• Home
  • Science and Technology

Google Researchers Have Reportedly Achieved “Quantum Supremacy”


Editor's Note: Oh great. Google has/owns this technology!? They already control the vast majority of information flowing across the internet. Now they will soon be able to process/manipulate it all in real-time like never before. From the sound of it, almost instantaneously. If Google is a danger to our freedom now, imagine what it will do once it has this technology in place!

 

TechnologyReview.com

The news:
According to a report in the Financial Times, a team of researchers from Google led by John Martinis have demonstrated quantum supremacy for the first time. This is the point at which a quantum computer is shown to be capable of performing a task that’s beyond the reach of even the most powerful conventional supercomputer. The claim appeared in a paper that was posted on a NASA website, but the publication was then taken down. Google did not respond to a request for comment from MIT Technology Review.

Why NASA? Google struck an agreement last year to use supercomputers available to NASA as benchmarks for its supremacy experiments. According to the Financial Times report, the paper said that Google’s quantum processor was able to perform a calculation in three minutes and 20 seconds that would take today’s most advanced supercomputer, known as Summit, around 10,000 years. In the paper, the researchers said that, to their knowledge, the experiment “marks the first computation that can only be performed on a quantum processor.”

Quantum speed up: Quantum machines are so powerful because they harness quantum bits, or qubits. Unlike classical bits, which are either a 1 or a 0, qubits can be in a kind of combination of both at the same time. Thanks to other quantum phenomena, which are described in our explainer here, quantum computers can crunch large amounts of data in parallel that conventional machines have to work through sequentially. Scientists have been working for years to demonstrate that the machines can definitively outperform conventional ones.

How significant is this milestone? Very. In a discussion of quantum computing at MIT Technology Review’s EmTech conference in Cambridge, Massachusetts this week before news of Google’s paper came out, Will Oliver, an MIT professor and quantum specialist, likened the computing milestone to the first flight of the Wright brothers at Kitty Hawk in aviation. He said it would give added impetus to research in the field, which should help quantum machines achieve their promise more quickly. Their immense processing power could ultimately help researchers and companies discover new drugs and materials, create more efficient supply chains, and turbocharge AI.

But, but: It’s not clear what task Google’s quantum machine was working on, but it’s likely to be a very narrow one. In an emailed comment to MIT Technology Review, Dario Gil of IBM, which is also working on quantum computers, says an experiment that was probably designed around a very narrow quantum sampling problem doesn’t mean the machines will rule the roost. “In fact quantum computers will never reign ‘supreme’ over classical ones,” says Gil, “but will work in concert with them, since each have their specific strengths.” For many problems, classical computers will remain the best tool to use.

And another but: Quantum computers are still a long way from being ready for mainstream use. The machines are notoriously prone to errors, because even the slightest change in temperature or tiny vibration can destroy the delicate state of qubits. Researchers are working on machines that will be easier to build, manage, and scale, and some computers are now available via the computing cloud. But it could still be many years before quantum computers that can tackle a wide range of problems are widely available.

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Brussels Halts 5G Deployment Indefinitely

5G project, says authorities, not compatible with radiation safety standards



NaturalNews.com

In the next year, preliminary 5G networks are set to roll out in China, the United States, South Korea, and Japan. In the next seven years, operators are projected to invest over $1 trillion to expand 5G wireless technology. With 5G, the telecom industry promises instant connectivity, paving the way for “smart cities.” 5G is a Big Tech dream come true – a data collection boon that will tie all internet-connected devices together and increase connectivity speeds up to 1000 times greater than existing 4G networks. As investors scramble to get a piece of the 5G pie, the technology is not projected for deployment in every first-world country, nor will it be accepted by every big city.
 

Brussels to halt 5G rollout over severe human health risks

In fact, the Minister of the Government of the Brussels-Capital Region, Céline Fremault, has vowed to halt 5G deployment. “The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit,” states Fremault in an interview with L’Echo. “I cannot welcome such technology if the radiation standards, which must protect the citizen, are not respected, 5G or not.”

No exceptions will be made in Brussels. Fremault warns that 5G violates Belgian radiation safety standards. Fremault is heeding the warning of over 240 scientists and doctors from over 41 nations who have published research documenting the harmful effects of 5G radiation on all biological life. These scientists have appealed to the United Nations, calling for a moratorium on 5G. The adverse effects of radio-frequency and millimeter waves on human and environmental health are well documented. 5G radiation has been shown to cause changes in bacterial growth, neuropyshiatric effects, DNA damage, and even cancer. Permissive countries (that sacrifice the health of their population) only consider the thermal effects of 5G. There’s much more to 5G radiation than that.
 

