Why are these results interesting?
What's missing from the page is a brief description of what these mean. Why are the these results interesting?
- Agreed. It's clear that you use this technique to take two equal-length power-of-2 numeric vectors, and generate a third vector. But, somewhere in the first paragraph, it should say WHY someone would want this third vector. My (strong) guess is that it has to do with cross-correlating the original two vectors, but that's just my guess (and a lot of Googling hasn't found any clear statement on the topic). -- Dan Griscom (talk) 11:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
A terrible analogy!
> This would be like taking a fair coin that is showing heads, flipping it twice, and it always landing on heads after the second flip.
This is a terrible analogy! Flipping a coin implies observation of the result. Had we used Hadamard transform for flipping a coin, the subsequent flips would not be any different. Quantum effects should never be explained using classical analogies! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kallikanzarid (talk • contribs) 11:44, 16 September 2012 (UTC)