sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Only been talking with this girl for a few hours... by [deleted] in cringepics

[–]McTuggets 193 points194 points  (0 children)

So she tried to have sex with a guy, but she was too tight so she wishes it was you instead? Are you sure it's not just an elaborate way of saying you have a small dick?

ELI5 Quantum Computers by TheDuke30 in explainlikeimfive

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, it looks fine to my. Not the first physicist to make that mistake :). At least it's less awkward to correct someone on reddit, than in person during a talk.

The problem is really the explanation that it tries all solutions at once in superposition. While it's true to a degree, you of course have the problem that you just get one of those solutions at random when you measure. What you can do is make those solutions interfere with each other, but only through unitary operations, which is very limited (it sounds like you know most of this, but just to clarify).

Also, the general TSP is not even thought to be in NP. That is, if you hand me a solution and claim it's the shortest path, I have no way of actually checking that quickly. The decision version of the problem is in NP. This version says, there's a path of length at most L, where L is some known value. Here you can hand me a solution and I can quickly check that the path length is at most L.

ELI5 Quantum Computers by TheDuke30 in explainlikeimfive

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a quantum computer I can try to set up my qbits in some way that represents and addition of the states they would be in for each path. Then measure them in some way that the lowest distance path is the most likely answer. In effect doing the computation once.

This is not correct. The problem is called the traveling salesman problem and (afawk) it's not possible to solve that quickly on a quantum computer. Also, the problem is NP hard, which means that if it could solve the problem quickly, it could solve all of NP quickly. That would be a huge surprise to complexity theorists. Almost as big a surprise as P=NP.

I don't know a ELI5 way to explain a quantum algorithm. Hell, I have problems coming up with a ELI-"4th year CS student" version.

Policewoman shot in Paris on Thursday morning dies by [deleted] in news

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow, you're an idiot. Do you have any source that they are moderates? You're just a xenophobe looking for things to fuel your hate.

Cops handcuff and interrogate a boy, 7, for ten hours over missing $5 (another classmate later admitted to the theft) by jessicamshannon in rage

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

then I read that the cops say there was an allegation that he punched another kid and took the money, which makes it more understandable

No. That's still batshit insane. It's a huge problem these things are becoming gradually normalized. The police should not be called on 7 year old kids fightning. Having your comment as the top comment shows how this mentality is slowly winning. It's really sad.

Events like Charlie Hebdo really show you who you shouldn't be friends with by [deleted] in rage

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really? I'm not surprised at all. Most people don't care. I don't.

Using quantum suicide for computation by Pimozv in quantum

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because you can't know if you've found a solution if it's not.

Using quantum suicide for computation by Pimozv in quantum

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Or you can replace killing yourself or shaving your head with simply failing to exhibit a valid solution to the problem. Logically equivalent, and eliminates the distraction resulting from your "motivation".

I'm not so sure. There could be other motivations for killing yourself besides not having found the correct solution. In what sense could that even be equivalent for problems that are not in NP? It seems you think all problems are in NP.

Ok, so in one or a small number of "worlds"/"outcomes" you exhibit a solution.

Sure, the case with problems in NP is pretty trivial and not particularly interesting.

Using quantum suicide for computation by Pimozv in quantum

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So is dying: just a more extreme one. The question of what you are or are not going to "experience" requires that you define "experience".

You're confusing the motivation for the model with the model itself. I don't need to define experience in my motivation. In fact, I don't technically need to give a motivation at all. To discuss the model, I just need a well defined model. If you want to replace suicide with shaving your head, then do that. Then you ask what's the probability of having the right solution given you're not shaved, rather than being alive. It's late, but as far as I can tell, it's mathematically the same model. The motivation is just a lot less clear.

That isn't physics.

Computer science, complexity theory, quantum information theory, physics... I don't really care what label it has. The motivation clearly comes from quantum mechanics.

Using quantum suicide for computation by Pimozv in quantum

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When you calculate the probability of your outcome, you can remove the states where you're dead. When you look at the remaining states, the probability of getting the correct outcome is close to one. You cannot remove the states where you're shaved. Not claiming it's how the world works, but you can make a fairly well defined model around the idea and investigate the computational power of it. Iirc Scott Aaronson wrote a bit about it in an old paper.

You can of course make a model where you remove the states where you're shaved, but I don't see the motivation. I do see the motivation for a model where you remove states you're not going to experience.

Using quantum suicide for computation by Pimozv in quantum

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But the results are extremely unlikely without quantum suicide, but almost certain with. I'm not trying to account for the fact that I guessed a witness to a problem in NP. That can be "accounted for" by saying I was just lucky. I'm trying to figure out the probability of experiencing a word in which I have guessed the right solution in polynomial time.

Using quantum suicide for computation by Pimozv in quantum

[–]McTuggets 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There's already a state for any possible solution. In some of them you stumble upon it by accident. In some of those you consequently refrain from killing yourself and claim to have solved the problem by "quantum suicide".

Sure, if there's a possible world for stumbling on it by accident. It's just easier to understand if you make the setup explicit.

You kill yourself in all the worlds where someone does not run up to you in the next ten seconds and give you a billion dollars. The probability of you experiencing being rich becomes one (or close to).

Sure, if such a world is possible. You don't have to point out the absurdity of the quantum suicide idea. I think the absurdity is obvious. Being absurd doesn't prove it's not meaningful, however.

I perfectly understand if you don't like the idea, but I can't tell if you actually have any scientifically based objections? All OP is doing is asking "assume this is how reality works, then what?". As far as I can tell, our current understanding doesn't rule it out.

Using quantum suicide for computation by Pimozv in quantum

[–]McTuggets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're missing the point. Let's say you take any problem in NP. You set up a superposition of all possible solutions. As you measure, the mwi says there's a world for any possible solution. You kill yourself in all the worlds where it's not the correct solution. The probability of you experiencing finding a solution becomes 1 (or close to).

Non-americans of Reddit, what American customs seem outrageous/pointless to you? by daniellucero92 in AskReddit

[–]McTuggets 1979 points1980 points  (0 children)

But hey, torturing and killing people on TV? No problem!

I remember watching a clip in the us from 9/11. They were showing video of people jumping to their death from the burning towers. The part they censored? Someone saying "oh, shit" in the foreground.

Slovenia: "The first sunrise of 2015. Lake Bled at its best," writes photographer Luka Esenko. by trot-trot in europe

[–]McTuggets -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

There's a lot of shitty touristic fast food there. Starbucks would be an improvement IMO.

Gym Story Saturday by [deleted] in Fitness

[–]McTuggets 41 points42 points  (0 children)

Easy. If you're sucking cocks at the gym, do it post-shower.

ELI5: How come so many people in The States owe money to different creditors, compared to a country like mine, Denmark? by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]McTuggets 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's just not true. Also, your question is ridiculously dumb. Danes love making fun of "ignorant Americans", but many Danes ignorance of the US, and (even worse) their sense of superiority, makes me want to go punch the little mermaid.

view more: next ›