Quni Episode 5
Steven M.:Okay, this is audio check. Welcome to The Poet's Guide to the Q-Universe. My name's Steven Michalove, I'm a lifetime prisoner of the tech industry from Seattle, Washington. So what you're about to hear is my poetical view, and some might say heretical view, of the quantum universe, the universe. And some applicability to the computing, and society, and ethics, and other human endeavors.
This is not an attempt to make an academic statement. If you're wondering why I'm doing this podcast, I can tell you why. Because the real universe, as opposed the Q-Universe, has tried to kill me a few times and we'll get into that in other podcasts. One of the things that left me when I had my stroke and brain damage was a gift to understand and talk about this stuff, and maybe even create music. We'll see how that turns out. So thanks for listening, and just a note, if you have small children or if you don't like them hearing expletives, please listen at a time that it won't disturb them. My personal opinion is expletives never hurt anyone, in fact, they're quite cool and creative. So enjoy the podcast. Take care. May all your endeavors bring love and joy to life. Thanks for listening to the Q-Universe, a Poet's Guide to the Q-Universe.
Well, super excited about this one. First podcast with the new set up. [Jesse] came over and did some engineering magic. I love it when audio heads do that. I really need a roadie. Does anybody want to be a roadie? Let me know. But that's not why we're here are we? No, we're here for another episode of the Q-uni. This one's going to be super cool, because I started this on two different threads. Started talking about my ROC, and started talking about computational threats around the quantum universe. Not necessarily time related, but I don't know, they just seem to make sense from a signaling perspective. So we're going to take this new topic on and as you've come to guess, we've got a new hero of the Q-Universe. Still working on some SWAG, so if you want to suggest a cool logo, we'll use it. That'd be rad. We'll even pay you for it. I don't know, you tell me what you think it's worth and we'll have that discussion. Hit me up on any of my social networking channels and we'll go from there.
So the hero today is [Umesh Vazirani]. Let me smell the last name because you probably need to spell mine too. It's Victor, Alpha, Zebra, Idaho, Roger, Alpha, Nancy, Integral. I had to use Integral for I, not Idaho sorry. No corporate timeout for doing that right? Who knows. I love corporate timeout, it's so fun. You really never know what's going to happen there. Okay, so the name of the paper that we're going to talk about today ... Okay. I was just telling somebody today I feel really lucky to be alive when this stuff is being written. I think it's ... My kids talk about primary sources a lot and it's really cool to be living in a time where a whole new set of primary sources is rising.
And Umesh Vazirani is one of those people making that new body of knowledge happen and creating primary sources. So thank you Umesh. I hope one day we get to talk and you can come give your opinion about my previous episode and how we can come up with some generalized area laws around genetic signaling using entanglement theory and computational models so we can actually come up with some test cases to see whether I'm full of shit or not. I really hope I am because that's the great thing about hypothesizing is the best part are not the test cases that pass. They're the ones that fail. So, I'm sure I'll get a lot of comments tonight about failing because we all need ... That's where the good stuff happens.
All right, here we go. How about local tests of global entanglement and a counter example of generalized area law. Now that is one hell of a paper and we'll put it on the bookshelf. You're asking yourself, "What bookshelf?" Well we'll tell you as soon as we got it built, I promise you. We're a startup right? I'm the minimal. I have a product, sorry. We're getting our cyber act together. You get that right? Okay. But that's not what makes Umesh a hero of the universe because he doesn't have to worry about any of that. He has real work to do like writing amazing papers.
So, we know that experimentally there have been a lot of computational effort put into using entanglement and non proximate signaling, which he's already talked about. But at the same time, my hypothesizing that genetic material is actually a test case for that. That you could actually isolate parts of a genetic strand that might be entangled in other parts and with other people, specifically people. So could you run an entanglement test on that? Take a sample of the DNA molecule and see if it's entangled and then I don't know. Let's go find somebody in France who's church records indicate they're a direct descendant of Charlemagne, and then let's go to a church and get a little of the DNA from Charlemagne's tomb. Let's hope there's enough to get it. Maybe from the bone, I don't know. I'm sure we'll get a lot of comments about that one.
Yeah, okay. So, would you also see the same modulations in utero? So we could take a mother. Let's say she's over 40 and had some amnio testing done. Could you look for that entanglement with Charlemagne's entanglement? That would be cool right? Okay. So if you take a generalized area that was so eloquently hypothesized here, could you take these arbitrary unknown related strands of DNA and discern signals across this type? So let's think about this from an experimental perspective. Let's get our electronic microscopes out for a second. Let's find a sequence of DNA we can demonstrate is carried across the strand. And then there may be actually, you don't know, a signal segment or maybe it's a cross section. Who knows geometrically where on that spiraling curve and equation sets. You think, "Oh, let's run a parallel line through on the X-axis. Maybe it's falling on that access where the ... My mic just fell. I guess I shocked it. My hypothesis, even my mic is surprised by it. You're probably even more surprised by it. So am I. That's what makes it so fun in the Q-Universe, until we start measuring, it doesn't exist.
Wait no, that's the real universe right? I get confused between the two things sometimes. Do you get confused? We all do. So let's get back to relationship between the amniocentesis fluid. So we have this fluid sample. We pull the related segment that we target through [inaudible] and classical means, classical genetic testing. First let's see if we can see an entanglement in the locality of the strand, or the atoms entanglement to themselves. One would think they would be. So once we've established they are, that would be an interesting test case in [inaudible] on that test case. Let's take this field trip to the future again.
