Slashdot Mirror
Quantum Computing for Dummies
Chillers writes "There seems to be a need for an undergraduate text on Quantum Computing. I've had a go at writing one, but in my opinion, it still needs work. The book is available available online (pdf) and any comments would be greatly appreciated."
here, save this kid from being unable to use his DSL for the next 8 hours:
r s/TOQCv1_0.pdf [Coral Link]
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au.nyud.net:8090/~chille
-Malakai
A Dragon Lives in my Garage
Please do my homework for me.
Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups. -- 0 1 My two bits
Film at 11!
He's about to get Slashdotted to hell... Let's get some more mirrors going. I would, but I'm banished to the land of 56k right now...
is my first response after looking at the PDF.
Seriously though, giving it a quick look, it seems that is it thorough. As I know something about Shannon and his work, I am interested to see what the implications of quantum computing are wrt channel capacity, entropy, and error correcting codes in general. I have a feeling that will take a more involved reading that I have time for at this moment.
Having done so much with so little for so long, I now can do anything with nothing at all.
...upload it as a Wiki, and let the entire world take a crack at it?
This process, akin to the open source development process, is how Wikipedia has accumulated so many factually accurate, well researched, and well written articles.
At that length I doubt most /.ers will actually read before commenting.
--
insert some trivial link here
Are you going to acknowledge all of us in the Preface of the completed work?
Are you seriously suggesting that anyone would comment an article without reading it when it is 250 pages? I hope those lazy slashdotters would read at least 50 pages. (By the way, please let me introduce myself. I am new here.)
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
Impressive!! Did you also post your request through Google Groups and perhaps some Yahoo! groups? I have found these groups to be excellent sources of advice and resources. For example, one reference was to http://www.rocketscientists.ca, which just happens to keep me within one click of most of the links I happen to like (including links to stories also posted here).
Regards, Robert Miller http://www.rocketscientists.ca/
ok well i have to admit that i haven't read the entire text, but here is what i've noticed so far. you seem to be a little light on information across the entire book. lets take an example. You discuss how fo fine sin(x) in 3.4.1 which is fine, i would not have, its a bit trivial, but then when you were discussing complex numbers in 3.6, you didn't discuss the rather troublesome third quadrant, and show z* and e^i(pi) in like one line, right after a shaded box at the bottom of the page, asking for students to read over it without absorbing them. also there are no self test questions, no example questions, nothing. this book needs work, but is an awesome start. now you need to work on getting the subtle details that students will miss, get them either in questions, examples, or complete explanation.
that's just how i feel though,
yel02
-=gabe2=- macbook dual 2.0
Thanks, It's not hosted by me personally. The SwiftDSL servers themselves are copping the hits. My DSL link is not affected.
There's actually a Wikipedia-related project called Wikibooks, dedicated to using the wiki process to collaboratively create textbooks. I think the OP's work would be an excellent contribution to this project.
Posted anonymously to prevent karma-whoring:
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~neilh/TOQCv1_0.pdf
... would an undergraduate student that prepares for his work in the field need to study an obscure, completely irrelevant, and virtual method of programming things that can barely count to 10?
I know you this issue is addressed in the introduction, even more, it is kind of the point of the book, however, I have serious doubts about how well it is going to work out. People who are so unfamiliar with basic math, even after becoming somewhat familiar with it after first chapters of the book, probably still are not going to be able to apply that math or even comprehend chapters, in which that math is used. The book is pretty much iterating through about two years of full-time studies of student majoring in physics, so I don't think there are so many people who are able to soak that information up quickly and then be able to use that knowledge. If one wants to write Hamiltonians, he must know linear algebra, complex numbers, etc. There is no way around it.
Let me illustrate what I mean. There is, for example, conservation of energy, which is quite clear and intuitive concept that can be grasped by any high school student. Quite a lot of things can be explained or illustrated by applying it and it will still be easy to understand. However, if one would attempt to go deeper and try to approach teaching it from the invariant principles, that's going to bring quite a lot of complicated things with it, including math (symmetry, Hamiltonians, 3j symbols, you name it). Not only high school students, but majority of undergrads will be simply overwhelmed and confused, not educated.
The way I see it there are probably only two choices. One is to assume certain knowledge possessed by reader. However, the idea of the book is quite opposite. That pretty much leaves the author with second option, which is qualitative, conceptual discussion with possible references to more detailed, quantative analysis sources. Unfortunately, that is outstandingly hard task. Book like that would be terrific and would probably boost the interest for the field from a lot of students (GEB, anyone?)
I certainly appreciate the effort though. As soon as the never-ending crunch-time at work is over, I will try to read the book and provide some more feedback (of somewhat dubious value).
A pair of professors at my university are also working on a very similar book. When I first saw this one on slashdot I thought someone may have tried to rip them off. Some of you may want to check out this one too. It looks as though it may be a bit more formal (with both notation and language tone).
I start with the second step of the continued fractions example on page 207 (217 of the PDF). 1 + 2/9 is not equal to 1 + 1/2/9.
In all seriousness, very solid book. I like the way you start from the basics, but don't dumb down the final algorithms (much). It's a good progression for the book, all the way from right triangles to Shor's algorithm. Bravo.
Uploaded the file to:. pdf
http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~stianbor/shared/TOQCv1_0
the university server should be able to take a slashdot or two.
I found this book really intersting, as I'm a MiT Computer Science student. Allthough I've taken courses in parts of what's described in the book (CS, information theory & math), it was interesting to see it from a different view. I will definitely recommend this paper to my fellow students.
In the Example-box the output should be 110 in stead of 100.
You might want to try selling print copies yourself on www.lulu.com. They have a print-on-demand service that works pretty well. (I've used it, but I am not affiliated with them in any way.) You can make your work available electronically, or in print, or both, and you can set the amount of royalty you want to charge. Lulu adds a 20% commission, plus a base cost that's a function of page count. You can design your own cover and upload that too.
...we have a slash site called QubitNews which could use some of your comments. In fact, we talked about this book some days ago. Feel free to drop by and participate (get quonnected!).
My journal. Mainly about freedom.