<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 3:51 PM, Adrian Tymes </span><span dir="ltr" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><<a href="mailto:atymes@gmail.com" target="_blank">atymes@gmail.com</a>></span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"> wrote:</span><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>The metaphor about the book came off as misleading to incorrect<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><font size="4">Given that Preskill is one of the world's leading experts on quantum information and is the Richard J Feynman J Feynman Professor of Theoretical Physics at the California Institute of Technology it might be wise to entertain the possibility that you could learn more from him about physics than he could learn from you</font></div><div><br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><i><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​>​</div>going off on how it's all mysterious and spooky</i></blockquote></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><font size="4">Niels Bohr said it best: </font></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><font size="4">"<i>Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory has not understood it</i>."</font></div><div class="gmail_extra"><font size="4"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_extra"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><i><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​>​</div>Rather, if you look at one entangled particle, the unusual thing is that you then know properties about its entangled partner - even if said partner is light years away, you know the information instantly</i></blockquote><font size="4"><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">That is the simplest possible<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​​</div> example of quantum entanglement involving a single Qbit, Preskill was talking about far more complex systems where thousands or millions of Qbits are entangled<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​​</div>, the sort of thing you'd need for a quantum computer. </div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">​John K Clark​</div><br></div></font></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div></div>