Discount cialis

REDWOOD CITY, Calif.--(BUSINESS discount cialis WIRE)--Oct http://mattjsmith.com/cialis-pills-online. 16, 2020-- Guardant Health, Inc. (Nasdaq. GH) today announced it will report financial results for the third quarter 2020 after market close on Thursday, November 5, 2020. Company management will be webcasting a corresponding conference call beginning at 1:30 p.m.

Pacific Time / 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time. Live audio of the webcast will be available on the “Investors” section of the company website at. Www.guardanthealth.com. The webcast will be archived and available for replay after the event.

About Guardant Health Guardant Health is a leading precision oncology company focused on helping conquer cancer globally through use of its proprietary blood tests, vast data sets and advanced analytics. The Guardant Health Oncology Platform leverages capabilities to drive commercial adoption, improve patient clinical outcomes and lower healthcare costs across all stages of the cancer care continuum. Guardant Health has launched liquid biopsy-based Guardant360®, Guardant360 CDx, and GuardantOMNI® tests for advanced stage cancer patients. These tests fuel development of its LUNAR program, which aims to address the needs of early stage cancer patients with neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment selection, cancer survivors with surveillance, asymptomatic individuals eligible for cancer screening and individuals at a higher risk for developing cancer with early detection. View source version on businesswire.com.

Https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201016005576/en/ Investor Contact. Carrie Mendivilinvestors@guardanthealth.com Media Contact. Anna Czenepress@guardanthealth.com Courtney Carrollcourtney.carroll@uncappedcommunications.com Source. Guardant Health, Inc.REDWOOD CITY, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 15, 2020-- Guardant Health, Inc.

(Nasdaq. GH) (“Guardant Health”), a leading precision oncology company focused on helping conquer cancer globally through use of its proprietary blood tests, vast data sets and advanced analytics, announced today the closings of an underwritten public offering of 7,700,000 shares of its common stock, which includes full exercise of the underwriter’s option to purchase 700,000 shares, at a public offering price of $102.00 per share, before deducting underwriting discounts and commissions, all of which were sold by SoftBank Investment Advisers. The initial closing of 7,000,000 shares occurred on October 9, 2020, and the closing of the underwriter’s option to purchase additional shares occurred today. Guardant Health did not sell any of its shares in the offering and did not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of shares in the offering by SoftBank Investment Advisers. J.P.

Morgan Securities LLC acted as sole book-running manager of the offering. The public offering was made pursuant to an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3 that was filed by Guardant Health with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and automatically became effective upon filing. A final prospectus supplement and accompanying prospectus relating to and describing the terms of the offering have been filed with the SEC and are available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Copies of the final prospectus supplement and accompanying prospectus may be obtained by contacting.

J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, c/o Broadridge Financial Solutions, 1155 Long Island Avenue, Edgewood, NY 11717, or by telephone at (866) 803-9204, or by email at prospectus-eq_fi@jpmchase.com. This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy these securities, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or other jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to the registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or other jurisdiction. Source. Guardant Health, Inc.

View source version on businesswire.com. Https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201015005933/en/ Investors. Carrie Mendivilinvestors@guardanthealth.com Media. Anna Czenepress@guardanthealth.comSource. Guardant Health, Inc..

Normal dose of cialis

	Cialis	Viagra super force	Levitra professional	Cialis super active	Viagra with fluoxetine
Best price	Online	Online	Yes	No	Online
Free pills	Online	No	Online	Yes	Online
Best place to buy	Oral take	Oral take	Oral take	Oral take	Oral take
How long does stay in your system	60mg 120 tablet $329.95	100mg + 100mg 60 tablet $209.95	20mg 270 tablet $945.95	20mg 180 capsule $359.95	$
Best price for generic	19h	7h	22h	18h	11h
Daily dosage	13h	22h	16h	5h	3h

About This TrackerThis tracker provides the number of confirmed cases and deaths from normal dose of cialis novel erectile dysfunction by country, the trend in confirmed case and death counts by country, and a global map showing which countries have confirmed cases and deaths. The data are drawn from the Johns Hopkins University (JHU) erectile dysfunction Resource Center’s erectile dysfunction treatment Map and the World Health Organization’s (WHO) erectile dysfunction Disease (erectile dysfunction treatment-2019) situation reports.This tracker will be updated regularly, as new data are released.Related Content. About erectile dysfunction treatment erectile dysfunctionIn late 2019, a new erectile dysfunction emerged in central normal dose of cialis China to cause disease in humans.

Cases of this disease, known as erectile dysfunction treatment, have since been reported across around the globe. On January normal dose of cialis 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the cialis represents a public health emergency of international concern, and on January 31, 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services declared it to be a health emergency for the United States..

About This TrackerThis tracker provides http://www.em-meinau-strasbourg.ac-strasbourg.fr/lecole/les-representants-des-parents-deleves/les-actions-et-initiatives-des-parents-deleves/ the number of confirmed cases and deaths from novel erectile dysfunction by country, the trend in confirmed case and discount cialis death counts by country, and a global map showing which countries have confirmed cases and deaths. The data are drawn from the Johns Hopkins University (JHU) erectile dysfunction Resource Center’s erectile dysfunction treatment Map and the World Health Organization’s (WHO) erectile dysfunction Disease (erectile dysfunction treatment-2019) situation reports.This tracker will be updated regularly, as new data are released.Related Content. About erectile dysfunction treatment erectile dysfunctionIn late 2019, a new erectile dysfunction emerged in central China to cause discount cialis disease in humans. Cases of this image source disease, known as erectile dysfunction treatment, have since been reported across around the globe.

On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the cialis represents a public health emergency of discount cialis international concern, and on January 31, 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services declared it to be a health emergency for the United States..

What may interact with Cialis?

Do not take Cialis with any of the following medications:

• nitrates like amyl nitrite, isosorbide dinitrate, isosorbide mononitrate, nitroglycerin

Cialis may also interact with the following medications:

• certain drugs for high blood pressure
• certain drugs for the treatment of HIV or AIDS
• certain drugs used for fungal or yeast s, like fluconazole, itraconazole, ketoconazole, and voriconazole
• certain drugs used for seizures like carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital
• grapefruit juice
• macrolide antibiotics like clarithromycin, erythromycin, troleandomycin
• medicines for prostate problems
• rifabutin, rifampin or rifapentine

This list may not describe all possible interactions. Give your health care provider a list of all the medicines, herbs, non-prescription drugs, or dietary supplements you use. Also tell them if you smoke, drink alcohol, or use illegal drugs. Some items may interact with your medicine.

Can you buy cialis over the counter usa

Ronald Lindquist, 87, can you buy cialis over the counter usa http://www.em-muttersholtz.ac-strasbourg.fr/contact/ has been active all his life. So, he wasn’t prepared for what happened when he stopped going out during the erectile dysfunction cialis and spent most of his time, inactive, at home. “I found it hard to get up and get out of bed,” can you buy cialis over the counter usa said Lindquist, who lives with his wife of 67 years in Palm Springs, California. €œI just wanted to lay around.

I lost my desire to do things.” Physically, Lindquist noticed that getting up out of a chair was difficult, as was getting in and out of his car. €œI was praying ‘Lord, give me some strength.’ can you buy cialis over the counter usa I kind of felt, I’m on my way out — I’m not going to make it,” he admitted. One little-discussed, long-term toll of the cialis. Large numbers of older adults have become physically and cognitively debilitated and less able to care for themselves during 15 months of sheltering in place.

No large-scale studies can you buy cialis over the counter usa have documented the extent of this phenomenon. But physicians, physical therapists and health plan leaders said the prospect of increased impairment and frailty in the older population is a growing concern. €œAnyone who cares for older adults has seen a significant decline in functioning as people have been less can you buy cialis over the counter usa active,” said Dr. Jonathan Bean, an expert in geriatric rehabilitation and director of the New England Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center at the Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System.

Bean’s 90-year-old mother, who lives in an assisted living facility, is a case in point. Before the cialis, she could walk with a walker, can you buy cialis over the counter usa engage in conversation and manage going to the bathroom. Now, she depends on a wheelchair and “her dementia has rapidly accelerated — she can’t really care for herself,” the doctor said. Bean said his mother is no longer able to benefit from rehabilitative therapies.

But many can you buy cialis over the counter usa older adults might be able to realize improvements if given proper attention. EMAIL SIGN-Up Subscribe to California Healthline's free Daily Edition. “Immobility and debility are outcomes to this horrific cialis that people aren’t even talking about yet,” said Linda Teodosio, a physical therapist and division rehabilitation manager in Bayada Home Health Care’s Towson, Maryland, office. €œWhat I’d love to see is a national effort, maybe by can you buy cialis over the counter usa the CDC [U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], focused on helping older people overcome these kinds of impairments.” The extent of the need is substantial, by many accounts.

Teodosio said she and her staff have seen a “tremendous increase” in falls and in the exacerbation of chronic illnesses such as diabetes, congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. €œOlder adults got off schedule during the cialis,” she explained, and “they didn’t can you buy cialis over the counter usa eat well, they didn’t hydrate properly, they didn’t move, they got weaker.” Dr. Lauren Jan Gleason, a geriatrician and assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago, said many older patients have lost muscle mass and strength this past year and are having difficulties with mobility and balance they didn’t have previously. €œI’m seeing weight gain and weight loss, and a lot more depression,” she noted.

Mary Louise Amilicia, 67, of East Meadow, New York, put on more than 100 pounds while staying at home round-the-clock and taking care of her husband Frank, 69, who was hospitalized with a severe can you buy cialis over the counter usa case of erectile dysfunction treatment in early December. While Amilicia also tested positive for the cialis, she had a mild case. €œWe were in the house every day 24/7, except when we had to go to the doctor, and when he got sick I can you buy cialis over the counter usa had to do all the stuff he used to do,” Amilicia told me. €œIt was a lot of stress.

I just began eating everything in sight and not taking care of myself.” The extra weight made it hard to move around, and Amilicia fell several times after Christmas, fortunately without sustaining serious injuries. After coming can you buy cialis over the counter usa home from the hospital, Frank couldn’t get out of a chair, walk 10 feet to the bathroom or climb the stairs in his house. Instead, he spent most of the day in a recliner, relying on his wife for help. Now, the couple is getting physical therapy from Northwell Health, New York state’s largest health care system.

Just before the cialis, Northwell launched a “rehabilitation at home” can you buy cialis over the counter usa program for patients who otherwise would have seen therapists in outpatient facilities. (Medicare Part B pays for the treatments.) Frank Amilicia was hospitalized with a severe case of erectile dysfunction treatment last December. When he returned home, he was confined to his recliner, relying can you buy cialis over the counter usa on his wife, Mary Louise, for help. Mary Louise put on extra weight while taking care of Frank and fell several times after Christmas.

Now, the couple is getting physical therapy from Northwell Health, New York state’s largest health care system. (Saaba Mundia) The program is can you buy cialis over the counter usa serving more than 100 patients on Long Island, in Westchester County and parts of New York City. €œThe demand is very strong and we’re in the process of hiring another 20 therapists,” said Nina DePaola, Northwell’s vice president of post-acute services. Sabaa Mundia, a physical therapist working with the Amilicias, said Mary Louise can walk up to 400 feet without a walker, after doing strengthening exercises twice a week over the course of three weeks.

Frank had been using a wheelchair and is now walking can you buy cialis over the counter usa 150 feet with a walker on a regular basis after more than a month of therapy. €œOlder adults can lose about 20% of their muscle mass if they don’t walk for up to five days,” Mundia said. €œAnd their endurance decreases, their stamina decreases, and their range of motion decreases.” Recognizing that risk, some health plans have been reaching out to older members to assess how they’re faring. In Massachusetts, Commonwealth Care Alliance serves more than 10,000 older adults who are poor and eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid, the federal-state program for people can you buy cialis over the counter usa with low incomes.

On average, they tend to have more medical needs than similarly aged seniors. Between March and September last year, the plan’s staffers conducted “wellness outreach assessments” by phone every two weeks, asking about ongoing medical care, new physical and emotional challenges, and the adequacy of available help, can you buy cialis over the counter usa among other concerns. Today, calls are made monthly and staffers have resumed seeing members in person. An increase in physical deconditioning is one of the big issues that’s emerged.

€œWe’ve had physical therapists digitally engage with members to coach can you buy cialis over the counter usa them through strength and balance training,” said Dr. Robert MacArthur, a geriatrician and Commonwealth Care’s chief medical officer. €œAnd when that didn’t work, we sent therapists into people’s homes.” In California, SCAN Health Plan serves a similarly vulnerable population of nearly 15,000 older adults dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid through its Medicare Advantage plans. Care navigators are calling these members frequently and telling them “now that you’re vaccinated, it’s safe to go see your doctor in person,” said can you buy cialis over the counter usa Eve Gelb, SCAN’s senior vice president of health care services.

Doctors can then evaluate unmet health needs and make referrals to physical and occupational therapists, if necessary. Another SCAN program, Member2Member, pairs older adult “peer health advocates” with members who have noted physical or emotional difficulties on health risk can you buy cialis over the counter usa assessments. That’s how Lindquist in Palm Springs connected with Jerry Payne, 79, a peer advocate who calls him regularly and helped him come up with a plan to emerge from his cialis-induced funk. €œFirst, he said, ‘Ron, you should try getting up every hour and taking a few steps’ — that was the start of it,” Lindquist told me.

€œThen, he’d can you buy cialis over the counter usa suggest walking another block when I would take my dog out. It was painful. Walking was not pleasant. But he can you buy cialis over the counter usa was very encouraging.” About a month ago, Payne had a Fitbit sent to Lindquist.

At first, Lindquist walked about 1,500 steps a day. Now, he’s up to can you buy cialis over the counter usa more than 5,000 steps a day and has a goal of reaching 10,000 steps. €œI’m sleeping better and I feel so much better all around,” Lindquist said. €œMy whole attitude and physicality has changed.

I tell you, this has been an answer to my prayers.” We’re eager to hear from readers about questions you’d like answered, problems you’ve been having with your care and advice you need in dealing with the health care can you buy cialis over the counter usa system. Visit khn.org/columnists to submit your requests or tips. This story was produced by KHN (Kaiser Health News), a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser can you buy cialis over the counter usa Family Foundation).

KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation. Judith can you buy cialis over the counter usa Graham. khn.navigatingaging@gmail.com, @judith_graham Related Topics Contact Us Submit a Story TipJon Greenberg interviewed Elisabeth Rosenthal, editor-in-chief of KHN. Shefali Luthra, health and gender reporter at The 19th.

And Derek Thompson, staff writer for The Atlantic, about erectile dysfunction treatment misinformation during PolitiFact’s United Facts of can you buy cialis over the counter usa America. A Festival of Fact-Checking. The journalists discussed the challenging environment for news and facts that grew out of the cialis. One major can you buy cialis over the counter usa issue was that Americans simply were not used to the idea that infectious diseases could cause mass disaster, Rosenthal said.

That mentality, combined with misinformation spread by then-President Donald Trump, made it easy for lies about the cialis to perpetuate. [embedded content] Related Topics Contact Us Submit a Story Tip.

Ronald Lindquist, 87, has been active all his discount cialis life. So, he wasn’t prepared for what happened when he stopped going out during the erectile dysfunction cialis and spent most of his time, inactive, at home. “I found it hard to get up and get out of bed,” said Lindquist, who lives with his wife discount cialis of 67 years in Palm Springs, California. €œI just wanted to lay around.

I lost my desire to do things.” Physically, Lindquist noticed that getting up out of a chair was difficult, as was getting in and out of his car. €œI was praying ‘Lord, give me some strength.’ I kind discount cialis of felt, I’m on my way out — I’m not going to make it,” he admitted. One little-discussed, long-term toll of the cialis. Large numbers of older adults have become physically and cognitively debilitated and less able to care for themselves during 15 months of sheltering in place.

No large-scale studies have documented the extent of this phenomenon discount cialis. But physicians, physical therapists and health plan leaders said the prospect of increased impairment and frailty in the older population is a growing concern. €œAnyone who discount cialis cares for older adults has seen a significant decline in functioning as people have been less active,” said Dr. Jonathan Bean, an expert in geriatric rehabilitation and director of the New England Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center at the Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System.

Bean’s 90-year-old mother, who lives in an assisted living facility, is a case in point. Before the cialis, she discount cialis could walk with a walker, engage in conversation and manage going to the bathroom. Now, she depends on a wheelchair and “her dementia has rapidly accelerated — she can’t really care for herself,” the doctor said. Bean said his mother is no longer able to benefit from rehabilitative therapies.

But many older adults might be able to realize improvements if discount cialis given proper attention. EMAIL SIGN-Up Subscribe to California Healthline's free Daily Edition. “Immobility and debility are outcomes to this horrific cialis that people aren’t even talking about yet,” said Linda Teodosio, a physical therapist and division rehabilitation manager in Bayada Home Health Care’s Towson, Maryland, office. €œWhat I’d love to see is a national effort, maybe by the discount cialis CDC [U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], focused on helping older people overcome these kinds of impairments.” The extent of the need is substantial, by many accounts.

Teodosio said she and her staff have seen a “tremendous increase” in falls and in the exacerbation of chronic illnesses such as diabetes, congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. €œOlder adults got off schedule during the cialis,” she explained, and “they didn’t eat well, they didn’t hydrate properly, they didn’t move, discount cialis they got weaker.” Dr. Lauren Jan Gleason, a geriatrician and assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago, said many older patients have lost muscle mass and strength this past year and are having difficulties with mobility and balance they didn’t have previously. €œI’m seeing weight gain and weight loss, and a lot more depression,” she noted.

Mary Louise Amilicia, 67, of discount cialis East Meadow, New York, put on more than 100 pounds while staying at home round-the-clock and taking care of her husband Frank, 69, who was hospitalized with a severe case of erectile dysfunction treatment in early December. While Amilicia also tested positive for the cialis, she had a mild case. €œWe were in the house every day 24/7, except when we had to go to the doctor, and when he got sick I had to do all the stuff he used to do,” Amilicia told me discount cialis. €œIt was a lot of stress.

I just began eating everything in sight and not taking care of myself.” The extra weight made it hard to move around, and Amilicia fell several times after Christmas, fortunately without sustaining serious injuries. After coming home from the hospital, Frank couldn’t get out of a chair, walk 10 feet to the bathroom discount cialis or climb the stairs in his house. Instead, he spent most of the day in a recliner, relying on his wife for help. Now, the couple is getting physical therapy from Northwell Health, New York state’s largest health care system.

Just before the cialis, Northwell launched a “rehabilitation at home” program for patients who otherwise would have seen therapists in discount cialis outpatient facilities. (Medicare Part B pays for the treatments.) Frank Amilicia was hospitalized with a severe case of erectile dysfunction treatment last December. When he returned home, he was confined to his recliner, relying on his wife, Mary discount cialis Louise, for help. Mary Louise put on extra weight while taking care of Frank and fell several times after Christmas.

Now, the couple is getting physical therapy from Northwell Health, New York state’s largest health care system. (Saaba Mundia) The program is serving more discount cialis than 100 patients on Long Island, in Westchester County and parts of New York City. €œThe demand is very strong and we’re in the process of hiring another 20 therapists,” said Nina DePaola, Northwell’s vice president of post-acute services. Sabaa Mundia, a physical therapist working with the Amilicias, said Mary Louise can walk up to 400 feet without a walker, after doing strengthening exercises twice a week over the course of three weeks.

Frank had been using a wheelchair and is now walking 150 feet with a discount cialis walker on a regular basis after more than a month of therapy. €œOlder adults can lose about 20% of their muscle mass if they don’t walk for up to five days,” Mundia said. €œAnd their endurance decreases, their stamina decreases, and their range of motion decreases.” Recognizing that risk, some health plans have been reaching out to older members to assess how they’re faring. In Massachusetts, Commonwealth Care Alliance serves more than 10,000 older adults who are poor and eligible for both Medicare and discount cialis Medicaid, the federal-state program for people with low incomes.

On average, they tend to have more medical needs than similarly aged seniors. Between March and September last year, the plan’s staffers conducted “wellness outreach assessments” by phone every two weeks, asking about ongoing medical care, new physical and emotional challenges, and the adequacy of available help, among other concerns discount cialis. Today, calls are made monthly and staffers have resumed seeing members in person. An increase in physical deconditioning is one of the big issues that’s emerged.

€œWe’ve had physical therapists digitally engage with discount cialis members to coach them through strength and balance training,” said Dr. Robert MacArthur, a geriatrician and Commonwealth Care’s chief medical officer. €œAnd when that didn’t work, we sent therapists into people’s homes.” In California, SCAN Health Plan serves a similarly vulnerable population of nearly 15,000 older adults dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid through its Medicare Advantage plans. Care navigators are calling these members frequently and telling them “now that you’re vaccinated, it’s safe to discount cialis go see your doctor in person,” said Eve Gelb, SCAN’s senior vice president of health care services.

Doctors can then evaluate unmet health needs and make referrals to physical and occupational therapists, if necessary. Another SCAN program, Member2Member, pairs older adult “peer health advocates” with members discount cialis who have noted physical or emotional difficulties on health risk assessments. That’s how Lindquist in Palm Springs connected with Jerry Payne, 79, a peer advocate who calls him regularly and helped him come up with a plan to emerge from his cialis-induced funk. €œFirst, he said, ‘Ron, you should try getting up every hour and taking a few steps’ — that was the start of it,” Lindquist told me.

€œThen, he’d suggest walking another block when I would take my dog discount cialis out. It was painful. Walking was not pleasant. But he was very discount cialis encouraging.” About a month ago, Payne had a Fitbit sent to Lindquist.

At first, Lindquist walked about 1,500 steps a day. Now, he’s up discount cialis to more than 5,000 steps a day and has a goal of reaching 10,000 steps. €œI’m sleeping better and I feel so much better all around,” Lindquist said. €œMy whole attitude and physicality has changed.

I tell you, this has been an answer to my prayers.” We’re eager discount cialis to hear from readers about questions you’d like answered, problems you’ve been having with your care and advice you need in dealing with the health care system. Visit khn.org/columnists to submit your requests or tips. This story was produced by KHN (Kaiser Health News), a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three discount cialis major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation).

KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation. Judith Graham discount cialis. khn.navigatingaging@gmail.com, @judith_graham Related Topics Contact Us Submit a Story TipJon Greenberg interviewed Elisabeth Rosenthal, editor-in-chief of KHN. Shefali Luthra, health and gender reporter at The 19th.

And Derek Thompson, staff writer for The Atlantic, about erectile dysfunction treatment misinformation during PolitiFact’s United Facts of America discount cialis. A Festival of Fact-Checking. The journalists discussed the challenging environment for news and facts that grew out of the cialis. One major issue was that Americans simply were not used to the idea discount cialis that infectious diseases could cause mass disaster, Rosenthal said.

That mentality, combined with misinformation spread by then-President Donald Trump, made it easy for lies about the cialis to perpetuate. [embedded content] Related Topics Contact Us Submit a Story Tip.

Does cialis have shelf life

A Washington Post story said “some cotton cloth masks are about does cialis have shelf life as effective as surgical masks, while thin polyester spandex gaiters may be worse than going maskless.” A Forbes article, referring to neck gaiters, said the study “found that one type of face covering might actually be doing more harm than good.” But the study didn’t show that, nor was it designed to. It was actually a test on how to test masks inexpensively, not to determine which one was most effective. The researchers set up a green laser beam in a dark room. A masked subject was then asked does cialis have shelf life to speak so that the droplets from the speaker’s mouth showed up in the green beam. The whole process was video recorded on a cell phone, after which researchers calculated the number of droplets that showed up.

The process was repeated 10 times for each mask (14 in total, one of which was a neck gaiter) and the setup cost less than $200. What was meant as a study on the pricing and efficacy of a does cialis have shelf life test turned into, at least in some journalistic circles, a definitive nail-in-the-coffin for gaiters. Days after the initial reports that neck gaiters might not only be useless but maybe even harmful, a new round of new reports came out saying that those initial reports were overblown and misleading. The authors of the study even held a press conference where they emphasized that their study was never meant to test the effectiveness of masks. They only tested one gaiter-style does cialis have shelf life mask, which says nothing about that style of mask in general.

The combination of reporting on the actual findings of the study and the direct comments from the authors seems to have abated the anti-neck gaiter fervor. But all of this this—or most of it, anyway—likely could have been prevented. You could make the argument that it’s not a scientist’s does cialis have shelf life job to worrying about how their science might be interpreted. It’s their job to do the research and publish it in a scientific manuscript. Leave the communicating for someone else.

But that’s not how the spread does cialis have shelf life of information works. Fewer and fewer newsrooms have staffers with scientific backgrounds, or who are dedicated to scientific reporting. To be clear, journalists don’t need to be scientists to understand science, but reporting on science does require a certain amount of expertise. When newsrooms ask reporters does cialis have shelf life to cover more and more topic areas and this specialization decreases, an attention to detail is sometimes lost. So, the onus to help journalists (and frankly, all nonscientists) get the facts straight falls to the scientists doing the science.

That’s where science communication training comes in. Science communication, or scicomm as it’s known colloquially, is not a core part of coursework in a majority of degree-granting science programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels does cialis have shelf life. This trend is slowly changing as more institutions incorporate scicomm into their curriculums. Outside of academia, nonprofits and scientific societies are taking up the mantle. I work for the American Geophysical Union (AGU), a society for Earth and space scientists, in the Sharing Science program, where we teach scientists to communicate with nonscientists through courses, workshops, webinars and other trainings does cialis have shelf life.

Aside from the AGU, there is the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the Stony Brook–affiliated Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science and the science storytelling organization The Story Collider, to name just to name a few. We teach the so-called “soft skills” that the ivory tower of science has shunned for so long but that are so necessary in effectively communicating. One thing we stress is “know your audience.” Scientists must think about how their science will be perceived, no matter how relevant or not it might be to does cialis have shelf life the broader public. Science does not exist in a vacuum. It never has.

But especially now, and especially with anything related to erectile dysfunction treatment, scientists much be does cialis have shelf life hypervigilant when communicating results and try, to the best of their abilities, to account for as many interpretations as possible. Yes, it is onerous, especially on top of the multitude of other responsibilities that come with being a scientist, but it is necessary. The traditional ways in which scientists communicate their results (i.e., scientific manuscripts) are not going away anytime soon. However, and while it may be an unfair ask, scientists must not does cialis have shelf life only be able to communicate their science to their peers. They must always think about nonscience audiences as the lines between science and “the public” continue to blur.

Training scientists to effectively communicate to, or at least think about, diverse audiences is a necessary part of science.In 1835 French philosopher Auguste Comte asserted that nobody would ever know what the stars were made of. €œWe understand the possibility of determining their shapes, their distances, their sizes and their movements,” he wrote, “whereas we would never know how to study by any does cialis have shelf life means their chemical composition, or their mineralogical structure, and, even more so, the nature of any organized beings that might live on their surface.” Comte would be stunned by the discoveries made since then. Today we know that the universe is far bigger and stranger than anyone suspected. Not only does it extend beyond the Milky Way to untold numbers of other galaxies—this would come as a surprise to astronomers of the 19th and early 20th century to whom our galaxy was “the universe”—but it is expanding faster every day. Now we can confidently trace cosmic history back 13.8 billion years to a moment only does cialis have shelf life a billionth of a second after the big bang.

Astronomers have pinned down our universe's expansion rate, the mean density of its main constituents, and other key numbers to a precision of 1 or 2 percent. They have also worked out new laws of physics governing space—general relativity and quantum mechanics—that turn out to be much more outlandish than the classical laws people understood before. These laws in turn predicted cosmic oddities does cialis have shelf life such as black holes, neutron stars and gravitational waves. The story of how we gained this knowledge is full of accidental discoveries, stunning surprises and dogged scientists pursuing goals others thought unreachable. Our first hint of the true nature of stars came in 1860, when Gustav Kirchhoff recognized that the dark lines in the spectrum of light coming from the sun were caused by different elements absorbing specific wavelengths.

Astronomers analyzed similar features in the light of other bright stars and discovered that they were made of the same materials found on Earth—not of some mysterious “fifth essence” as does cialis have shelf life the ancients had believed. But it took longer to understand what fuel made the stars shine. Lord Kelvin (William Thomson) calculated that if stars derived their power just from gravity, slowly deflating as their radiation leaked out, then the sun's age was 20 million to 40 million years—far less time than Charles Darwin or the geologists of the time inferred had elapsed on Earth. In his last paper on the subject, in 1908, Kelvin inserted an escape clause stating that he would stick by his estimate “unless there were some other energy source laid up does cialis have shelf life in the storehouse of creation.” That source, it turned out, is nuclear fusion—the process by which atomic nuclei join to create a larger nucleus and release energy. In 1925 astrophysicist Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin used the light spectra of stars to calculate their chemical abundances and found that, unlike Earth, they were made mainly of hydrogen and helium.

She revealed her conclusions in what astronomer Otto Struve described as “the most brilliant Ph.D. Thesis ever written in astronomy.” A decade later physicist Hans Bethe showed that the fusion of hydrogen nuclei into helium was the main power source in ordinary stars does cialis have shelf life. What is the source of the sun's power?. The answer—fusion—came in 1938. Credit.

SOHO (ESA and NASA) At the same time stars were becoming less mysterious, so, too, was the nature of fuzzy “nebulae” becoming clearer. In a “great debate” held before the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C., on April 26, 1920, Harlow Shapley maintained that our Milky Way was preeminent and that all the nebulae were part of it. In contrast, Heber Curtis argued that some of the fuzzy objects in the sky were separate galaxies—“island universes”—fully the equal of our Milky Way. The conflict was settled not that night but just a few years later, in 1924, when Edwin Hubble measured the distances to many nebulae and proved they were beyond the reaches of the Milky Way. His evidence came from Cepheids, variable stars in the nebulae that reveal their true brightness, and thus their distance, by their pulsation period—a relation discovered by Henrietta Swan Leavitt.

Soon after Hubble realized that the universe was bigger than many had thought, he found that it was still growing. In 1929 he discovered that spectral features in the starlight from distant galaxies appeared redder—that is, they had longer wavelengths—than the same features in nearby stars. If this effect was interpreted as a Doppler shift—the natural spreading of waves as they recede—it would imply that other galaxies were moving away from one another and from us. Indeed, the farther away they were, the faster their recession seemed to be. This was the first clue that our cosmos was not static but was expanding all the time.

The universe also appeared to contain much that we could not see. In 1933 Fritz Zwicky estimated the mass of all the stars in the Coma cluster of galaxies and found that they make up only about 1 percent of the mass necessary to keep the cluster from flying apart. The discrepancy was dubbed “the missing mass problem,” but many scientists at the time doubted Zwicky's suggestion that hidden matter might be to blame. The question remained divisive until the 1970s, when work by Vera Rubin and W. Kent Ford (observing stars) and by Morton Roberts and Robert Whitehurst (making radio observations) showed that the outer parts of galactic disks would also fly apart unless they were subject to a stronger gravitational pull than stars and gas alone could provide.

Finally, most astronomers were compelled to accept that some kind of “dark matter” must be present. €œWe have peered into a new world,” Rubin wrote, “and have seen that it is more mysterious and more complex than we had imagined.” Scientists now believe that dark matter outnumbers visible matter by about a factor of five, yet we are hardly closer than we were in the 1930s to figuring out what it is. Gravity, the force that revealed all that dark matter, has proved to be nearly as baffling. A pivotal moment came in 1915 when Albert Einstein published his general theory of relativity, which transcended Isaac Newton's mechanics and revealed that gravity is actually the deformation of the fabric of space and time. This new theory was slow to take hold.

Even after it was shown to be correct by observations of a 1919 solar eclipse, many dismissed the theory as an interesting quirk—after all, Newton's laws were still good enough for calculating most things. €œThe discoveries, while very important, did not, however, affect anything on this earth,” astronomer W.J.S. Lockyer told the New York Times after the eclipse. For almost half a century after it was proposed, general relativity was sidelined from the mainstream of physics. Then, beginning in the 1960s, astronomers started discovering new and extreme phenomena that only Einstein's ideas could explain.

One example lurks in the Crab Nebula, one of the best-known objects in the sky, which is composed of the expanding debris from a supernova witnessed by Chinese astronomers in a.d. 1054. Since it appeared, the nebula has kept on shining blue and bright—but how?. Its light source was a longtime puzzle, but the answer came in 1968, when the dim star at its center was revealed to be anything but normal. It was actually an ultracompact neutron star, heavier than the sun but only a few miles in radius and spinning at 30 revolutions per second.

€œThis was a totally unexpected, totally new kind of object behaving in a way that astronomers had never expected, never dreamt of,” said Jocelyn Bell Burnell, one of the discoverers of the phenomenon. The star's excessive spin sends out a wind of fast electrons that generate the blue light. The gravitational force at the surface of such an incredibly dense object falls way outside of Newton's purview—a rocket would need to be fired at half the speed of light to escape its pull. Here the relativistic effects predicted by Einstein must be taken into account. Thousands of such spinning neutron stars—called pulsars—have been discovered.

All are believed to be remnants of the cores of stars that exploded as supernovae, offering an ideal laboratory for studying the laws of nature under extreme conditions. The most exotic result of Einstein's theory was the concept of black holes—objects that have collapsed so far that not even light can escape their gravitational pull. For decades these were only conjecture, and Einstein wrote in 1939 that they “do not exist in physical reality.” But in 1963 astronomers discovered quasars. Mysterious, hyperluminous beacons in the centers of some galaxies. More than a decade passed before a consensus emerged that this intense brightness was generated by gas swirling into huge black holes lurking in the galaxies' cores.

It was the strongest evidence yet that these bizarre predictions of general relativity actually exist. When did the universe begin?. Did it even have a beginning?. Astronomers had long debated these questions when, in the middle of the 20th century, two competing theories proposed very different answers. The “hot big bang” model said the cosmos began extremely small, hot and dense and then cooled and spread out over time.

The “steady state” hypothesis held that the universe had essentially existed in the same form forever. The contest was settled by a serendipitous discovery. In 1965 radio astronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were trying to calibrate a new antenna at Bell Labs in New Jersey. They had a problem. No matter what they did to reduce background interference, they measured a consistent level of noise in every direction.

They even evicted a family of pigeons that had been nesting in the antenna in the hope that they were the source of the problem. But the signal persisted. They had discovered that intergalactic space is not completely cold. Instead it is warmed to nearly three kelvins (just above absolute zero) by weak microwaves. Penzias and Wilson had accidentally uncovered the “afterglow of creation”—the cooled and diluted relic of an era when everything in the universe was squeezed until it was hot and dense.

The finding tipped the balance firmly in favor of the big bang picture of cosmology. According to the model, during the earliest, hottest epochs of time, the universe was opaque, rather like the inside of a star, and light was repeatedly scattered by electrons. When the temperature fell to 3,000 kelvins, however, the electrons slowed down enough to be captured by protons and created neutral atoms. Thereafter light could travel freely. The Bell Labs signal was this ancient light, first released about 300,000 years after the birth of the universe and still pervading the cosmos—what we call the cosmic microwave background.

It took a while for the magnitude of the discovery to sink in for the scientists who made it. €œWe were very pleased to have a possible explanation [for the antenna noise], but I don't think either of us really took the cosmology very seriously at first,” Wilson says. €œWalter Sullivan wrote a first-page article in the New York Times about it, and I began to think at that point that, you know, maybe I better start taking this cosmology seriously.” Measurements of this radiation have since enabled scientists to understand how galaxies emerged. Precise observations of the microwaves reveal that they are not completely uniform over the sky. Some patches are slightly hotter, others slightly cooler.

The amplitude of these fluctuations is only one part in 100,000, but they are the seeds of today's cosmic structure. Any region of the expanding universe that started off slightly denser than average expanded less because it was subjected to extra gravity. Its growth lagged further and further, the contrast between its density and that of its surroundings becoming greater and greater. Eventually these clumps were dense enough that gas was pulled in and compressed into stars, forming galaxies. The crucial point is this.

Computer models that simulate this process are fed the initial fluctuations measured in the cosmic microwave background, which represent the universe when it was 300,000 years old. The output after 13.8 billion years of virtual time have elapsed is a cosmos where galaxies resemble those we see, clustered as they are in the actual universe. This is a real triumph. We understand, at least in outline, 99.998 percent of cosmic history. It is not only the big cosmic picture that we have come to understand.

