Page 3,395«..1020..3,3943,3953,3963,397..3,4003,410..»

U of T physicists discover that quantum tunnelling is not instantaneous – Varsity

Imagine if matter could go through other matter. Wouldnt the world be a different place?

Lets say you went on a hiking trip and arrived at a bridge over a river. Theoretically, you have two options to get to the other side: you could either go over the bridge, or you could paddle under it. But what if you could go through the bridge?

This is analogous to a phenomenon in quantum physics physics at very small length scales known as quantum tunnelling. A recent Nature publication highlights a discovery made on quantum tunnelling by Dr. Aephraim Steinberg and his team at the University of Torontos Department of Physics.

The team proved that quantum tunnelling is not instantaneous. In other words, if a particle were to go through a barrier, it would spend a certain amount of time in the barrier. According to Steinberg, the most surprising thing about the principle of quantum tunnelling is that a particle going through a barrier need not be an electron.

In principle, a baseball could do this, he said in an interview with The Varsity.

What is quantum tunnelling?

Most physicists explain quantum tunnelling with a classic analogy of a ball and a hill. If you try to push a ball up a hill and you give it a strong push, it wont get over the crest of the hill unless you give it one big push so that it can reach the hilltop. In physics talk, you need to make sure that the ball has enough kinetic energy to overcome the hills potential energy.

However, the quantum world doesnt use those seemingly logical rules and it is for this reason that the field of quantum mechanics can be so difficult to explain.

Unlike classical physics, quantum physics is probabilistic. That means that instead of calculating the exact locations and positions of particles, quantum physicists investigate the probability of electrons being located in a certain area.

If you had a quantum ball and hill scenario, even though it is highly likely that youll find the ball on your side of the hill, theres still a tiny probability that youll find your ball inside the hill. Theres an even smaller chance that your ball could eventually end up on the other side of the hill almost as if it had dug a tunnel through.

This is how quantum tunnelling is observed in most experiments: a change in location from one side of a barrier to another.

According to Steinberg, he wouldnt call his recent findings a discovery.

I think very few people thought the process was instantaneous, he said. Theres been over 80 years of debate over how exactly one should talk about the duration and process of different attempts to define and to measure it. And a year or two ago, there was a new story with another group, and they found that it was instantaneous. And we disagreed with that description.

How did Steinbergs team do it?

The team measured how long a rubidium atom spends inside a barrier of light constructed using lasers and microwaves. Rubidium atoms were cooled to one nanokelvin and directed by lasers to move in one direction. The path of these atoms was then blocked by another laser beam, which served as a barrier of light. The experimenters wanted to know how long the atoms spent inside the barrier before making it out on the other side.

So, how do you measure the travel time of an atom?

If you let every particle carry its own stopwatch, and then you wait and look through to see when the particle appears on the other side, you can look at its stopwatch [to measure the time it took], Steinberg said. It turns out that particles like electrons and atoms have a property called spin and the spins react to magnetic fields.

Steinberg and his colleagues used the spins of the rubidium atoms as hands on a clock face. Inside the light barrier, they exposed the atoms to a magnetic field, which caused the clock hands to rotate effectively revealing how long each atom spent inside. The longer the particle took inside the barrier, the longer it was exposed to the magnetic field, and the more its spin rotated.

Ultimately, the researchers found that each atom spends 0.61 milliseconds inside the light barrier a small number, but definitely not zero.

Basically, what were really striving for is simply a better understanding of how the quantum mechanical particles get where they get, Steinberg said. Tunnelling is one of the most striking examples of this. Honestly, what interests me is the modern question of how we think about this quantum world at all.

Quantum tunnelling is a process we see in our everyday lives.

[It has a role in] things like photosynthesis, even vision, where electrons and even protons are required in order to transfer energy along some of the biochemical pathways, Steinberg said. And maybe one of the most fundamental [roles quantum tunnelling has] in our existence is that a lot of nuclear processes require tunnelling. So the fusion that occurs in the sun that allows us to survive actually relies on tunnelling as well.

Whats next for the team?

Steinberg noted that his team is going in a few different directions.

Its relatively straightforward to just calculate if I throw a lot of particles in a barrier on average, how much time [they would spend] in the barrier. Thats not so difficult, Steinberg said. What makes the process confusing comes back to this indeterminism in quantum mechanics; some particles get through and others are reflected. People wanted to know, How long does it take just for the particles to get through?

But the team was in for a surprise. In the particular place they looked, transmitted and reflected particles spent the same amount of time in the barrier. Steinberg is now interested in asking different questions.

Instead of just asking, How much time do the particles spend overall in the barrier? you ask more specific questions. Where in the barrier are they spending most of their time? Are they on the left hand side or on the right hand side or middle? Steinberg said. Then, we expect to actually see different results with the transmitted and the reflected particles. So we want to refine our experiments to do that.

The probabilistic and often controversial nature of quantum physics has given the physicist a lot to think about.

Although the predictions for what were used to asking are probabilistic, the laws that we use for our predictions are, in fact, completely deterministic, Steinberg said. In other words, we can predict exactly what the final probability distribution is theres no ambiguity about that.

Steinberg continued, So its a controversy thats more on the philosophical side. What does it mean to have a description of nature that only gives us probabilities? And does it give us definite results?

See the original post:

U of T physicists discover that quantum tunnelling is not instantaneous - Varsity

Read More..

What Erwin Schrdinger Said About the Upanishads – The Wire Science

Erwin Schrdinger, 1933. Photo: Nobel Foundation/Public Domain.

Quantum physics is one of the most remarkable developments of the 20th century. Until the early 1900s or so, Isaac Newtons laws of motion dominated the study of the physical universe. They were later upgraded, for the most part, by Albert Einsteins theories of relativity, and together, they could satisfactorily explain almost all physical phenomena. These classical theories formed the bedrock on which the entire superstructure of physics rested.

But in the early 1900s, physicists found that subatomic particles like electrons could behave in ways that defied the predictions of classical physics. To explain this behaviour, they formulated the theories and principles of quantum mechanics together a set of natural laws that could predict the behaviour of electrons and other subatomic particles very well.

Some of the more well-known among these physicists were Einstein, Niels Bohr, Erwin Schrdinger and Werner Heisenberg. However, these physicists and others would soon find that the newcomer, while opening new theoretical and technological vistas, also made some strange predictions. For example, it allowed electrons to tunnel through walls, particles to exist simultaneously in two places at once, black holes to evaporate, and information to be exchanged between observers faster than light.

This was a crucial moment in history, when physics was in a state of major upheaval. The familiar classical picture of reality was being disrupted by one that seemed to be too crazy to be true, even as it explained numerous experimental observations that the former could not. Einstein, Bohr, Schrdinger, Heisenberg and others were deeply troubled by its implications. Indeed, they were faced with a personal dilemma: to believe a preposterous theory that worked or discard it for an intuitive theory that didnt work.

At this critical juncture, they discovered that their notion, that the world we see is not reality itself but a projection onto our consciousness, wasnt completely new. In the ancient Indian texts known as the Upanishads, they found echoes of their theories, and a philosophical foundation to ensure they would no longer be cast adrift by the implications of quantum mechanics.

