Slashdot Mirror
Are We Entering a "Golden Age of Quantum Computing Research"?
Lashdots writes: Last month, an elite team at IBM Research announced an advance in quantum computing: it had built a four-qubit square lattice of superconducting qubits, roughly one-quarter-inch square, that was capable of detecting and measuring the two types of quantum computing errors (bit-flip and phase-flip). Previously, it was only possible to address one type of quantum error or the other. The next step is to correct quantum errors.
In a blog post, Mark Ritter, who oversees scientists and engineers at IBM's T.J. Watson Research Laboratory, wrote: "I believe we're entering what will come to be seen as the golden age of quantum computing research." His team, he said, is "on the forefront of efforts to create the first true quantum computer." But what would that mean, and what other big next steps are there?
In a blog post, Mark Ritter, who oversees scientists and engineers at IBM's T.J. Watson Research Laboratory, wrote: "I believe we're entering what will come to be seen as the golden age of quantum computing research." His team, he said, is "on the forefront of efforts to create the first true quantum computer." But what would that mean, and what other big next steps are there?
how does that even compute into being a golden age?
is it settled now even if that one companys "quantum computer" can actually solve anything faster than a simulation about what it does for cheaper?
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Betteridge's law of headlines
IMHO, QC is a dirty money-grab / scam. Don't waste our time until you've got at least 64 entangled qbits.
No?
+1. Stupid headline and sensationalism.
I suppose we are entering the golden age of flying cars as well.
You mean the D-Wave computer? It seems to be a common misconception that it's a quantum computer in the sense of using coherent superpositions to perform computations - it is not. It's another kind of quantum computer - it performs quantum annealing, which is a way to use quantum effects to accelerate certain cases of simulated annealing. Whether or not the D-Wave computer can actually do anything faster than more traditional methods is up for discussion, but the only one who ever claimed it was a quantum computer in the sense discussed here has been clueless journalists.
Oh since you have refuted QM why don't you just publish your findings an claim your Nobel Prize instead of spewing rants on Slashdot?
They're analogue computers they can solve the thing they're setup to solve faster than a digital computer.
So for example, if you set up a system that follows an elliptical curve as a voltage (as opposed to calculating the values of the curve in the floating point unit of a digital computer), then it can crack elliptical curve cryptography a lot faster.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_computer
The buzzword these days seems to be to call these 'quantum' if the analogue aspect is the phase of a photon, but that's just marketing nonsense.
"Oh since you have refuted QM why don't you just publish your findings an claim your Nobel Prize instead of spewing rants on Slashdot?"
Thank you for your contribution to science.
Understand, we could measure the photons at the youngs fringes, and measure the photons detected at the other detector, take both datasets, and calculate BOTH the filtered and non-FILTERED set after the fact. Using this simple thought experiment, you can show the falseness of the experiment.
The claim that 'detection' causes the photons phase to be set (and the corresponding other photon by entanglement), is then shown to be false, because we calculated BOTH results, as if the phase had been set and had not been set. The co-incidence detector is a man made thing, we can perfectly simulate its action in the experiment by processing the results after the fact in a computer.
It's easy enough for Slashdot readers to understand how that experiment REALLY works, its not a complex thought experiment, its very simple one.
Can I also point out, that this experiment uses electronic detectors, which detect by promoting electrons through their DISCRETE energy states. So your detector imposes a quantum effect that is not isolated from the result. The effect you measure is just the quantum effect from the detector. Einstein was right.
What will the programming languages be like?
perhaps i = 1 to something
maybe print i
next i
?
" But what would that mean, and what other big next steps are there?" Step 1. Quantum blobs for drivers. Step 2. Quantum NDA for quantum driver development. Step 3. Quantum blobby firmware that you can use from their quantum app center only. Step 4. Quantum secure boot. You cannot install quantum linux on this quantum computer, quantum corporates are quantum mechanically holding you from your quantum ....
Step 5. Stallman dies accidentally in a Schroedinger quantum experiment because he tried to persuade people that FOSS has the same power to liberate people in both classical and quantum reality.
Yes and no
Aberrations have appeared in my destiny prognostication engine!
