Page 2,290«..1020..2,2892,2902,2912,292..2,3002,310..»

Cryptocurrency Prices, Charts, and Crypto Market Cap …

What is cryptocurrency market cap?

Market cap is one of the most popular metrics in the industry that is used to gauge the value of an asset. The market cap of a cryptocurrency is calculated based on the coin's total circulating supply multiplied by the current price. For detailed examples on how the market capitalization of a coin is calculated, please view our methodology page.

As a financial metric, market cap allows you to compare the total circulating value of one cryptocurrency with another. Large cap cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum have a market cap of over $10 billion. They typically consist of protocols that have demonstrated track record, and have a vibrant ecosystem of developers maintaining and enhancing the protocol, as well as building new projects on top of them. From a trading perspective, large caps would typically be hosted on more exchanges, have higher liquidity, and are less volatile when compared against other mid and small cap cryptocurrencies.

While market cap is a simple and intuitive comparison metric, it is not a perfect point of comparison. Some cryptocurrency projects may appear to have inflated market cap through price swings and the tokenomics of their supply. As such, it is best to use this metric as a reference alongside other metrics such as trading volume, liquidity, fully diluted valuation, and fundamentals during your research process.

Yes, you can check crypto prices on mobile by using the CoinGecko app on iOS and Android.

Candlestick charts give an overview to traders on the price movement based on previous trends. The body of the candlestick shows where the price of a coin opened and closed for the particular period of time which the candlestick represents. If the candle is green in a crypto chart, it represents positive changes in price while red candle represents negative changes in price. The shadow indicates the high price and low price for the period.

Read more from the original source:
Cryptocurrency Prices, Charts, and Crypto Market Cap ...

Read More..

Cryptocurrency Taxes: What Advisors Need to Know – Barron’s

Tax season is here and advisors with clients who sold crypto in 2020 will probably get plenty of questions. The tax laws can be complex and fuzzy.

Heres what you need to know:

Is cryptocurrency taxable? Since 2014, the IRS has considered cryptocurrency to be property, not a virtual currency. This means that a transaction can result in a taxable gain or loss.

What is a cryptocurrency capital gain or loss? It is similar to a stock transaction. The gain or loss is the price you sold the cryptocurrency for, minus the cost basis.

For example, suppose you buy one Ethereum coin for $2,500. After a few months, the value soars to $3,500. You exchange your Ethereum coin for $3,500 of another cryptocurrency. In this case, you will have a capital gain of $1,000.

This is a short-term gain because you held onto the Ethereum coin for less than a year, and your taxes will be at your ordinary income tax rates. If you held for over a year, the transaction would have been taxed as a long-term capital gain, which has a maximum rate of 23.8%.

You can subtract your total losses from the total gains each year, thereby reducing gainsand taxes on gains. And you can deduct up to $3,000 in net losses against your ordinary income. If you have losses above this amount, you can carry them forward to future years.

How do you report a transaction on your tax return? Some cryptocurrency exchanges send you a 1099-B that lists the cost basis and net gains and losses from your transactions. With this information, you will fill out Schedule D and Form 8949 for your 1040 return. If an exchange does not issue a 1099-B, then you will need to track the information using your own records.

This can easily get complicated. For example, suppose you spend $100,000 on cryptocurrency. Then during the yearas the price appreciatesyou sell some to buy a Tesla, some other cryptocurrencies, fast food, clothes, and so on. All these are likely taxable transactions.

Any new rules? President Bidens $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill includes provisions to require exchangesby 2023to report cryptocurrency transactions and include them on 1099-B forms. The goal is to generate $28 billion in tax revenues during the next decade.

The bill also will require exchanges to report identifying information about crypto sellers for amounts over $10,000. The provision will go into effect in 2024.

Advisor Newsletter

A collection of our top stories from the day, delivered every evening. Stay on top of the latest advisor news, community commentary, and opinion from industry leaders.

Should clients be worried about the IRS? Definitely. The 2021 Form 1040 has the following question: At any time during 2021, did you receive, sell, exchange, or otherwise dispose of any financial interest in any virtual currency? In other words, the IRS is getting more aggressive with enforcement. The agency has already had success in obtaining client information from exchanges.

If you do not properly report your crypto gains, you could be subject to back taxes, interest, penalties and even jail time.

What about wash sales? The wash-sale rule prevents investors from engaging in short-term stock trading to harvest tax losses. For example, if you sell a stock at a loss and then quickly buy it back, the IRS will deny the deduction. You have to wait at least 30 days to buy back the same stock or a security that is substantially similar.

A loophole exempted cryptocurrency transactions from the wash rule. This could change in 2022, according to pending legislation.

Tom Taulli is a freelance writer, author, and former broker. He is also an enrolled agent, which allows him to represent clients before the IRS.

Originally posted here:
Cryptocurrency Taxes: What Advisors Need to Know - Barron's

Read More..

An unknown buyer used $4.3 million in cryptocurrency to buy a billion-year-old space diamond from Sotheby’s – Yahoo Tech

A member of the Sotheby's auction house team holds the "Enigma" black diamond on February 04, 2022 in London, England. Photo by Leon Neal/Getty ImagesPhoto by Leon Neal/Getty Images

Sotheby's sold a billion-year-old black diamond from space for $4.3 million worth of cryptocurrency.

Named the Enigma, the diamond is 555.55 carats with 55 facets, aka flat surfaces.

The diamond was found near the Earth's surface where it may have formed from meteoric impacts.

A billion-year-old diamond from space sold at auction for $4.3 million worth of cryptocurrency.

Sotheby's announced Wednesday that the Enigma an extremely rare, black 555.55-carat diamond sold to an unidentified buyer who paid in cryptocurrency. The Enigma, according to the Guinness World Record Book, is the largest cut diamond in the world.