A strange world

Quantum physics took shape through several counterintuitive discoveries regarding the inconsistent behaviour of light. James Maxwell showed in 1865 that light could be modelled as electromagnetic waves. In 1905, Albert Einstein published his paper on the photoelectric effect, where he proposed that light is composed of tiny massless particles called photons. Louis de Broglie, a French aristocrat, unified these views in 1924 with a bold suggestion that all matter exhibits wave-like behaviour. This proposition, known as the wave-particle duality, opened up a Pandoras box of arguments that challenge the nature of reality, even its very existence.

According to classical physics, microscopic particles like electrons are solid spherical balls of matter. Quantum physics replaces this picture with something alien to our sensibilities. It says that rather than being in one place, an electron is located in a diffuse cloud of probabilities. If you try to observe the electron, there is a higher probability that you will find it in a denser region of the cloud than a sparser region.

This cloud is represented mathematically by the wave function. And at the heart of quantum physics is an equation that governs how a wave function evolves as time passes. The Austrian-Irish physicist Erwin Schrdinger arrived at it in 1926, and so its called the Schrdingers equation.

Science writers revel in portraying the tension between the reality described by quantum physics and the reality we perceive through our senses. Since macroscopic objects like trees and cars are composed of microscopic particles like atoms and molecules, which in turn also behave like waves, macroscopic objects should also behave like waves. But this is not what we experience. The computer on which I wrote this article and the device on which you are reading it surely dont feel like waves!

So when does something stop behaving like a wave and start behaving like a piece of matter, an object composed strictly of particles? Surprisingly, this happens when we observe it.

According to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, observing an object causes it to lose its quantum nature and collapse into the classical form were used to. This collapse of the wave function implies that the reality we see exists only when we are there to observe it. And an observer does not merely observe reality; she creates it.

If left to themselves, things would remain as waves until somebody observed them. Einstein, who could not reconcile himself with this, summed up the strangeness of quantum physics when he asked a friend, Do you believe the Moon exists only when I look at it?

Subjective reality of the Upanishads

The Upanishads are a collection of Sanskrit texts transmitted orally from teacher to student over thousands of years. While the Vedas prescribe rituals to appease deities, the Upanishads are concerned with the nature of reality, mind and the self.

Schrdinger was first exposed to Indian philosophy around 1918, through the writings of the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer. An ardent student of the Upanishads, Schopenhauer had declared, In the whole world there is no study so beneficial and so elevating as that of the Upanishads. It has been the solace of my life. It will be the solace of my death.

The Upanishads describe the relationship between the Brahman and the Atman. Brahman is the universal self or the ultimate singular reality. The Atman is the individuals inner self, the soul. A central tenet of the Upanishads is tat tvam asi, which means the Brahman and the Atman are identical. There is only one universal self, and we are all one with it.

The Isha Upanishad states, the Brahman forms everything that is living or non-living the wise man knows that all beings are identical with his self, and his self is the self of all beings.

Schrdinger was fascinated by this thought. According to Subhash Kaks book The Wishing Tree (2008), Schrdinger named his dog Atman, and his conference talks would, by one account, often end with the statement Atman=Brahman, that he would call somewhat self-aggrandisingly the second Schrdingers equation. When his affair with the Irish artist Sheila May ended, she wrote him a letter that alluded to this fascination: I looked into your eyes and found all life there, that spirit which you said was no more you or me, but us, one mind, one being you can love me all your life, but we are two now, not one.

Quantum physics eliminates the gap between the observer and the observed. The Upanishads say that the observer and the observed are the same things. In his 1944 book What is Life?, Schrdinger took on a peculiar line of thought. If the world is indeed created by our act of observation, there should be billions of such worlds, one for each of us. How come your world and my world are the same? If something happens in my world, does it happen in your world, too? What causes all these worlds to synchronise with each other?

He found his answer, again, in the Upanishads. There is obviously only one alternative, he wrote, namely the unification of minds or consciousnesses. Their multiplicity is only apparent, in truth there is only one mind. This is the doctrine of the Upanishads.

According to the Upanishads, Brahman alone exists. Everything we see around us is Maya, a distortion of the Brahman caused due to our ignorance and imperfect senses. The Chandogya Upanishad says, All this is Brahman. Everything comes from Brahman, everything goes back to Brahman, and everything is sustained by Brahman.

On this, Schrdinger wrote, there is only one thing and that what seems to be a plurality is merely a series of different aspects of this one thing, produced by a deception (the Indian Maya); the same illusion is produced in a gallery of mirrors, and in the same way Gaurisankar and Mt Everest turned out to be the same peak seen from different valleys.

It is easy to see why such a concept would have appealed to Schrdinger. Quantum physics insists that reality exists as waves, and wave-particle duality arises due to our observation. Because we cannot perceive the true wave nature of reality, our observation reduces it to the incomplete reality we see. This reduction is what we know as the collapse of the wave function. The emergence of Maya thus neatly maps to the collapse.

Schrdinger was not making passing references to the Upanishads; instead, he had wholly internalised their core message. Myriads of suns, surrounded by possibly inhabited planets, multiplicity of galaxies, each one with its myriads of suns According to me, all these things are Maya.

The Upanishads describe how reality arises out of consciousness. But consciousness cannot be found inside our bodies as a substance or an organ. In that case, how can a non-material consciousness interact with and control our material bodies? Exactly where does mind interact with matter? This question is known as the mind-body problem, and has vexed philosophers for a long time.

Since we havent been able to locate or explain this interaction, were left with a deceptively simple choice: either consciousness or reality doesnt exist.

Most exponents of modern science today lean towards the materialist view that consciousness is a byproduct of the neurochemical processes occurring in our brain. It depends on these processes and cannot exist without them.

On the other hand, the Upanishads uphold an idealist view that consciousness exists by itself, and that the physical world depends on it. There is no objective reality that exists independently of the observer. Schrdinger supported this view and lamented the aversion for it: it must be said that to Western thought this doctrine has little appeal, it is unpalatable, it is dubbed fantastic, unscientific. Well, so it is because our science Greek science is based on objectivation, whereby it has cut itself off from an adequate understanding of the subject of cognisance, of the mind.

So the mind-body problem, he wrote, is our fruitless quest for the place where mind acts on matter or vice-versa The material world has only been constructed at the price of taking the self, that is, mind, out of it, removing it; mind is not part of it; obviously, therefore, it can neither act on it nor be acted on by any of its parts.

Physicists and Upanishads

Schrdinger was moved by the Upanishads. He discussed it with everyone he met and made determined efforts to incorporate it in his life. The epitaph on his tombstone reads, So all Being is an one and only Being; And that it continues to be when someone dies; [this] tells you, that he did not cease to be.

And he wasnt alone. Niels Bohr had famously said, I go to the Upanishad to ask questions. In The Tao of Physics (1975), Fritjof Capra wrote of the time Heisenberg met Rabindranath Tagore, and that the introduction to Indian thought brought Heisenberg great comfort.

