>Not allowing the players to come into the game with entangled states is really, really strange.
I think i saw such a warning on a casino door in LV.
amelius•42m ago
How did they check?
moktonar•1h ago
I find that cases like this represent one of the biggest problems in today’s research: once someone falsifies something, an entire branch of research gets cut off completely as nobody wants to pursue that path anymore, understandably. But if the “proof” is in fact wrong, then you actually just hid a big part of the research surface to everybody. And usually that’s also where progress is made: when, despite proof, research is pursued because of a gut feeling. Stay skeptic!
catigula•33m ago
Quantum computing research feels like one of those things whose greatest effort would likely be classified research. In fact, you could argue the article in the OP looks like well-poisoning based on the author's conclusions.
terminalbraid•27m ago
What was wrong with the proof in this case? The paper explicitly states and acknowledges the issue raised by this article before the author was aware of it. The author of the article just contends that it is an experimental issue to set up unentangled initial states which are required for the experiment, and indeed someone who was going to perform the experiment needs to convincing demonstrate the assumptions are met.
The author even admits this "is better than doing no test at all".
trhway•1h ago
I think i saw such a warning on a casino door in LV.
amelius•42m ago