Topic for #homecmos is now Homebrew CMOS and MEMS foundry design | http://code.google.com/p/homecmos/ | Logs: http://en.qi-hardware.com/homecmos-logs/
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
soul-d has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
soul-d has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
_whitelogger has joined #homecmos
R0b0t1_ has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
B0101 has joined #homecmos
<B0101> Hi, anyone thought of using Aluminium as a N-type dopant?
<B0101> oh sorry, I mean P-Type dopant
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
B0101 has quit []
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu_ has joined #homecmos
xiangfu_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
B0101 has joined #homecmos
<B0101> ahhh... Quantum Mechanics *is* weird...
<B0101> I just can't get over the fact that just by measuring a state, we change its result...
<Sync__> why not?
<B0101> well, for the double slit experiment, does it mean that when we measure the state of a photon, the particle *chooses* its state?
<soul-d> no so far i understand double slit experiment thats about single photons interfering egg if you shoot single photons through double slit you get the same interferance distribution on the detector as if you would have with many particles
<soul-d> and somthing to do with probabilty where you will find the particles
<B0101> hmmm, but can different observers come out with different results in the same experiment?
<B0101> for example, 1 team looks only at the interference patterns and records their results while another team, see both the results of the detectors and the interference patterns? Will their results be coherent?
<soul-d> no otherwise there would be no such thing as double slit experiement
<Sync__> no because propabilities stay the same
<Sync__> if you look at single photons then different detectors can have different results
<Sync__> because you change the state
<Sync__> (actually there are solutions for that to eavesdrop on quantum computers)
<Sync__> (but they just use a flaw in the detector)
<soul-d> well you can create a multitudie of complex interference paterns that don't look the same but the math behind it is the same
<Sync__> meh. the solutions to the old exams they gave us are wrong
* Sync__ rages
<soul-d> heh as long you passed it's fine ?
<Sync__> well the exam is on monday
<Sync__> and I'm like ???? infront of the old ones
<soul-d> like as practice ?
<Sync__> my solutions are either an order of magnitude under or above the solution they gave
<Sync__> yeah
<Sync__> depends on how I interpet a graph
<soul-d> yeah thats nasty if you can't even trust example answers
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #homecmos
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
B0101 has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat]