-fix-that

basic science

0

Ransome62 t1_iytrcs5 wrote

Lol wtf does that have to do with me explaining how a quantum computer works?

Your link is about as relevant to this as this one:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatulence

Maybe you should study this first before we debate quantum physics....

https://www.askamathematician.com/2009/10/q-how-can-we-prove-that-22-always-equals-4/

1

TopGullSenior t1_iyttmcp wrote

I wasn't saying anything about that. Did I get on your thread? I'm pretty sure you have misunderstood my comment and straight-up attacked while accusing me of argument-baiting, but it could be something else, too. I was the one asking why one scientist or a madman gets to jeopardize the future of an entire sector of the universe when megalomaniacal individuals decide they can do it. You asked me to explain how Elon Musk applied to one individual ruining the planet and I gave you a link. Then I explained how one person ruined night astronomy as an example. Maybe you should try close reading before you argue semantics: https://www.commonsense.org/education/top-picks/resources-for-close-reading-and-literary-analysis-lessons

. First, please try decaf. Also, I accept your apology.

1

GetlostMaps t1_iyh31ma wrote

The universe is just a computer simulation,not anything real.

−3