Timeline for Is the recent Nature paper by Minev et al. evidence of new physics?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 4, 2021 at 9:47 | answer | added | Agnius Vasiliauskas | timeline score: 0 | |
| Feb 5, 2021 at 16:58 | vote | accept | glS | ||
| Jan 31, 2021 at 17:46 | comment | added | BioPhysicist | Maybe because of the title? | |
| Jan 26, 2021 at 16:11 | history | edited | glS | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| Jan 26, 2021 at 12:55 | answer | added | ACuriousMind♦ | timeline score: 13 | |
| Jan 26, 2021 at 12:07 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 3, 2021 at 13:32 | |||||
| Jan 26, 2021 at 11:59 | history | edited | Urb | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 8 characters in body
|
| Jan 26, 2021 at 10:44 | comment | added | Alchimista | Oot: What is a "superconducting atom" ? It must be a short. If so, poor wording for Nature level. | |
| Jan 26, 2021 at 0:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhysics/status/1353855229326987266 | ||
| Jan 25, 2021 at 23:00 | comment | added | glS | @Obie2.0 I might simply not fully understand what the "quantum jumps" referred to here should be taken to mean. If they are essentially performing tomography at every time step, then sure obviously the evolution is deterministic at the state level. But if that's what they are doing I don't understand the point of this "quantum jump" formalism here | |
| Jan 25, 2021 at 22:46 | comment | added | Obie 2.0 | They seem to be talking about the evolution of the state kets of a system between two energy levels, correct? There would be nothing surprising about that: the state kets can be used to calculate the probability of measuring a value of some observable, but their time evolution is deterministic. | |
| Jan 25, 2021 at 20:39 | history | edited | glS | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Jan 25, 2021 at 20:34 | history | asked | glS | CC BY-SA 4.0 |