Slashdot Mirror
A Working Quantum Computer in 3 Years?
prostoalex writes "Vancouver, BC-based D-Wave Systems got $17.5 mln from Draper Fisher Jurvetson to work on a preliminary version of a quantum computer, Technology Review reports. Delivery date? Within three years: 'It won't be a fully functional quantum computer of the sort long envisioned; but D-Wave is on track to produce a special-purpose, "noisy" piece of quantum hardware that could solve many of the physical-simulation problems that stump today's computers, says David Meyer, a mathematician working on quantum algorithms at the University of California, San Diego.'"
Yeah, but will it play Duke Nukem Forever??
The truth shall always be free: Boris Floricic is Tron.
All your possible answers are belong to us!
The whole mania behind this technology is that somehow we will be able to pull correct data out of thin air using the magical properties of quantum units. Somehow eigenvalues will just instantaneously pop into existence by the careful selection of input parameters.
Too bad that's not how it works. These computers will still have to process data the same as any other processor and all the threat behind magically decoding 128-bit encryption is pure fluff. We are talking about another way of computing, for sure, but it is just another step in the evolution of computing systems rather than a brand new magic bullet for encryption maniacs.
It is also unclear why people want to build a "quantum computer" when it seems that simply putting it on a peripheral board and using it as a separate calculation machine seems to be a much more straightforward application of the device than trying to cram a whole computer with these chips.
__
Funny Adult Vido Clips
The 2006, 2007, 2008 Vaporware Award goes to D-Wave Systems.
Wow, a Quantum Computer that only exist in a "Powerpoint Universe ©".
Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
On a more serious note... a fully operational quantum computing device in 3 years? Did they borrow their marketing/timeline departments from the Longhorn division of Micro$oft?
The Peanut Gallery, Ubergeek, Biblically Sober
NCAAbbs.com: Thousands of fans, Hundreds of teams, Just one place
... but it's not a proper quantum computer. It's based on tunneling, not entanglement. The latter is what everyone understands by the term 'quantum computer'. Their computer just requires knowledge of quantum theory to build it. Well, so do conventional computers...
No matter how fast or slow those computers (or better specific algorithm executers) will be is unclear, but forget thinking in Ghz or something for Quantum Computers.
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
Sure, I mean it could be vaporware and a nice way to seperate 18 mill (US or Canidan?) from some VCs...
However, given that they have narrowed their focus (from a general purpose machine) to a special purpose machine using (they say) todays level of technology, they have a good chance..
Known and working tech + narrow problem = Engineering + Marketing = A working product
http://www.hawknest.com/
People have been building quantum computers for years now. The biggest ones these days (around 14-qubits) are NMR quantum computers, although that technique appears to have scalability issues.
Seems to me that this is only news since they plan on selling quantum-CPU time.
There are two kinds of "quantum computers":
;-) which basically makes use of quantum effects to implement smaller/faster/better transistors. that's all what this one boils down to: make better transistors and build the very same computers we made so far (of course, while trying to improve things like speed, energy usage, size, costs...)
;-)
;-) they're probably going to be available as extension cards for "classical" computers (similar to of 3D accelerator cards today...)
the one is a dererministic computing device (call it "pentium" or similar...
the other is a whole new kind of devices. these are devices where bits of information are not represented by small elecrtronic components meaning either '0' or '1', but by quantum mechanical systems (say: atoms, molecules or even photons) that are both '0' and '1' at the same time (each of them with a certain probability).
the very moment you try to find out in what state a given quantum bit (say: qubit) is, it "decides" whether it wants to be '0' or '1'. but until then, it is _both_ (it's not like it's either one or the other, but you just don't know... it's really _both_ of 0 and 1 at the same time!)
so the big advantage of the latter is that instead of, for example, multiplying two numbers, then multiplying other tho numbere, than others and so on, you can really multiply _all_ numbers with _all_ numbers in a single computation step (ok, that's a very simplified description, but that basically is it).
thus, it reduces the computation time for certain numbers (like cracking RSA-based encription keys) from "exponential" to "constant", or to say it in numbers: from "1000 times the age of the universe" to "5 seconds"
but all this only with a given probability -- a quantum computer is not a deterministic device, so don't imagine firing up mozilla on your brand new QC
This is somewhat offtopic, but I ran across it a few months ago and it's really interesting. QCL allows you to write and run quantum algorithms. Runs on Linux and OS X with some tweaking.
The documentation that comes with it is really interesting, and gives some good insights into how quantum computing works and how to write programs for a quantum computer.
Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
A little searching on arXiv.org brought up:
Quantum Algorithm for SAT Problem and Quantum Mutual Entropy
So at least the first half of that title relates to your question.
We'd better start learning Q++; or better yet preparing the port to .quant platform.
..
..
Start to code those void Byte2Qbyte(QBYTE* pOut, const BYTE *pIn) NOW!!
We should start building an open source STL extension around template class QAlgo<..>, QBit<..>,
It's going to be too late when they hit us with US patent #1.232.322.999
OR when they start outsorcing the Q++ development to India once more..
This time, we gotta be ready!!!
Provided that your measurement either of "working" or "3 years" is sufficiently imprecise.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Forget building bombs. Filesharing is destroying the economy and will soon be classified as cyberterrorism. Just imagine what would happen if the pirates got their hands on a quantum computer. They'd suddenly be able to bittorrent all movies simultaneously. Such powerful technology could destroy civilization as we know it.
