kbwt

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.

> So yes, it "tunnels" through the timer field also, but the probability of interacting with the timer field is not zero.

Of course, but it is less than one. Hence the measurement underestimates the proper time interval.

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 would think exactly the opposite.

In your example, how do I embed a Foo in my FooAndBar object?

> 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.

At that point, what does Protobuf really buy you?

All of those will be around not because they are good, but because so many other things are built against their interfaces.

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.

Anecdotally I know of one very popular application that has a bug in their SHA-1 implementation causing it to effectively only perform a single round.

No, this law was proposed by NRW and Hessen, but if passed it would affect all of Germany.