Slaughterbot

Create a simple Blockchain in Go

Better way to understand blockchain is to create own!

At the end you will able to:-
# create your own block chain.
# understand how hashing works in maintaining integrity of the block chain.
# see how new block get added.
# see how tiebreaker get resolved when multiple nodes generate block.
# view your blockchain in web browser.
# write new block.
# get foundational understanding of the blockchain.

Let's GO 👊

Setup
          After installing and configuring Go, grab the following packages

          go get github.com/davecgh/go-spew/spew
          go-spew/spew

Spew allow us to view structs and slices cleanly formatted in our console.Then grab...

          go get github.com/joho/godotenv
          godotenv

Godotenv let us read from .env file that we keep in the root of our directory.

Let's create a .env file in the riot of our directory defining the port that will serve http requests.
Just add one line to this file:
          PORT=8080

Create a main.go file. Everything from now on will be written to this file.

Import
     Here are the imports we'll need, along with our package declaration. Let's write these to main.go
Data model
     Let's define the struct of each of our blocks that will make up the blockchain.

Each Block contains data that will be written to the to the blockchain, and represents each case when you took your pulse rate.

*Index is the position of the data record in the blockchain
*Timestamp is automatically determined and is the time the data is written
*BPM or beats per minute, is your pulse rate
*Hash is a SHA256 identifier representing this data record
*PrevHash is the SHA256 identifier of the previous record in the chain

Let's also model out the blockchain iself, which is simply a slice of Block:

So how does hashing fit into blocks and blockchain? We use hashes to identify and keep the block in the right order. By ensuring the PrevHash in each Block is identical to Hash in the previous Block we know the proper order of the block that make up the chain.

Hashing and Generating New Blocks

So why do we need hashing? We hash data for 2 main reasons:

(1) To save space. Hashes are derived from all the data that is on the block. In our case, we only have a few data points but imagine we have data from hundreds, thousands or millions of previous blocks. It’s much more efficient to hash that data into a single SHA256 string or hash the hashes than to copy all the data in preceding blocks over and over again.
(2) Preserve integrity of the blockchain. By storing previous hashes like we do in the diagram above, we’re able to ensure the blocks in the blockchain are in the right order. If a malicious party were to come in and try to manipulate the data (for example, to change our heart rate to fix life insurance prices), the hashes would change quickly and the chain would “break”, and everyone would know to not trust that malicious chain.

Let’s write a function that takes our Block data and creates a SHA256 hash of it.

This calculateHash function concatenates Index, Timestamp, BPM, PrevHash of the Block we provide as an argument and returns the SHA256 hash as a string. Now we can generate a new Block with all the elements we need with a new generateBlock function. We’ll need to supply it the previous block so we can get its hash and our pulse rate in BPM. Don’t worry about the BPM int argument that’s passed in. We’ll address that later.
Notice that the current time is automatically written in the block with time.Now(). Also notice that our prior calculateHash function was called. PrevHash is copied over from the hash of the previous block. Index is incremented from the Index of the previous block.

Block Validation

Now we need to write some functions to make sure the blocks haven’t been tampered with. We do this by checking Index to make sure they’ve incremented as expected. We also check to make sure our PrevHash is indeed the same as the Hash of the previous block. Lastly, we want to double check the hash of the current block by running the calculateHash function again on the current block. Let’s write a isBlockValid function that does all these things and returns a bool. It’ll return true if it passes all our checks:
What if we run into an issue where two nodes of our blockchain ecosystem both added blocks to their chains and we received them both. Which one do we pick as the source of truth? We choose the longest chain. This is a classic blockchain issue and has nothing to do with nefarious actors. Two well meaning nodes may simply have different chain lengths, so naturally the longer one will be the most up to date and have the latest blocks. So let’s make sure the new chain we’re taking in is longer than the current chain we have. If it is, we can overwrite our chain with the new one that has the new block(s).

TO STUDY WARMHOLE GOOGLE SCIENTIST ARE USING QUANTUM COMPUTER

Warmhole is the weirdest theoritical physics phenomenon, which links pair of blackhole..

Quantum Gravity in the Lab:
Teleportation by Size and Traversable Wormholes

With the long-term goal of studying quantum gravity in the lab, we propose holographic
teleportation protocols that can be readily executed in table-top experiments. These protocols
exhibit similar behavior to that seen in the recent traversable wormhole constructions of [1, 2]:
information that is scrambled into one half of an entangled system will, following a weak
coupling between the two halves, unscramble into the other half. We introduce the concept
of teleportation by size to capture how the physics of operator-size growth naturally leads to
information transmission. The transmission of a signal through a semi-classical holographic
wormhole corresponds to a rather special property of the operator-size distribution we call size
winding. For more general setups (which may not have a clean emergent geometry), we argue
that imperfect size winding is a generalization of the traversable wormhole phenomenon. For
example, a form of signalling continues to function at high temperature and at large times
for generic chaotic systems, even though it does not correspond to a signal going through a
geometrical wormhole, but rather to an interference effect involving macroscopically different
emergent geometries. Finally, we outline implementations feasible with current technology
in two experimental platforms: Rydberg atom arrays and trapped ions.