While most diamonds are uncovered deep within the Earth, the Enigma is an "extremely rare carbonado," which is a type of diamond discovered near the Earth's surface and believed to have extraterrestrial origins, the London-based auction house said.

"It is thought that this specific type of black diamond was created either from meteoric impacts producing natural chemical vapor deposition or an extraterrestrial origin - from supernovae explosions that formed diamond-bearing asteroids which ultimately collided with the Earth," Sotheby's said.

On Twitter, crypto entrepreneur Richard Heart made a video claiming he was the buyer of the rare space diamond. He said once the payment goes through, he'll rename the item the HEX.com diamond, a reference to a crypto platform he's part of.

In its rough original form, the diamond weighed more than 800 carats. It took three years to get it into its current form with 55 facets, aka flat surfaces, weighing exactly 555.55-carats and having a high degree of polish, Sotheby's said. The Enigma's chosen shape is a Hamsa, a Middle Eastern palm symbol representing protection, blessings, power, and strength.

The nearly 300-year-old auction house has been diving into the crypto world. Last year, it began accepting cryptocurrencies as a form of payment in an effort to expand its client base and has been auctioning digital collectibles known as NFTs.

Crypto enthusiasts have a propensity for big items. The Wall Street Journal in its report said the auction house sold a 100-carat diamond for $12.3 million in crypto in July. Also last year, crypto Twitter rallied around tiny cubes of Tungsten that are extremely dense. They even bid for the opportunity to touch a 2,000-pound Tungsten cube once a year.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Here is the original post:
An unknown buyer used $4.3 million in cryptocurrency to buy a billion-year-old space diamond from Sotheby's - Yahoo Tech

Read More..

Top cryptocurrency prices today: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Dogecoin fall up to 5% – Economic Times

New Delhi: Most of the top 10 cryptocurrencies by market value were trading lower in Wednesday's trade, with the biggest falls seen in BNB and Cardano.

Among key cryptos, Bitcoin was down 1.18 per cent at $43,406.01. The largest cryptocurrency in m-cap was still up 12 per cent in the last seven days.

Ethereum was quoting at $3,080.69, down 1.84 per cent.

Polkadot and Dogecoin, number 11 and 12 in m-cap terms, were also down 5 per cent each.

The global crypto market cap stood at the $1.97 trillion mark, down 2 per cent. The total crypto market volume jumped 8.67 per cent to $102.96 billion.

Meanwhile, the non-fungible tokens (NFT) community has said that the government was being unfair to the emerging digital asset class by lumping it in with cryptocurrencies in the recently announced digital asset tax regime.

Global Updates

Crypto Returns Calculator

0x1inchAaveAdExAirSwapAlgorandAnkrAugurAvalancheAxie InfinityBancorBand ProtocolBasic Attention TokenBinance CoinBitcoinBitcoin CashCOTICardanoChainlinkChilizChromiaCivicCompoundCosmosCurve DAO TokenDFI.moneyDIADaiDashDecentralandDigiByteDogecoinEOSElrondEnjin CoinEthereumEthereum ClassicFantomFetch.aiFilecoinGASGalaGolemHarmonyIOSTIndian RupeeInternet ComputerKeep NetworkKyber NetworkLitecoinLivepeerLoopringMakerMetalNEMNEONKNNanoNanoNumeraireOmiseGOPax DollarPolkadotPolygonPower LedgerQuantstampQuarkChainRepublic ProtocolRequestRipio Credit NetworkRippleShiba InuSolanaStatusStellarStorjSushiSwipeSynthetix Network TokenTerraTetherTezosThe GraphThe SandboxTheta FuelTheta NetworkTronTrue USDUSD CoinUniswapVeChainWavesZilliqaaelfdistrict0xiExec RLCyearn.finance

Original post:
Top cryptocurrency prices today: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Dogecoin fall up to 5% - Economic Times

Read More..

I-Team: Woman Warns Others After Losing $2.5M In Cryptocurrency Romance Scam – CBS Boston

BOSTON (CBS) Cindy Tsai says it started with a seemingly innocent message. A man who called himself Jimmy texted her on WhatsApp. Are you Linda from the pet store? Cindy said. And I messaged back and said wrong number.

That text quickly escalated into the two sharing personal information and Cindy telling Jimmy she was recently diagnosed with terminal cancer. Cindy says, Jimmy was attentive, good looking and was a comfort for her during a difficult time. Cindy says she was also going through a divorce and in her mind the friendship became a relationship.

It didnt take long before Jimmy began showing Cindy how much money he was making trading in cryptocurrency and offered to help her invest on the platform he was using. At first Cindy was skeptical. I basically said, look I dont need a financial advisor, I am not giving you a dime, she said.

But Jimmy told her that she would control her own account and he wouldnt get any of the money. Thats when Cindy says her interest was piqued. Using the link Jimmy gave her, Cindy set up the account.

Matthew Giacobbi, the Special Agent in Charge of the FBIs Boston Division, says these are growing schemes. Once the victim clicks on the link, it takes them to a spoofed site or close to a legitimate site that traders in cryptocurrency use and that looks very real but it is not. Theyve become very sophisticated at making these websites look real when theyre not, Giacobbi said.

Cindys investment started out small but over a few months grew to $2.5 million. All of that money is now gone. The FBI estimates in 2021, 24,000 people fell victim to these types of scams losing about a billion dollars.

Giacobbi says with cryptocurrency, once you give someone your digital wallet and key, that money is gone instantly, and it is very difficult for law enforcement to track.

Cindy says she became suspicious after having a hard time withdrawing money. The site wanted hundreds of thousands of dollars for taxes and also wanted to charge her to expedite her withdrawal. By then it was too late.

