Generate an explanation for the given claim using the provided supporting material from the paragraph. Please consider the following points while generating an output. 1) The claim will always have supporting proof in the paragraph, and the paragraph will have a clear point of view supporting the claim. 2) There can be instances where direct correlation to the claim is not available. Make use of the sentences in the paragraph to provide a corresponding output supporting the claim. 3) The explanation should be at least one and at most twelve sentences long.

Q: Paragraph: Serge Haroche of France and American David Wineland, both 68, found ways to manipulate the very smallest particles of matter and light to observe strange behavior that previously could only be imagined in equations and thought experiments. Wineland once described his own work as a “parlor trick” that performed the seemingly magical feat of putting an object in two places at once. Other scientists praised the achievements as bringing to life the wildest dreams of science fiction. “The Nobel laureates have opened the door to a new era of experimentation with quantum physics by demonstrating the direct observation of individual quantum particles without destroying them,” said the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which awarded them the 8 million crown ($1.2 million) prize. “Perhaps the quantum computer will change our everyday lives in this century in the same radical way as the classical computer did in the last century.”  Haroche said he was walking in the street with his wife when he recognized the Swedish country code on the incoming call to inform him of the award. “I saw the area code 46, then I sat down,” he told reporters in Sweden by telephone. “First I called my children, then I called my closest colleagues, without whom I would never have won this prize,” he said. Asked how he would celebrate, he said: “I will have champagne, of course.”  He told Reuters he hoped the prize would give him a platform “that will allow me to communicate ideas, not just in this field of research but for research in general, fundamental research”. Wineland was asleep at home in Boulder, Colorado, when the phone call from Stockholm arrived before dawn on Tuesday morning, he said at a press conference. (His wife answered.) Physics is the second of this year’s crop of awards; scientists from Britain and Japan shared the first prize on Monday, in medicine, for adult stem cell research. The prizes, which reward achievements in science, literature and peace, were first awarded in 1901 in accordance with the will of Swedish dynamite millionaire Alfred Nobel. “This year’s Nobel Prize recognizes some of the most incredible experimental tests of the weirder aspects of quantum mechanics,” said Jim Al-Khalili, professor of physics at the University of Surrey in Britain. “Until the last decade or two, some of these results were nothing more than ideas in science fiction or, at best, the wilder imaginations of quantum physicists. Wineland and Haroche and their teams have shown just how strange the quantum world really is and opened up the potential for new technologies undreamt of not so long ago.”  Quantum physics studies the behavior of the fundamental building blocks of the universe at a scale smaller than atoms, when tiny particles act in strange ways that can only be described with advanced mathematics. Researchers have long dreamt of building “quantum computers” that would operate using that mathematics - able to conduct far more complicated calculations and hold vastly more data than classical computers. But they could only be built if the behavior of individual particles could be observed. “Single particles are not easily isolated from their surrounding environment, and they lose their mysterious quantum properties as soon as they interact with the outside world,” the Nobel committee explained. “Through their ingenious laboratory methods Haroche and Wineland, together with their research groups, have managed to measure and control very fragile quantum states, which were previously thought inaccessible for direct observation. The new methods allow them to examine, control and count the particles.”  Both scientists work in the field of quantum optics, studying the fundamental interactions between light and matter. The Nobel committee said they used opposite approaches to the same problem: Wineland uses light particles - or photons - to measure and control particles of matter - electrons - while Haroche uses electrons to control and measure photons. In one of the strange properties of quantum mechanics, tiny particles act as if they are simultaneously in two locations, based on the likelihood that they would be found at either, known as a “superposition.”  It was long thought that it would be impossible to demonstrate this in a lab. But Wineland’s “parlor trick” was to hit an atom with laser light, which according to quantum theory had a 50 percent chance of moving it, and observe the atom at two different locations, 80 billionths of a meter apart. In a normal computer, a switch must either be on or off. A quantum computer would work with switches that, like the particles in Wineland’s experiment, behaved as if they were in more than one position at the same time. An example is a computer trying to work out the shortest route around town for a travelling salesman. A traditional computer might try every possible route and then choose the shortest. A quantum computer could do the calculation in one step, as if the salesman travelled each route simultaneously. Wineland is a dedicated experimentalist, not bothered by the bizarre philosophical implications of quantum mechanics, such as the notion that reality does not exist until an observer measures it. “You can find debate on this, but I’m not sure we’re so special in the universe” as to have the power to bring reality into being, he told Reuters. His realism extends to applications of his work. “I wouldn’t recommend anybody buy stock in a quantum computing company,” Wineland told reporters, but he said he was optimistic that it might be possible to build one eventually. He plans to be part of the quest. Asked if his science career was nearing an end, he said he had no plans to retire “until they drag me out of here for being too old”. ($1 = 6.6125 Swedish crowns) Claim: "Nobel for quantum ""parlor trick"" that could make super computers."