A series of discoveries has also revealed the history of the elemental building blocks that make up stars, planets and even our own bodies. Starting in the 1950s, progress in atomic physics led to accurate modeling of stars' surface layers. Simultaneously, detailed knowledge of the nuclei not just of hydrogen and helium atoms but also of the rest of the elements allowed scientists to calculate which nuclear reactions dominate at different stages in a star's life. Astronomers came to understand how nuclear fusion creates an onion-skin structure in massive stars as atoms successively fuse to build heavier and heavier elements, ending with iron in the innermost, hottest layer. Inside the Crab Nebula is a neutron star.

Classical physics fails, and relativity applies. Credit. NASA, ESA and Hubble Heritage Team (STSCI and AURA) Astronomers also learned how stars die when they exhaust their hydrogen fuel and blow off their outer gaseous layers. Lighter stars then settle down to a quiet demise as dense, dim objects called white dwarfs, but heavier stars shed more of their mass, either in winds during their lives or in an explosive death via supernova. This expelled mass turns out to be crucial to our own existence.

It mixes into the interstellar medium and recondenses into new stars orbited by planets such as Earth. The concept was conceived by Fred Hoyle, who developed it during the 1950s along with two other British astronomers, Margaret Burbidge and Geoffrey Burbidge, and American nuclear physicist William Fowler. In their classic 1957 paper in Reviews of Modern Physics (known by the initials of its authors as BBFH), they analyzed the networks of the nuclear reactions involved and discovered how most atoms in the periodic table came to exist. They calculated why oxygen and carbon, for instance, are common, whereas gold and uranium are rare. Our galaxy, it turns out, is a huge ecological system where gas is being recycled through successive generations of stars.

Each of us contains atoms forged in dozens of different stars spread across the Milky Way that lived and died more than 4.5 billion years ago. Scientists long assumed this process was seeding planets—and possibly even life—around stars other than our own sun. But we did not know for sure whether planets existed outside our solar system until the 1990s, when astronomers developed clever methods for identifying worlds that are too dim for us to see directly. One technique looks for tiny periodic changes in a star's movement caused by the gravitational pull of a planet orbiting it. In 1995 Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz used this strategy to detect 51 Pegasi b, the first known exoplanet orbiting a sunlike star.

The technique can reveal a planet's mass, the length of its “year” and the shape of its orbit. So far more than 800 exoplanets have been found this way. A second technique works better for smaller planets. A star dims slightly when a planet transits in front of it. An Earth-like planet passing a sunlike star can cause a dimming of about one part in 10,000 once per orbit.

The Kepler spacecraft launched in 2009 found more than 2,000 planets this way, many no bigger than Earth. A big surprise to come from astronomers' success in planet hunting was the variety of different planets out there—many much larger and closer to their stars than the bodies in our solar system—suggesting that our cosmic neighborhood may be somewhat special. By this point scientists understood where almost all the elements that form planets, stars and galaxies originated. The final piece in this puzzle, however, arrived very recently and from a seemingly unrelated inquiry. General relativity had predicted a phenomenon called gravitational waves—ripples in spacetime produced by the movement of massive objects.

Despite decades of searching for them, however, no waves were seen—until September 2015. That was when the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) detected the first evidence of gravitational waves in the form of a “chirp”—a minute shaking of spacetime that speeds up and then dies away. In this case, it was caused by two black holes in a binary system that had started out orbiting each other but gradually spiraled together and eventually converged into a single massive hole. The crash occurred more than a billion light-years away. LIGO's detectors consist of mirrors four kilometers apart whose separation is measured by laser beams that reflect light back and forth between them.

A passing gravitational wave causes the space between the two mirrors to jitter by an amount millions of times as small as the diameter of a single atom—LIGO is indeed an amazing feat of precision engineering and perseverance. Since that first find, more than a dozen similar events have been detected, opening up a new field that probes the dynamics of space itself. One event was of special astrophysical interest because it signaled the merger of two pulsars. Unlike black hole mergers, this kind of collision, a splat between two ultradense stars, yields a pulse of optical light, x-rays and gamma rays. The discovery filled a gap in the classic work of BBFH.

The authors had explained the genesis of many of the elements in space but were flummoxed by the forging of gold. In the 1970s David N. Schramm and his colleagues had speculated that the exotic nuclear processes involved in hypothetical mergers of pulsar stars might do the job—a theory that has since been validated. Despite the incredible progress in astronomy over the past 175 years, we have perhaps more questions now than we did back then. Take dark matter.

I am on record as having said more than 20 years ago that we would know dark matter's nature long before today. Although that prediction has proved wrong, I have not given up hope. Dark energy, however, is a different story. Dark energy entered the picture in 1998, when researchers measuring the distances and speeds of supernovae found that the expansion of the universe was actually accelerating. Gravitational attraction pulling galaxies toward one another seemed to be overwhelmed by a mysterious new force latent in empty space that pushes galaxies apart—a force that came to be known as dark energy.

The mystery of dark energy has lingered—we still do not know what causes it or why it has the particular strength it does—and we probably will not understand it until we have a model for the graininess of space on a scale a billion billion times smaller than an atomic nucleus. Theorists working on string theory or loop quantum gravity are tackling this challenge, but the phenomenon seems so far from being accessible by any experiment that I am not expecting answers anytime soon. The upside, however, is that a theory that could account for the energy in the vacuum of space might also yield insights into the very beginning of our universe, when everything was so compressed and dense that quantum fluctuations could shake the entire cosmos. Which brings us to another major question facing us now. How did it all begin?.

What exactly set off the big bang that started our universe?. Did space undergo a period of extremely rapid early expansion called inflation, as many theorists believe?. And there is something else. Some models, such as eternal inflation, suggest that “our” big bang could be just one island of spacetime in a vast archipelago—one big bang among many. If this hypothesis is true, different big bangs may cool down differently, leading to unique laws of physics in each case—a “multiverse” rather than a universe.

Some physicists hate the multiverse concept because it means that we will never have neat explanations for the fundamental numbers that govern our physical laws, which may in this grander perspective be just environmental accidents. But our preferences are irrelevant to nature. About 10 years ago I was on a panel at Stanford University where we were asked by someone in the audience how much we would bet on the multiverse concept. I said that on a scale of betting my goldfish, my dog or my life, I was nearly at the dog level. Andrei Linde, who had spent 25 years promoting eternal inflation, said he would almost bet his life.

Later, on being told this, physicist Steven Weinberg said he would happily bet my dog and Linde's life. Linde, my dog and I will all be dead before the question is settled. But none of this should be dismissed as metaphysics. It is speculative science—exciting science. And it may be true.

And what will happen to this universe—or multiverse—of ours?. Long-range forecasts are seldom reliable, but the best and most conservative bet is that we have almost an eternity ahead with an ever colder and ever emptier cosmos. Galaxies will accelerate away and disappear. All that will be left from our vantage point will be the remnants of the Milky Way, Andromeda and smaller neighbors. Protons may decay, dark matter particles may be annihilated, there may be occasional flashes when black holes evaporate—and then silence.

This possible future is based on the assumption that the dark energy stays constant. If it decays, however, there could be a “big crunch” with the universe contracting in on itself. Or if dark energy strengthens, there would be a “big rip” when galaxies, stars and even atoms are torn apart. Other questions closer to home tantalize us. Could there be life on any of these new planets we are discovering?.

Here we are still in the realm of speculation. But unless the origin of life on Earth involved a rare fluke, I expect evidence of a biosphere on an exoplanet within 20 years. I will not hold my breath for the discovery of aliens, but I think the search for extraterrestrial intelligence is a worthwhile gamble. Success in the search would carry the momentous message that concepts of logic and physics are not limited to the hardware in human skulls. Until now, progress in cosmology and astrophysics has owed 95 percent to advancing instruments and technology and less than 5 percent to armchair theory.

I expect that balance to persist. What Hubble wrote in the 1930s remains a good maxim today. €œNot until the empirical resources are exhausted, need we pass on to the dreamy realms of speculation.” There have been many particularly exhilarating eras in the past 175 years—the 1920s and 1930s, when we realized the universe was not limited to the Milky Way, and the 1960s and 1970s, when we discovered objects that defy classical physics, such as neutron stars and quasars, and clues about the beginning of time from the cosmic microwave background. Since then, the pace of advancement has crescendoed rather than slackened. When the history of science gets written, this amazing progress will be acclaimed as one of its greatest triumphs—up there with plate tectonics, the genome and the Standard Model of particle physics.

And some major fields in astronomy are just getting going. Exoplanet research is only 25 years old, and serious work in astrobiology is really only starting. Some exoplanets may have life—they may even harbor aliens who know all the answers already. I find that encouraging. Credit.

Moritz Stefaner and Christian LässerFor more context, see “Visualizing 175 Years of Words in Scientific American”Fully functional quantum computers and a new quantum industry may appear much sooner than many have anticipated—thanks to five new National Quantum Information Science Research centers just announced by the U.S. Department of Energy. This latest development in the recently launched National Quantum Initiative Act, signed into law in December 2018, comes with $625 million in funding over five years. It’s a huge deal. For the first time, researchers from academia, U.S.

National labs and industry will be working side by side aiming to speed up the fundamental quantum information science research. And more research should bring us closer to advanced quantum technologies and the grandest goal of quantum information science, creating a fault-tolerant quantum computer that can indefinitely compute without errors. Why do we need quantum computers?. We need them to speed up the process of scientific discovery so that we can address some our greatest global challenges, from designing new materials for more efficient carbon capture plants and batteries to better drugs and treatments. Traditionally, material design has depended a lot on either happy accidents or a long and tedious iterative process of experimentation.