A global victims support group says with predators on every social media site anyone can unwittingly become a victim. Grace Yuen with the Global Anti-Scam Organization says everyone has insecurities and when the predators find it, thats when they get you. Thats what makes it so insidious, Yuen said.

Cindy whos a lawyer, admits she saw the red flags. Its interesting the disconnect between your logical self and your emotional self once you have that relationship, she said. I was the most vulnerable in my entire life and I desperately wanted to believe him. My mission is to let everyone know, whether people judge me or dont judge me I want to raise awareness.

Cindy did file a report with the FBIs Internet Crime Complaint Center. The FBI tells us the best way to protect yourself from becoming a victim, dont invest with people you only met online, do your homework, dont click on hyperlinks and never give your banking information or digital wallet to anyone. And if you believe you have been scammed report it to the FBI.

See the rest here:
I-Team: Woman Warns Others After Losing $2.5M In Cryptocurrency Romance Scam - CBS Boston

Read More..

Cryptocurrency has taken the idolatry of wealth to a new level of sinfulness – America Magazine

On Feb. 1, a cryptic gold cube worth nearly $12 million appeared in New Yorks Central Park. On display for one day only, the cube was an art installation by artist Niclas Castello. Made exclusively of pure 24-karat gold and weighing a staggering 400 pounds, it came with its own security team to guard it.

If you thought the Castello Cube, as it is called, is a statement on wealth disparity, you could easily be forgiven. New York State has the highest income inequality in the country: In 2020, the average income in Manhattan for the top 1 percent was 113 times that of the bottom 99 percent. And according to the 2020 Census, approximately 129 homeless people live in Central Park. Surely a $12 million cube in the middle of the park has to be some kind of critique about the way we overlook poverty and fetishize wealth?

Unfortunately not. The cube is an advertisement for Mr. Castellos new cryptocurrency, named after himself: CastCoin. The installation isnt about wealth disparityjust wealth. After being on display in the park for less than 24 hours, the Castello Cube was carted off to a Wall Street dinner party reportedly filled with celebrities.

Cryptocurrency is a digital currency that uses blockchain technology and therefore is decentralized, creating an online exchange that is not reliant on a government or bank to uphold its value. Bitcoin was the first and most famous cryptocurrency, but today there are thousands, with Castellos CastCoin being one of the latest. Some hope that crypto will usher in a more democratic future where currencies and transactions can be certified without any backing institution. But those hopes for the future overlook that crypto raises some serious ethical questions. Much like the Castello Cube itself, cryptocurrency does not hold up to a deeper look.

An Empty Obsession

Online, the Castello Cube is billed as being made of solid gold and appears to tower high above the lawn. But this is just hype. The cube is solid gold, insofar as it is made of gold and nothing else. But it is not, in fact, a solid cubethe inside is hollow, and the walls only a quarter of an inch thick. Its also much smaller than it appears online, only about a foot and a half tall, in fact. (To have to speak of only that much pure gold is a condemnation of the work in and of itself.)

Its an excellent metaphor for cryptocurrencies. The outside glitters; the inside is empty. It looms large online but amounts to little in the real world. Crypto has soared in popularity: A 2021 survey found that 13 percent of Americans had traded in crypto in the past 12 months, with another 11 percent reporting they were likely to invest in the next year. A 2021 survey by Pew Research found that 43 percent of men aged 18 to 29 report having invested in cryptocurrency. Some see it as a get-rich-quick scheme, a high-stakes, high-reward trading opportunity that can easily bestow millions. Cryptocurrency is famed for its volatility. In April 2011, one Bitcoin cost $1; in April 2021, the same cost almost $65,000; today its worth is about $40,500.

For others, it is as much of a cultural movement as a financial one, becoming something of a lifestyle with financiers and tech fans. Advertisements for cartoon dog-themed cryptocurrency shine over Times Square, and figures like Elon Musk use their cults of personality to encourage their followers to buy in. R/CryptoCurrency on Reddit, which describes itself as The leading community for cryptocurrency news, discussion, and analysis, has 4.4 million members, obsessively watching and discussing the crypto market.

Our New Golden Calf

In the apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, Pope Francis warned of the dangers of idolizing money like this. He writes:

Idolatry of money has been a problem for as long as money has existed. But part of what makes crypto different is the way its extreme volatility rewards constant anxious monitoring and encourages obsession not only with investing but with pressuring others to invest as well. Because there is a limited amount of Bitcoin, for example, higher demand for it drives higher prices.

Cryptocurrency has been regarded as democratizing finance because it gives anybody with a computer the ability to get in on the ground floor of an investment that can then take off astronomically. But the dark side of this democratization is that it has spread an obsession with consumption and unhealthy market watching to ever-larger populations than ever before.

And while cryptocurrencies make some people rich, their environmental effects ultimately impoverish all of us. Cryptocurrency is created through an electronic process called mining, which uses computers to solve complex equations and create small amounts of the digital currency. Some cryptocurrencies have a cap on how many units can be mined, which makes the equations progressively more complex, requiring increasing amounts of energy and computational power to continue to mine. (If trying to understand this makes your head hurt, dont worrymine does, too.)

The Bitcoin mining process alone has usedmore electricity than some small countries, including Ukraine, Norway, Sweden and the United Arab Emirates. One single Bitcoin transaction uses enough energy to power an average U.S. household for 75 days. And much of the energy used to power Bitcoin mining and transactions comes from burning fossil fuels. Its impact on the climate is immense. As the environment continues to deteriorate, crypto miners continue to use staggering amounts of resources to create digital monopoly money.

The fact of the matter is that crypto is bad for us. Crypto is what leads to a $12 million hollow box made out of gold being displayed in public parks. The greater risk, however, is that it will lead to such a fixation on wealth that we wont see the poverty around us. That it will lead us to forget our common home and ignore how we are destroying our climate. In the words of Pope Francis, that it will reduce us to mere consumers.