J. Robert Oppenheimer, who led the Manhattan Project to develop the worlds first nuclear weapons, learned Sanskrit so he could read the Bhagavad Gita in its original form. When he witnessed the first atom bomb explode, he famously recalled a verse from the Gita, where Krishna shows Arjuna his true form. He translated the verse into English thus: Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.

The Upanishads provided solace a conception of reality and the universe based on observation and reasoning. In the precepts of these texts, the physicists found moral comfort, intellectual courage and spiritual guidance.

Nothing attests to the importance of these philosophical edifices less than absurd claims that Schrdinger and other scientists merely baked the lessons of the Upanishads into quantum theory. Such statements are misleading through and through. Schrdinger was, foremost, a physicist deeply entrenched in the methods of science. Indian philosophy soothed his soul but it is unlikely that it helped him frame mathematical equations.

Indeed, Schrdinger was often critical of many Indian ideas and pointed out that they were prone to superstition. Modern science, according to him, represented the zenith of human thought. He sought Indian philosophy not to replace the methods of science but to be inspired. He was aware that mixing two systems of thought separated by thousands of years was not easy. He believed Western thought needed to borrow ideas from Indian philosophy with great care. As he wrote,

I do believe that this is precisely the point where our present way of thinking does need to be amended, perhaps by a bit of blood-transfusion from Eastern thought. That will not be easy, we must beware of blunders blood-transfusion always needs great precaution to prevent clotting. We do not wish to lose the logical precision that our scientific thought has reached, and that is unparalleled anywhere at any epoch.

Apart from philosophy, Indian thinkers have made vital scientific contributions to astronomy, mathematics, literature, law, biology, psychology and most other realms of human endeavour, if not all of them. They often do not receive the recognition due them. However, these instances of overlooking no matter how severe can never be corrected by attributing dubious achievements to these or other Indians.

The Upanishads themselves preach a message of unity and are opposed to any form of discrimination. To adapt the words of the Isha Upanishad, Who sees all beings in their own self and their own self in all beings, loses all hatred and fear.

Viraj Kulkarni has a masters degree in computer science from UC Berkeley and is currently pursuing a PhD in artificial intelligence. He is on Twitter at @VirajZero.

See the original post here:

What Erwin Schrdinger Said About the Upanishads - The Wire Science

Read More..

Physics is stuck and needs another Einstein to revolutionize it, physicist Avi Loeb says – Salon

Albert Einstein's work so revolutionized physics that it is difficult to discusshim without slipping into hagiography. Indeed, his brilliance is so storied thathis surname has become synonymous with "genius," and his brain preserved for study.

And yet, while Einstein was undeniably a smart cookie, one cannot look back at the course of history without noticing that the dominoes were all there, set up, and waiting for someone like him to start toppling them. Part of Einstein's brilliance was merelyrealizing this. Avi Loeb, a professor of physics at Harvard University with a regular a column in Scientific American, told me that he thinks that Einstein's physics revelations would have been developed by others even if Einstein hadn't been born. "It would take maybea few more decades," Loeb clarified."Many of the things that Einstein personally was responsible for there at least 10 touchstonesin physics where each of them is a major intellectual achievement you know, they would be discovered by different people, I think," Loeb continued. "That illustrates his genius."

Loeb is advising on a publicproject celebrating Einstein's life and work at Hebrew University, which hosts an archive of Einstein's documents. The project,"Einstein: Visualize the Impossible," is slated to be an interactive online exhibition to engage the public with Einstein's work. As a fellow physicist, Einstein's work and hislife haveweighed on Loeb's mind for years, which is why he was interested in helping curate.

In considering Einstein's legacy, though, Loeb says we have to reckon with what has and hasn't changed about the physics world. In the 1890s, when Einstein was in college, physics knowledge was a shell of what it istoday. Quantum mechanics, dark matter, nuclear physics and most fundamental particles wereunknown, and astronomers knew little about the nature of the universe or even that there were other galaxies outside our own. Nowadays, many of the biggest physics discoveries happen by virtue of some of the largest and most expensive scientific instruments ever built: gravitational wave observatories, say, or the Large Hadron Collider at CERN.

Given the landscape of physics today,could an Einstein-like physicist exist again someone who, say,works in a patent office, quietly ponderingthe nature of space-time, yet whose revelations cause much of the field to be completely rethought?

Loeb thought so. "There are some dark clouds in physics," Loeb told me. "People will tell you, 'we just need to figure out which particles makes the dark matter, it's just another particle. It has some weak interaction, and that's pretty much it.' ButI thinkthere is a very good chance that we are missing some very importantingredients that a brilliant person might recognize in the coming years." Loeb even said the potential for a revolutionary physics breakthrough today "is not smaller it's actually bigger right now" than it was in Einstein's time.

I spoke with Loeb via phone about Einstein's legacy, and how physics has become "stuck" on certain problems; as always, this interview has been condensed and edited for print.

To start, let's talk about some of Einstein's contributions to science. What compelled you to help curate this celebration of Einstein's legacy?

Well, to start, Einstein's special theory of relativityrevolutionized our notion of space and time. The fact thatspace and time are entities that are lumped together and that the speed of light is the ultimate speed, and, and that you can convert mass to energy, which is demonstrated bynuclear energy in particular. Then later on, he made the extremely important contributions to quantum mechanics, andof course developed the general theory of relativity that he published in November 1915, 105 years ago. And amazingly,exactly a hundred years later, in August, 2015,gravitational waves were detected by the LIGO experiment and they demonstrated that not only do gravitational waves exist, which are ripples in space and time that Einstein's theory forecasted, but also thatthe forces of these gravitational waves are black holes, which are also a prediction of Einstein's theory.

Obviously Einstein was very visionary, but also in a sense, he had peers people like Karl Schwarzchild and Edwin Hubble who were doing work that wouldhelp him test and correlate his theories. I've wondered, say, if Einstein were born 30 years later, would someone else havefigured out relativity, andthe photoelectric effect, and so on?

That's a good question. Physics is about nature, right? So we're trying to learn about nature. We're trying to understand nature and you know, so, in that sense, wecollect data and eventually someone comesup with the right idea. The question is, how long does thattake?What I'm saying is,I believe that the same ideas would have been developed. I don't know how close to the time that Einstein and thought about them, but eventually. . . .it would take maybe a few more decades or something. Butthe most important thing is, I think it would have been fragmented. So, you know, many of the things that Einstein personally was responsible for like there at least 10 touchstones in physics where each of them is a major intellectual achievement they would be discovered by different people. So the fact that he came up with with all of them illustrates his genius.

But you know, if you look at people that got the Nobel prize, there are many people examples of people that got it once for one major discovery, that's pretty much what they did for their life. Either they did it early on in their life or late, but doesn't matter. And that's not true about Einstein. So he didn't only deviatefrom the beaten path and, and come up with original ideas, but he did it multiple times. And by that, you know, it contributed to humanity. A great deal, I should say, like for example, hisa general theory of relativity this idea that space and time and gravity are connected.

