This is a rather common misconception about sensitivity, it is only true under the constraint where you are unable to increase the amplitude of your measurement.

You are always limited by shot noise (counting noise, quantisation noise, Poisson noise, whatever name you give it). And people love to say that you can only beat it by squeezing (increase noise in one quadrature to reduce it in another). But another option is to just increase N, turn up the laser power to have more photons or atoms in your sensor and watch your noise floor drop way faster than you will ever get using squeezing.

Now the cold atom sensors are an interesting case. No one has managed to laser cool atoms faster than an overall rate of around 10^9 atoms per second. And we have been stuck there since the mid 2000s. As a result, the fundamental noise limit from shot noise hampers these cold atom accelerometers significantly in short term sensitivity, as they just don’t have enough N of atoms in free fall. In this case, you might look to squeeze to get a better signal, but that’s a lot of complexity for not much gain.

There are only 2 examples I know of where squeezing has made a difference to a real world measurement. LIGO, can’t increase photons without thermally heating the mirrors too much, and confocal microscopes looking at biological samples, cant turn up the laser power without burning the tissue. In 99% of cases, just increase N to make a better sensor.

Here is the paper

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.25563

And here is the easier to read press release from Q-CTRL with less errors and ad block black screens.

https://q-ctrl.com/blog/q-ctrl-achieves-worlds-first-gps-free-quantum-gravimetric-navigation-demonstration-in-maritime-field-trial

They are comparing purely inertial navigation (I assume using the advanced nav boreas D90) and inertial nav combined with gravity map matching.

It is more of a demonstration than a comparison. Pure inertial nav has no way to re zero from an external reference so the error only grows.

Both of these systems are worse than any form of sat nav. But both of them keep working if the sat nav is jammed.

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.25563

Here is the real article without the compounding editorial errors.

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.25563

You don’t. Any appropriately sensitive/accurate accelerometer or magnetometer is sufficient to do this.

The quantum part is 90% hype used to and attract funding. There are some advantages to the cold atom based sensors Q-CTRL makes, along with issues that need to be worked on, but they are other sensing technologies that could beat it in the long run.

I think you just hit what I subconsciously hated. It’s this underlying aggressive position and combative approach that I just don’t enjoy listening to. Like sure, John Deer or whoever is in the shit books this week deserves it, but I don’t want those vibes on my weekend.

Lewis Rossman.

I have no valid reason for this. I fundamentally agree with the guy on most things for the dozen or so vids I have seen. Right to repair etc etc.

But something about him just comes across as entitled and annoying. Like even if I knew the was right I would want to disagree with him.

I should watch this again.

Was about to comment exactly this. Capacitors just can’t store the joules needed in any reasonable amount. There is some conversion loss but lithium batteries usually have a 95% or better cycle efficiency.

microslop

Never heard of this but are they deliberately made to taste bad? Seems like a clever idea. The nicotine is there if you need it but the terrible taste puts you off.

That said, cigarettes smell awful to me and people keep going so I can’t imagine how bad they would have to taste.

GitHub, hahah. Teenagers these days. The government must be concerned about the psychosocial harm caused by unaccepted pull request.

There are variations of the Skull and Crossbones here that have specific meaning?