this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
91 points (96.9% liked)

Technology

81558 readers
4258 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
91
Quantum teleportation demonstrated over existing fiber networks — Deutsche Telekom’s T‑Labs used commercially available Qunnect hardware for the demo, claims 90% average accuracy (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 16 hours ago by throws_lemy@reddthat.com to c/technology@lemmy.world
57 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“Teleporting quantum information is now a practical reality,” asserts Deutsche Telekom. The firm’s T‑Labs used commercially available Qunnect hardware to demo quantum teleportation over 30km of live, commercial Berlin fiber, running alongside classical internet traffic. In an email to Tom’s Hardware, Deutsche Telekom’s PR folks said that Cisco also ran the same hardware and demo process to connect data centers in NYC.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rah@hilariouschaos.com 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

what actually makes consciousness in a brain is (hypothetically, technically) microtubules

This is only a proposed theory, it's very far from accepted fact.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

This is only a proposed theory, it’s very far from accepted fact.

Which is why I said hypothetically...

Although up until a year ago the very idea that quantum entanglement could happen in the brain was treated as a joke for like 30 years and that's why the larger theory was instantly dismissed...

Which is why I added the "technically" as well.

If we're being technical even gravity is just a theory. But it's not like being deny the existence of gravity...

[–] rah@hilariouschaos.com 3 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

Which is why I said hypothetically…

I think you may have misused the word "hypothetically" then.

up until a year ago the very idea that quantum entanglement could happen in the brain was treated as a joke for like 30 years

I was taught Orch OR theory at university about 17 years ago.

that’s why the larger theory was instantly dismissed

Instantly dismissed by who? It's a new theory, there will always be detractors and critics of new theories (see, for example: oxygen theory of combustion). That's very different from being "instantly dismissed".

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

I think you may have misused the word “hypothetically” then

I 100% did

I was taught Orch OR theory at university about 17 years ago

Then you were also taught that there was no way the brain could maintain sustained quantum entanglement at the same time.

It’s a new theory

I mean, frame of reference...

You said you learned it 17 years ago, that's not very "new".

But compared to any other science, all of psychology is incredibly "new".

I'm multitasking bro, this ain't that deep

[–] rah@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Then you were also taught that there was no way the brain could maintain sustained quantum entanglement

No. I've no idea what could have possibly brought you to that conclusion.

Please don't try to tell me what brought you to that conclusion while multitasking. For that matter, please don't try to tell me at all.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -1 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

No. I’ve no idea what could have possibly brought you to that conclusion

Luckily it's easy to find research from that period:

This model requires that the tubulin is able to switch between alternative conformational states in a coherent manner, and that this process be rapid on the physiological time scale. Here, the biological feasibility of the Orch OR proposal is examined in light of recent experimental studies on microtubule assembly and dynamics. It is shown that the tubulins do not possess essential properties required for the Orch OR proposal, as originally proposed, to hold. Further, we consider also recent progress in the understanding of the long-lived coherent motions in biological systems, a feature critical to Orch OR, and show that no reformation of the proposal based on known physical paradigms could lead to quantum computing within microtubules. Hence, the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness.

https://journals.aps.org/pre/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevE.80.021912

I rember that time as well, although it seems my memory is better than yours, despite you being waaaaaaay more confident.

If you have further questions tho, ask someone else. Good luck finding someone better equiped to talk about this stuff tho. Every days another burnt bridge, right?

[–] rah@hilariouschaos.com 2 points 13 hours ago

Hence, the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness.

One paper claiming that the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness does not mean that the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness.

it seems my memory is better than yours

I'm not sure why you think my memory is in any way relevant.

Published 13 August, 2009

There's a significant journey from being published in a paper to being taught in classes. I was taught Orch OR somewhere between 2008 and 2010 so there's no reason to think memory comes into it.