It seems like physics has changed between Einstein's day and now. Most of the underlying physical principles of our universe appear to have been well-defined and tested by now say, the standard model of particle physics, or relativity and gravitation. And a lot of advances happen now because of data from huge teams working on government-funded instruments. Given thelandscape of physics, is it actually possible that there could be somebody else like Einstein nowadays, someone who revolutionizes the whole field?Or do you think things have sort of fundamentally changed both in terms of funding of experimentsand of our understanding of the universe so that such a thing isno longerpossible?

I mean, we do have much bigger experiments as you said, and much more data in some fields. But we still need people that think about the blueprint of physics, thatthink about the fundamental assumptions that everyone else is making that might be wrong. We need critical thinking. And there are some dark clouds on the horizon, just as they were 150 years ago. You know, back then, back then it was the blackbody radiation. And people at the time thought, "well, we just need to clarifythat dark cloud, and then we finish physics." [Editor's note: in the 1890s, the fact that objects glowed different colors as they heated up was one of the great mysteries of physics. It turned out to be related to quantum mechanics, the study of which prompted an ongoing revolution in physics.]

And right now there are some dark clouds, too, you know. Like, there is the nature of dark matter, orthe nature of the cosmological constant, or that we don't know where the vacuum gets its energy from. People will tell you, "oh, these are just minute details. You know, we just need to figure out which particles makes the dark matter, it's just another particle. It has some weak interaction, and that's pretty much it. And the dark energy, you know, it's just the vacuum energy density, you know, for some reason it's more maybe, because otherwise we wouldn't exist here." You know, we can give each other awards and celebrate the end of physics.

I think it'spretty much similar [to the 19th century situation]. And I think there, there is a very good chance that we are missing some very importantingredients that a brilliant person might recognize in the coming years,in the coming decades.

What are some of the "dark clouds" in physics,as you say?

One of thechallenges is unifying quantum mechanics and gravity. So you have this huge contingency of string theories that agree among themselves that they are leading the frontier, but nevertheless, they haven't provided any concrete predictions that can be tested by experiments over the past 40 years. [Editor's note: String theory unifies quantum mechanics and gravity, but it is, as Loeb mentions, not testable as far as anyone knows.]

[String theorists]are still advocating that they're the smartest physicists although they're not doing physics, because in my book, physics is about testing your ideas against reality, with experiments. And, you know, I very much believe thatput your theory to the guillotine of experimental data, and it may cut its head off. But if you don't risk your theory by testing it, you can be very proud of yourself.The only way that you maintain your humility is by recognizing that there is something superior to your ideas, which is nature. And it's a learning experience where you're not supposed to know everything in advance.

And that's unfortunately not popular these days. Today, it's all about impressing each other. And that's part of social media, you know, trying to impress other people to say things that look smart, that look very intelligent, thatcompletely alignwith what everyone else is saying so that they will like you, that you would have more likes on Twitter. Okay. So that's the motivation, so that you can get more awards, more grants so that you can get a tenure appointment and everyone would respect you.

That's wrong. That was clearly not the motivation of Einstein. He was not trying to be liked, and that's why he wasworking in a patent office. But hisideas happened to be right. And in a way he was naive in that sense, but that's the right approach you should be always learning.

So I would say there is the same potential even greater now because we are at a time when we recognize the success of physics. It has a huge impact on the economy, on politics, and so forth. So we recognize that but if you look at the frontiers of physics, which is blue sky research, you know, it's supposed to be open minded butit's not open-minded. Thereare groups of people, entrenched in ideas that will never be tested and they believe that they're leading the frontier.

Right. So are you saying that the premise of the some of the major experiments might even be wrong? Like, all the prominent dark matter experiments are trying to find this weakly-interacting, supersymmetric particle, but even that assumption may be wrong?

So here is an example:Supersymmetry, you know, that was an idea advocated for decades now. [Editor's note: Supersymmetry is the theory that for every fundamental particle, there is a "partner" particle; so for the electron, there would be a supersymmetric "selectron," and for the top quark, there would be a supersymmetric "squark," and so on. Dark matter is theorized to be made of one of these particles. Yet none of the supersymmetric particles have ever been observed.]And people celebratedthis idea, and gave each other awards. The Large Hadron Collider in CERN was supposed to detect the lightest supersymmetric particles and it didn't. There'sno evidence for supersymmetry.

So obviously what people say is, "oh, maybe it's around the corner." But it's already ruled out the most natural versions of supersymmetry are ruled out. So here's an idea that was celebrated as part of the mainstream not only celebrated, but it was the foundation for string theory.So they put it as a building block:"We know it exists, put it as a brick at the bottom of the tower that we are building called string theory, called superstring theory. And let's assume that we know it it's completely trivial,experimentalists willeventually find it, we don't even need to think about it let's put it as a building block of our tower."

Doesn't exist. LHD [Large Hadron Collider]didn't find it. So then, people say, "okay, weakly interactingmassive particles are dark matter butfor decades, they haven't found anything. [Editor's note: One prominent theory to explain dark matter is that it consists of particles that are heavy but rarely interact with normal matter, though they bounce off of themselves and have a gravitational interaction. Most of the major experiments searching for dark matter are attempting to find this type of weakly interacting massive particle, or WIMP for short.]

And so I asked the experimentalists, "how long will you continue to search for WIMPs, these weakly interacting particles, since the limits are orders of magnitude below the expectation?" And he said, "I will continue to search for WIMPs as long as I get funding."

So in the mainstream approach, there is thisstubbornness like, we stick to the ideas that we believe in. And then anyone that deviates from that will besidelined. You know, anyone that considers any other theory for unifyingquantum mechanics and gravity through string theory is sidelined,even though there is no reasonable evidence for string theory. So I would say the potential now for a breakthrough that will be really revolutionary is not smaller it's actually bigger right now [than it was in Einstein's]. It's just, the social pressure is stronger.

Sowe do need we desperately need another Einstein. There is no doubt.

Read this article:

Physics is stuck and needs another Einstein to revolutionize it, physicist Avi Loeb says - Salon

Read More..

Our quantum internet breakthrough could help make hacking a thing of the past – GCN.com

Our quantum internet breakthrough could help make hacking a thing of the past

The advent of mass working from home has made many people more aware of the security risks of sending sensitive information via the internet. The best we can do at the moment is make it difficult to intercept and hack your messages but we cant make it impossible.

What we need is a new type of internet: thequantum internet. In this version of the global network, data is secure, connections are private and your worries about information being intercepted are a thing of the past.

My colleagues and I have just made a breakthrough,published in Science Advances, that will make such a quantum internet possible by scaling up the concepts behind it using existing telecommunications infrastructure.

Our current way of protecting online data is to encrypt it usingmathematical problemsthat are easy to solve if you have a digital key to unlock the encryption but hard to solve without it. However, hard does not mean impossible and, with enough time and computer power, todays methods of encryption can be broken.

Quantum communication, on the other hand, creates keys using individual particles of light (photons) , which according to the principles of quantum physics are impossibleto make an exact copy of. Any attempt to copy these keys will unavoidably cause errors that can be detected. This means a hacker, no matter how clever or powerful they are or what kind of supercomputer they possess, cannot replicate a quantum key or read the message it encrypts.

This concept has already been demonstratedin satellitesand overfibre-optic cables, and used to send secure messages betweendifferent countries. So why are we not already using in everyday life? The problem is that it requires expensive, specialised technology that means its not currently scalable.

Previous quantum communication techniqueswere like pairs of childrens walkie talkies. You need one pair of handsets for every pair of users that want to securely communicate. So if three children want to talk to each other they will need three pairs of handsets (or six walkie talkies) and each child must have two of them. If eight children want to talk to each other they would need 56 walkie talkies.

Obviously its not practical for someone to have a separate device for every person or website they want to communicate with over the internet. So we figured out a way to securely connect every user with just one device each, more similar to phones than walkie talkies.

Each walkie talkie handset acts as both a transmitter and a receiver in order to share the quantum keys that make communication secure. In our model, users only need a receiver because they get the photons to generate their keys from a central transmitter.

This is possible because of another principle of quantum physics called entanglement. A photon cant be exactly copied but it can be entangled with another photon so that they both behave in the same way when measured, no matter how far apart they are what Albert Einstein called spooky action at a distance.

Full network

When two users want to communicate, our transmitter sends them an entangled pair of photons one particle for each user. The users devices then perform a series of measurements on these photons to create a shared secret quantum key. They can then encrypt their messages with this key and transfer them securely.

By using multiplexing, a common telecommunications technique of combining or splitting signals, we can effectively send these entangled photon pairs to multiple combinations of people at once.

We can also send many signals to each user in a way that they can all be simultaneously decoded. In this way weve effectively replaced pairs of walkie talkies with a system more similar to a video call with multiple participants, in which you can communicate with each user privately and independently as well as all at once.

Weve so far tested this concept by connecting eight users across a single city. We are now working to improve the speed of our network and interconnect several such networks. Collaborators have already started using our quantum network as a test bed for several exciting applications beyond just quantum communication.

We also hope to develop even better quantum networks based on this technology with commercial partners in the next few years. With innovations like this, I hope to witness the beginning of the quantum internet in the next ten years.

This article was first posted on The Conversation.

About the Author

Siddarth Koduru Joshi is a research fellow in quantum communication at the University of Bristol.

Read the original post:

Our quantum internet breakthrough could help make hacking a thing of the past - GCN.com

Read More..

Mechanism Proposed to Explain Resilience of Superconductors to Magnetic Fields – AZoQuantum

Written by AZoQuantumSep 8 2020

At the University of Tsukuba, a researcher has come up with a new explanation for how superconductors subjected to a magnetic field can returnwithout losing any energyto their earlier state once the field is removed.

This study could pave the way for a new theory of superconductivity and a more environment-friendly electrical distribution system.

Superconductors are a family of materials that exhibit the remarkable ability to conduct electricity without any resistance. As such, an electrical current can indefinitely circle around a loop of superconducting wire. The obstacle is that it is necessary to maintain these materials very cold, and more so, a strong magnetic field can make a superconductor to recover back to normal.

Previously, it was considered that it is not easy to reverse the transition from being superconducting to normal induced by a magnetic field. This is because the energy would be dissipated by the typical process of Joule heating.

This mechanism, where the electrical energy is converted into heat by the resistance in normal wires, is precisely what enables the use of an electric stovetop or space heater.

Joule heating is usually considered negatively, because it wastes energy and can even cause overloaded wires to melt. However, it has been known for a long time from experiments that, if you remove the magnetic field, a current-carrying superconductor can, in fact, be returned to its previous state without loss of energy.

Hiroyasu Koizumi, Professor, Division of Quantum Condensed Matter Physics, Center for Computational Sciences, University of Tsukuba

Professor Koizumi has now offered a new explanation for this phenomenon. Although the electrons couple up and move synchronously in the superconducting state, the actual reason behind such a synchronized motion is the existence of the so-called Berry connection, which is characterized by the topological quantum number.

This number is an integer and if it is a nonzero number, then there is a flow of current. Consequently, this supercurrent can be abruptly turned off by modifying this number to zero in the absence of Joule heating.

Previously, James Clerk Maxwell, the founder of modern electromagnetic theory, hypothesized a similar molecular vortex model that visualized space being filled with the rotation of currents in small circles. As everything was spinning in the same manner, it reminded Maxwell of idle wheelsgears used in machines for this purpose.

The surprising thing is that a model from the early days of electromagnetism, like Maxwells idle wheels, can help us resolve questions arising today. This research may help lead to a future in which energy can be delivered from power plants to homes with perfect efficiency.

Hiroyasu Koizumi, Professor, Division of Quantum Condensed Matter Physics, Center for Computational Sciences, University of Tsukuba

Koizumi, H. (2020) Reversible superconducting-normal phase transition in a magnetic field and the existence of topologically protected loop currents that appear and disappear without Joule heating. EPL. doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/131/37001.

Source: http://www.tsukuba.ac.jp/en

Read the original:

Mechanism Proposed to Explain Resilience of Superconductors to Magnetic Fields - AZoQuantum

Read More..

The Quantum Dream: Are We There Yet? – Toolbox

The emergence of quantum computing has led industry heavyweights to fast track their research and innovations. This week, Google conducted the largest chemical simulation on a quantum computer to date. The U.S. Department of Energy, on the other hand, launched five new Quantum Information Science (QIS) Research Centers. Will this accelerate quantum computings progress?

Quantum technology is the next big wave in the tech landscape. As opposed to traditional computers where all the information emails, tweets, YouTube videos, and Facebook photos are streams of electrical pulses in binary digits, 1s and 0s; quantum computers rely on quantum bits or qubits to store information. Qubits are subatomic particles, such as electrons or photons which change their state regularly. Therefore, they can be 1s and 0s at the same time. This enables quantum computers to run multiple complex computational tasks simultaneously and faster when compared to digital computers, mainframes, and servers.

Introduced in the 1980s, quantum computing can unlock the complexities across different industries much faster than traditional computers. A quantum computer can decipher complex encryption systems that can easily impact digital banking, cryptocurrencies, and e-commerce sectors, which heavily depend on encrypted data. Quantum computers can expedite the discovery of new medicines, aid in climate change, power AI, transform logistics, and design new materials. In the U.S., technology giants, including IBM, Google, Honeywell, Microsoft, Intel, IonQ, and Rigetti Computing, are leading the race to build quantum computers and gain a foothold in the quantum computing space. Whereas Alibaba, Baidu, Huawei are leading companies in China.

For a long time, the U.S. and its allies, such as Japan and Germany, had been working hard to compete with China to dominate the quantum technology space. In 2018, the U.S. government released the National Strategy Overview for Quantum Information Science to reduce technical skills gaps and accelerate quantum computing research and development.

In 2019, Google claimed quantum supremacy for supercomputers when the companys Sycamore processor performed specific tasks in 200 seconds, which would have taken a supercomputer 10,000 years to complete. In the same year, Intel rolled out Horse Ridge, a cryogenic quantum control chip, to reduce the quantum computing complexities and accelerate quantum practicality.

Tech news: Is Data Portability the Answer To Anti-Competitive Practices?

Whats 2020 Looking Like For Quantum Computing?

