Originally posted by @humy Interesting and it would be great if they devolved it but I wish they didn't use the vary unscientific sounding term "magic dust".
'Magic dust' is as unscientific expression as the 'god particle'.
They use it to attract unscientific (read: religious) people to read the article.
Originally posted by @fabianfnas 'Magic dust' is as unscientific expression as the 'god particle'.
They use it to attract unscientific (read: religious) people to read the article.
rather than saying it is "based on 'magic dust' ", they could say it is " based on 'polaritons' ", because it is. But that is hard for many people to remember so lets call that "pol-dust" and say it is " based on 'pol-dust' " and these computers are "dust-computers" that do "dust-computing".
Originally posted by @humy rather than saying it is "based on 'magic dust' ", they could say it is " based on 'polaritons' ", because it is. But that is hard for many people to remember so lets call that "pol-dust" and say it is " based on 'pol-dust' " and these computers are "dust-computers" that do "dust-computing".
'Magic dust' sounds like some illegal drug or something.
'Dust-computing' is better, but... I'd prefer polaritons.