Nine countries have banned cryptocurrencies outright, with another 42 enacting regulations and policies that ban it implicitly. We can stop believing in cryptocurrency and reject its power over us and over our climate. Its time to throw the golden calf back into the fire it came from.

Read the original post:
Cryptocurrency has taken the idolatry of wealth to a new level of sinfulness - America Magazine

Read More..

What is quantum entanglement? All about this ‘spooky’ quirk of physics – Interesting Engineering

If you know anything about quantum mechanics, there's a good chance you've heard of quantum entanglement. This feature of quantum mechanics is one of the most extraordinary discoveries of the 20th century and is one of the most promising avenues of research for advanced technologies in communications, computing, and more.

But what is quantum entanglement and why is it so important? Why did it freak Albert Einstein out? And why does it appear to violate one of the most important laws of physics?

Any time you discuss quantum mechanics, things are going to get complicated, and quantum entanglement is no different.

The first thing to understand is that particles exist in a state of "superposition" until they are observed. In a very common demonstration, the quantum particles used as qubits in a quantum computer are both 0 and 1 at the same time until they are observed, whereby they appear to randomly become a0 or 1.

Now, in simple terms, quantum entanglement is when two particles are produced or interact in such a way that the key properties of those particles cannot be described independently of each other.

For example, if two photons are generated and are entangled, one particle may have a clockwise spin on one axis so that the other will necessarily have a counterclockwise spin on that same axis.

In and of itself, this is not that radical. But because particles in quantum mechanics can also be described as wave functions, the act of measuring the spin of a particle is said to "collapse" its wave function to produce that measurable property (like going from both 0 and 1 to only 0 or only 1).

When you do this to entangled particles, however, we get to the really incredible part of quantum entanglement. When you measure an entangled particle to determine its spin along some axis and collapse its wave function, the other particle also collapses to produce the measurable property of spin, even though you did not observe the other particle.

If a pair of entangled particles are both 0 and 1, and you measure one particle as 0, the other entangled particle automatically collapses to produce a 1, entirely on its own and without any interaction from the observer.

This appears to happeninstantaneouslyand regardless of their distance from each other, which originally led to the paradoxical conclusion that the information about the measured particle's spin is somehow being transmitted to its entangled partner faster than even the speed of light.

Not only is quantum entanglement real, but it's also an important component of emerging technologies like quantum computing and quantum communications.

In quantum computing, how can you operate on qubits in a quantum processor without observing them and therefore collapsing them into plain old digital bits? How do you detect errors without looking at the qubits and destroying the whole mechanism that makes quantum computing so powerful?

The quantum entanglement of several particles in a row is vital to putting enough distance between qubits and the outside world to keep the vital qubits in superposition long enough for them to perform computations.

Quantum communications is another area of research that hopes to take advantage of quantum entanglement to facilitate communication, though it doesn't mean that faster than light communication is on the horizon (in fact, such a technology is likely impossible).

To some degree, yes.

When most people discuss quantum entanglement, they use an example of two entangled particles behaving in a certain way to demonstrate the phenomenon, but this is very much a simplification of an incredibly complex quantum system.

The reality is that a given particle can be entangled with many different particles to varying degrees, not just the "maximally entangled" state where two particles are one to one correlated to one another and only to each other.

This is why measuring one part of an entangled pair doesn't automatically guarantee that you will know the state of the other particle in real-world applications, since that other particle has other entanglements it is maintaining as well. It does give you a better than random chance of knowing the other particle's state though.

Quantum entanglement, or at least the principles that describe the phenomenon, was first proposed by Einstein and his colleagues Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen in a 1935 paper in the journal Physical Reviewtitled "Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete." In it, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen discussed that an especially strong correlation of quantum states between particles can lead to them having a single unified quantum state.

They also determined that this unified state can result in the measurement of one strongly correlated particle having a direct effect on the other strongly correlated particle without regard to the distance between the two particles.

The purpose of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper wasn't to announce the "discovery" of quantum entanglement, per se, but rather to describe this phenomenon that had been observed and discussed and argue that there must be a missing component of quantum mechanics that hasn't been discovered yet.

Since the strong correlation phenomenon they described violated laws laid down in Einstein's relativityand appeared to be paradoxical, the paper argued there must be something else that physicists were missing that would properly place the quantum realm under the umbrella of relativity. That "something else" still hasn't been found almost a century later.

The first use of the word "entanglement" to describe this phenomenon belongs toErwin Schrdinger, who recognized it as one of quantum mechanics' most fundamental features and argued that it wasn't a mystery that would soon be resolved under relativity, but rather a strong break from classical physics entirely.

Famously, Einstein described quantum entanglement as "spooky action at a distance," but he actually described it as more than just a weird quirk of ghostly particles with instantaneous knowledge of each other.

Einstein actually saw quantum entanglement as a mathematical paradox, an inherent contradiction in mathematical logic that shows that something about the arguments being made must be wrong.

In the case of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, as it came to be called, the arguments are that the fundamental rules of quantum mechanics are completely known and that general relativity is valid. If general relativity is valid, then nothing in the universe can travel faster than the speed of light, which moves at 186,000 miles per second.

If quantum mechanics were fully understood, then the rules governing the strong correlation between particles are complete and our observations tell us everything we need to know.

Since quantum particles are "of the universe" they ought to be governed by the speed of lightjust like everything else, but quantum entanglement not only appears to instantaneously share information between particles that could theoretically be on opposite ends of the universe. Even weirder, this information might even travel back and forth through time.

Quantum entanglement through time would have all kinds of implications for the nature of causality, which is about as fundamental a law of physics as it gets. It doesn't work the other way around, effects can't precede their cause, but some scientists think that those rules might not apply to the quantum realm any more than the speed of light would.

