Gelfand 1913-2009

Israel Gelfand, one of the great mathematicians of our age, apparently passed away yesterday at the age of 96. Check out the list of results that bear his name on the above linked Wikipedia page. Wow. Today I will, in his honor, think a bit more about Gelfand-Tsetlin basis and what they can be used for in quantum computing.

Nobel Prize in Physics for Fiber Optics, CCDs

The Nobel Prize in Physics for 2009 has been announced and goes to Charles K. Kao for “for groundbreaking achievements concerning the transmission of light in fibers for optical communication” and to Willard S. Boyle and George E. Smith for the “for the invention of an imaging semiconductor circuit – the CCD sensor.”
I’m crazy busy so don’t have time to comment on the physics of these awards at the moment, but the thing that struck me about this selection will probably strike a few others and can be summarized in two words: Bell labs. Boyle and Smith are retired from Bell labs which is also where they invented the CCD. And today…. Well today Bell labs does not do any basic physics research. Instead its current owner, Alcatel-Lucent has Bell labs focused on “more immediately marketable areas such as networking, high-speed electronics, wireless, nanotechnology and software.” In other words, you can pretty much bet that when you plot Bell labs nobel prizes verses time you will see an amazing bubble, leading to a complete collapse.
Oh, and by my count that makes two McGill grads with Nobel prizes this year so far (Boyle in physics, Szostak in medicine.)

QIP 2010 and CSQ 2010

Two conferences. Renato Renner sends along a note about QIP 2010. The paper submission deadline is one month away:

QIP 2010 will be held in Zurich, Switzerland, January 18-22.
The submission deadline for contributed talks is 22 October 2009.
For more information, please see http://www.qip2010.ethz.ch
We look forward to welcoming you to Zurich,
the organizers

Also a conference on superconducting qubits in San Diego:

Please note our conference coming next spring; Coherence in Superconducting Qubits, to be held April 25-28, 2010, in San Diego, CA.
The agenda and registration are described at http://csq.myconferencehost.com/?page=1.

Zurich in winter, San Diego in spring…life must be good for the traveling postdoc.

Gell-Mann on Conventional Wisdom

Via Asymptotia, an interview with Murray Gell-Mann (who just turned 80. Happy Birthday Murray!) I particularly like the comments at the end of the article:

Battles of new ideas against conventional wisdom are common in science, aren’t they?
It’s very interesting how these certain negative principles get embedded in science sometimes. Most challenges to scientific orthodoxy are wrong. A lot of them are crank. But it happens from time to time that a challenge to scientific orthodoxy is actually right. And the people who make that challenge face a terrible situation. Getting heard, getting believed, getting taken seriously and so on. And I’ve lived through a lot of those, some of them with my own work, but also with other people’s very important work. Let’s take continental drift, for example. American geologists were absolutely convinced, almost all of them, that continental drift was rubbish. The reason is that the mechanisms that were put forward for it were unsatisfactory. But that’s no reason to disregard a phenomenon. Because the theories people have put forward about the phenomenon are unsatisfactory, that doesn’t mean the phenomenon doesn’t exist. But that’s what most American geologists did until finally their noses were rubbed in continental drift in 1962, ’63 and so on when they found the stripes in the mid-ocean, and so it was perfectly clear that there had to be continental drift, and it was associated then with a model that people could believe, namely plate tectonics. But the phenomenon was still there. It was there before plate tectonics. The fact that they hadn’t found the mechanism didn’t mean the phenomenon wasn’t there. Continental drift was actually real. And evidence was accumulating for it. At Caltech the physicists imported Teddy Bullard to talk about his work and Patrick Blackett to talk about his work, these had to do with paleoclimate evidence for continental drift and paleomagnetism evidence for continental drift. And as that evidence accumulated, the American geologists voted more and more strongly for the idea that continental drift didn’t exist. The more the evidence was there, the less they believed it. Finally in 1962 and 1963 they had to accept it and they accepted it along with a successful model presented by plate tectonics….

Apocalypse Avoided

As I discussed a few blog posts ago a serious hole in our apocalypse protection network was about to be compromised with the non-renewal of the website http://www.hasthelhcdestroyedtheearth.com/. But it seems that Domenic has come to the rescue! See comment in the above blog post and the RSS feed update:

Domenic (a true fan of this site) was so distraught at the thought of missing out on further reassurances of the earth’s continued existence that he’s ponied up the registration cost for another year. So, we’re not going anywhere after all.

1. The world has not ended. 2. The website is still going. Hence 3. Keeping the website going is what is keeping the world from ending. Err.

Weinstein v. Krugman v. Orzel (Mathematical Elegance Death Match)

Over at the most uncertain blog, he of uncertain principles (aka Chad) takes up a challenge posed by @EricRWeinstein on twitter concerning Paul Krugman’s recent article on why economists got the economic crisis so wrong. Since I know even less economics than anyone around here this seems like a great opportunity for me to weigh in (this is, after all, the blogosphere!)
Continue reading “Weinstein v. Krugman v. Orzel (Mathematical Elegance Death Match)”

The World Is Ending (or at Least a Website)

One RSS feeds I subscribe to is the one at http://www.hasthelhcdestroyedtheearth.com/. I mean, if the world is going to end, I certainly want Google reader to be the first to tell me. But today’s RSS update is, instead of the traditional “no”, different:

Bye bye everyone. This domain is not being renewed. It’s been fun.

Which means that soon when you check www.hasthelhcdestroyedtheearth.com, you may not get an answer. Which may or may not mean the LHC has destroyed the world (oh noes!) Or it may just mean that your going to find a web page filled with spam from a domain name squatter. Which is kind of the same thing, I guess.