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.

Example Input: 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."
Example Output: 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.

Example Input: Paragraph: "As Donald Trump amps up attacks on the Clinton Foundation, Democrats are pointing out that Trump himself has given to the nonprofit he now calls a pay-to-play operation. Recently released emails between Hillary Clinton’s aides when she was secretary of state and officials at the Clinton Foundation have demonstrated that some foundation donors did get access to Clinton, though there’s no evidence of direct favors. Addressing the topic on NBC’s Meet the Press, Barack Obama’s former campaign manager David Plouffe noted the Clinton Foundation’s work on HIV/AIDS and malaria and Trump’s own ties to the charity. ""The Clinton Foundation, I think it’s a universal agreement, has done remarkable work around the world. I think Donald Trump himself contributed $100,000 to the foundation,"" he said. Plouffe is right that Trump gave at least $100,000 to the foundation, a fact that Trump and his campaign readily admit. One caveat: It appears that the money came through Trump’s own foundation, not directly from Trump. The Clinton Foundation lists Donald J. Trump as a contributor with a cumulative lifetime donation amount between $100,001 to $250,000. It’s not clear if Trump himself made a personal contribution, but tax forms show that the Donald J. Trump Foundation (which Trump controls) donated $100,000 to the foundation in 2009 and reserved a table at the Clinton Foundation gala for $10,000 in 2010. Trump’s daughter Ivanka is also listed as a donor who gave between $5,001 and $10,000 and her father-in-law, Charles Kushner, gave between $250,001 and $500,000. Trump’s gift amount places him in the top 0.2 percent of the foundation’s donors. Most of its 300,000 donors (85.5 percent) gave less than $250. Breaking it down by dollar amount, however, Trump’s total contribution isn’t that big. We estimated that the foundation has received at least $800 million in donations, over 70 percent of which came from gifts of $1 million or more. In 2009, the Trump Foundation gave $926,750 to some 40 organizations (page 18). The Clinton Foundation received one of the largest gifts that year, matched or surpassed only by the Arnold Palmer Medical Center Foundation ($100,000), the New York Presbyterian Hospital ($125,000) and the Police Athletic League ($156,000). Altogether, the Trump Foundation has donated $5.5 million to 298 charities between 2009 and 2013 according to the nonprofit’s tax forms, Forbes found. Trump did not make any personal contributions to his foundations during this time. (Money for the Trump Foundation in these years came from others and from investment income.) Trump doesn’t deny that he donated to the Clinton Foundation that he now calls a criminal enterprise. During the first GOP primary debate in August 2015, Trump voluntarily brought up his giving to the Clinton Foundation when asked about his previous donations to Hillary Clinton. ""When they call, I give. And you know what? When I need something from them two years later, three years later, I call them, they are there for me,"" Trump said. ""With Hillary Clinton, I said be at my wedding, and she came to my wedding. You know why? She didn’t have a choice, because I gave. I gave to a foundation that, frankly, that foundation is supposed to do good. I didn’t know her money would be used on private jets going all over the world."" For the record, the Clintons did attend Trump’s third wedding to Melania Knauss, but that occurred in 2005, four years before the $100,000 donation. A few months later, Trump gave pretty similar answers when he was asked to explain the Forbes article on his charitable giving record in late January. ""I did give to the Clinton Foundation. What I didn't know is they'd be using it for private aircraft and things like that. The Clinton Foundation was helping with Haiti and with lots of other things and I thought it was going to do some good work. So, it didn't make any difference to me,"" he said on Jan. 31’s Fox News Sunday. ""Again, I was a businessman and it was my obligation to get along with everybody, including the Clintons, including Democrats and liberals and Republicans and conservatives."" Our ruling Plouffe said, ""Donald Trump himself gave $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation."" Tax records show the Donald J. Trump Foundation gave $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation in 2009, and spent an additional $10,000 for a table at a Clinton Foundation gala the following year. The Clinton Foundation also lists Donald J. Trump (as well his daughter Ivanka and Ivanka’s father-in-law) as a contributor. It’s important to note that Trump made the donation through his foundation, not out of his personal income. But Trump himself acknowledges the donation. Claim: "David Plouffe Says ""Donald Trump himself contributed $100,000"" to the Clinton Foundation."
Example Output: "Plouffe said, ""Donald Trump himself gave $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation."" Tax records show the Donald J. Trump Foundation gave $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation in 2009, and spent an additional $10,000 for a table at a Clinton Foundation gala the following year. The Clinton Foundation also lists Donald J. Trump (as well his daughter Ivanka and Ivanka’s father-in-law) as a contributor. It’s important to note that Trump made the donation through his foundation, not out of his personal income. But Trump himself acknowledges the donation."

