There are plenty of “solid” states of matter. It was easy to classify things into solid, liquid, and gas, when that’s all that we knew about. Those really aren’t valid classifications of states of matter any longer.

Basically, you’re relying on a “naive classification” of states. That’s fine in most cases. Who wants to…

The elections behave differently in the state of matter that the scientists have created. As the article mentions, the electrons, swirl around in vortices. When you have the same atoms/molecules, and the only difference between one batch and another is how their electrons “act”, you have two different states of matter.

It is indeed a state of matter. It’s constructed mechanically, but the matter itself acts in a way that normal matter does not.

It wouldn’t look like much to the eye. You wouldn’t be able to see these vortices.

“While the swirls of electrical activity have been theoretically hypothesized in the past...”

Theoretically hypothesized?

It uses two neural networks, in addition to the tree search, to improve the speed of the search. It seems to be able to learn, to an extent, but it hasn’t learned how to play go. It’s learned how to play a better game of go. That’s easy. Once you have a program, which “knows” how to play go, it’s far easier to create…

It’s fine. When he gets fired from this job, the IRS will probably hire him.

So what he’s saying is that our gut bacteria work for the NSA?

There are a few things here. First, beating a professional is not the same as beating a grand master. Second, creating a program that can play go, and one that can learn to play go, are entirely different. It’s a minor step to make a program that can play a really good game of go. It’s another to make a program that…

I called it. Part of this has to do with Apple itself. Part has to do with the apparent shift towards spending on non-luxury goods. The iPhone is a cell phone, but it is really a luxury cell phone.

Well, if the entire crevice can go unnoticed, for so many years, it’s definitely possible for animals hiding in the loch to evade detection. It’s not evidence for “Nessy”, but it certainly does shoot down some of the arguments against “her.”

Hmm?

I can’t say I have the greatest understanding. I’m waiting for confirmation on a Quora answer.

Not exactly. The thing is, quantum particles don’t “exist in a location” in the classical sense, but rather their location is described as a probability distribution. As for this specific finding, I’ll have to review the study itself, and brush up on the technical language used for describing quantum states.

Both studies, the one cited in this article, and the one that I cited, suggest that most of the supposed hiatus can be accounted for by the argument they use. Correct?

Technically they don’t contradict each other, as I pointed out here, they both could be right, in which case the CMIP5 model is still wrong, and actually there was a huge spike in temperature. It’s certainly possible. But it seems that these studies are attempts to reestablish the previous narrative that the CMIP5…

You’re still not getting it. Magically both of these studies account for the missing heat: one by saying it went somewhere else, and the other by saying that it was there all along, and it was just a measurement error.

So either

(1) they’re both wrong, and there was a hiatus

(2) one is correct and the other is wrong…

Except that the studies are giving two different explanations. This one is saying that the apparent lack of warming was due to the heat moving into the lower ocean levels. The former study says “no no; the heat is where we thought it was, we just measured it wrong.”

** Edit: You’re actually referring to a different…

Honestly... give me a brick pizza oven...

Awesome, can we give all members of congress head transplants?