Major milestone in quantum internet demoed in Berlin, and separately by Cisco in New York.

“Teleporting quantum information is now a practical reality,” asserts Deutsche Telekom. The firm’s T‑Labs used commercially available Qunnect hardware to demo quantum teleportation over 30km of live, commercial Berlin fiber, running alongside classical internet traffic. In an email to Tom’s Hardware, Deutsche Telekom’s PR folks said that Cisco also ran the same hardware and demo process to connect data centers in NYC.

  • rah@hilariouschaos.comEnglish
    3·
    7 hours ago

    what actually makes consciousness in a brain is (hypothetically, technically) microtubules

    This is only a proposed theory, it’s very far from accepted fact.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      7 hours ago

      This is only a proposed theory, it’s very far from accepted fact.

      Which is why I said hypothetically…

      Although up until a year ago the very idea that quantum entanglement could happen in the brain was treated as a joke for like 30 years and that’s why the larger theory was instantly dismissed…

      Which is why I added the “technically” as well.

      If we’re being technical even gravity is just a theory. But it’s not like being deny the existence of gravity…

      • rah@hilariouschaos.comEnglish
        3·
        6 hours ago

        Which is why I said hypothetically…

        I think you may have misused the word “hypothetically” then.

        up until a year ago the very idea that quantum entanglement could happen in the brain was treated as a joke for like 30 years

        I was taught Orch OR theory at university about 17 years ago.

        that’s why the larger theory was instantly dismissed

        Instantly dismissed by who? It’s a new theory, there will always be detractors and critics of new theories (see, for example: oxygen theory of combustion). That’s very different from being “instantly dismissed”.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
          11·
          6 hours ago

          I think you may have misused the word “hypothetically” then

          I 100% did

          I was taught Orch OR theory at university about 17 years ago

          Then you were also taught that there was no way the brain could maintain sustained quantum entanglement at the same time.

          It’s a new theory

          I mean, frame of reference…

          You said you learned it 17 years ago, that’s not very “new”.

          But compared to any other science, all of psychology is incredibly “new”.

          I’m multitasking bro, this ain’t that deep

          • rah@hilariouschaos.comEnglish
            21·
            6 hours ago

            Then you were also taught that there was no way the brain could maintain sustained quantum entanglement

            No. I’ve no idea what could have possibly brought you to that conclusion.

            Please don’t try to tell me what brought you to that conclusion while multitasking. For that matter, please don’t try to tell me at all.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
              12·
              6 hours ago

              No. I’ve no idea what could have possibly brought you to that conclusion

              Luckily it’s easy to find research from that period:

              This model requires that the tubulin is able to switch between alternative conformational states in a coherent manner, and that this process be rapid on the physiological time scale. Here, the biological feasibility of the Orch OR proposal is examined in light of recent experimental studies on microtubule assembly and dynamics. It is shown that the tubulins do not possess essential properties required for the Orch OR proposal, as originally proposed, to hold. Further, we consider also recent progress in the understanding of the long-lived coherent motions in biological systems, a feature critical to Orch OR, and show that no reformation of the proposal based on known physical paradigms could lead to quantum computing within microtubules. Hence, the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness.

              https://journals.aps.org/pre/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevE.80.021912

              I rember that time as well, although it seems my memory is better than yours, despite you being waaaaaaay more confident.

              If you have further questions tho, ask someone else. Good luck finding someone better equiped to talk about this stuff tho. Every days another burnt bridge, right?

              • rah@hilariouschaos.comEnglish
                2·
                6 hours ago

                Hence, the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness.

                One paper claiming that the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness does not mean that the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness.

                it seems my memory is better than yours

                I’m not sure why you think my memory is in any way relevant.

                Published 13 August, 2009

                There’s a significant journey from being published in a paper to being taught in classes. I was taught Orch OR somewhere between 2008 and 2010 so there’s no reason to think memory comes into it.