This last point is still mostly speculative, but it has some experimental basis, and it just further complicates the paradox that Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen proposed in their 1935 paper.

Quantum entanglement is important for two major reasons.

First, quantum entanglement is such a fundamental mechanism of the quantum world while also being one that we can directly interact with and influence.It may provide a key way to harness some of the most fundamental properties of the universe to advance our technology to new heights.

We know how to entangle particles and do so regularly both in laboratories and in real-world applications like quantum computers.Quantum computers in particular demonstrate the potential of quantum mechanics in modern technology, and quantum entanglement is the best tool we have for actually leveraging quantum mechanics in this way.

The other major reason why quantum entanglement is important is that it is a signpost that points towards something truly fundamental about our universe. It is as clear a demonstration as you can get that the quantum world is almost a purer form of the universe than the one we can see and that obeys laws that we can explain.

If all the universe is a stage and matter is the actors, then quantum entanglementand quantum mechanics more broadlymay be the line riggings that lift the curtains, the switches that turn the lights on and off, or even the costumes that the actors wear.

If we watch a play, there are two ways to appreciate it. You can see past the theater and the set pieces to appreciate the story that the play conveys, or you can appreciate the quality of the performance, the staging, and the execution.

You might see two very different things by watching the exact same performance, and quantum mechanics appear to give us a different way of seeing the same universe we've always seen, and quantum entanglement may be the key that gets us backstage.

More:

What is quantum entanglement? All about this 'spooky' quirk of physics - Interesting Engineering

Read More..

Einstein Finally Warms Up to Quantum Mechanics? The Solution Is Shockingly Intuitive – SciTechDaily

Einstein was no stranger to mathematical challenges. He struggled to define energy in a way that acknowledged both the law of energy conservation and covariance, which is general relativitys fundamental feature where physical laws are the same for all observers.

A research team at Kyoto Universitys Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics has now proposed a novel approach to this longstanding problem by defining energy to incorporate the concept of entropy. Although a great deal of effort has gone into reconciling the elegance of general relativity with quantum mechanics, team member Shuichi Yokoyama says, The solution is shockingly intuitive.

Einsteins field equations describe how matter and energy shape spacetime and how in turn the structure of spacetime moves matter and energy. Solving this set of equations, however, is notoriously difficult, such as with pinning down the behavior of a charge associated with an energy-momentum tensor, the troublesome factor that describes mass and energy.

The research team has observed that the conservation of charge resembles entropy, which can be described as a measure of the number of different ways of arranging parts of a system.

And theres the rub: conserved entropy defies this standard definition.

The existence of this conserved quantity contradicts a principle in basic physics known as Noethers theorem, in which conservation of any quantity generally arises because of some kind of symmetry in a system.

Surprised that other researchers have not already applied this new definition of the energy-momentum tensor, another team member, Shinya Aoki, adds that he is also intrigued that in general curved spacetime, a conserved quantity can be defined even without symmetry.

In fact, the team has also applied this novel approach to observe a variety of cosmic phenomena, such as the expansion of the universe and black holes. While the calculations correspond well with the currently accepted behavior of entropy for a Schwarzschild black hole, the equations show that entropy density is concentrated at the singularity in the center of the black hole, a region where spacetime becomes poorly defined.

The authors hope that their research will spur deeper discussion among many scientists not only in gravity theory but also in basic physics.

Reference: Charge conservation, entropy current and gravitation by Sinya Aoki, Tetsuya Onogi and Shuichi Yokoyama, 2 November 2021, International Journal of Modern Physics A.DOI: 10.1142/S0217751X21502018

The rest is here:

Einstein Finally Warms Up to Quantum Mechanics? The Solution Is Shockingly Intuitive - SciTechDaily

Read More..

Quantum Holograms Dont Even Need to See Their Subject – IEEE Spectrum

Applications for the CAD software extend far beyond medicine and throughout the burgeoning field of synthetic biology, which involves redesigning organisms to give them new abilities. For example, we envision users designing solutions for biomanufacturing; it's possible that society could reduce its reliance on petroleum thanks to microorganisms that produce valuable chemicals and materials. And to aid the fight against climate change, users could design microorganisms that ingest and lock up carbon, thus reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide (the main driver of global warming).

Our consortium, GP-write, can be understood as a sequel to the Human Genome Project, in which scientists first learned how to "read" the entire genetic sequence of human beings. GP-write aims to take the next step in genetic literacy by enabling the routine "writing" of entire genomes, each with tens of thousands of different variations. As genome writing and editing becomes more accessible, biosafety is a top priority. We're building safeguards into our system from the start to ensure that the platform isn't used to craft dangerous or pathogenic sequences.

Need a quick refresher on genetic engineering? It starts with DNA, the double-stranded molecule that encodes the instructions for all life on our planet. DNA is composed of four types of nitrogen basesadenine (A), thymine (T), guanine (G), and cytosine (C)and the sequence of those bases determines the biological instructions in the DNA. Those bases pair up to create what look like the rungs of a long and twisted ladder. The human genome (meaning the entire DNA sequence in each human cell) is composed of approximately 3 billion base-pairs. Within the genome are sections of DNA called genes, many of which code for the production of proteins; there are more than 20,000 genes in the human genome.

The Human Genome Project, which produced the first draft of a human genome in 2000, took more than a decade and cost about $2.7 billion in total. Today, an individual's genome can be sequenced in a day for $600, with some predicting that the $100 genome is not far behind. The ease of genome sequencing has transformed both basic biological research and nearly all areas of medicine. For example, doctors have been able to precisely identify genomic variants that are correlated with certain types of cancer, helping them to establish screening regimens for early detection. However, the process of identifying and understanding variants that cause disease and developing targeted therapeutics is still in its infancy and remains a defining challenge.

