Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
- From: "T.H. Ray" <thray123@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 15:50:19 EDT
On Sun, 13 May 2007 00:25:30 EDT, "T.H. Ray"
<thray123@xxxxxxx> wrote:
thePaul Feyerabend, the foremost science critic of
Feyerabendlast century, once
wrote in his book 'Against Method' that "the most
stupid procedures
and the most laughable results in their domain are
surrounded with an
aura of excellence. It is time to cut them down in
size, and to give
them a more modest position in society."
computingwas speaking of
scientists in general but he may as well have been
talking about the
new "science" of quantum computing. Quantum
properties,is based on the
idea that the states of certain quantum
quantumsuch as the spin
of a particle, are superposed, meaning that a
theoryproperty can
have multiple states simultaneously.
You can read the rest of the article here:
http://rebelscience.blogspot.com/
ahahaha...
Louis Savain
If quantum computing is "bunk," so is the whole
of quantum mechanics. Nonlocality is essential tothe
theory, and since nonlocality has beenexperimentally
validated, your personal beliefs on the matter areentirely
unsupported.
I am not debating nonlocality since I can easily
explain to myself
that nonlocality is a logical necessity of the
universe. Nonlocality
really means nonspatiality. I am debating the concept
of superposition
of states which is what QC is based on. Superposition
has never been
observed. It is an interpretation, regardless of the
claims of quantum
physicists. It's crackpottery of the worst kind.
Why Space (Distance) Is an Illusion or
Nasty Little Truth About Space:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Crackpots/nasty.htm#Space
Louis Savain
You don't have enough knowledge of what we already know about
quantum behavior, to engage in a debate. Fill that gap first.
Superposition is a mathematical tool, as simple as adding. It's
what makes sense of a world made of waves that collide. It
is not necessary to tag some personal philsophy onto it-- the
phenomenon is entirely objective.
Tom
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
- From: Traveler
- Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
- References:
- Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
- From: Traveler
- Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
- Prev by Date: Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
- Next by Date: Re: Contraction Mappings - Concave functions
- Previous by thread: Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
- Next by thread: Re: Why Quantum Computing Is Bunk
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|