Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Replies: 176   Last Post: Jun 10, 2007 12:30 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
ZZBunker

Posts: 940
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Posted: May 24, 2007 4:56 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On May 19, 2:16 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article <1179491973.522676.40...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > On May 17, 6:38 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <1179338636.841136.32...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,

>
> > > Vend <ven...@virgilio.it> wrote:
> > > > On 16 Mag, 16:03, Mitchell Jones <mjo...@21cenlogic.com> wrote:
> > > > > ***{Fine. How do you know you did that, other than by counting the
> > > > > clicks on the photon detector? Maybe you actually released a million
> > > > > photons, and only got one click. --MJ}***

>
> > > > It's a well known fact (since Plank and Einstain) that photons have
> > > > quantized energy:
> > > > The energy of a single photon is equal to: hc/l, where h is the
> > > > Plank's constant, c is the speed of light in the vacuum and l is the
> > > > wavelength of the radiation.

>
> > > > When you desing a light source you can control the total emitted power
> > > > (total energy/time) and the wavelength (the 'color' of the light).
> > > > Since the total energy emitted in a given time interval is just the
> > > > sum of the energy of all photons emitted in that interval, you can
> > > > simply calculate the average number of photons per interval: n = El/
> > > > hc, where E is the total energy.

>
> > > > Therefore, by keeping a low total power and/or a low wavelength you
> > > > can archive a small number of photons per time interval. In
> > > > particular, you can desing the source so that it emits only one photon
> > > > in an interval much larger than the time required for the photon to
> > > > traverse your experimental setup.
> > > > Then you can be sure (with high probability) that there is at most one
> > > > photon at time traveling in your experimental system.

>
> > > This idea that we can model light as a traveling entity was what
> > > led Albert Einstein to write `On the Electrodynamics of Moving
> > > Bodies'.

>
> > That's a little squishy. Everybody knows that light travels,
>
> That it is something `everybody knows' is what makes it
> so interesting. If it is traveling we should be able to
> observe it travelling. Yes? Or else it is something other than
> the other kinds of things that travel in physics, in
> which case all bets are off. Thinking that light _is_ a
> photon imposes a billiard ball universe where it will
> not fit. You cannot have your cake and eat it to.
>

> > and has
> > known that for a half-dozen centuries at least. Calling it a
> > "traveling entity" doesn't add any meaning to that.

>
> Modeling it as a traveling entity is what we are
> offered by physics. This is exactly what I am talking
> about.
>

> > What prompted
> > Einstein was the peculiar form of Maxwell's equations that didn't
> > obviously satisfy invariance with respect to inertial reference frames
> > the same way that Newtonian mechanics did.

>
> Einstein tried to visualize himself traveling along
> with a beam of light and picturing the
> electro-magnetism field. He discovered that it is an
> impossible configuration with respect to the laws of
> electro-magnetism. _This_ is how he was led to consider
> the transformation laws for Maxwell's equations.
>

> > > An electromagnetic wave observed in a reference frame
> > > traveling with it is a configuration that utterly violates the
> > > laws of electricity and magnetism.

>
> > There is no reference frame traveling with the electromagnetic wave in
> > which you can observe it. I have no idea where you got the idea that
> > there was.

>
> That is my point. The attempt to visualize such a frame
> leads to an electro-magnetic field at variance with the
> observed laws of electro-magnetism. Hence, the model in
> which light travels has problems; it is convenient but
> ought not be taken seriously.
>

> > > Nobody has ever observed a
> > > photon.

>
> > That's just plain wrong.
>
> Show me an experiment that observes a photon.


There is no such experiment.
Logic actually made marginal progress in the 20th century.

Einstein proved that calculus is neither necessary nor sufficient
for light to exist.
Goedel proved that set theory is neither necessary nor sufficient
for axioms to exist.
Turing proved that AT&T is neither necessary nor sufficient
for dimensions to exist.
RNA proved that DNA is neither necessary nor sufficient
for evolution to exist.




