🚨 Scientists turned one of quantum physics’ strangest mysteries into an image For decades, quantum entanglement existed mostly as equations, measurements and abstract ideas. Then researchers did something remarkable: they **reconstructed the quantum state of two entangled photons and turned the information into a visual pattern**. The result looked almost like a colorful **Yin-Yang symbol**. But the photons were not photographed as if they were physically connected. The image was a mathematical reconstruction based on measurements of their shared quantum state. Entangled particles can behave in deeply connected ways, showing correlations that classical physics cannot fully explain. Now, researchers can actually **visualize information about that strange relationship**. It may look like art—but behind those colors is a mathematical picture of one of nature’s most mysterious quantum phenomena. **Source:** Toninelli, E., et al. *Experimental reconstruction of the quantum state of two entangled photons.* **Nature Communications.**

Can gravity draw? What happens when a simple physical law produces forms no one has designed? Jared S. Tarbell's @jaredstarbell Gravity (2026) follows Newton's law of attraction, but no predetermined composition. 🧵↓

If we build the demodulator then ask and listen, will it speak, and if so, in what manner and what might it say?

Compare Jack Sarfatti's physics of consciousness to Frederico Faggin's 15 web pages Jack Sarfatti and Federico Faggin both delve into the intersection of quantum physics and consciousness, but their approaches and conclusions differ significantly due to their unique backgrounds and theoretical frameworks. Jack Sarfatti's Perspective: Quantum Consciousness: Sarfatti's work on "post-quantum physics" suggests that consciousness exists at a level beyond the physical dimensions of space and time, interacting with the material world through what he describes as synchronicity rather than causality. He posits that consciousness might be a non-material process that is integral to understanding quantum mechanics, where quantum probability waves might be influenced or directed by consciousness. Technological Implication: Sarfatti proposes that his model could eventually lead to the development of conscious computer chips, suggesting a practical application where quantum mechanics and consciousness intersect in technology. Physical but Non-Material: He views consciousness as a physical phenomenon in the sense that it interacts with the physical world, yet it is not composed of conventional matter or energy, thereby challenging the traditional materialistic understanding of consciousness. Federico Faggin's Perspective: Consciousness as Fundamental: Faggin argues that consciousness and free will are not emergent properties of the brain but fundamental aspects of reality itself. His theory, termed "Quantum Information Panpsychism" (QIP), suggests that quantum fields are inherently conscious and possess free will. Consciousness here is seen as a quantum phenomenon, with the physical world being an expression or symbol of this deeper reality. No Conscious Computers: Contrary to Sarfatti, Faggin believes that consciousness cannot be replicated by classical deterministic systems like computers. Jack Elon's GROK AI is mistaken. I agree with Faggin that classical computers cannot be conscious. He emphasizes that consciousness requires non-algorithmic free will and qualia, which digital computers inherently lack due to their basis in classical physics. Idealist Model: Faggin's model leans towards idealism, where the nature of reality is fundamentally mental or spiritual rather than material. He suggests that the physical phenomena we observe are a sort of interface or symbolic representation of a more profound, conscious reality. Comparative Analysis: Nature of Consciousness: While both see consciousness as tied to quantum mechanics, Sarfatti's model suggests consciousness as an external influencer of quantum phenomena, whereas Faggin places consciousness at the very foundation of quantum fields, making it the substrate from which physical reality emerges. Technological Feasibility: Sarfatti envisions a future where technology might harness or mimic consciousness, contrasting with Faggin's view that true consciousness cannot be artificially created by classical systems. Jack: Same AI Straw man error. Faggin and I agree on this. Technological Feasibility: Sarfatti envisions a future where technology might harness or mimic consciousness, contrasting with Faggin's view that classical systems cannot artificially create true consciousness.where consciousness is the primary reality from which all else emerges. Jack: Again it's post-quantum computers that are conscious not classical computers. Empirical Testing: Both propose frameworks that might yield testable predictions, but Faggin's approach with the Federico and Elvia Faggin Foundation actively seeks to support research that might empirically validate his theory, particularly through the new mathematical theory of consciousness. In summary, while both physicists explore the quantum-consciousness nexus, their interpretations, implications for technology, and philosophical stances diverge significantly, reflecting their distinct personal journeys and scientific insights into the nature of reality and consciousness.