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

20,000 Satellites for 5G to be Launched Sending Focused Beams of Intense Microwave Radiation Over Entire Earth


By John P. Thomas
Health Impact News

Public attention about 5G has been focused on the plans of telecom companies to install millions of small cell towers on electric utility poles, on public buildings and schools, on bus stop shelters, in public parks, and anywhere they want in national parks and on federally owned land.

In local urban communities there would be a cell tower approximately every 500 feet along every street.

As bad as these small cell towers might seem from the standpoint of constant exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation in close proximity to the source, perhaps an even more alarming prospect will be the beaming of millimeter length microwaves at the earth from thousands of new communication satellites.

The FCC gave approval to SpaceX on March 29, 2018, to launch 4,425 satellites into low orbit around the Earth. [1]

The total number of satellites that is expected to be put into low and high orbit by several companies will be 20,000 satellites. [1]
 

5G will use Phased Array Antennas to shoot Beams of Radiation at Cell Phones

These satellites will use the same type of phased array antennas as will be used by the ground-based 5G systems.

This means that they will send tightly focused beams of intense microwave radiation at each specific 5G device that is on the Earth and each device will send a beam of radiation back to the satellite. [2]

Previous generations of RF cellular communication used large antennas to send a blanket of radiation in all directions. The lower frequencies they used and the broad distribution of microwaves limited the numbers of cellular devices that could connect through an individual tall tower.

The much shorter length microwaves used for 5G will make it possible to use small phased array antennas to send and receive signals. 

Phased array antennas consist of clusters of hundreds of tiny antennas that work together to shoot a ray of energy at a target just like a bullet. A cluster of these tiny antennas can be arranged in a 4 inch by 4 inch matrix.

The rays of microwaves they produce will be strong enough to pass through walls and human bodies. If they were not strong enough to do this, then everyone with a 5G smartphone would have to stand outside when using the devices. [2]

Each 5G product will also have multiple phased array antennas which will be used to create a powerful beam of radiation back to the 5G devices mounted on electrical utility poles or toward a specific satellite in space.

These beams of radiation will also need to be strong enough to pass through walls and human flesh such as a hand or head to reach the intended destination. [2]

This means that if you are in a crowded location, such as an airport or on a train, there will be hundreds if not thousands of invisible beams of radiation flying through the environment at the speed of light.

As people move in that environment, their bodies will be penetrated by numerous beams of radiation as they walk or as other people walk around them with their 5G smartphones. [2] 

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Dangers of 5G Wireless Technology To Become Major Senate Issue

Health hazards being discussed more openly


https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/at-senate-commerce-hearing-blumenthal-raises-concerns-on-5g-wireless-technologys-potential-health-risksSenate.gov

At Senate Commerce Hearing, Blumenthal Raises Concerns on 5G Wireless Technology's Potential Health Risks.
 

Blumenthal criticizes the FCC & FDA for inadequate answers on outstanding public health questions

Wireless carriers concede they are not aware of any independent scientific studies on safety of 5G technologies

[WASHINGTON, DC]— During today’s Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing on the future of 5G wireless technology and their impact on the American people and economy, U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) raised concerns with the lack of any scientific research and data on the technology’s potential health risks. The full video of Blumenthal’s statement and exchange with industry representatives can be found here.  

Blumenthal blasted the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—government agencies jointly-responsible for ensuring that cellphone technologies are safe to use—for failing to conduct any research into the safety of 5G technology, and instead, engaging in bureaucratic finger-pointing and deferring to industry.

In December 2018, Blumenthal and U.S. Representative Anna G. Eshoo (CA-18) sent a letter to FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr seeking answers regarding potential health risks posed by new 5G wireless technology. At today’s hearing, Blumenthal criticized Carr for failing to provide answers, and instead, just echoing, “the general statements of the FDA, which shares regulatory responsibility for cell phones with the FCC.”  Blumenthal also decried the FDA’s statements as “pretty unsatisfactory.”  A PDF of Carr’s complete response is available here.

During an exchange with wireless industry representatives, Blumenthal asked them whether they have supported research on the safety of 5G technology and potential links between radiofrequency and cancer, and the industry representatives conceded they have not.

“If you go to the FDA website, there basically is a cursory and superficial citation to existing scientific data saying ‘The FDA has urged the cell phone industry to take a number of steps, including support additional research on possible biological effects of radio frequency fields for the type of signals emitted by cell phones.’ I believe that Americans deserve to know what the health effects are, not to pre-judge what scientific studies may show, and they also deserve a commitment to do the research on outstanding questions,” said Blumenthal.  “So my question for you: How much money has the industry committed to supporting additional independent research—I stress independent—research? Is that independent research ongoing? Has any been completed? Where can consumers look for it? And we’re talking about research on the biological effects of this new technology.”