Until now, genetic editing has been a matter of changing one or two genes within a massive genome; sophisticated techniques like CRISPR can create targeted edits, but at a small scale. And although many software packages exist to help with gene editing and synthesis, the scope of those software algorithms is limited to single or few gene edits. Our CAD program will be the first to enable editing and design at genome-scale, allowing users to change thousands of genes, and it will operate with a degree of abstraction and automation that allows designers to think about the big picture. As users create new genome variants and study the results in cells, each variant's traits and characteristics (called its phenotype) can be noted and added to the platform's libraries. Such a shared database could vastly speed up research on complex diseases.

What's more, current genomic design software requires human experts to predict the effect of edits. In a future version, GP-write's software will include predictions of phenotype to help scientists understand if their edits will have the desired effect. All the experimental data generated by users can feed into a machine-learning program, improving its predictions in a virtuous cycle. As more researchers leverage the CAD platform and share data (the open-source platform will be freely available to academia), its predictive power will be enhanced and refined.

Our first version of the CAD software will feature a user-friendly graphical interface enabling researchers to upload a species' genome, make thousands of edits throughout the genome, and output a file that can go directly to a DNA synthesis company for manufacture. The platform will also enable design sharing, an important feature in the collaborative efforts required for large-scale genome-writing initiatives.

There are clear parallels between CAD programs for electronic and genome design. To make a gadget with four transistors, you wouldn't need the help of a computer. But today's systems may have billions of transistors and other components, and designing them would be impossible without design-automation software. Likewise, designing just a snippet of DNA can be a manual process. But sophisticated genomic designwith thousands to tens of thousands of edits across a genomeis simply not feasible without something like the CAD program we're developing. Users must be able to input high-level directives that are executed across the genome in a matter of seconds.

Our CAD program will be the first to enable editing at genome-scale, with a degree of abstraction and automation that allows designers to think about the big picture.

A good CAD program for electronics includes certain design rules to prevent a user from spending a lot of time on a design, only to discover that it can't be built. For example, a good program won't let the user put down transistors in patterns that can't be manufactured or put in a logic that doesn't make sense. We want the same sort of design-for-manufacture rules for our genomic CAD program. Ultimately, our system will alert users if they're creating sequences that can't be manufactured by synthesis companies, which currently have limitations such as trouble with certain repetitive DNA sequences. It will also inform users if their biological logic is faulty; for example, if the gene sequence they added to code for the production of a protein won't work, because they've mistakenly included a "stop production" signal halfway through.

But other aspects of our enterprise seem unique. For one thing, our users may import huge files containing billions of base-pairs. The genome of the Polychaos dubium, a freshwater amoeboid, clocks in at 670 billion base-pairsthat's over 200 times larger than the human genome! As our CAD program will be hosted on the cloud and run on any Internet browser, we need to think about efficiency in the user experience. We don't want a user to click the "save" button and then wait ten minutes for results. We may employ the technique of lazy loading, in which the program only uploads the portion of the genome that the user is working on, or implement other tricks with caching.

Getting a DNA sequence into the CAD program is just the first step, because the sequence, on its own, doesn't tell you much. What's needed is another layer of annotation to indicate the structure and function of that sequence. For example, a gene that codes for the production of a protein is composed of three regions: the promoter that turns the gene on, the coding region that contains instructions for synthesizing RNA (the next step in protein production), and the termination sequence that indicates the end of the gene. Within the coding region, there are "exons," which are directly translated into the amino acids that make up proteins and "introns," intervening sequences of nucleotides that are removed during the process of gene expression. There are existing standards for this annotation that we want to improve on, so our standardized interface language will be readily interpretable by people all over the world.

The CAD program from GP-write will enable users to apply high-level directives to edit a genome, including inserting, deleting, modifying, and replacing certain parts of the sequence. GP-write

Once a user imports the genome, the editing engine will enable the user to make changes throughout the genome. Right now, we're exploring different ways to efficiently make these changes and keep track of them. One idea is an approach we call genome algebra, which is analogous to the algebra we all learned in school. In mathematics, if you want to get from the number 1 to the number 10, there are infinite ways to do it. You could add 1 million and then subtract almost all of it, or you could get there by repeatedly adding tiny amounts. In algebra, you have a set of operations, costs for each of those operations, and tools that help organize everything.

In genome algebra, we have four operations: we can insert, delete, invert, or edit sequences of nucleotides. The CAD program can execute these operations based on certain rules of genomics, without the user having to get into the details. Similar to the "PEMDAS rule" that defines the order of operations in arithmetic, the genome editing engine must order the user's operations correctly to get the desired outcome. The software could also compare sequences against each other, essentially checking their math to determine similarities and differences in the resulting genomes.

In a later version of the software, we'll also have algorithms that advise users on how best to create the genomes they have in mind. Some altered genomes can most efficiently be produced by creating the DNA sequence from scratch, while others are more suited to large-scale edits of an existing genome. Users will be able to input their design objectives and get recommendations on whether to use a synthesis or editing strategyor a combination of the two.

Users can import any genome (here, the E. coli bacteria genome), and create many edited versions; the CAD program will automatically annotate each version to show the changes made. GP-write

Our goal is to make the CAD program a "one-stop shop" for users, with the help of the members of our Industry Advisory Board: Agilent Technologies, a global leader in life sciences, diagnostics and applied chemical markets; the DNA synthesis companies Ansa Biotechnologies, DNA Script, and Twist Bioscience; and the gene editing automation companies Inscripta and Lattice Automation. (Lattice was founded by coauthor Douglas Densmore). We are also partnering with biofoudries such as the Edinburgh Genome Foundry that can take synthetic DNA fragments, assemble them, and validate them before the genome is sent to a lab for testing in cells.

