raxacoricofallapatorius

1,182 reputation

1619

bio	website
	location	United States
	age
visits	member for	2 years, 2 months
	seen	May 19 at 16:00
stats	profile views	225

"What is now proved was once only imagined." — William Blake

	1,182 reputation	bio	website		visits	member for	2 years, 2 months
1619 badges		location	United States		seen	May 19 at 16:00

summary answers questions tags badges favorites bounties reputation activity

292 Actions

suggestions reviews revisions comments badges posts accepts all

May 14	comment	When is the right ascension of the mean sun 0? Thanks, this is promising and may explain what I'm seeing in my related question, though I'm not clear right now (it's been a while since I asked) how to modify my "naive" EOT derivation to accommodate this information to confirm that it solves my problem there (help with that would be an answer).
May 14	revised	Why is my approach to the equation of time off by a constant? Link starting RA calibration question; fix subscript on "naive" function.
May 14	revised	Why is my approach to the equation of time off by a constant? Link starting RA calibration question.
Apr 11	accepted	Is it ever necessary to extend an analysis of Grover's algorithm beyond $k/N = 1/2$?
Apr 10	revised	Is it ever necessary to extend an analysis of Grover's algorithm beyond $k/N = 1/2$? Typos.
Apr 10	comment	Is it ever necessary to extend an analysis of Grover's algorithm beyond $k/N = 1/2$? Assume for the moment that I'm following a strategy that I'm happy with up to $k/N = 1/2$.
Apr 10	comment	Is it ever necessary to extend an analysis of Grover's algorithm beyond $k/N = 1/2$? Yes, so if whatever strategy I adopt using (unmodified) Grover's algorithm achieves a probability of a hit of $p_h$, then can't I say after measuring $x\in S$ using Grover's, modified as above, that any of the unmeasured values, $y\in S\setminus x$, is a hit with probability $1-p_h$? And if so then whenever I've got a $k$ that gives me an unsatisfactory $p_h$, can't I switch to the modified version?
Apr 10	revised	Is it ever necessary to extend an analysis of Grover's algorithm beyond $k/N = 1/2$? Add tag.
Apr 9	asked	Is it ever necessary to extend an analysis of Grover's algorithm beyond $k/N = 1/2$?
Apr 1	awarded	Critic
Mar 29	revised	Is there a “map” of the interplanetary transport network? Add link to NASA's trajectory browser.
Mar 29	accepted	Should it be obvious that independent quantum states are composed by taking the tensor product?
Mar 21	awarded	Necromancer
Mar 18	awarded	Notable Question
Mar 14	awarded	Yearling
Mar 12	comment	How to apply a Hadamard gate? Do you mean how does one apply $H$ to an individual (e.g. "the first") qubit?
Mar 12	revised	How to apply a Hadamard gate? Fix kets LaTeX.
Mar 12	suggested	suggested edit on How to apply a Hadamard gate?
Mar 11	comment	Why the quantum entanglement doesn't break quantum cryptography Doesn't a $CNOT$ gate work for these two special cases?
Feb 24	comment	Is “entanglement” unique to quantum systems? Note that I wasn't as clear as I should have been in the original question, where I rely too much on the context of the passage I was citing. There, "entanglement" is effectively defined to mean nothing more than "unfactorable" — i.e., requiring more than $k+l$ bits. Hence my note at the end about what I am seeking: "If one struck out...". If "entanglement" is formally defined differently (e.g. requiring something specific about the substates, such as being physically distant) then my question isn't really about entanglement, but about this specific (factorability and dimensionality) property.