In July 2020, IBM announced a research partnership with the Japanese business and academia to advance quantum computing innovations. This alliance will deepen ties between the countries and build an ecosystem to improve quantum skills and advance research and development.

More recently, in June 2020, Honeywell announced the development of the worlds highest-performing quantum computer. AWS, Microsoft, and several other IaaS providers have announced quantum cloud services, an initiative to advance quantum computing adoption. In August 2020, AWS announced the general availability of its Amazon Braket, a quantum cloud service that allows developers to design, develop, test, and run quantum algorithms.

Since last year, auto manufacturers, such as Daimler and Volkswagen have been leveraging quantum computers to identify new methods to improve electric vehicle battery performance. Pharmaceutical companies are also using the technology to develop new medicines and drugs.

Last week, the Google AI Quantum team used their quantum processor, Sycamore, to simulate changes in the configuration of a chemical molecule, diazene. During the process, the computer was able to describe the changes in the positions of hydrogen accurately. The computer also gave an accurate description of the binding energy of hydrogen in bigger chains.

If quantum computers develop the ability to predict chemical processes, it would advance the development of a wide range of new materials with unknown properties. Current quantum computers, unfortunately, lack the augmented scaling required for such a task. Although todays computers are not ready to take on such a challenge yet, computer scientists hope to accomplish this in the near future as tech giants like Google invest in quantum computing-related research.

Tech news: Will Googles Nearby Share Have Anything Transformative to Offer?

It, therefore, came as a relief to many computer scientists when the U.S. Department of Energy announced an investment of $625 million over the next five years for five newly formed Quantum Information Science (QIS) Research Centers in the U.S. The newly formed hubs are an amalgam of research universities, national labs, and tech titans in quantum computing. Each of the research hubs is led by the Energy Departments Argonne National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Fermi National Laboratory, and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; powered by Microsoft, IBM, Intel, Riggeti, and ColdQuanta. This partnership aims to advance quantum computing commercialization.

Chetan Nayak, general manager of Quantum Hardware at Microsoft, says, While quantum computing will someday have a profound impact, todays quantum computing systems are still nascent technologies. To scale these systems, we must overcome a number of scientific challenges. Microsoft has been tackling these challenges head-on through our work towards developing topological qubits, classical information processing devices for quantum control, new quantum algorithms, and simulations.

At the start of this year, Daniel Newman, principal analyst and founding partner at Futurum Research, predicted that 2020 will be a big year for investors and Silicon Valley to invest in quantum computing companies. He said, It will be incredibly impactful over the next decade, and 2020 should be a big year for advancement and investment.

Quantum computing is still in the development phase, and the lack of suppliers and skilled researchers might be one of the influential factors in its establishment. However, if tech giants, and researchers continue to collaborate on a large scale, quantum technology can turbocharge innovation at a large scale.

What are your thoughts on the progress of quantum computing? Comment below or let us know on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook. Wed love to hear from you!

More:
The Quantum Dream: Are We There Yet? - Toolbox

Read More..

17 extremely useful productivity tips from this years 40 Under 40 – Yahoo Finance UK

Launching a groundbreaking news organization. Building a better quantum computer. Running for Congress and winning in an upset. Founding a company and taking it public. The honorees on Fortunes 2020 40 Under 40 certainly know how to get things done, so we asked them to tell us more about how they set and exceed their ambitious goals. We discovered that, for this years 40 Under 40, being more productive often means planning ahead and churning through tasks as quickly as possiblebut also sometimes just shutting everything off and taking a break.

Diana Avila, 34, global head of banking and expansion at TransferWise

I do not have meetings on Mondays. Instead, I use Monday for deep workanything that requires a lot of focus and time. This allows me to take on more meetings as the week develops and dedicate my time to others because Ive already accomplished any necessary work.

Margaret Anadu, 38, head of the urban investment group at Goldman Sachs

I try to go for an hour-long walk each morning completely free of any inputs (no music, podcasts, emails, etc.). Its my time to center myself and to think through what is happening with my family, with my team, and with the partners we work with in underserved communities. This is when I think through some of the most complex challenges facing me in the days and weeks ahead. This intentional, early morning quiet time, while often hard to carve out with two young kids at home, sets the tone for the day and makes me a better wife, mom, leader, and investor.

Henry Schuck, 37, cofounder and CEO of ZoomInfo

Spend time outlining whats important to you over the next three, six, and 12 months, and then regularly check to make sure youre spending your time on those priorities.

Charlotte Clymer, 33, writer, LGBTQ advocate, and consultant

Keep a good calendar. Everything goes down in the calendar, regardless of whether its drinks with friends or a media interview. It doesnt mean you have to follow it exactly, but keeping a steady calendar has a way of sharpening discipline. I cant recommend it enough.

Keia Cole, 39, head of digital experience at MassMutual

I set aside time on Friday mornings for mentoring and networking conversations. I love having the opportunity to connect with people across the organization. I found that creating time and space on Friday mornings makes me more present in those discussions, rather than squeezing people in during the rush of the week. And I am usually more relaxed and joyful because its Friday!

Suneera Madhani, 32, founder and CEO of Fattmerchant

Just say no. It has not only helped me in my professional life; it also helped personally as I juggle between mom life and work life. Understanding that it is okay to not say yes to everything that comes your way allows you to focus on things that help you move the needle toward your goals.

Matthew A. Cherry, 38, writer, director and producer at Cherry Lane Productions

Surround yourself with good people, and learn how to delegate.

Racquel Bracken, 37, partner at Venrock

Batch email. Nothing is that urgent, and if it is, your team will call or text you.You can waste so much time needlessly checking emails, when really whats better is to triage them at the beginning and end of every day.

Emily Ramshaw, 39, cofounder and CEO of The 19th*

Im a pre-crastinator by nature. I do everything immediately; as a result, Im almost always overbusy, but Im almost never stressed and crashing on deadline. Pick your poison?

Taylor Lorenz, 35, technology reporter at the New York Times

Set deadlines early so if (or when) you miss them you still have time left before the actual deadline.

Marissa Giustina, 30, senior research scientist and quantum electronics engineer at Google Research

When you really want to get something done, close your email. (Small tip; big impact.)

Ambar Bhattacharyya, 37, managing director at Maverick Ventures

When I need to be really productive, I disconnect from the Internet. I turn off the Wi-Fi on my computer so that I can focus on things like reading through an important document, working on detailed analysis, or writing a thoughtful response back to someone. For me, the No. 1 thing that takes away from productivity is all of the pop-ups, texts, alerts, and email notifications I am constantly receiving on all my devices. They are really hard to get away from unless everything is off and away.

Story continues

Jose Antonio Vargas, 39, founder of Define American

Turn off the Internet. When Im thinking, brainstorming, and writing, I turn the Wi-Fi off to limit the distraction and force me to focus.

Rep. Conor Lamb, 36, U.S. House of Representatives for Pennsylvanias 17th Congressional District

Put your phone in airplane mode.

Erica Anderson, 36, executive producer at New York magazine and Vox Media

I social distance from my phone! Its never in the bedroom (helps to get restful sleep), and I leave it alone during meetings to stay present. While I definitely multitask, recognizing that the phone can lessen my productivity is an important part of my personal work culture.