Okay transporters get ready to do this experiment thing again. Okay. So we transmitted across the time generations and we read the signals from our control atoms from the newborn. Then we take the sequence from the mother or the father, depending on if it's a parental segment or maternal segment, which is easy to determine if we stay and identify all chromosome areas. Well, maleness and femaleness is not that easy, but I think for the purposes of this test case, we could probably use something on the gender determination baseline codes. That would probably be a good idea. So, let's use the maternal line. I think there's a lot less variation there. The signals are clear in the maternal line. The Jews knew this. That's why it really doesn't matter who the father is, it's really the mother that matters, but you know I'm a hardcore feminist anyway.
So, now we've taken one trip to the past. Let's take another trip to the past. Let's do the next generation. Let's do the grandmother and the grandfather. We can do paternal modulation as well and that will give an interesting case to see if we have crosstalk between sexes or not. That's an interesting way of putting gender. You can look at it as like a stereo signal. Maybe on the left channel you have maleness, and on the right channel you have femaleness. And then sometimes you get crosstalk. That's why it doesn't really matter this bullshit about "gender this, gender that." It's just signals cross sometimes. Get over it. I mean come on. Oh my stereo system at home doesn't have a lot of crosstalk, but it's clearly male right? I guess I built it.
So in that way, and no it doesn't have a lot of crosstalk, but I know lots of females that love amazing tech gear after all work in the tech industry right? I'm just saying that I've identified my stereo as male. Okay, we were talking about ... Oh yeah, we need a to beam up. I'm going to beam to the next generation. So we got the grandfather. Let's go and find a first cousin by the maternal side. And then let's find unrelated set of people that have never met, and let's see if we can eliminate rareness, but I'm sure Umesh given the fact that he is one of the authors on the paper of quantum modulation and randomness. We'll just call it a good mathematical model, come up with mathematical correlations between our outputs from our [inaudible] algorithms. That's my theory and I'm sticking to it.
If anyone can write some Q-sharp code to represent this pseudo code. Okay let's do it. We'll build some cool test cases, because it's not really going to be that much code. That's what's really cool about these kind of experiments. They can be done quickly because in fact, it's just a filtering information stream problem. And you just think of a classical RA problem. So, since we're only looking for one axis, which is a time axis, which should be a fairly simple set of algorithms. Hey, [inaudible]. Transporters away. All right, so did we find causative correlation? Do we have causation? Do we have correlation? I hope we have a causative effect. Let's disprove it. Get our random sample out there, give us a fairly tight and standard deviation [inaudible]. We certainly should have by now if our computational model was right.
So let's take a couple hundred million more samples, or maybe 200 million samples. Let's do the whole chromosome. That's a lot of atoms to build a correlation off of that'll help ensure that we have a sweet and solid bell curve for our sample. Okay, let's go ski to the top of the mountain. Where is that at? It's at the top of our bell curve. Ski down the other side. Why? Because that's where the test cases fail. That's what you're looking for. Okay, we're on the other side. Let's do the real test case. Let's take Charlemagne's DNA. Can we find the same correlation in the same part of the genome? Wait, Charlemagne's a dude. We've got to do a million [inaudible]. You know why? Because the guys don't really matter. Oops, we forgot that part of our mathematical ... All right, that might present a problem.
Do we have anymore Marie Antoinette DNA? I don't know. That's fine. [inaudible] is ruined. That would be cool. Let's look for a Nobel Price winning author. That would be ... When I say author, I mean a primary source material, sorry. She's a scientist, but she didn't earned Nobel Prizes from just sitting in the lab doing science, she wrote a couple papers. Oh yeah, wait. Does that mean scientists are writer? No, not entirely, but ... I don't know, because I'm not a scientist. Umesh, let's talk about ... Do you think that we have a mathematical under pending for a reasonable set of test cases to take her amazing theoretical work into the field of Q-sharp and genetic testing? One is very mature, one is maturing very quick. That's the nice thing about code is it's quick to mature because we have a lot of really cool coders.
Are we ready for tonight's biased unsubstantiated hypothesis? My hypothesis is that the best Q-sharp coders in the universe will be females, or at least identify that way or whatever. Because the Q-Universe is all about the relationships. I think entanglement, someone that's really good at entanglement, is going to be an amazing mother of a new generation of computational practice. That's tonight's unsubstantiated hypothesis. Thank you for beaming with us to the Q-Universe.
This podcast has been brought to you by Healing Hearts Productions, a full [inaudible] lobby or mailbox. Fill your own mailbox of Steven Michalove as like a business license or something, I'm not sure. Hopefully I can somebody to help me with that math too. Have a good one. Such a cool paper. Thank you, I love the heroes of the Q-Universe. I love them. You're my heroes. Amazing hypothesis. A lot of heroes involved in creating this podcast. So my first and closest hero I'd like to thank is myself, is Steven Michalove. I just can't even believe it's me. I suffer a little bit from delusions of failure and friction. So thanks for putting up with my test cases. Next up is Jesse [inaudible] because he does magic. So thanks for the magic. Please subscribe via your favorite podcast channel. Thanks.