they will discover the very same phenomenon in the human brain.
14 publicly visible posts • joined 22 Mar 2011
The relativity theory stated an upper limit for speed correctly, according to the observations. Einstein`s big failure was to state that light itself possesses this maximum speed. No clear evidence proved this, although the two speeds are very near to each other.
Neutrinos are just more closer to the maximum speed, but we still don`t know if they reach it or not.
that the effect described here, can be used to produce connected photon-pairs for quantum-state teleportation?
"the observed photons have properties predicted by quantum theory"
this sentence is very important, if it means what i'm thinking of. Does this mean that we know the quantum state of the created photons? Because the main problem of quantum-state teleportation was, that we don't know the initial state.
The applications are crashing all the time on it, when I use it, I have the feeling that I'm using a Windows 95.
I'm totally not surprised. Have anybody seen the language they use, called: "Object C" ?
It's the one of the worst languages ever created, it is not object oriented at all. It is impossible to manage complex software with that sh*t.
oh I can see "the age of mac" coming. You don't know exactly what hardware is in your system, know nothing about it`s performance. You can choose from 2-3 configs to customize your machine, but only by the manufacturer, you can't buy computer parts on the market, only full configs. The only thing you know is that it's shinee. And if somebody wants to buy a strong machine, have to pay in the category of servers.
manufacturers are very optimistic, but i don't think we will be able to go under 16nm until 2040-2050.
So after we will get stuck for decades at 16nm, the only possible way to increase performance will be the massive parallelism, using as many cores as possible. This will require chips with low transistor count, like VLIW. So this could give some hope for Itanium.
My biggest problem with XP was that it doesn't handle hyper-threading well. Example, we have 2 cores with hyper-threading enabled, so have 4 logical cores, and we have two tasks. XP puts the tasks on logical core 1 and 2, so on the same core. Win 7 puts them on logical cores 1 and 3.