So im watching a video about google's new Willow quantum chip. Long story short, the chips creator, Hartmut Nevin, says the computational speed is proof of parallel universes.

Im not a scientist, but I have two questions....

1. If the chip is accessing data or power or whatever from one or more parallel universes, whats that look like in the other universe? If our universe is gaining information through utilizing another universe, whats happening in that other universe (essentially same question)?

2. Could it be bending time?

The speed of the computation is too fast, so they assume the chip is going to another dimension/universe.....what if its just so fast that its bending time. In my mind this is similar to UAP executing maneuvers that "break" physics. But I think it's becoming clear that they are bending gravity/time. So what if these chips are just going faster than light? I fear im not even smart enough to form this second question

Yea thats the question

From the article:

Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Brookhaven National Laboratory have uncovered experimental evidence that particles of matter emerging from energetic subatomic smashups retain a key feature of virtual particles that exist only fleetingly in the quantum vacuum. The finding offers a new way to explore how the vacuum—once thought of as empty space—provides important ingredients needed to transform virtual "nothingness" into the matter that makes up our world.

This experiment has been interpreted to suggest virtual particles are “real” particles. This causes a problem though because virtual particles don’t have to satisfy energy conservation. The explanation has always been that virtual particles wink in and out of existence at such short times scales, ca. 10^-21 and shorter, that they can not be measured.

But I’ve always been ill-at-ease with this explanation. The reason is under special relativity, the time they exist can be made longer if the system is moving fast enough. Consider then, the highest Lorentz time dilation factor we can reach with our proton accelerators is ca. 10,000. But the highest energies observed with ultra high energy cosmic rays, UHECR’s, is a million times higher than our accelerators, corresponding to an equivalently higher time dilation to reach a dilation factor of 10^10. This means we would observe the existence times of the “virtual particles” arising from UHECR’s at 10^-11 s, or 10 picoseconds. This is well within the measuring times we’re capable of. In fact, the explanation of anomalous effects we observe with UHECR’s may be due to those “virtual particles” being measured as real:

https://www.google.com/search?q=anomalies+of+uhecr.

And using the fastest timing equipment we now have, we might not even have resort to looking at UHECR’s. Agostini, Krausz, and L’Huillier won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2023 for creating methods of measuring events at attosecond times scales, 10^-18. Then at our highest particle accelerator energies generating time dilations factors of ca. 10,000, virtual particles existing at 10^-21 seconds, would be observed by us to to last 10^-17 seconds, 10 attoseconds.

Another intriguing approach is from measurements of quantum tunneling. Some experimental results suggest this might happen at attosecond times scales rather than happening instantaneously as previously thought. Then measurements of quantum tunneling in accelerated systems to 10,000 time dilation factor would bring that time down to the 10^14 second, 10 femtosecond range. This is within the range of time measuring devices already present at our highest energy accelerators.

I have seen a few cases when simple experiments could be used to for example demonstrate the quantized nature of light. I am wondering what experiments could you realistically do that demonstrate quantum properties of matter and light.

OP here. I'm trying out a new interactive way to teach complex concepts. What do you think of the style? How about content, could you follow along okay?

I am 13 (interested in physics i know stuff like temp is just average kinetic energy and also entanglement and dirac equation and also computing but i always thought how we even come with this math or etc stuff that an particle may or may not be there until its measured (when an photon falls on particle) and also an question (only if you are student of particle or quantum physics) we know that higgs boson is an elementary particle but then how did we know it was responsible for higgs field and all other stuff but due to particle decay we cant even see it (even if higgs boson dont decayed we still could not see it) then how did we or anyone can prove that its due to this particle that higgs field is there and how we know that this a particle (that we have never seen) interact this way with other particle

I got my PhD in ionospheric physics two years ago from a European university. Recently, after reading some online resources, I got highly interested in quantum computing. But I don't really know to achieve this. Fo example, would you suggest first completing an online course then apply for phd or just directly applying for phd?

