I am not a physicist, but the experiment does not seem convincing to me.
The Larmor clock doesn’t measure a proper time as in spacetime distance between two events. Instead it measures the rotation of a dipole in an electromagnetic field.
The experimenters apply a combination of an electrostatic field (the barrier) and a magnetic field (the timer driving Larmor precession).
In the frame of reference of the spinning particle, this is exhibited as a sum of two electrostatic fields. The barrier is a locally uniform repulsive electrostatic field, while the the timer is a radially varying axial electrostatic field. The particle is a dipole, tilted from the timer axis by the precession angle. When the particle tunnels through the barrier, it also tunnels through the timer field, without precessing over the tunneled distance just as the particle is not exhibiting repulsion from the barrier over the same distance.
This is experimentally verifiable as the amount of missed precession has a lower bound proportional to the sine of the angle between the magnetic field and the barrier.
I work on software for augmented reality and distributed systems. That background is not directly applicable to quantum physics, but I like to think that I am highly trained at spotting logical errors.
Tunneling doesn't mean jumping. The probability wave of the particle does exist inside the barrier, see e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:TunnelEffektKling1.p... So yes, it "tunnels" through the timer field also, but the probability of interacting with the timer field is not zero.
I would be interested if the Lamor clock also shows a shift in the reflected particles. Because that would mean, also the reflected particles spend some time inside the barrier.
"Inside the barrier, the atoms encounter, and barely interact with, a weak magnetic field. This weak interaction does not perturb the tunneling. But it causes each atom’s clock hand to move by an unpredictable amount, which can be measured once that atom exits the barrier. "
> On a small scale, planar waves can be modeled like flat sheets of paper traveling through space without any angular momentum (no twisting motion).
They certainly have angular momentum, it just depends on the choice of origin. If you pick an origin along the peak ray of the plane wave, there will be no twist around that point. Just like with a particle traveling in free space.
Unfortunately, I don’t know enough to intelligently comment on this. I was largely under the guidance of my professor. However, I can tell you that in my modeling I used the paraxial approximation and that the light was linearly polarized. It was my understanding that only circularly polarized light carried intrinsic angular momentum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_angular_momentum_of_light...).
Also, I would agree with you that in a uniform electric field, a single E vector in isolation would appear to produce a torque on a point some distance away. But if the rest of the field is considered, the net torque at that point would be zero, right?
Would that make it only interoperable with itself, and not have the security a correct implementation of SHA1 provides? Is it a security bug (i.e. is there anything worth stealing by breaking their not-quite-SHA1-hash)?
The application is using a proprietary client/server protocol, so it already lacks lacks any kind of interoperability.
In this specific case, it's unclear whether the bug has direct security implications. The broken SHA-1 is used on some user-controlled data that gets XORed onto the server's decryption of a user-specified payload before being passed into an RC4 key schedule. It's certainly plausible that this might produce a server-assisted privacy compromise of other users' sessions.
In the currently proposed revision, the law applies to anyone facilitating access to an internet-based service "unless the criminal use of the service is of insignificant importance".
The Larmor clock doesn’t measure a proper time as in spacetime distance between two events. Instead it measures the rotation of a dipole in an electromagnetic field.
The experimenters apply a combination of an electrostatic field (the barrier) and a magnetic field (the timer driving Larmor precession). In the frame of reference of the spinning particle, this is exhibited as a sum of two electrostatic fields. The barrier is a locally uniform repulsive electrostatic field, while the the timer is a radially varying axial electrostatic field. The particle is a dipole, tilted from the timer axis by the precession angle. When the particle tunnels through the barrier, it also tunnels through the timer field, without precessing over the tunneled distance just as the particle is not exhibiting repulsion from the barrier over the same distance.
This is experimentally verifiable as the amount of missed precession has a lower bound proportional to the sine of the angle between the magnetic field and the barrier.