mrfahrenheit · 9 weeks ago
holy shit that's impressive
ntnick · 9 weeks ago
It opens so many doors for the future
creativedragonbaby · 9 weeks ago
It’s crazy that we can get computers to simulate these things. They can do so much advanced mathematics in just a few seconds or minutes depending on the complexity
funkmasterrex · 9 weeks ago
How the fuck did they get a Maxwell's Demon though? All I can find is that they had the assistance of one.. a "pure demon qubit", but where the fuck did that come from? Honestly, it sounds like leveling water in two containers through a permiable membrane but once side has salt that can't penetrate the membrane. The "salt" being the demon qubit.
funkmasterrex · 9 weeks ago
Also, that "pure demon qubit" might as well be extra energy; energy can overcome entropy, thereby not violating the second law of thermodynamics. And look at the magnitude. To use their own example, you can expend energy and put the billiards back in a triangle. You don't even have to move them yourself if you put magnets in them at the right positions. Going from 0:0 to 1:0 then back to 0:0 isn't going back in time... although achieving it at a 85% rate is interesting.
other observations for discussion:
It also takes energy to get a qubit into it's ground state
The computer is programmed to go "backwards". You can press rewind and still be moving forward in time.
"13.7 billion years—observing 10 billion freshly localized electrons every second, the reverse evolution of the particle's state would only happen once. And even then, the electron would travel no more than a mere one ten-billionth of a second into the past."
funkmasterrex · 9 weeks ago
1.37x10^9 * 3.154x10^7 (number of seconds in a year) x 10^9 = 4.321x10^15 to 1 chances of it ever being observed in nature, and then only one ten-billionth of a second.... A virtual particle screwing with the results is more likely in the physical world <_<
funkmasterrex · 9 weeks ago
4.321x10^25* my bad
funkmasterrex · 9 weeks ago
Now, as for cancelling out "noise", that's huge for practicality, so that's cool.
wimsyexpergefactor · 8 weeks ago
SO I know I'm about to sound stupid as heck to ya'll freaking geniuses in here, (please keep In mind I'm still bogging through high school.) Sp, with the article (From my understanding of it??) are they referring to time itself as a thing to be reversed? Isn't time just a construct? Like, we live in a subjective 'time' based on events like degradation, thought processing speed and atomic function itself? I'm just a little confused, bc I thought that days and minutes and seconds were constructed as concepts to place relativity and the ability to measure the rate of change we observe and and experience in our universe. So with this, (Idk if I'm making sense at All, sorry, I know I can be an idiot) if they figured out a way to 'reverse time', is it just altering the state of something back to an exact previous state? (Like it mentioned the electron's degredation) Or is it meaning time in a very literal-law-of-universe kind of way? I'm probably being really dumb about this hah, sorry
funkmasterrex · 8 weeks ago
Yes, time is relative, but it also moves only in one direction, as far as we know. That's why traveling to the "future" is theoretically possible, but as far as we know, traveling to the past is not.