Ever since I got introduced to quantum physics, I became highly fascinated with the Schrodinger equation, especially how beautiful it looks. I also got to understand the Hamiltonian operator as the representation of total energy of a quantum system. So, I easily understood it governs dynamics under the principle of energy (and possibly momentum) conservation. However, Newton's second law, as I have been taught, does not describe dynamics under that principle since it is fundamentally force-based. So I got totally confused about how it represents Newton's second law in quantum mechanics if it is not force-based. I tried searching the internet but it always answers with what “conventional assumptions” say. Any active researcher to help me understand what is going on? And also is there a possibility of having a strictly force-based formulation as this research suggests?

I’m trying to better understand the assumptions behind Bell’s theorem, in particular the factorization (or “local causality”) condition.

As I understand it, Bell inequalities rely on the idea that joint probabilities can be written as:

P(A,B∣a,b,λ)=P(A∣a,λ)P(B∣b,λ),

where λ represents underlying variables.

This is usually interpreted as a statement about locality and hidden variables.

However, I’m wondering about a slightly different angle.

Suppose that what we call “observables” are not direct functions of an underlying state, but instead come from a many-to-one mapping (i.e. different underlying configurations correspond to the same observable outcome).

In other words, observable states correspond to equivalence classes of more detailed configurations.

My question is:

In such a situation, is it still expected that Bell-type factorization should hold at the observable level?

Or could the many-to-one nature of this mapping itself prevent a factorized description, even if the underlying dynamics are local?

I’m not trying to challenge Bell’s theorem itself, but to understand whether its assumptions implicitly rely on observables being “fine-grained enough” (i.e. effectively injective with respect to the underlying variables).

Are there known results or discussions about this kind of coarse-graining effect?

Hello everyone.

I will have finished my bachelor's degree by September this year. I am a Computer Science major with excellent grades and an IELTS score of 8. I am looking forward to studying in one of the top 5 or 10 universities in the world. I am living in Jordan right now. I just wanted to ask about available scholarship opportunities for my case and what are your recommendations regarding studying Quantum Computing as a higher education degree ? I have Rhodes Trust in my mind now, but I don't wanna put all my eggs in one basket. I will appreciate all of your answers.

What would be the best way either the connections or applying to find a good intern for post graduation students. Which is are topics to consider for thesis and projects to build. What else to learn

Does anyone know any good "beginner friendly" quantum computing open source projects (software not hardware) to contribute to? It would be really helpful thanks!

I’m currently a junior computer engineering student at a large R1 engineering school in the US interested in photonics / quantum systems engineering and wanted some realistic feedback on my grad school trajectory for thesis-based master’s or potentially PhD programs.

Current situation:

• CompE major
• GPA likely ending up around mid-3.5 range
• Upcoming SWE/infrastructure-focused internship this summer
• Some undergraduate project/research organization involvement related to quantum computing concepts
• Experience with Qiskit and photonics simulation tools

Planned trajectory over the next year:

• Trying to get involved in quantum/photonics research during senior year
• Planning to build a more serious project combining quantum simulation + photonics/networking concepts
• Interested more in quantum systems/networking/photonics engineering rather than pure theory

Target schools would include strong quantum/photonics programs (UMD/UIUC/Michigan/UChicago-level schools, plus some reaches).

Main questions:

1. How competitive is a mid-3.5 GPA for this field if combined with good research alignment?
2. Does the photonics/quantum systems engineering route make more sense than trying to compete in pure theory?
3. What kinds of projects/research experience actually help for admissions and internships in this space?
4. Are internships/startups/national labs more realistic stepping stones into the field before targeting larger companies?

Would appreciate honest feedback from people already in the field or in related grad programs.

when i was on the bus i watched a tt that showed sonic phasing though a punch then i thought hey can he actually do this? so i searched it up and it said that he could if he vibrate his molecules at specific frequencies he could potentially phase though atoms. im still unsure if he could do this so i went here to ask on reddit if he could really pull this off

https://preview.redd.it/jzdxe574byzg1.png?width=613&format=png&auto=webp&s=71d657d17c9314b4d3c6646cb49c803cbd662f3d

https://preview.redd.it/jgavqolcbyzg1.png?width=600&format=png&auto=webp&s=dc532603b72ff76cf961b38393fcc8bd49e91332