Over the past half a century, classical computers have greatly accelerated this process by performing molecular simulations. Still, classical computers can’t simulate complex molecules with enough accuracy, and that’s where quantum computing will be able to help. Quantum computers rely on the same physical rules as atoms to manipulate information. Just like traditional, classical, computers execute logical circuits to run software programs, quantum computers use the physics phenomena of superposition, entanglement and interference to execute quantum circuits. One day soon, they should be able to perform mathematical calculations out of the reach of the most advanced current and future classical supercomputers.

But to get there, we will need to build quantum machines that compute without errors. Quantum computers rely on fragile qubits, short for quantum bits, which are only of use when they are in a delicate quantum state. Any external disturbances or “noise,” such as heat, light or vibrations, inevitably yanks these qubits out of their quantum state and turns them into regular bits. Overcoming this hurdle is beyond the limits of a single team, and we need scores of scientists from academia, the national labs and industry to get us there. This is where the new centers come in.

At last, they will get the talent from all our R&D sectors to work together on quantum-related issues. Take the problem of building a quantum system that would compute without errors. Our best theories estimate that to get there, we should build machines with tens of millions of qubits on a single cooled-down chip. But we don’t want to cool down quantum chips the size of football fields. To avoid it, we need many breakthroughs—meaning we have to invest in research at scale.

Luckily, some of the latest results show that it’s possible to reduce the number of qubits we need to implement error-correcting codes. But even if we achieve this, we will have to overcome another hurdle. Linking quantum processors, just like we connect today’s computer chips inside data centers using intranets. This requires quantum interconnects that transfer the fragile quantum information stored in the processor’s qubits into a different quantum format (say, photons) that “communicate” the data to another processor. Advances in this space must unite disparate technologies like superconducting qubits and fiber optics, while solving outstanding challenges in materials science and quantum communications.

Research teams could probably solve these problems, and many other challenges the quantum information science community is tackling, individually. But it would take decades, and we can’t afford to wait this long. Partnerships and collaboration, through the new centers, will offer us the chance of making the quantum leap we need. With a long-term vision of establishing a robust national quantum ecosystem, academia, national labs and industry partners at last have a quantum roadmap. Now it’s up to all the partners in this joint effort to create a quantum ecosystem and industry.

We’ll need plenty of the wit, talent, creativity and enthusiasm of a skilled and diverse quantum workforce to make it happen..

A Washington Post story said “some cotton cloth masks are about as effective as surgical masks, while thin polyester spandex gaiters may be worse than going maskless.” A Forbes article, referring to neck gaiters, said the study “found that one type of face covering might actually be doing more harm than good.” But the discount cialis study didn’t show that, nor was it designed where to buy cialis to. It was actually a test on how to test masks inexpensively, not to determine which one was most effective. The researchers set up a green laser beam in a dark room.

A masked subject was then asked to speak so that the droplets discount cialis from the speaker’s mouth showed up in the green beam. The whole process was video recorded on a cell phone, after which researchers calculated the number of droplets that showed up. The process was repeated 10 times for each mask (14 in total, one of which was a neck gaiter) and the setup cost less than $200.

What was meant as a study on the pricing and efficacy of a test turned into, at least in discount cialis some journalistic circles, a definitive nail-in-the-coffin for gaiters. Days after the initial reports that neck gaiters might not only be useless but maybe even harmful, a new round of new reports came out saying that those initial reports were overblown and misleading. The authors of the study even held a press conference where they emphasized that their study was never meant to test the effectiveness of masks.

They only tested one gaiter-style mask, which says nothing about that style of mask in general discount cialis. The combination of reporting on the actual findings of the study and the direct comments from the authors seems to have abated the anti-neck gaiter fervor. But all of this this—or most of it, anyway—likely could have been prevented.

You could make the argument that it’s not a scientist’s job to worrying about how their discount cialis science might be interpreted. It’s their job to do the research and publish it in a scientific manuscript. Leave the communicating for someone else.

But that’s not how discount cialis the spread of information works. Fewer and fewer newsrooms have staffers with scientific backgrounds, or who are dedicated to scientific reporting. To be clear, journalists don’t need to be scientists to understand science, but reporting on science does require a certain amount of expertise.

When newsrooms ask reporters to cover more and more topic areas and this specialization decreases, an attention to detail is discount cialis sometimes lost. So, the onus to help journalists (and frankly, all nonscientists) get the facts straight falls to the scientists doing the science. That’s where science communication training comes in.

Science communication, or scicomm as it’s known colloquially, is not a core discount cialis part of coursework in a majority of degree-granting science programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels. This trend is slowly changing as more institutions incorporate scicomm into their curriculums. Outside of academia, nonprofits and scientific societies are taking up the mantle.

I work for the American Geophysical Union (AGU), a society for Earth and space scientists, in the Sharing Science program, where we teach scientists to communicate with discount cialis nonscientists through courses, workshops, webinars and other trainings. Aside from the AGU, there is the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the Stony Brook–affiliated Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science and the science storytelling organization The Story Collider, to name just to name a few. We teach the so-called “soft skills” that the ivory tower of science has shunned for so long but that are so necessary in effectively communicating.

One thing we stress is “know your audience.” Scientists must think about how their science will be perceived, no matter how relevant or not it might be discount cialis to the broader public. Science does not exist in a vacuum. It never has.

But especially now, and especially with anything related to erectile dysfunction treatment, scientists discount cialis much be hypervigilant when communicating results and try, to the best of their abilities, to account for as many interpretations as possible. Yes, it is onerous, especially on top of the multitude of other responsibilities that come with being a scientist, but it is necessary. The traditional ways in which scientists communicate their results (i.e., scientific manuscripts) are not going away anytime soon.

However, and while it may be an unfair ask, scientists must not only be able to communicate their science to their discount cialis peers. They must always think about nonscience audiences as the lines between science and “the public” continue to blur. Training scientists to effectively communicate to, or at least think about, diverse audiences is a necessary part of science.In 1835 French philosopher Auguste Comte asserted that nobody would ever know what the stars were made of.

€œWe understand the possibility of determining their shapes, their distances, their sizes and their movements,” he wrote, “whereas we would never know how to study by any means their chemical composition, or their mineralogical structure, and, even more so, the nature of any organized beings that discount cialis might live on their surface.” Comte would be stunned by the discoveries made since then. Today we know that the universe is far bigger and stranger than anyone suspected. Not only does it extend beyond the Milky Way to untold numbers of other galaxies—this would come as a surprise to astronomers of the 19th and early 20th century to whom our galaxy was “the universe”—but it is expanding faster every day.

Now we can confidently trace cosmic history back 13.8 billion years to a moment only a billionth of a discount cialis second after the big bang. Astronomers have pinned down our universe's expansion rate, the mean density of its main constituents, and other key numbers to a precision of 1 or 2 percent. They have also worked out new laws of physics governing space—general relativity and quantum mechanics—that turn out to be much more outlandish than the classical laws people understood before.

These laws in turn predicted cosmic oddities such as black holes, discount cialis neutron stars and gravitational waves. The story of how we gained this knowledge is full of accidental discoveries, stunning surprises and dogged scientists pursuing goals others thought unreachable. Our first hint of the true nature of stars came in 1860, when Gustav Kirchhoff recognized that the dark lines in the spectrum of light coming from the sun were caused by different elements absorbing specific wavelengths.

Astronomers analyzed discount cialis similar features in the light of other bright stars and discovered that they were made of the same materials found on Earth—not of some mysterious “fifth essence” as the ancients had believed. But it took longer to understand what fuel made the stars shine. Lord Kelvin (William Thomson) calculated that if stars derived their power just from gravity, slowly deflating as their radiation leaked out, then the sun's age was 20 million to 40 million years—far less time than Charles Darwin or the geologists of the time inferred had elapsed on Earth.

In his last paper on the subject, in 1908, Kelvin inserted an escape clause stating that he would stick by his estimate “unless there were some other energy source laid up in the storehouse of creation.” That source, it turned out, is nuclear fusion—the process by discount cialis which atomic nuclei join to create a larger nucleus and release energy. In 1925 astrophysicist Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin used the light spectra of stars to calculate their chemical abundances and found that, unlike Earth, they were made mainly of hydrogen and helium. She revealed her conclusions in what astronomer Otto Struve described as “the most brilliant Ph.D.

Thesis ever written in astronomy.” A decade later physicist Hans Bethe showed that discount cialis the fusion of hydrogen nuclei into helium was the main power source in ordinary stars. What is the source of the sun's power?. The answer—fusion—came in 1938.

Credit. SOHO (ESA and NASA) At the same time stars were becoming less mysterious, so, too, was the nature of fuzzy “nebulae” becoming clearer. In a “great debate” held before the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C., on April 26, 1920, Harlow Shapley maintained that our Milky Way was preeminent and that all the nebulae were part of it.

In contrast, Heber Curtis argued that some of the fuzzy objects in the sky were separate galaxies—“island universes”—fully the equal of our Milky Way. The conflict was settled not that night but just a few years later, in 1924, when Edwin Hubble measured the distances to many nebulae and proved they were beyond the reaches of the Milky Way. His evidence came from Cepheids, variable stars in the nebulae that reveal their true brightness, and thus their distance, by their pulsation period—a relation discovered by Henrietta Swan Leavitt.