INTRODUCTION
In the quest to understand the quantum nature of spacetime and gravity, a key difficulty is the
lack of contact with experiment. Since gravity is so weak, directly probing quantum gravity means
going to experimentally infeasible energy scales. However, a consequence of the holographic
principle [3, 4] and its concrete realization in the AdS/CFT correspondence [5–7] (see also [8]) is
that non-gravitational systems with sufficient entanglement may exhibit phenomena characteristic
of quantum gravity. This suggests that we may be able to use table-top physics experiments to probe
quantum gravity indirectly. Indeed, the technology for the control of complex quantum many-body
systems is advancing rapidly, and we appear to be at the dawn of a new era in physics—the study
of quantum gravity in the lab.
The purpose of this paper is to discuss one way in which quantum gravity can make contact
with experiment. We will focus on a surprising communication phenomenon. We will examine a
particular entangled state—one that could actually be made in an atomic physics lab—and consider
the fate of a message inserted into the system in a certain way. Since the system is chaotic, the
message is soon dissolved amongst the constituent parts of the system. The surprise is what happens
next. After a period in which the message seems thoroughly scrambled with the rest of the state, the
message then abruptly unscrambles, and recoheres at a point far away from where it was originally
inserted. The signal has unexpectedly refocused, without it being at all obvious what it was that
acted as the lens.

One way to describe this phenomenon is just to brute-force use the Schrodinger equation. But
what makes this phenomenon so intriguing is that it has a much simpler explanation, albeit a
simple explanation that arises from an unexpected direction [1]. If we imagine the initial entangled
quantum state consists of two entangled black holes, then there is a natural explanation for why
the message reappears—it travelled through a wormhole connecting the two black holes! This is a
phenomenon that one could prospectively realize in the lab that has as its most compact explanation
a story involving emergent spacetime dimensions.
An analogy may be helpful. Consider two people having a conversation, or as a physicist might
describe it “exchanging information using sound waves”. From the point of view of molecular
dynamics, it is remarkable that they can communicate at all. The room might contain 1027 or more
molecules with a given molecule experiencing a collision every 10−10s or so. In such a system, it is
effectively impossible to follow the complete dynamics: the butterfly effect implies that a computer
would need roughly 1037 additional bits of precision every time it propagated the full state of the
system for one more second. Communication is possible despite the chaos because the system
nevertheless possesses emergent collective modes—sound waves—which behave in an orderly
fashion.
When quantum effects are important, complex patterns of entanglement can give rise to qualita-
tively new kinds of emergent collective phenomena. One extreme example of this kind of emergence
is precisely the holographic generation of spacetime and gravity from entanglement, complexity,
and chaos. In such situations, new physical structures become possible, including wormholes which
connect distant regions of spacetime. And like the physics of sound in the chaotic atmosphere of the
room, the physics of these wormholes points the way to a general class of quantum communication
procedures which would otherwise appear utterly mysterious. The experimental study of such
situations therefore offers a path toward a deeper understanding of quantum gravity. By probing
stringy corrections to the gravitational description, a sophisticated experiment of this type could
even provide an experimental test of string theory.

(source:the arXiv)

HISTORY OF SANSKRIT

It is said that Brahma introduced this language to the sages of celestial bodies.

Sanskrit is traceable to the 2nd millennium BCE in a form as Vadic Sanskrit, with the Rigveda as the earliest known composition. A more refined and standardized grammatical form called Classical Sanskrit emerged in the mid 1st millennium BCE withthe Astadhyayi treatise of Panini

In the ancient era, Sanskrit composition were orally transmitted by method of memorization of exceptional complexity, rigour and fidelity.

Sanskrit texts dated to the 1st millennium CE were written in the BRAHMISCRIPT, the NAGARI SCRIPT, the historic South Indian Script and their derivative scripts.

Vadic Sanskrit 

Pre-classical form of sanskrit(vadic sanskrit language had a "set linguistic pattern" by the 2nd millennium BCE) 

#IT IS LESS HOMOGENEOUS #

rigveda, samveda, yajurveda, atharvaveda

(Brahmanas, Aranyats, Upanishads) 

classical Sanskrit 

The formalization of the sanskrit language is credited to Panini along with Patanjali's MAHA BHASYA & KATYAANA's.

Panini composed ASTADHYAYI (eight chapter grammar) 

Astadhyayi was not the 1st description of Sanskrit grammar but it is the earliest that has survived in full. 

Panini cites ten scholars  on the phonological and grammatical aspects of sanskrit language before him, as well as the variants in the usage of Sanskrit in different region of India. 

Ten vadic scholar he quotes are:-

1. Aspisali

2. Kashyapa

3. Gargya

4. Galava

5. Cakra varmana

6. Bharadvaja

7. Sakatayana

8. Sakalya

9. Senaka

10. Sphotayana

PANINI MADE USE OF A TECHNICAL META LANGUAGE CONSISTING OF A SYNTAX, MORPHOLOGY & LEXICON. THIS METALANGUAGE IS ORGANIZED ACCORDING TO A SERIES OF META-RULES, SAME OF WHICHARE EXPLICITLY STATED WHILE OTHER CAN BE DERIVED. 

ideas of symmetry

bio_attraction

~♥~

Almost in all cases there is probability of possibility, and possibility is like Photon of Quantum theory.