Example Input: Paragraph: Experts say it’s only a matter of time before a shift in a major fault line off the Oregon coast causes a massive earthquake that generates a tsunami as much as seven stories tall. Even as work on Oregon State University’s Marine Studies Building was underway in Newport, the Legislature went a step further and repealed a ban on construction of new “critical facilities” in tsunami inundation zones, allowing fire stations, police stations and schools to be built in the potential path of a tsunami. Passage of the bill in June was little noticed during one of the most tumultuous legislative sessions in Oregon history. But it has since been roundly criticized — including by Gov. Kate Brown, who told journalists the bill’s passage was one of her disappointments, even though she signed the measure and previously said it benefited economic development. Chris Goldfinger, an Oregon State University professor and an earthquake geologist, says putting the $60 million oceanography building in the path of a tsunami is “beyond ironic,” and allowing even more construction threatens lives in favor of development. “It’s foolhardy. In every other country in the world, best practice for tsunamis is avoidance, not building in a tsunami zone,” Goldfinger said at a symposium for journalists in Newport that included a tour of the construction project. Proponents of the university facility point out that the building will withstand strong earthquakes and be higher than the biggest tsunami. It will feature a rooftop evacuation site that can accommodate more than 900 people, accessed via an exterior ramp. Two days of supplies, including water, food and first aid, will be kept on the roof, said Cinamon Moffett, research facility coordinator for the marine center. Once the water subsides, survivors would be evacuated to a community college on a nearby hill, she said. An earthquake in the Cascadia subduction zone, which extends in the ocean off Northern California to Canada’s Vancouver Island, has a 37 percent probability of happening off Oregon in the next 50 years, with a slightly lower chance of one striking near Washington state, Goldfinger said. Cascadia earthquakes have an average magnitude of around 9, making them among the world’s biggest. Evidence of a Cascadia earthquake’s awesome destructive power is visible 30 miles (50 kilometers) up the coast from Newport. There, a “ghost forest” of Sitka spruces juts up from a beach in the tiny town of Neskowin. An earthquake 2,000 years ago likely caused the ground beneath the trees to plunge, and tsunami debris buried them. The remnants were partially uncovered by storms in 1997. Today, the barnacle-encrusted trees stand like sentinels, facing the Pacific Ocean with vacation homes and a motel nearby. The last time the ocean reared up from a Cascadia earthquake was in 1700. The estimated magnitude 9 quake sent a tsunami across the Pacific into the coast of Japan, where it flooded farm fields, damaged fishermen’s shacks and ascended a castle moat. In the Pacific Northwest and Canada, the impact was far worse, and is described in the folklore of indigenous peoples. One tale describes a struggle between a thunderbird and a whale that caused the earth to shake and the ocean to wash away people and homes. Oregon became a leader in tsunami preparedness when the Legislature, in 1995, banned construction of certain public facilities in inundation zones. Vancouver Island in Canada’s British Columbia province was slammed by the 1700 tsunami. But no law prohibits construction of public buildings in tsunami zones there, according to Emergency Management BC. Washington state requires municipalities and counties to establish rules to limit development in areas that are frequently flooded or could be hit by tsunamis, landslides or other calamities. California has no state-mandated development restrictions in tsunami zones, said Rick Wilson, senior engineering geologist with the California Geological Survey. But the state recently adopted new language in its building code requiring that certain types of buildings be constructed to withstand tsunami forces, Wilson said. Other states are moving to do the same, using standards from the American Society of Civil Engineers. Japan, reacting to a 2011 earthquake and tsunami that left more than 18,000 dead or presumed dead, passed a law allowing towns to set tsunami warning zones and make evacuation and reconstruction plans. The government is spending 1 trillion yen ($9 billion) to build giant seawalls around the northern coastline. Moving to higher ground is not required, though some coastal communities have done so. “Oregon has gone from sort of a leader in this to full reverse,” said Goldfinger, who was attending a seismology conference in Japan when the 2011 earthquake hit. Oregon lawmakers overwhelmingly repealed the 1995 construction ban in June, as tensions in the Capitol ratcheted up over Republican opposition to a bill addressing global warming. Few people attended hearings at which lawmakers from coastal districts testified in favor of the repeal. Democratic Rep. David Gomberg, one of its sponsors, told members of a House committee to imagine the impacts if the state banned new schools, parking garages and police and fire stations in their communities. “What would be the consequence of that, to your ability to get insurance on your home, your ability to attract a new business into a neighborhood that’s not safe enough for fire departments, your ability to resell your home in a neighborhood not safe enough for police departments?” Gomberg asked. He said the state geology department should “help us rather than to stop ... our communities growing, thriving or continuing.” Gomberg said his bill gives the department responsibility for advising where a new inundation line should be and how risks can be mitigated. He also said he will introduce legislation for Oregon to adopt the American Society of Civil Engineers’ tsunami and earthquake building standards. Republican Sen. Brian Boquist, who was at the center of a Republican walkout over the global warming bill, was the only senator to vote against the repeal. Boquist said in an email that it allows public entities to build, knowing full well the buildings will not survive a tsunami. It is too soon to tell if coastal cities will use the new leeway to build facilities in inundation zones. Some have been doing the opposite. The town of Seaside, 70 miles (110 kilometers) northwest of Portland, is moving schools out of the tsunami zone. Newport Mayor Dean Sawyer said his city has no plans to build critical facilities in the inundation zone. But he praised the Marine Studies Building for its rooftop evacuation site, which can fit the population of an entire neighborhood of his fishing town. “We consider it to be a unique solution,” he said. Meanwhile, the Corvallis Gazette-Times noted in an editorial that while it is possible to design a building that can survive an earthquake and tsunami, “that doesn’t answer the question of why we should take the risk in the first place.” The newspaper urged lawmakers to reassess the new law when they convene next year. ___ Associated Press writers Mari Yamaguchi in Tokyo and Rob Gillies in Toronto contributed to this report. ___ Follow Andrew Selsky on Twitter at https://twitter.com/andrewselsky Claim: Critics blast Oregon repeal of tsunami-zone building ban.
Example Output:
With sunlight sparkling off surrounding Yaquina Bay, workers are putting up an ocean-studies building, smack in the middle of an area expected to one day be hit by a tsunami.