Category: Quotes

Twist and Turn

~ rbonini

I think I’ll point you to a BBC op-ed piece that talks about the new technology of spintronics (lo-and-behold, there is a Wikipedia article. Honestly, is there anything that is not in that wiki? But I digress).

Quote:

“If you think about the spin of a particle, such as an electron, it can point up or down or at any superposition of the two; partially up or partially down,” said Professor Awschalom.

Each of these different “superpositions” can represent an almost infinite number of combinations of ones and zeros.

“You can store an almost infinite number of bits of information in one particle space,” he added.

This almost limitless number of possibilities would also pave the way for advanced computer processing, such as is needed in quantum computing.

“The spin of a particle is a very natural particle for quantum information processing,” said Professor Awschalom.

 

I’m used to reading about major conflicts between classical and Quantum physics, but can anyone give me more info about the “superpositions” part of this theory – I’m having trouble getting my head around it?

This is the explanation from Wikipedia:

Spintronics is the ability to change or influence the rotation of an electron.

Electrons have the basic properties of spin, charge, and mass. That the electron has superposition (being everywhere) at the same time, where theory states you can only know certain values but not simultaneously, one pair is momentum and position, and the other is energy and time. Electrons have 2 spin states +spin up and -spin down which are usually found in paired electrons. No two electrons can occupy the same quantum state. Spin up and spin down states of fermions have different energies depending on whether or not the spin states are aligned with the magnetic field or not. Electrons absorb photons quantum energy to change valence orbits, and they lose spin coherence by colliding with mutually resonant photons frequencies causing the electron to spin flip by energy transfer through mutual spin-orbit coupling and photon emission.

 

I’m still having trouble getting this (the superposition article in Wikipedia isn’t much help either).

How True

~ rbonini

I’ve just read this post from Jeff Atwood:

I believe there’s a healthy balance all programmers need to establish, somewhere between…

  1. Locking yourself away in a private office and having an intimate dialog with a compiler about your program.
  2. Getting out in public and having an open dialog with other human beings about your program.

If you didn’t catch the humor there, it had to do with the “intimate dialog with a compiler” bit 🙂 .

Funny things are often true. Hold that thought.

So this bit had me chuckling:

Most programmers are introverts, so they don’t usually need any encouragement to run off and spend time alone with their computer. They do it naturally. Left to their own devices, that’s all they’d ever do. I don’t blame them; computers are a lot more rational than people. That’s what attracts most of us to the field. But it is possible to go too far in the other direction, too. It’s much rarer, because it bucks the natural introversion of most software developers, but it does happen. Take me, for example. Sometimes I worry that I spend more time talking about programming than actually programming.

 

Natural introvert. Hmmm. Remarkable timing on Jeff’s part. I was telling myself  just the other day how much more comfortable it is to talk to a C++ compiler….

Jeff spends the rest of his post urging the rest of us to stop talking about implementing features and implement them. I’m as guilty of this as the next programmer/developer, so I’d better get a move on.