Soon after Hubble realized that the universe was bigger than many had thought, he found that it was still growing. In 1929 he discovered that spectral features in the starlight from distant galaxies appeared redder—that is, they had longer wavelengths—than the same features in nearby stars. If this effect was interpreted as a Doppler shift—the natural spreading of waves as they recede—it would imply that other galaxies were moving away from one another and from us.

Indeed, the farther away they were, the faster their recession seemed to be. This was the first clue that our cosmos was not static but was expanding all the time. The universe also appeared to contain much that we could not see.

In 1933 Fritz Zwicky estimated the mass of all the stars in the Coma cluster of galaxies and found that they make up only about 1 percent of the mass necessary to keep the cluster from flying apart. The discrepancy was dubbed “the missing mass problem,” but many scientists at the time doubted Zwicky's suggestion that hidden matter might be to blame. The question remained divisive until the 1970s, when work by Vera Rubin and W.

Kent Ford (observing stars) and by Morton Roberts and Robert Whitehurst (making radio observations) showed that the outer parts of galactic disks would also fly apart unless they were subject to a stronger gravitational pull than stars and gas alone could provide. Finally, most astronomers were compelled to accept that some kind of “dark matter” must be present. €œWe have peered into a new world,” Rubin wrote, “and have seen that it is more mysterious and more complex than we had imagined.” Scientists now believe that dark matter outnumbers visible matter by about a factor of five, yet we are hardly closer than we were in the 1930s to figuring out what it is.

Gravity, the force that revealed all that dark matter, has proved to be nearly as baffling. A pivotal moment came in 1915 when Albert Einstein published his general theory of relativity, which transcended Isaac Newton's mechanics and revealed that gravity is actually the deformation of the fabric of space and time. This new theory was slow to take hold.

Even after it was shown to be correct by observations of a 1919 solar eclipse, many dismissed the theory as an interesting quirk—after all, Newton's laws were still good enough for calculating most things. €œThe discoveries, while very important, did not, however, affect anything on this earth,” astronomer W.J.S. Lockyer told the New York Times after the eclipse.

For almost half a century after it was proposed, general relativity was sidelined from the mainstream of physics. Then, beginning in the 1960s, astronomers started discovering new and extreme phenomena that only Einstein's ideas could explain. One example lurks in the Crab Nebula, one of the best-known objects in the sky, which is composed of the expanding debris from a supernova witnessed by Chinese astronomers in a.d.

1054. Since it appeared, the nebula has kept on shining blue and bright—but how?. Its light source was a longtime puzzle, but the answer came in 1968, when the dim star at its center was revealed to be anything but normal.

It was actually an ultracompact neutron star, heavier than the sun but only a few miles in radius and spinning at 30 revolutions per second. €œThis was a totally unexpected, totally new kind of object behaving in a way that astronomers had never expected, never dreamt of,” said Jocelyn Bell Burnell, one of the discoverers of the phenomenon. The star's excessive spin sends out a wind of fast electrons that generate the blue light.

The gravitational force at the surface of such an incredibly dense object falls way outside of Newton's purview—a rocket would need to be fired at half the speed of light to escape its pull. Here the relativistic effects predicted by Einstein must be taken into account. Thousands of such spinning neutron stars—called pulsars—have been discovered.

All are believed to be remnants of the cores of stars that exploded as supernovae, offering an ideal laboratory for studying the laws of nature under extreme conditions. The most exotic result of Einstein's theory was the concept of black holes—objects that have collapsed so far that not even light can escape their gravitational pull. For decades these were only conjecture, and Einstein wrote in 1939 that they “do not exist in physical reality.” But in 1963 astronomers discovered quasars.

Mysterious, hyperluminous beacons in the centers of some galaxies. More than a decade passed before a consensus emerged that this intense brightness was generated by gas swirling into huge black holes lurking in the galaxies' cores. It was the strongest evidence yet that these bizarre predictions of general relativity actually exist.

When did the universe begin?. Did it even have a beginning?. Astronomers had long debated these questions when, in the middle of the 20th century, two competing theories proposed very different answers.

The “hot big bang” model said the cosmos began extremely small, hot and dense and then cooled and spread out over time. The “steady state” hypothesis held that the universe had essentially existed in the same form forever. The contest was settled by a serendipitous discovery.

In 1965 radio astronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were trying to calibrate a new antenna at Bell Labs in New Jersey. They had a problem. No matter what they did to reduce background interference, they measured a consistent level of noise in every direction.

They even evicted a family of pigeons that had been nesting in the antenna in the hope that they were the source of the problem. But the signal persisted. They had discovered that intergalactic space is not completely cold.

Instead it is warmed to nearly three kelvins (just above absolute zero) by weak microwaves. Penzias and Wilson had accidentally uncovered the “afterglow of creation”—the cooled and diluted relic of an era when everything in the universe was squeezed until it was hot and dense. The finding tipped the balance firmly in favor of the big bang picture of cosmology.

According to the model, during the earliest, hottest epochs of time, the universe was opaque, rather like the inside of a star, and light was repeatedly scattered by electrons. When the temperature fell to 3,000 kelvins, however, the electrons slowed down enough to be captured by protons and created neutral atoms. Thereafter light could travel freely.

The Bell Labs signal was this ancient light, first released about 300,000 years after the birth of the universe and still pervading the cosmos—what we call the cosmic microwave background. It took a while for the magnitude of the discovery to sink in for the scientists who made it. €œWe were very pleased to have a possible explanation [for the antenna noise], but I don't think either of us really took the cosmology very seriously at first,” Wilson says.

€œWalter Sullivan wrote a first-page article in the New York Times about it, and I began to think at that point that, you know, maybe I better start taking this cosmology seriously.” Measurements of this radiation have since enabled scientists to understand how galaxies emerged. Precise observations of the microwaves reveal that they are not completely uniform over the sky. Some patches are slightly hotter, others slightly cooler.

The amplitude of these fluctuations is only one part in 100,000, but they are the seeds of today's cosmic structure. Any region of the expanding universe that started off slightly denser than average expanded less because it was subjected to extra gravity. Its growth lagged further and further, the contrast between its density and that of its surroundings becoming greater and greater.

Eventually these clumps were dense enough that gas was pulled in and compressed into stars, forming galaxies. The crucial point is this. Computer models that simulate this process are fed the initial fluctuations measured in the cosmic microwave background, which represent the universe when it was 300,000 years old.

The output after 13.8 billion years of virtual time have elapsed is a cosmos where galaxies resemble those we see, clustered as they are in the actual universe. This is a real triumph. We understand, at least in outline, 99.998 percent of cosmic history.

It is not only the big cosmic picture that we have come to understand. A series of discoveries has where to buy cialis online also revealed the history of the elemental building blocks that make up stars, planets and even our own bodies. Starting in the 1950s, progress in atomic physics led to accurate modeling of stars' surface layers.

Simultaneously, detailed knowledge of the nuclei not just of hydrogen and helium atoms but also of the rest of the elements allowed scientists to calculate which nuclear reactions dominate at different stages in a star's life. Astronomers came to understand how nuclear fusion creates an onion-skin structure in massive stars as atoms successively fuse to build heavier and heavier elements, ending with iron in the innermost, hottest layer. Inside the Crab Nebula is a neutron star.

Classical physics fails, and relativity applies. Credit. NASA, ESA and Hubble Heritage Team (STSCI and AURA) Astronomers also learned how stars die when they exhaust their hydrogen fuel and blow off their outer gaseous layers.

Lighter stars then settle down to a quiet demise as dense, dim objects called white dwarfs, but heavier stars shed more of their mass, either in winds during their lives or in an explosive death via supernova. This expelled mass turns out to be crucial to our own existence. It mixes into the interstellar medium and recondenses into new stars orbited by planets such as Earth.

The concept was conceived by Fred Hoyle, who developed it during the 1950s along with two other British astronomers, Margaret Burbidge and Geoffrey Burbidge, and American nuclear physicist William Fowler. In their classic 1957 paper in Reviews of Modern Physics (known by the initials of its authors as BBFH), they analyzed the networks of the nuclear reactions involved and discovered how most atoms in the periodic table came to exist. They calculated why oxygen and carbon, for instance, are common, whereas gold and uranium are rare.

Our galaxy, it turns out, is a huge ecological system where gas is being recycled through successive generations of stars. Each of us contains atoms forged in dozens of different stars spread across the Milky Way that lived and died more than 4.5 billion years ago. Scientists long assumed this process was seeding planets—and possibly even life—around stars other than our own sun.

But we did not know for sure whether planets existed outside our solar system until the 1990s, when astronomers developed clever methods for identifying worlds that are too dim for us to see directly. One technique looks for tiny periodic changes in a star's movement caused by the gravitational pull of a planet orbiting it. In 1995 Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz used this strategy to detect 51 Pegasi b, the first known exoplanet orbiting a sunlike star.

The technique can reveal a planet's mass, the length of its “year” and the shape of its orbit. So far more than 800 exoplanets have been found this way. A second technique works better for smaller planets.

A star dims slightly when a planet transits in front of it. An Earth-like planet passing a sunlike star can cause a dimming of about one part in 10,000 once per orbit. The Kepler spacecraft launched in 2009 found more than 2,000 planets this way, many no bigger than Earth.