Will Ahmed, 30, founder and CEO of WHOOP

Get more sleep. Being well rested makes everything else easier, especially work.

Kate Rosenbluth, 38, founder and chief scientific officer of Cala Health

Forgive yourself for your failures. Its so easy to waste energy worrying unproductively about our failures, when you could be redirecting that energy to making meaningful positive impact. Youre probably the only one keeping score of your wins and losses, so drop the self-judgment and instead see your failures as building muscle for your next attempt.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Link:
17 extremely useful productivity tips from this years 40 Under 40 - Yahoo Finance UK

Read More..

How Amazon Quietly Powers The Internet – Forbes

Amazon (AMZN)

What was the last thing you heard about Amazon (AMZN)?

Let me guess. Its battle with Walmart WMT ? Or was it the FAAs approval of Amazons delivery drones? Most of this news about Amazons store is just noise that distracts investors from Amazons real force.

As Ill show, Amazon is running an operating system that powers some of todays most important technologies such as virtual reality, machine learning, and even quantum computing. Behind the scenes, it is utilized by over a million companiesincluding tech giants Apple AAPL , Netflix NFLX , and Facebook FB .

This is Amazons key and ever-growing moneymaker that has been driving Amazon stock to the moon. But before I pull the curtains, lets step back for a moment.

First, how Amazon makes moneyfor real

For all the online shopping fuss, Amazon doesn't earn much from its store. Yes, Amazon.com AMZN flips hundreds of billions of dollars worth of products every yearand its revenues are on a tear. But Amazon turns only a sliver of that into profits.

In the past year, Amazons store generated a record $282 billion in revenue from Amazon.com. That translated to just $5.6 billion in profitskeep in mind that was Amazon.coms most profitable year ever.

Meanwhile, most of Amazons profits came from the lesser-known side of its business called Amazon Web Services (AWS), as you can see below:

Amazon's profits from AWS vs Amazon.com

Its Amazons cloud arm that is serving over a million companies across the world. You may have heard that AWS has something to do with storing data in the cloud. But its much,muchmore than that.

AWS is the operating system of the internet

To get an idea of how AWS works, take your computer as an example.

Like every other computer, it runs on an operating system such as Windows or MacOS, which comes with a set of programs. This software puts your computer resources to use and helps you carry out daily taskssuch as sending emails or sorting out your files.

Now, think of AWS as an operating system thats running not one, but hundreds of thousands of big computers (in tech lingo: servers). It gives companies nearly unlimited computing power and storageas well as tools to build and run their software on the internet.

The difference is that these big computers sit in Amazons warehouses. And companies work on them remotelyor via the cloud. In other words, AWS is like the operating system of the internet.

Amazons operating system now powers AI, blockchain, and other next-gen technologies

In 2003, when Amazons AWS first started out, it offered only a couple of basic cloud services for storage and mail. Today, this system offers an unmatched set of 175+ tools that help companies build software harnesses todays top technologies.

The list includes blockchain, VR, machine learning (AI), quantum computing, augmented reality (AR), and other technologies that are the building blocks of todays internet.

For example, Netflix is using AWS for more than simply storing and streaming its shows on the internet. Its also employing AWS machine learning technology to recommend movies and shows to you.

Youve also probably heard of Slack (WORK), the most popular messaging app for business. Slack recently announced it will use Amazons media technology to introduce video and audio calls on its app.

And its not just tech companies that are utilizing Amazons AWS tools.

Take GE Power. The worlds energy leader is using AWS analytics technology to store and sift through avalanches of data from its plants. Or Fidelity. Americas mutual fund giant experiments with Amazons VR technology to build VR chat rooms for its clients.

In a picture, Amazons AWS works like this:

How Amazon's AWS powers the internet

Amazons AWS is earning more and more... and more

Amazon is not the only company running a cloud service. Google, Microsoft MSFT , Alibibaba, IBM IBM , and other tech giants are all duking it out for a slice of this lucrative business. But Amazon is the biggest and most feature-rich.

Today, Amazon controls 33% of the market, leaving its closest competitors Microsoft (2nd with 18%) and Google (3rd with 9%) far behind in the dust. That means nearly one third of the internet is running on Amazons AWS.

And it doesnt appear that Amazon will step down from its cloud throne anytime soon. Amazons sales from AWS soared 10X in the past six years. And last year, Amazon reported a bigger sales gain from AWS (dollar-wise) than any other cloud company.

Heres the main takeaway for investors

If you are looking into Amazon stock, dont get caught up in the online shopping fuss.

For years, AWS has been the linchpin of Amazons business. And this invisible side of Amazon is where Amazons largest gears turn.

Problem is, AWS is like a black box. Amazon reports very little on its operations. So if you want to dig deeper, youll have to do your own research.

Youll also have to weigh a couple of risks before putting your money into Amazon stock:

Other than that, Amazon is an outstanding stock, killing it in one of the most lucrative businesses on the planet. And its proven to be resilient to Covid, whose spread could hit the markers again.

Get investing tips that make you go Hmm...

Every week, I put out a big picture story to help explain whats driving the markets. Subscribe here to get my analysis and stock picks right in your inbox.

Read more:
How Amazon Quietly Powers The Internet - Forbes

Read More..

How Will Greece Be Impacted By Cryptocurrency? – GreekCityTimes.com

Over the last decade, Greece has taken centre stage in the news when it comes to bailouts from the EU, increasingly gaining a reputation worldwide as having a weakened economy, rising debts, lower pensions, continued high unemployment among young people and the rife polarisation in politics and leadership, leaving many Greeks frustrated with the current systems in place.

Greece is now also under attack from Turkey, with constant threats from its neighbor over the continued altercations within the areas of gas-rich waters in the Eastern Mediterranean. To top it all off, now theres COVID-19 to deal with. This has hit Greece where it hurts most, its tourism industry.

Greece had over360,000 tourists enter the country last year alone, with numbers drastically down this year due to COVID-19. For a country which is heavily reliant on its glistening tourism industry, future Greece cannot just rely on tourism to financially sustain itself moving forward. It needs another mean of currency, especially with the euro continually falling to new lows.

In late 2019, the Greek government irrevocably announced that it would require digital tax receipts from all of its citizens, in an effort to combat otherwise untraceable cash transactions. Its not a secret that Greeks love to use cash for everything.

CoinDeskreported that These extra banking measures will largely affect the lower and middle classes who rely on Greek banks for their everyday business, not the wealthy, who store the majority of their collective wealth in foreign banks.

Many economists and analysts have condemned Greeces increasing reliance on higher tax rates. Inadvertently, many financial experts believe this will result in catastrophic cash flow issues for Greeces shrinking middle class, who as mentioned above, rely on cash; driving a larger wedge between the ultra-rich and the underprivileged. In a nutshell, the new banking rules which aim to carve out cash use, only end up hurting the poverty-stricken population of Greece.

So, with the new rules came problems. And problems need a solution. With a frappe in one hand and a smartphone in the other, the prudent Greek had to find a way around these new rules. And so, began the interest in cryptocurrency. But in an increasingly volatile economy, can cryptocurrency really help Greece?