Users can most readily benefit from our connections to DNA synthesis companies; when possible, we'll use these companies' APIs to allow CAD users to place orders and send their sequences off to be synthesized. (In the case of DNA Script, when a user places an order it would be quickly printed on the company's DNA printers; some dedicated users might even buy their own printers for more rapid turnaround.) In the future, we'd like to make the ordering step even more user-friendly by suggesting the company best suited to the manufacture of a particular sequence, or perhaps by creating a marketplace where the user can see prices from multiple manufacturers, the way people do on airfare sites.

We've recently added two new members to our Industrial Advisory Board, each of which brings interesting new capabilities to our users. Catalog Technologies is the first commercially viable platform to use synthetic DNA for massive digital storage and computation, and could eventually help users store vast amounts of genomic data generated on GP-write software. The other new board member is SOSV's IndieBio, the leader in biotech startup development. It will work with GP-write to select, fund, and launch companies advancing genome-writing science from IndieBio's New York office. Naturally, all those startups will have access to our CAD software.

We're motivated by a desire to make genome editing and synthesis more accessible than ever before. Imagine if high-school kids who don't have access to a wet lab could find their way to genetic research via a computer in their school library; this scenario could enable outreach to future genome design engineers and could lead to a more diverse workforce. Our CAD program could also entice people with engineering or computational backgroundsbut with no knowledge of biologyto contribute their skills to genetic research.

Because of this new level of accessibility, biosafety is a top priority. We're planning to build several different levels of safety checks into our system. There will be user authentication, so we'll know who's using our technology. We'll have biosecurity checks upon the import and export of any sequence, basing our "prohibited" list on the standards devised by the International Gene Synthesis Consortium (IGSC), and updated in accordance with their evolving database of pathogens and potentially dangerous sequences. In addition to hard checkpoints that prevent a user from moving forward with something dangerous, we may also develop a softer system of warnings.

Imagine if high-school kids who don't have access to a lab could find their way to genetic research via a computer in their school library.

We'll also keep a permanent record of redesigned genomes for tracing and tracking purposes. This record will serve as a unique identifier for each new genome and will enable proper attribution to further encourage sharing and collaboration. The goal is to create a broadly accessible resource for researchers, philanthropies, pharmaceutical companies, and funders to share their designs and lessons learned, helping all of them identify fruitful pathways for advancing R&D on genetic diseases and environmental health. We believe that the authentication of users and annotated tracking of their designs will serve two complementary goals: It will enhance biosecurity while also engendering a safer environment for collaborative exchange by creating a record for attribution.

One project that will put the CAD program to the test is a grand challenge adopted by GP-write, the Ultra-Safe Cell Project. This effort, led by coauthor Farren Isaacs and Harvard professor George Church, aims to create a human cell line that is resistant to viral infection. Such virus-resistant cells could be a huge boon to the biomanufacturing and pharmaceutical industry by enabling the production of more robust and stable products, potentially driving down the cost of biomanufacturing and passing along the savings to patients.

The Ultra-Safe Cell Project relies on a technique called recoding. To build proteins, cells use combinations of three DNA bases, called codons, to code for each amino acid building block. For example, the triplet 'GGC' represents the amino acid glycine, TTA represents leucine, GTC represents valine, and so on. Because there are 64 possible codons but only 20 amino acids, many of the codons are redundant. For example, four different codons can code for glycine: GGT, GGC, GGA, and GGG. If you replaced a redundant codon in all genes (or 'recode' the genes), the human cell could still make all of its proteins. But viruseswhose genes would still include the redundant codons and which rely on the host cell to replicatewould not be able to translate their genes into proteins. Think of a key that no longer fits into the lock; viruses trying to replicate would be unable to do so in the cells' machinery, rendering the recoded cells virus-resistant.

This concept of recoding for viral resistance has already been demonstrated. Isaacs, Church, and their colleagues reported in a 2013 paper in Science that, by removing all 321 instances of a single codon from the genome of the E. coli bacterium, they could impart resistance to viruses which use that codon. But the ultra-safe cell line requires edits on a much grander scale. We estimate that it would entail thousands to tens of thousands of edits across the human genome (for example, removing specific redundant codons from all 20,000 human genes). Such an ambitious undertaking can only be achieved with the help of the CAD program, which can automate much of the drudge work and let researchers focus on high-level design.

The famed physicist Richard Feynman once said, "What I cannot create, I do not understand." With our CAD program, we hope geneticists become creators who understand life on an entirely new level.

From Your Site Articles

Related Articles Around the Web

Continued here:

Quantum Holograms Dont Even Need to See Their Subject - IEEE Spectrum

Read More..

What is the ‘Gold Foil Experiment’? The Geiger-Marsden experiments explained – Livescience.com

The Geiger-Marsden experiment, also called the gold foil experiment or the -particle scattering experiments, refers to a series of early-20th-century experiments that gave physicists their first view of the structure of the atomic nucleus and the physics underlying the everyday world. It was first proposed by Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ernest Rutherford.

As familiar as terms like electron, proton and neutron are to us now, in the early 1900s, scientists had very little concept of the fundamental particles that made up atoms.

In fact, until 1897, scientists believed that atoms had no internal structure and believed that they were an indivisible unit of matter. Even the label "atom" gives this impression, given that it's derived from the Greek word "atomos," meaning "indivisible."

But that year, University of Cambridge physicist Joseph John Thomson discovered the electron and disproved the concept of the atom being unsplittable, according to Britannica. Thomson found that metals emitted negatively charged particles when illuminated with high-frequency light.

His discovery of electrons also suggested that there were more elements to atomic structure. That's because matter is usually electrically neutral; so if atoms contain negatively charged particles, they must also contain a source of equivalent positive charge to balance out the negative charge.

By 1904, Thomson had suggested a "plum pudding model" of the atom in which an atom comprises a number of negatively charged electrons in a sphere of uniform positive charge, distributed like blueberries in a muffin.

The model had serious shortcomings, however primarily the mysterious nature of this positively charged sphere. One scientist who was skeptical of this model of atoms was Rutherford, who won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for his 1899 discovery of a form of radioactive decay via -particles two protons and two neutrons bound together and identical to a helium-4 nucleus, even if the researchers of the time didn't know this.

Rutherford's Nobel-winning discovery of particles formed the basis of the gold foil experiment, which cast doubt on the plum pudding model. His experiment would probe atomic structure with high-velocity -particles emitted by a radioactive source. He initially handed off his investigation to two of his protgs, Ernest Marsden and Hans Geiger, according to Britannica.

Rutherford reasoned that if Thomson's plum pudding model was correct, then when an -particle hit a thin foil of gold, the particle should pass through with only the tiniest of deflections. This is because -particles are 7,000 times more massive than the electrons that presumably made up the interior of the atom.

Marsden and Geiger conducted the experiments primarily at the Physical Laboratories of the University of Manchester in the U.K. between 1908 and 1913.

The duo used a radioactive source of -particles facing a thin sheet of gold or platinum surrounded by fluorescent screens that glowed when struck by the deflected particles, thus allowing the scientists to measure the angle of deflection.

The research team calculated that if Thomson's model was correct, the maximum deflection should occur when the -particle grazed an atom it encountered and thus experienced the maximum transverse electrostatic force. Even in this case, the plum pudding model predicted a maximum deflection angle of just 0.06 degrees.

Of course, an -particle passing through an extremely thin gold foil would still encounter about 1,000 atoms, and thus its deflections would be essentially random. Even with this random scattering, the maximum angle of refraction if Thomson's model was correct would be just over half a degree. The chance of an -particle being reflected back was just 1 in 10^1,000 (1 followed by a thousand zeroes).

Yet, when Geiger and Marsden conducted their eponymous experiment, they found that in about 2% of cases, the -particle underwent large deflections. Even more shocking, around 1 in 10,000 -particles were reflected directly back from the gold foil.

Rutherford explained just how extraordinary this result was, likening it to firing a 15-inch (38 centimeters) shell (projectile) at a sheet of tissue paper and having it bounce back at you, according to Britannica

Extraordinary though they were, the results of the Geiger-Marsden experiments did not immediately cause a sensation in the physics community. Initially, the data were unnoticed or even ignored, according to the book "Quantum Physics: An Introduction" by J. Manners.

The results did have a profound effect on Rutherford, however, who in 1910 set about determining a model of atomic structure that would supersede Thomson's plum pudding model, Manners wrote in his book.

The Rutherford model of the atom, put forward in 1911, proposed a nucleus, where the majority of the particle's mass was concentrated, according to Britannica. Surrounding this tiny central core were electrons, and the distance at which they orbited determined the size of the atom. The model suggested that most of the atom was empty space.

When the -particle approaches within 10^-13 meters of the compact nucleus of Rutherford's atomic model, it experiences a repulsive force around a million times more powerful than it would experience in the plum pudding model. This explains the large-angle scatterings seen in the Geiger-Marsden experiments.

Later Geiger-Marsden experiments were also instrumental; the 1913 tests helped determine the upper limits of the size of an atomic nucleus. These experiments revealed that the angle of scattering of the -particle was proportional to the square of the charge of the atomic nucleus, or Z, according to the book "Quantum Physics of Matter," published in 2000 and edited by Alan Durrant.

In 1920, James Chadwick used a similar experimental setup to determine the Z value for a number of metals. The British physicist went on to discover the neutron in 1932, delineating it as a separate particle from the proton, the American Physical Society said.

Yet the Rutherford model shared a critical problem with the earlier plum pudding model of the atom: The orbiting electrons in both models should be continuously emitting electromagnetic energy, which would cause them to lose energy and eventually spiral into the nucleus. In fact, the electrons in Rutherford's model should have lasted less than 10^-5 seconds.

Another problem presented by Rutherford's model is that it doesn't account for the sizes of atoms.

Despite these failings, the Rutherford model derived from the Geiger-Marsden experiments would become the inspiration for Niels Bohr's atomic model of hydrogen, for which he won a Nobel Prize in Physics.

Bohr united Rutherford's atomic model with the quantum theories of Max Planck to determine that electrons in an atom can only take discrete energy values, thereby explaining why they remain stable around a nucleus unless emitting or absorbing a photon, or light particle.

Thus, the work of Rutherford, Geiger (who later became famous for his invention of a radiation detector)and Marsden helped to form the foundations of both quantum mechanics and particle physics.

Rutherford's idea of firing a beam at a target was adapted to particle accelerators during the 20th century. Perhaps the ultimate example of this type of experiment is the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, which accelerates beams of particles to near light speed and slams them together.

Thomson's Atomic Model, Lumens Chemistry for Non-Majors,.

Rutherford Model, Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/science/Rutherford-model

Alpha particle, U.S NRC, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/alpha-particle.html

Manners. J., et al, 'Quantum Physics: An Introduction,' Open University, 2008.

Durrant, A., et al, 'Quantum Physics of Matter,' Open University, 2008

Ernest Rutherford, Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ernest-Rutherford

Niels Bohr, The Nobel Prize, https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1922/bohr/facts/

House. J. E., 'Origins of Quantum Theory,' Fundamentals of Quantum Mechanics (Third Edition), 2018

View post:

What is the 'Gold Foil Experiment'? The Geiger-Marsden experiments explained - Livescience.com

Read More..