TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Einstein’s Thought Experiments

65 点作者 peterthehacker将近 5 年前

5 条评论

segfaultbuserr将近 5 年前
&gt; <i>Well, the demon needs to have information about the motion of the atoms, otherwise it does not know when to open the door. The interesting thing about Maxwell’s demon is that it tells us entropy is somehow the opposite of information, you can use information to decrease entropy.</i><p>It&#x27;s the first connection between the laws of physics and the process of computing, although it&#x27;s a modern reinterpretation (the original interpretation only argued measurements by the demon requires energy). An interesting implication is: all computers in this universe must generate heat because information is lost in the logic circuit. However, if we can construct the logic circuit in such a way that all information is preserved at the output (i.e. reversible) [0], this computer only needs an infinitesimal amount of energy to operate.<p>Also a fun fact: Do you know that the term &quot;daemon&quot; for background processes was originally named after Maxwell&#x27;s demon? [1]<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Reversible_computing" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Reversible_computing</a><p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Daemon_(computing)#Terminology" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Daemon_(computing)#Terminology</a>
bawana将近 5 年前
Sabine has made a name for herself being a contrarian.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=sZI8-9i0SOo" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=sZI8-9i0SOo</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blogs.scientificamerican.com&#x2F;cross-check&#x2F;physicist-sabine-hossenfelder-fears-theorists-lacking-data-may-succumb-to-wishful-thinking&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blogs.scientificamerican.com&#x2F;cross-check&#x2F;physicist-s...</a><p>She&#x27;ll even take your money to answer your questions if you dont like physics forums<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.aps.org&#x2F;publications&#x2F;apsnews&#x2F;201611&#x2F;hossenfelder.cfm" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.aps.org&#x2F;publications&#x2F;apsnews&#x2F;201611&#x2F;hossenfelder...</a><p>I dont mean to sound critical, but her statements remind me of Lord Kelvin&#x27;s statement<p>&quot;There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement&quot;<p>Personally, I think theoretical physics should never be discussed in the absence of the specific data it is trying to address. So much confusion happens when the details are not understood first before the grand theory is proposed. Theories too often are presented as gifts from the heavens and without the corpus to which they speak.
评论 #23980067 未加载
评论 #23979801 未加载
reeboo将近 5 年前
&quot;You see, Einstein had a problem with it because it seems to conflict with the speed of light limit in Special Relativity. We know today that this is not the case, quantum mechanics does not conflict with Special Relativity because no useful information can be sent between entangled particles.&quot; -- So how does quantum communication work? I thought it leveraged entanglement to convey information such that it became untamperable.
评论 #23976897 未加载
评论 #23977075 未加载
评论 #23979368 未加载
sidcool将近 5 年前
I did not get the point: &quot;No useful information can be sent in quantum entanglement&quot;. Has it been found how entanglement actually works?
评论 #23979501 未加载
评论 #23978851 未加载
评论 #23979527 未加载
评论 #23981284 未加载
评论 #23980163 未加载
drewcoo将近 5 年前
The thought experiment did not originate with Einstein. The name gedankenexperiment predates him and Maxwell&#x27;s use of the concept. So the article also misreports the origination with Maxwell. Maybe they should have skipped the couching in history if they didn&#x27;t know the history or even want to look it up.<p>And now that I&#x27;m reading the article&#x27;s comments, other readers have also made those points.<p>This article is useful as a tackle dummy for skeptics but not much else.
评论 #23979299 未加载
评论 #23976212 未加载
评论 #23976422 未加载
评论 #23976404 未加载