Ask the average Greek citizen what Bitcoin is, and chances are theyll look a little confused. The average Greek citizen wont even know what cryptocurrency is. Greece is lagging in technological enhancement, ranking 3rd from the bottom of the list,according to the European Commission.Many Greeks dont know how to invest their money, let alone save their money. The ongoing financial crisis has brought this issue to a new light. So, what drove the Greek people to begin incorporating cryptocurrency into their lives? Youve already read the main clue why, but lets delve deeper.

Greek tech entrepreneur Andreas M. Antonopoulos explains it like this. In a highly publicised interview withGarden of Crypto, he stated that when the Greek banks shut down in the middle of the financial crisis in 2015, the public sought a safe alternative on the internet, starting Greeces cryptocurrency frenzy. Crypto thus became a haven for assets as the banks became more volatile and less safe to store assets.

Similar to many other struggling economies in the modern-day arena of finance, countries such as Venezuela andZimbabwehave begun utilising cryptocurrency as a form of resistance to an economy mired in controversy, corruption, and debt, Mr Antonopoulos stated.

In May this year,Bitcoin.comreported that the interest in cryptocurrency from Greek women had grown 163.67 per cent.!

This was the highest percentage in all of Europe in this particular study. The number of Bitcoin ATMs in Greece also increased to at least five around the country.

With Greeces unemployment rate sittingat 17 per centand the current pandemic not looking like itll magically disappear anytime soon, many Greeks are beginning to look for alternatives to the current financial system. They are continuing to seek solace in digital currencies. There are Facebook groups, such as theBitcoin Community Greeceand Cryptocurrency Greece, whos aim is to educate the Greek population on the investment opportunities within cryptocurrency. These groups have gained much popularity, with Bitcoin Community Greece attaining nearly 5000 members to date.

In conclusion, this displays that Greeks are taking cryptocurrency much more seriously since it first started gaining popularity in the height of the financial crisis in 2014. Could this lead to a potential cure from Greeces ailment with debt? The ongoing the bailouts from the EU, incorporated with cryptocurrency, could potentially see Greece improving financially and economically over time.

The views expressed by the author does not necessarily reflect those of Greek City Times.

See the original post:
How Will Greece Be Impacted By Cryptocurrency? - GreekCityTimes.com

Read More..

The Rise and Fall of a Tribal Cryptocurrency – hackernoon.com

@mina.downMina Down

I am a researcher and writer interested in new technologies that contribute to the social good.

MazaCoin is a cryptocurrency that tried to bring together two very different communities: cryptocurrency maximalists and a North American indigenous tribe looking to assert its sovereignty.

Over the past several decades, financial and information technologies have evolved from corporate-dominated finance and international trade to include microlending and person-to-person digital financial transfers. Since the development of Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies have come to play an increasingly important role in this evolution.

Opinions on the development of cryptocurrency run the gamut fromhypercriticalhand-wringing about the traditional value of trust, to the techno-libertarianism associated with Silicon Valley.

Given the wide variety of views, it is interesting to discover a project that tried to bridge two seemingly unrelated ideologies: the libertarian and individualistic ethos of cryptocurrency, and an indigenous tribal communitys desire to assert their independence from the U.S. government.

MazaCoin launched officially on February 20th, 2014 andproclaimeditself to be a sovereign altcoin for native Americans.Media reportscalled MazaCoin as a Bitcoin spinoff that had been adopted by tribes in the U.S. as a national currency. On February 27th, 2014, the entrepreneur behind MazaCoin, Payu Harriscalledit the national currency of theLakota Nationof the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.

Harris himself claimed to be a member of the Lakota Nation. An article inForbesevendescribedhim as a Lakota chief. In PR for the MazaCoin project, Harris talked about the crushing poverty of the Lakota, whose reservation is located in the second poorest county in the United States. HeclaimedMazaCoin would be a way for the Lakota to achieve economic independence:

Harrisinsistedas many as 50% of reservation merchants would buy into the system within the first 12 months and that Mazacoin would be standard for all indigenous communities in the world within 10 years.

Between February and March 2014, Harris did many interviews. During that time MazaCoin was also trading well on exchanges, branded using the image of a Native American tribes resistance against the federal government. The story was a good fit with progressive eager to support an oppressed groups claim for sovereignty. It equally fit capitalist narratives of self-reliance, libertarianism, and anti-government feeling.

However, a different picture of Mazacoin quickly emerged. On March 7th, 2014,Native Sun Newsran anarticlestating:

The article reported that whileForbesidentified Payu Harris as a chief of the Lakota at Pine Ridge, his name did not appear anywhere on the tribes membership rolls. Word spread through online forums and in the Pine Ridge community that Harris had overstepped. Speculation started that he might be a con artist.

Less than two weeks after theNative Sun Newsarticle, MazaCoins value collapsed. A few weeks later, the project was declaredall but dead. Shortly after, MazaCoins website and social media accounts were deleted.

In 2015, the project returned, rebranded as simply Maza. Harrisclaimedthe coin was making a comeback and the open source code was moved to GitHub. New PR material was released that described it as a tribal cryptocurrency more broadly, not specifically for the Lakota. Unlike the original Website, there are no declarations of sovereignty. Instead, Maza is described as a ticketing solution for Native and non-Native events, Concerts, shows, Powwows, and even Hotel/Resort Booking. Talk is limited to economics with no explicit political dimension.

It appears the audience for Maza was no longer intended to be the Pine Ridge Oglala Lakota but an alt-currency audience looking for investment opportunities. However, there was still little public information available about the development team or sponsors. The coin failed to take off. Currently, Maza is not listed on any exchanges.

Since Karl Marx first described how capitalism creates different social classes, scholars have understood that financial technologies embody social relations. The design of these technologies, from cash to publicly-traded corporate securities to newer cryptocurrency innovations, all reflect social values. For example, the Bitcoin narrative is highly individualistic, rooted in libertarian notions of individual freedom in opposition to corrupt and outdated governmental institutions.

At the same time, however, cryptocurrencies require high-level computer skills and a lot of computational and electrical power to maintain. Despite the claims of decentralization and democratic control, therefore, there is something highly elitist about cryptocurrency in that it requires a highly specialized technocratic class (ie. developers) beyond the reach of political institutions.

What is interesting about MazaCoin is the early discussion of it combined these two visions in various ways: first, in ground-up calls for sovereignty by non-elites and a high-profile individual leader; second, in anti-government rhetoric and an apparent (tribal)governmental endorsement; third, in the promise of sophisticated technology in a community noted for its poverty.

This ideological collision is evident on Mazas web site:

While the underlying technology and ideology of trustless peer-to-peer economics can appeal to financial elites and amateur investors alike, it would seem cryptocurrency and the economic needs of the Lakota were incompatible. While MazaCoin was able to attract initial investor interest, its failure was in not connecting with the needs of its intended beneficiaries.

Background research for this article can be foundhere.

Subscribe to get your daily round-up of top tech stories!

More:
The Rise and Fall of a Tribal Cryptocurrency - hackernoon.com

Read More..