Author: dabacon

Posted on

Multiday View in Scirate.com

I’ve added a new feature to Scirate.com: the ability to view the votes over differing timespans than just one day. Thus, for instance, you can now view all of the papers in the last month order by the number of votes. To get to these views, click on the view menu at the top of the page. Thus, for example, over the last 30 days the top papers are

9 cites: 0705.4077
Title: The power of quantum systems on a line
Authors: Dorit Aharonov, Daniel Gottesman, Julia Kempe
9 cites: 0705.2784
Title: Quantum algorithms for hidden nonlinear structures
Authors: Andrew M. Childs, Leonard J. Schulman, Umesh V. Vazirani
7 cites: 0705.2742
Title: A toy model for quantum mechanics
Author: S. J. van Enk

Posted on

Balancing Work and Play

Some kids never grow up. Here for example is my nephew Marcus. Watching his uncle Dave, a very overgrown kid, balance a pipe on his nose:
Dave Balancing Act
Note the volcano in the background.

Posted on

Rumors

Higgs rumor spreads to Slate.com. Me, I want to start a rumor that a Manhattan project for quantum computing has already built a large scale quantum computer (now wouldn’t that make a certain company which has built a small special purpose analog classical computer mad.)

Posted on

Karma's Gonna Getcha

A while back, I wrote a post, Laugh Therapy where I described a paper, quant-ph/0610117 by M. I. Dyakonov entitled “Is Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation Really Possible?” The tone of my post was flipant and commentors (both online and offline) rightly pointed out that the proper way to resond to such a post is not with my bad jokestering, but by pointing out the technical flaws in the argument. i.e. to respond like a professional and not like a clown (which, of course, is my first reaction to nearly everything in the world.) At the time I didn’t think much about it, except that I agreed with the commentors. But I also thought, but yeah, when will this ever really be important? I mean no offense but large chunks of what I see on the arxiv everyday is, well, kind of junky (and I don’t exclude myself from this category.) So what harm is there in one more paper which I strongly disagreed with on the arxiv?
Karma, however, must have heard these musing in my head, since today I received a rejection for a grant proposal and what did I find in one of the reviews? Yep, you guessed it, a reference to quant-ph/0610117. Doh.

Posted on

New Scirate.com Comment Feature

After fixing some of the broken features of Scirate.com I decided that it was time that I added a comment feature per paper to the website. So, yep, now you can comment away on any paper you want that is listed on Scirate.com. Note that you have to be registered to comment. Of course any comments you have about the comment function being broken is welcome. The recommendation system should also be up and running fully again and hopefully has also been speeded up by some rearrangements I just performed.

Posted on

Quantum Ode to U.S. Physics Deparments :)

Looking over the AMO/Condensed Matter job rumor mill this moring I was hoping to see that the luck of theoretical quantum computing folk in U.S. physics departments has improved, but alas! Anyone willing to rumor monger and lighten my mood by revealing a change in attitude? And, since it was just Memorial Day here in the US:

Where have all the quantum theorists gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the quantum theorists gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the quantum theorists gone?
Canada has picked them every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Posted on

Quantum Books

Last week I stumbled upon a new quantum computing book, Quantum Computing for Computer Architects by Tzvetan S. Metodi and Frederic T. Chong (don’t even try to say that first name outloud, you might break your mouth! 🙂 ) Did you know that quantum computing papers have appeared in the top computer architecture conferences (see ISCA 2006 for example) But seriously, don’t mention this to physics hiring committees 🙂 Update: Commentor toby points out that the entire book is downloadable on the publisher’s website here (well you may need a university subscription??)
In SFO airport the other day I was browing the science section of a bookstore when I came across Punk Science by Manjir Samanta-Laughton. Cool title, I thought, Punk Science sounds very radical. Indeed:

Punk Science demonstrates that ideas from the cutting-edge of science actually explain phenomena that have previously been thought of as paranormal. Dr. Samanta-Laughton offers a new model of the universe, where consciousness generates life, where black holes exist inside our bodies as well as far out in space, and where the same science explains galaxies and planets as well as human evolution, auras and chakras. Drawing on the very latest in scientific understanding, the Black Hole principle outlined by [sic] in this book, represents the next leap forward in both human understanding and living, and gives a closer approximation to scientific reality than the macho-approach of the old-style physics.

Doh, radical indeed.
Oh, and commentor Perry notes that quantum computers feature in a new mystery novel, Simple Genius by David Baldacci. Sweet, having already appearing in science fiction, quantum computing is now in mysteries, which means that soon quantum computing will appear in some high falutin mainstream literature.