A: A French and an American scientist won the Nobel Prize in physics on Tuesday for finding ways to measure quantum particles without destroying them, which could make it possible to build a new kind of computer far more powerful than any seen before.
****
Q: Paragraph: "For the third year in a row, the Milwaukee Brewers’ lights-out closer John Axford faced a challenge when it came to getting to spring training on time. In 2010, it was an auto accident; in 2011 a case of food poisoning. This season it was red tape involving his 8-month-old son, J.B., also known to Axford’s Twitter followers as ""Little Ax."" The boy was born in Milwaukee, and is a U.S. citizen. The elder Axford, however, is a Canadian. And his trip to Arizona was delayed because he didn’t have a passport for the baby when he was planning to fly from Canada into the United States. His Twitter followers (@JohnAxford) got a play-by-play of his travel travails. Among the offerings: ""Thank you Homeland Security for not letting my AMERICAN son into AMERICA! #3YearValentinesCurse #WontBeSeeingYouTodayWarmWeatherInPhoenix""  He was more expansive in an interview with the Journal Sentinel, which is what prompted us to turn our version of the radar gun -- the Truth-O-Meter -- on Axford. ""Homeland Security requires passports for every age, no matter what,"" Axford said in the interview. ""You can arrive by land or sea if you're under the age of 15 with a birth certificate, but if you go by air Homeland Security requires passports for everybody, no matter what the age."" Is he right? Passports only by air, though birth certificates suffice by car or boat? Now, it’s  Axford is a sports figure. But his statement touches squarely on U.S. policy. So we checked with the State Department, Homeland Security, border control and several federal government websites. Turns out the rules are different for border-crossing babies, depending on the mode of travel. If you’re traveling by air, you need a passport. Period. And, yes, you have to get a photograph of the kid. A kid passport costs $105. However, if you’re coming by land -- such as the border crossing in Detroit -- the rules are less strict, and less expensive. ""U.S. children ages 15 and under arriving by land or sea from a contiguous territory may present an original or copy of his or her birth certificate (issued by the Vital Records Department in the state where he or she was born), a Consular Report of Birth Abroad, or a Naturalization Certificate. If the child is a newborn and the actual birth certificate has not arrived from the Vital Records Department, we will accept a Hospital issued birth certificate."" Each year, the federal government issues about 450,000 passports to infants, a spokeswoman for the State Department said in an email. The department even provides helpful hints for how to take a passport picture of your little one. Kiddie passports are valid for five years. In the end, Axford got to spring training the hard way, again. His father drove the family across the border to Detroit and they caught a flight from there to Arizona. Our conclusion  Axford’s trip back to the mound took a detour. He said it was because of travel delays and said federal law required his baby to have a passport to fly back into the country. He learned a valuable lesson about border crossing: The feds are always right." Claim: All travelers -- even babies -- arriving in the U.S. by air must have a passport.

A: Milwaukee Brewers pitcher John Axford says even babies need a passport to enter the U.S. by air
****
Q: Paragraph: In February 2020, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh announced that he had been diagnosed with lung cancer. While U.S. President Donald Trump honored the controversial commentator with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, some social media users noted that Limbaugh had a history of making demeaning comments on his program. For instance, one widely shared video clip supposedly showed Limbaugh mocking actor Michael J. Fox and claiming that he was “exaggerating” symptoms of his Parkinson’s disease. Just A Quick Reminder Of The Time Rush Limbaugh Mocked Michael J. Fox's Parkinson's By Pretending To Shake Uncontrollably. pic.twitter.com/dX3L0jtnUv — Austin (@austin63867) February 3, 2020  This is a genuine clip of Limbaugh describing Fox on his program. Media Matters archived the full audio of this segment, which originally aired during an Oct. 23, 2006, episode of Limbaugh’s radio show. Here’s a partial transcript of the segment: In this commercial he is exaggerating the effects of the disease. He is moving all around and shaking and it’s purely an act. This is the only time I’ve ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has. He can control himself to keep himself in the frame of the picture. And he can control himself enough to keep his eyes right on the lens, the teleprompter. But his head and shoulders are moving all over the place. This is really shameless, folks. This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn’t take his medication or he’s acting. Fox, who is probably best known for playing young conservative Alex P. Keaton on the show “Family Ties” and the time-traveling high school student Marty McFly in the “Back to the Future” series, was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease in 1991. In 2006, he filmed a 30-second ad for former Democratic U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill and her support of stem cell research: Limbaugh was commenting on this advertisement in the above-displayed clip. The segment stirred considerable controversy at the time and even drew an apology from Limbaugh. The Guardian reported: “Hours later the talkshow host was forced to retract. ‘I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong. '” While Limbaugh initially apologized, he would later say on his show that he never made fun of Fox and that this controversy was created by the “drive-by” media. Limbaugh also renewed attacks on Fox and said that the actor was “allowing his illness to be exploited” and was “shilling for a Democratic politician.” The Washington Post reported: After his apology, Limbaugh shifted his ground and renewed his attack on Fox. “Now people are telling me they have seen Michael J. Fox in interviews and he does appear the same way in the interviews as he does in this commercial,” Limbaugh said, according to a transcript on his Web site. “All right then, I stand corrected. . . . So I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox, if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act.” Claim: "Radio host Rush Limbaugh once claimed that actor Michael J. Fox was ""exaggerating"" his Parkinson's disease symptoms in a political ad."

A:
Then Limbaugh pivoted to a different critique: “Michael J. Fox is allowing his illness to be exploited and in the process is shilling for a Democratic politician.”
****