The main Intel 4004 architect is Frederico Faggin @fedefaggin who did the MOS silicon gate technology ( SGT ) work. The team at Intel also included Ted Hoff and Stanley Mazor. But without Masatoshi Shima‘s aid in logic design, the project could not be completed. SGT pics below…

It’s the world’s first CPU! The metal layer is very prominent on this 4-bit chip. With the light coming from the side, we can only see the reflections. The Intel logo, however, is really neat and thanks to Frederico Faggin, who lead the project, we have a small signature (F.F.)!

I really want to just build a new genre of game that brings Gen X and a few Millennials back to looking forward to gaming again. I’m aiming for you to be able to get lost in this world for over 400+ hours. Top down RPG, Massive Open World Exploration, RTS. Multiple endings, choices matter. Not a sandbox, but play how YOU want to play. Save your family or venture off on your own, save yourself, and leave them to their fate?

Soon I’ll unveil an app I’ve been quietly building. An extremely fun way for everyone to explore a #quantum physics question we ask in the @EntropicScience collective: does #consciousness leave a mark on "chance"? X handle change coming. Same person. New chapter. Stay close

0x596f7520616e642049203d2055490d0a456e65726779203d204c6f6f73680d0a546172676574203d204e6f76656c74790d0a446f2074686520756e6578706563746564

Satoshi knew the way. He invented the mechanism and introduced it into #Bitcoin Core in 2010. Time to take off the blindfold.

There is another, better way, whereby Bitcoin can secure the world from the bottom of the stack.

New world of #BitcoinL2 is rife with an idea to settle rollup proofs directly on Bitcoin's chain. ?A shortsighted holdover of trying to appeal to simpler maxi mentality, purely for marketing purposes? Maxi's aren't steering. Wrong move, and not even technically viable in big pic.

Cutting-edge analog sensors

Imagine every driver in Los Angeles using one of these. What a horror show.

Maybe accepted chronology is questionable and we humans today know very little of our own real history beyond the past few hundred years.

Does that make #ETH a security?

Long response, but after all it is indeed a big question. Grab your favorite hot drink. First off, isn't really that simplistic. Multiple points to compare, and different characteristics can be more or less ideal for different use cases. That said, the design of PoDA and the L1 DA it provides on mainnet today arguably has advantages for a wider range of use cases than Eth's P-DS work-in-progress, for higher-value uses, and especially for users who do not wish to rely wholly upon POS-based consensus. • No sharding required: Model can facilitate much greater censorship resistance than is possible w/ sharding. Every PoDA node processes blobs fully. There are implementation peculiarities with sharding, but generally around supermajority of offline nodes (or even much less), it cannot guarantee DA. • More efficient Keccak-based blobs. No need for KZG committments because no need for sharding. • Inherently performant due to efficiency • Fewer attack vectors • Blob hashes on L1 are anchored in Bitcoin AUXPOW at >50% of total Bitcoin network hashrate, plus secured against 51% attack through additive multi-quorum finality on top. This can make EVM L2s attractive for the Bitcoin ecosystem as identical security assumptions exist at the bottom of the stack. • Combined strengths of onchain provability (hash) with offchain cost efficiency (archive). Especially nice for archivers opting for IPFS via Filecoin/Lighthouse, or other storage solutions that involve chain consensus. • DA cost of course depends on payload, but even under heavy payloads it is extremely low cost. At a baseline payload of 1,800 OP-based system transactions, PoDA cost comes in much lower than $0.01 USD. Contrast to what Optimism pays today using calldata, at ~1 ETH per hour, and I also guarantee it will still be much lower cost than P-DS. • Onchain hashes are UTXO & quantum safe, yet PoDA serves DA to EVM layers • Mechanically simple DA-focused fee market. No added complexity to speak of to achieve appropriate fee market. • Data is very simple to reproduce and check • Can prune data much quicker, and tie in pruning with finality + 6 hours. Another factor that helps keep L1 full nodes light-weight, easy to sync, and able to use off-the-shelf equipment for much longer, fostering decentralization. Overall it's a very simple system and doesn't add much complexity. Probably a sigh of relief compared to an Ethereum that will become even more complex with P-DS.

"Avoid premature optimization" is #wisdom for #engineers. But it can go too far, or become an excuse, or be totally out-of-place. Also, I've seen its strongest advocates buckle without realizing it, supporting pseudo-solutions that are opportunistic within market pressures, that end up digging a deeper hole in the big picture. That high-horse died.

This is the chat of a fairly popular gaming brand that advertised themselves as aiming for web3 tokenized utility. This is "the industry". "He's right you know"