"Einstein cast gravity not as a force but as the geometric bending of space and time. In a popular analogy, the fabric of space-time is like the flat expanse of a mattress, and a massive object like a star is like a bowling ball sitting on top. The weight of the bowling ball compresses the mattress, forming a dimple — matter tells space-time how to curve.

In this analogy, a planet is like a smaller ball. If it rolls close enough to the bowling ball, its path will be altered by the dimple in the mattress — space-time tells matter how to move."

This analogy is wrong in a way that even people who've studied physics often don't realize.

On an everyday scale like the Earth orbiting the Sun, almost none of that gravitational interaction is from the bending of space. Far beyond 99% (actually, about 99.999999%) of it is from the bending of time.

> a measure of quantumness known as “magic.”

This naming-proposal couldn't possibly cause any problems down the line...

> They had worked out a way of running software on a classical computer that would mimic a quantum task.

When it comes to using a regular computer to mimic (read: fake) the execution of an exotic program/API for nonexistnet future hardware, I highly recommend the humorously titled talk: "Temporally Quaquaversal Virtual Nanomachine Programming In Multiple Topologically Connected Quantum-Relativistic Parallel Timespaces... Made Easy!" [0][1]

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzTjPx4NIiM

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpInOI4o2LY

Charm, quark, colors, time crystals, holographs.. And now, magic. Don't worry Einstein, no spooky action at a distance here, it's just magical.

> The more non-Clifford gates you need to produce a quantum state, the more magical that state is. The group found that the particles were highly magical. ..They showed that magic gave space its springiness. Magic, in other words, is connected to space’s ability to bend.

At some point these physicists crossed over into a very specialized form of poetry, a game of language.

Greek 'anameixi' loosely means a mixture or a blending. The special states could be called 'anameixic', the property could be called 'anameixicity'.

Why am I trying to find a name for this? Otoh, why are so many physicists trying so hard to popularize their projects for the last 40 or 50 years? Oh .. I think I just answered my own question.

That is an incredibly unfortunate term to use for the phenomenon.

I got nothing, but recall an old joke... "Magic is real, unless declared int!"

If you want to learn more about quantum mechanics starting from 1+1=2 please check out https://quantum.chaidhat.com !

In absolute, those are irrevocably pliable scientific facts.

They can choose any word to name a new feature; and they choose "magic"... Next one, it'll be "dark magic".

Can anyone else not stand quanta magazine? Everything posted here from there is the most woo-based, mis-represented, science mumbo jumbo. I didnt read the article cause this seems like a prime example of that so someone can correct me if I’m wrong

Quanta article are getting longer and longer. AI effect?

Mathematicians shouldn’t be allowed to name anything, it’s beyond ridiculous

Whole lotta bike shedding going on in this thread.

Calling something 'magic' is like an admission that you have no clue about what is going on. Seems to me, they do have some clue, namely that instead of codes with perfect isolation, there might be some advantage to studying ones that allow some blending. The resulting spaces may (or may not) lead to a better description of reality, but doing science means to peel back that mystery. So to go and promote this under the term 'magic' is disingenuous.

> while these locations can be constricted by these particles

Anyone else get Game of Life vibes?

If particles are "entangled", that means they are not separated. Correct? So why are we still looking at the universe as materialists?

Gravity is the force created by a mesh of entanglements. Entanglement is not the "connective tissue". Entanglement is the whole universe. Only our minds disentangle the universe out of necessity.

In other words, there are no particles, only waves. A planet is not a chunk of matter, it is a wave. a planet has no real boundary, that is a product of human consciousness.

IMHO, as an analogy, matter is not 'a bowling-ball on a mattress', but more like a scrunched-up section of table-cloth. Tiny knots or whirlpools of space-time/quantum fields, different particles are different topologies of knot, albeit the nature of space-time is unclear and it may well be a projection.

>"magic"

Please no.

I gotta say every aspect of this headline reads like bullshit. Unfortunately

So, when it comes to the quantum physics of dark matter, would this property be dark magic?

I’m so sorry. Couldn’t help myself.

>In holographic theories, physicists may have traced the pliability of space-time to its quantum roots

...ah yes holography again. Not to say that all these insights from it are completely worthless, but unless we actually find a holographic dual of our universe instead of AdS spaces (which are the opposite of our universe if anything), this whole field is starting to feel more like a jobs program for mathematicians out of new ideas.