At the end of the exchange, Blumenthal concluded, “So there really is no research ongoing.  We’re kind of flying blind here, as far as health and safety is concerned.”

In November 2018, the National Toxicology Program released the final results of the longest and most expensive study to date on cellphones and cancer. Those studies found “some evidence” of a link to cancer, at least in male rats. However, the study only focused on the risks associated with 2G and 3G cell phones. The latest 5G wireless technology relies on the deployment of many more new antennas and transmitters that are clustered lower to the ground and closer to homes and schools. There has been even more limited research with respect to the health ramifications of 5G technology, and the FCC has thus far failed to adequately explain how they have determined 5G is safe.

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Inside A Warehouse Where Thousands Of Robots Pack Groceries


Ocado's new warehouse has thousands of robots zooming around a grid system to pack groceries. The thousands of robots can process 65,000 orders every week. They communicate on a 4G network to avoid bumping into each other. Is this the future of retail?

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Google CEO Unveils New Era of Robots That Sound Like Humans


By Seung Lee
MercutyNews.com

MOUNTAIN VIEW — Google CEO Sundar Pichai broke a new barrier in artificial intelligence technology Tuesday when he unveiled a voice assistant that sounds exactly like a human voice.

At the I/O developers conference, Pichai introduced Google Duplex, which allows the Assistant to speak with human-like cadence and includes artificial intelligence that is able to comprehend context and unclear answers.

Pichai demonstrated Duplex’s ability by having Assistant make reservations with a restaurant and a hair salon in two recorded phone calls. The receivers of the calls seemed to have no idea they were speaking to an AI voice. In the phone calls, Google Assistant said “ums” and “uhs” to make itself sound more human. In its phone call with the restaurant, where it was too busy to book a reservation, Google Assistant was able to naturally respond to questions and remarks made in a thick accent.

 

 
 
 

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Book Details Al Gore’s Quest To Become World’s First ‘Carbon Billionaire’

‘Lavishly’ profited off climate lobbying


 

 

 

 

By: Marc Morano
Climate
Depot

 

Book Chapter Excerpt:

Making Out like a Bandit

And it’s not just universities, professors, and green organizations that have reaped financial benefits from the climate panic. Former vice president Al Gore has done quite well for himself, too. As Bloomberg News reported, “In the last personal finance report he filed as vice president, Gore disclosed on May 22, 2000, that the value of his assets totaled between $780,000 and $1.9 million.”

Buy by 2007, Gore’s wealth had skyrocketed. By that point he had a net worth “well in excess” of $100 million, including pre–public offering Google stock options, according to an article at Fast Company. MIT scientist Richard Lindzen declared that Gore wanted to become the world’s first “carbon billionaire.” After the Obama administration bloated climate and energy stimulus packages, Gore was on the path to that achievement.

By 2008, Gore was so flush that he announced a $300 million campaign to promote climate fears and so-called solutions. And he just kept raking it in. According to a 2012 Washington Post report, “14 green-tech firms in which Gore invested received or directly benefited from more than $2.5 billion in loans, grants and tax breaks, part of Obama’s historic push to seed a U.S. renewable-energy industry with public money.”

The Post explained that Gore “benefited from a powerful resume and a constellation of friends in the investment world and in Washington. And four years ago, his portfolio aligned smoothly with the agenda of an incoming administration and its plan to spend billions in stimulus funds on alternative energy. The recovering politician was pushing the right cause at the perfect time. Gore’s orbit extended deeply into the administration, with several former aides winning senior clean-energy posts.”

Republican Congressman Fred Upton of Michigan, the chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee, has been a critic of Gore’s profiting off the taxpayer funds using his government connections. Gore’s portfolio “is reflective of a disturbing pattern that those closest to the president [Obama] have been rewarded with billions of taxpayer dollars and benefited from the administration’s green bonanza in the rush to spend stimulus cash.”

Gore was essentially either a founder, a member, or a partner in a whole wide range of groups that were profiting or poised to profit from a green energy stimulus and federally mandated carbon trading schemes if they became law. Gore would have personally benefited if the carbon cap-and-trade bill he supported had become law. The media never treated his Congressional testimony in support of the climate bills for what it actually was—a former vice president supporting legislation that would make him richer. These reports prompted one sarcastic skeptic to suggest, “Maybe Al Gore Should Be the Subject of a RICO Investigation.”