Badass Resumes
How long before Apple drops x86 and moves to QC architecture?
Ban Engadget - moderators censor comments!
It will, however, be ideally suited to solving problems like the infamous traveling-salesman problem . . . D-Wave's chip performs exactly this type of calculation automatically, in seconds.
How many seconds?
Are they claiming that the travelling salesmen problem can be solved in polynomial time? This would be the biggest news to come out of the computer industry since the invention of the transistor. As far as I know, no quantum algorithms exist for solving NP complete problems such as the travelling salesmen problem. Can anyone here enlighten me?
In other news, CompTIA have released a working draft for their new Q+ exam - it's suitable for any engineer with 6 months' hands-on experience of Quantum Mechanics and GR. The pass mark is 80% and all 20 questions on the exam must be answered simultaneously.
AT&ROFLMAO
I'd love to see a quantum computer! That'd be so cool. And it's the only way to implement my perfect chess program.
But even if they do get this thing to succeed, with all the technical issues solved, the business model won't work. They want to sell solutions, not hardware? So company X asks a question, but the answer is only worthwhile if competing company Y can't ask the same question. The resolution is simple, company X will patent the question! Imagine how innovation can be stiffled now -- an order of magnitude better than under the current system. It won't be long before company Y, to preempt other companies from gaining an advantage, will start to patent questions it has no intention of asking! With a little lobbying to conservative politicians, legistation will be passed to outlaw thinking entirely! Is this what we have to look forward to in three years?
Bt seriously, it's an old problem -- social systems can't keep up with technological advancements, and all attempts only make thing worse.
In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.
User: My computer's not working!
Tech: Imagine that it's working and look at it again.
User: Hey! How'd you do that?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
One or two bit at a time quantum computers - sure, we can build those. My hunch, however, is that to build an N bit quantum computer is exp(N) hard. I expect we will eventually have non-trivial quantum computers, but unfortunately the amount of effort to make them will be as much as the effort to build a classical machine that can simulate them. This isn't just nay-saying, unlike the claims that driving at over 30mph would kill humans, my claims are backed up by many physicists, in particular those that don't have a financial interest in quantum computers.
On the other hand, quantum computer science is very interesting as a branch of mathematics and Shor's algorithm for factoring, for example, is a thing of beauty. So I don't blame people bluffing in order to get grant money. And I suppose I don't really hold it against researchers trying to get money out of venture capitalists this way either. Just as long as that money isn't coming out of any funds I'm investing in...
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
We'll, it's kinda cheating. The algorithm is STILL NP, but in quantum computing we can run all paths in parallel so we solve all possible combinaisons at once, which becomes polynomial. However, we have no way of finding the good answer at 100%.
See, the problem in quantum computing is that you can have multiple states in parallel, but you can only 'read' one and lose all other states. This is like having a book with 400 pages, but when you open it, it selects (with a certain probability) a specific page and the whole book becomes that page, you lose all other pages.
We need to make the system converge/interfere in a meaningful way to the correct solution, and in its own way, this is the challenge of QC. In the end, if our algorithm works, we will be able to get the answer to the travelling salesman problem with a probability (depending how good our convergence is). Just like our book above, we need to increase the chance of opening the book on the page with the correct solution. This is non-trivial.
The thing is, the 'weight' of that convergence/meaningful interference, in problems like the travelling salesman, is usually as high as the time it takes to run the normal algorithm in classical computing. We end up not having much gains, it's not that fast. So, yes, if they are that good, we can solve the travelling salesman dilema in seconds... with a certain, probably very low %. Probably even a meaningless %.
However, in problems like finding if a function is unanimous(f(x)=0 or f(x)=1 for all x) or balanced (f(x)=0 for exactly half of x and f(x)=1 for exactly the other half of x) could be done in quantum computer with no errors and very fast, while in classical computing you'd have to try each value of x. If you however allow a certain % of error, the classical way with a stochastic computer would work best (test only a certain pool of value).
Well...I don't think trotting out Einstein's example everytime a theorist makes a surprising claim is very productive. What the parent post was pointing out is that there isn't an absolute correspondence between our mathematical formalisms of physical laws and physical reality itself. Surprising things happen when our experimental limits are pushed...the mathematical model holds or sometimes it breaks. Afterall, Einstein wasn't a science celebrity after the publication of his first papers. It took the startling physical realization of his predictions, namely, the anamoly in Mercury's orbit.
By the way, it's extremely false myth that Einstein was bad at math.
They'd suddenly be able to bittorrent all movies simultaneously.
Yeah, until someone tries to watch one, and then suddenly everybody has only that movie...
I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
but in quantum computing we can run all paths in parallel so we solve all possible combinaisons at once, which becomes polynomial.
This is parially true, and is exploited in Shor's factoring algorithm. But note that Shor's algorithm would not work if it relied only on doing brute force calculations in parallel. Shor's algorithm works because it reduces the problem of factorization to a series of steps that can be done in parallel, then passed through the QFT to yeild the correct result with high probability. You could not, on a quantum computer, factor a large number by trying all combinations of numbers in parallel, because you would have no way (at least no way that is known) to arrive at the answer with high probability...you would just get some random answer as you described in your book analogy.
The point here is that no one has been able to reduce an NP problem to a series of steps that can be run in parallel on a quantum computer to yield an answer with high probability. If you can do this, you will be very rich and famous