>
> --
> Michael Press- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -





Date Subject Author
5/12/07
Read Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Phineas T Puddleduck
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Phineas T Puddleduck
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Phineas T Puddleduck
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
hanson
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Phineas T Puddleduck
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Aatu Koskensilta
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
T.H. Ray
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
T.H. Ray
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
John Sefton
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/14/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/14/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/14/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
John Sefton
5/14/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/15/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/15/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/14/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/15/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/15/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Brian Quincy Hutchings
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Brian Quincy Hutchings
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Brian Quincy Hutchings
5/17/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/15/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/15/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/17/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Olea
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
mike3
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
T.H. Ray
5/15/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Jake
5/17/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Grouchy
5/17/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/18/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/15/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Mitchell Jones
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Mitchell Jones
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/17/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Mitchell Jones
5/17/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Denis Feldmann
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/17/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Mitchell Jones
5/18/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/18/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Mitchell Jones
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Mitchell Jones
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/17/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/18/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Phineas T Puddleduck
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Phineas T Puddleduck
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Phineas T Puddleduck
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/22/07
Read Why Michael Press does not know what he is talking about.
Jack Sarfatti
5/22/07
Read Re: theories of light?
Michael Press
5/22/07
Read Re: theories of light?
Jack Sarfatti
5/24/07
Read Re: theories of light?
Michael Press
5/24/07
Read Michael Press is a Crank Crackpot
Jack Sarfatti
5/24/07
Read Re: Michael Press is a Crank Crackpot
T.H. Ray
5/24/07
Read Re: Michael Press is a Crank Crackpot
Denis Feldmann
5/24/07
Read Blind and stupid
Jack Sarfatti
5/25/07
Read Re: physics of light.
Michael Press
5/24/07
Read Re: theories of light?
Dr. David Kirkby
5/25/07
Read Re: theories of light?
T.H. Ray
5/25/07
Read Re: theories of light?
Michael Press
5/22/07
Read Re: theories of light?
galathaea
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/24/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
ZZBunker
5/18/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Phineas T Puddleduck
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/23/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/23/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/24/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/24/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/22/07
Read This post by Michael Press is crank
Jack Sarfatti
5/22/07
Read Re: This post by Michael Press is crank
Dr. David Kirkby
5/23/07
Read Re: This post by Michael Press is crank
Jack Sarfatti
5/23/07
Read Re: What is light?
Michael Press
5/23/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/23/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
RAYN.NADERI@gmail.com
5/23/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
RAYN.NADERI@gmail.com
5/23/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
RAYN.NADERI@gmail.com
5/23/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
RAYN.NADERI@gmail.com
5/24/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/23/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Brian Quincy Hutchings
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Phineas T Puddleduck
5/19/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Phineas T Puddleduck
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/20/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Vend
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/21/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/22/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Michael Press
5/22/07
Read Why what Michael Press says about photons is bunk
Jack Sarfatti
5/22/07
Read Re: Why what Michael Press says about photons is bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/23/07
Read Re: Why what Michael Press says about photons is bunk
Jack Sarfatti
5/23/07
Read Re: Why what Michael Press says about photons is bunk
Michael Press
5/23/07
Read Re: Why what Michael Press says about photons is bunk
kundan
5/24/07
Read Re: Why what Michael Press says about photons is bunk
Michael Press
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Eric Gisse
5/12/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
T.H. Ray
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
T.H. Ray
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
T.H. Ray
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
T.H. Ray
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Dr. David Kirkby
5/13/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
ZZBunker
5/14/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
PD
5/15/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/14/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
David Bernier
5/15/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
mike3
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
ZZBunker
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
mike3
5/16/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
5/18/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Brian Quincy Hutchings
5/24/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
mike3
6/8/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Traveler
6/10/07
Read Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
Brian Quincy Hutchings

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.