The power of carbon trading schemes to enrich politicians and corrupt politics is one reason that environmental guru James Lovelock has slammed carbon trading, declaring, “Most of the ‘green’ stuff is verging on a gigantic scam. Carbon trading, with its huge government subsidies, is just what finance and industry wanted. It’s not going to do a damn thing about climate change, but it’ll make a lot of money for a lot of people.”

 

In 2013, Gore sold his Current TV network to the Qatar-funded Al Jazeera for a reported $100 million. The sale inspired this headline at my Climate Depot website: “AlGorjeera—It’s Official: Al Gore Is by Far the Most Lavishly Funded Fossil Fuel Player in the Global Warming Debate Today.”

I asked if the media would now accurately label Gore an industry-funded activist every time they reported on him. Gore had literally sold out to big oil and gas: Al-Jazeera “received its initial funding through a decree from Emir of Qatar, and Qatar gets its wealth from its vast oil and natural gas reserves.”

The freshly laid off staffers from Current TV did not hesitate to lash out at Gore. “Gore’s supposed to be the face of clean energy and just sold [the channel] to very big oil, the emir of Qatar! Current never even took big oil advertising—and Al Gore, that bullshitter sells to the emir?” declared one former staffer, according to the New York Post. Another staffer commented, “He [Gore] has no credibility.”

Read: Bonus chapter: Intimidating the ‘Deniers’ to Enforce the ‘Consensus’ – Climate ‘deniers’ threatened with being ‘thrown in jail’

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

In Startling Reversal, Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming


 

Apocalyptic scenarios attributed to global warming are simply false and the human race will be able to accommodate whatever “climate change” throws at us, claims a remarkably sober new essay in Scientific American.

 

By Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D.
Breitbart.com

The essay, penned by John Horgan, the director of the Center for Science Writings at the Stevens Institute of Technology, analyzes two recent reports by “ecomodernists” who reject climate panic and frame the question of climate change and humanity’s ability to cope with it in radically new terms.

One of the reports, a work called “Enlightened Environmentalism” by Harvard iconoclast Steven Pinker, urges people to regain some much-needed perspective on climate, especially in the context of the overwhelming material benefits of industrialization.

Pooh-poohing “the mainstream environmental movement, and the radicalism and fatalism it encourages,” Pinker argues that humanity can solve problems related to climate change the same way it has solved myriad other problems, by harnessing “the benevolent forces of modernity.”

Separating himself from environmentalists who seem to detest modernity, Pinker asserts that industrialization “has been good for humanity.”

“It has fed billions, doubled lifespans, slashed extreme poverty, and, by replacing muscle with machinery, made it easier to end slavery, emancipate women, and educate children. It has allowed people to read at night, live where they want, stay warm in winter, see the world, and multiply human contact. Any costs in pollution and habitat loss have to be weighed against these gifts,” he says.

advertisement

And just as human ingenuity has allowed us to overcome countless obstacles in the past, he notes, it is more than reasonable to suppose it will do so in the future as well.

The second report put forward by Horgan is a recent article by Will Boisvert titled “The Conquest of Climate,” which contends that the “consequences for human well-being will be small” even if human greenhouse emissions significantly warm the planet.

Boisvert, who has been described as a “left-wing environmental expert, is no “climate denier,” yet he calls for climate alarmists to take a deep breath and step back from doomsday forecasts that likely have little to do with what will actually take place in the future.

As an example, the author pokes fun at a 2016 Newsweek article announcing that “Climate change could cause half a million deaths in 2050 due to reduced food availability.”

The story, based on a Lancet study, made dire forecasts regarding the effects of climate change on agriculture, while failing to note that the study actually predicts much more abundant food availability in 2050 thanks to advances in agricultural productivity. These advances will “dwarf the effects of climate change,” he contends, and the “poorest countries will benefit most.”

Like Pinkers, Boisvert tries to factor in what climate alarmists ignore: the capability of human beings to react to changing scenarios in remarkably ingenious ways.

“Throughout history humans not only weathered climate crises but deliberately flung ourselves into them as we migrated away from our African homeland into deserts, mountains, floodplains and taiga,” he writes, before embarking on an excursus into the striking cleverness of the Inuit in adapting to a hostile environment.

The current climate change “crisis” that has ecologists’ knickers in a knot, just isn’t that big a deal, he argues. It is merely the “latest episode in humanity’s ongoing conquest of extreme climates,” which will likewise “amount to just another problem in economic and technological development, and a middling-scale one at that.”

While climate skeptics will welcome this gust of common sense wafting in from the Scientific American, establishment climate alarmists will undoubtedly seek to quash the news, knowing it could affect not only the funding they depend on, but the ideologically driven political programs they seek to impose on the world.

After all, if the world is not under imminent peril from climate change, who will listen to—and fund—the prophets of doom?

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)