A big surprise to come from astronomers' success in planet hunting was the variety of different planets out there—many much larger and closer to their stars than the bodies in our solar system—suggesting that our cosmic neighborhood may be somewhat special. By this point scientists understood where almost all the elements that form planets, stars and galaxies originated. The final piece in this puzzle, however, arrived very recently and from a seemingly unrelated inquiry.

General relativity had predicted a phenomenon called gravitational waves—ripples in spacetime produced by the movement of massive objects. Despite decades of searching for them, however, no waves were seen—until September 2015. That was when the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) detected the first evidence of gravitational waves in the form of a “chirp”—a minute shaking of spacetime that speeds up and then dies away.

In this case, it was caused by two black holes in a binary system that had started out orbiting each other but gradually spiraled together and eventually converged into a single massive hole. The crash occurred more than a billion light-years away. LIGO's detectors consist of mirrors four kilometers apart whose separation is measured by laser beams that reflect light back and forth between them.

A passing gravitational wave causes the space between the two mirrors to jitter by an amount millions of times as small as the diameter of a single atom—LIGO is indeed an amazing feat of precision engineering and perseverance. Since that first find, more than a dozen similar events have been detected, opening up a new field that probes the dynamics of space itself. One event was of special astrophysical interest because it signaled the merger of two pulsars.

Unlike black hole mergers, this kind of collision, a splat between two ultradense stars, yields a pulse of optical light, x-rays and gamma rays. The discovery filled a gap in the classic work of BBFH. The authors had explained the genesis of many of the elements in space but were flummoxed by the forging of gold.

In the 1970s David N. Schramm and his colleagues had speculated that the exotic nuclear processes involved in hypothetical mergers of pulsar stars might do the job—a theory that has since been validated. Despite the incredible progress in astronomy over the past 175 years, we have perhaps more questions now than we did back then.

Take dark matter. I am on record as having said more than 20 years ago that we would know dark matter's nature long before today. Although that prediction has proved wrong, I have not given up hope.

Dark energy, however, is a different story. Dark energy entered the picture in 1998, when researchers measuring the distances and speeds of supernovae found that the expansion of the universe was actually accelerating. Gravitational attraction pulling galaxies toward one another seemed to be overwhelmed by a mysterious new force latent in empty space that pushes galaxies apart—a force that came to be known as dark energy.

The mystery of dark energy has lingered—we still do not know what causes it or why it has the particular strength it does—and we probably will not understand it until we have a model for the graininess of space on a scale a billion billion times smaller than an atomic nucleus. Theorists working on string theory or loop quantum gravity are tackling this challenge, but the phenomenon seems so far from being accessible by any experiment that I am not expecting answers anytime soon. The upside, however, is that a theory that could account for the energy in the vacuum of space might also yield insights into the very beginning of our universe, when everything was so compressed and dense that quantum fluctuations could shake the entire cosmos.

Which brings us to another major question facing us now. How did it all begin?. What exactly set off the big bang that started our universe?.

Did space undergo a period of extremely rapid early expansion called inflation, as many theorists believe?. And there is something else. Some models, such as eternal inflation, suggest that “our” big bang could be just one island of spacetime in a vast archipelago—one big bang among many.

If this hypothesis is true, different big bangs may cool down differently, leading to unique laws of physics in each case—a “multiverse” rather than a universe. Some physicists hate the multiverse concept because it means that we will never have neat explanations for the fundamental numbers that govern our physical laws, which may in this grander perspective be just environmental accidents. But our preferences are irrelevant to nature.

About 10 years ago I was on a panel at Stanford University where we were asked by someone in the audience how much we would bet on the multiverse concept. I said that on a scale of betting my goldfish, my dog or my life, I was nearly at the dog level. Andrei Linde, who had spent 25 years promoting eternal inflation, said he would almost bet his life.

Later, on being told this, physicist Steven Weinberg said he would happily bet my dog and Linde's life. Linde, my dog and I will all be dead before the question is settled. But none of this should be dismissed as metaphysics.

It is speculative science—exciting science. And it may be true. And what will happen to this universe—or multiverse—of ours?.

Long-range forecasts are seldom reliable, but the best and most conservative bet is that we have almost an eternity ahead with an ever colder and ever emptier cosmos. Galaxies will accelerate away and disappear. All that will be left from our vantage point will be the remnants of the Milky Way, Andromeda and smaller neighbors.

Protons may decay, dark matter particles may be annihilated, there may be occasional flashes when black holes evaporate—and then silence. This possible future is based on the assumption that the dark energy stays constant. If it decays, however, there could be a “big crunch” with the universe contracting in on itself.

Or if dark energy strengthens, there would be a “big rip” when galaxies, stars and even atoms are torn apart. Other questions closer to home tantalize us. Could there be life on any of these new planets we are discovering?.

Here we are still in the realm of speculation. But unless the origin of life on Earth involved a rare fluke, I expect evidence of a biosphere on an exoplanet within 20 years. I will not hold my breath for the discovery of aliens, but I think the search for extraterrestrial intelligence is a worthwhile gamble.

Success in the search would carry the momentous message that concepts of logic and physics are not limited to the hardware in human skulls. Until now, progress in cosmology and astrophysics has owed 95 percent to advancing instruments and technology and less than 5 percent to armchair theory. I expect that balance to persist.

What Hubble wrote in the 1930s remains a good maxim today. €œNot until the empirical resources are exhausted, need we pass on to the dreamy realms of speculation.” There have been many particularly exhilarating eras in the past 175 years—the 1920s and 1930s, when we realized the universe was not limited to the Milky Way, and the 1960s and 1970s, when we discovered objects that defy classical physics, such as neutron stars and quasars, and clues about the beginning of time from the cosmic microwave background. Since then, the pace of advancement has crescendoed rather than slackened.

When the history of science gets written, this amazing progress will be acclaimed as one of its greatest triumphs—up there with plate tectonics, the genome and the Standard Model of particle physics. And some major fields in astronomy are just getting going. Exoplanet research is only 25 years old, and serious work in astrobiology is really only starting.

Some exoplanets may have life—they may even harbor aliens who know all the answers already. I find that encouraging. Credit.

Moritz Stefaner and Christian LässerFor more context, see “Visualizing 175 Years of Words in Scientific American”Fully functional quantum computers and a new quantum industry may appear much sooner than many have anticipated—thanks to five new National Quantum Information Science Research centers just announced by the U.S. Department of Energy. This latest development in the recently launched National Quantum Initiative Act, signed into law in December 2018, comes with $625 million in funding over five years.

It’s a huge deal. For the first time, researchers from academia, U.S. National labs and industry will be working side by side aiming to speed up the fundamental quantum information science research.

And more research should bring us closer to advanced quantum technologies and the grandest goal of quantum information science, creating a fault-tolerant quantum computer that can indefinitely compute without errors. Why do we need quantum computers?. We need them to speed up the process of scientific discovery so that we can address some our greatest global challenges, from designing new materials for more efficient carbon capture plants and batteries to better drugs and treatments.

Traditionally, material design has depended a lot on either happy accidents or a long and tedious iterative process of experimentation. Over the past half a century, classical computers have greatly accelerated this process by performing molecular simulations. Still, classical computers can’t simulate complex molecules with enough accuracy, and that’s where quantum computing will be able to help.

Quantum computers rely on the same physical rules as atoms to manipulate information. Just like traditional, classical, computers execute logical circuits to run software programs, quantum computers use the physics phenomena of superposition, entanglement and interference to execute quantum circuits. One day soon, they should be able to perform mathematical calculations out of the reach of the most advanced current and future classical supercomputers.

But to get there, we will need to build quantum machines that compute without errors. Quantum computers rely on fragile qubits, short for quantum bits, which are only of use when they are in a delicate quantum state. Any external disturbances or “noise,” such as heat, light or vibrations, inevitably yanks these qubits out of their quantum state and turns them into regular bits.

Overcoming this hurdle is beyond the limits of a single team, and we need scores of scientists from academia, the national labs and industry to get us there. This is where the new centers come in. At last, they will get the talent from all our R&D sectors to work together on quantum-related issues.

Take the problem of building a quantum system that would compute without errors. Our best theories estimate that to get there, we should build machines with tens of millions of qubits on a single cooled-down chip. But we don’t want to cool down quantum chips the size of football fields.

To avoid it, we need many breakthroughs—meaning we have to invest in research at scale. Luckily, some of the latest results show that it’s possible to reduce the number of qubits we need to implement error-correcting codes. But even if we achieve this, we will have to overcome another hurdle.

Linking quantum processors, just like we connect today’s computer chips inside data centers using intranets. This requires quantum interconnects that transfer the fragile quantum information stored in the processor’s qubits into a different quantum format (say, photons) that “communicate” the data to another processor. Advances in this space must unite disparate technologies like superconducting qubits and fiber optics, while solving outstanding challenges in materials science and quantum communications.

Research teams could probably solve these problems, and many other challenges the quantum information science community is tackling, individually. But it would take decades, and we can’t afford to wait this long. Partnerships and collaboration, through the new centers, will offer us the chance of making the quantum leap we need.

With a long-term vision of establishing a robust national quantum ecosystem, academia, national labs and industry partners at last have a quantum roadmap. Now it’s up to all the partners in this joint effort to create a quantum ecosystem and industry. We’ll need plenty of the wit, talent, creativity and enthusiasm of a skilled and diverse quantum workforce to make it happen..