Semiconductor design relies heavily on quantum mechanics, you idiot.
Uh, yeah...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
They made them for the military when you weren't paying attention. The plan is to use them as a drone ambulance that can carry 800lbs of cargo
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Wake me when we're in the golden age of quantum computing...
Wake me when we're in the Golden Age of anything.
Well, "square lattice of superconducting qubits" just rolls of the tongue, doesn't it. It sounds like something you'd find on the menu of an avant-garde restaurant.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
No, nothing is settled. It may still well turn out that computations do not scale to a relevant number of q-bits and it may be that doing computations takes extremely long and has an increase for more complex computations that eliminates all advantages. In fact, looking at alternative computing mechanisms, such as Josephson gates, it seems quite likely that the hype will keep for another 10 years or so before the community finally admits defeat. One reason could be that complexity of doing computations or number of repetitions needed increase the effort exponentially in the number of bits employs. And unlike classical computers, you cannot divide problems for QCs into smaller ones, you always need enough q-bits to get the whole problem in in one go.
Also, for many problems, QCs are simply unsuitable or do not help much. For example for breaking ciphers in a known plaintext scenario, a working QC reduced the number of bits to half. With that AES-256 is still completely secure and AES-128 may be secure if each of the O(2^64) non-elementary computation steps needed takes long. Even Shor's algorithm for factorization needs O(n^3) quantum gates for n bits and as it is probabilistic, and hence a number of repetitions in addition that also grows in n. It is quite possible to increase n into regions where no known QC can solve the problem. (Currently, that border is n = 5 or so and has been for a long, long time).
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
They are after money, not science. Hence they will do anything that makes clueless people buy their magic box. Sop far they seem to be selling enough to stay in business, as idiots with money are not that rare.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
is the cat included or not or both?
Nonsense. Symmetric crypto is not affected much, and even asymmetric crypto may still stand, but maybe with longer numbers.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
I don't think there actually is. This is a high-effort scientific stunt that only very few people can do. I doubt it has any practical relevance.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
We're in the Golden Age of slashdot right now!
Or is that the Golden Years?
Ask me again after you've opened the box and agreed to the shrink wrap license on the D-Wave you just bought...
The Golden Age of research on any cutting edge technology is that point at which deep pockets take it seriously enough to spend serious money and give researches comfortable timelines while at the same time have limited expectations of tangible and useful results.
Betterige's law (aka Hinchliffe's Rule) is neither true, nor false.
Since 1995, it cannot be evaluated, see https://newtonexcelbach.wordpr...
Gödel and Heisenberg would have been proud!
they certainly marketed it as a quantum computer.
anyways, what I was indeed after was does their thing perform faster than a simulation ran on similarly costing hardware of the supposed process?
anyways, saying that we're entering the golden age of quantum computers is like saying that we were entering the golden age of hollywood began in 1800's. it's just stupid. maybe it's the golden age for funding for these guys though.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
In the pipe, five by five.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
the quantum sneakers, so I can take a quantum leap.
Josephson junctions are used daily all over the world so I don't understand your point. There's nothing called a Josephson gate - however one can use Josephson junctions to form gates of different forms - RSFQ and RQL are the most common at the moment.
The reason we don't use computers based on JJ are many - semiconductor logic is well known and very cheap, I'll include III - V semiconductors here even though they are much more expensive than silicon based logic they are still cheaper than superconductive wafers. There still isn't a good type of memory working at the temperatures required. The processes available aren't as good either, 1m and 6 metal layer (4 effective - 2 are used as superconductive ground planes) is the state of the art AFAIK.
The -only- reason quantum computing is getting funding is because of Shor's Algorithm and similar attacks on crypto. Were it not for that, this would be defunded and left on the rocks like the Superconducting Super Collider in Texas.
In the 1990s, sure, I can see something funded, but these days, if it can't be weaponized, used for defense, used for profit, or used for torturing people, it just won't get funding.
The predictions at that time was that computers would be entirely built of Josephson-circuitry and be super-fast as a consequence. They just needed to solve a few problems, like the supercooling and integration and the like. Turns out these were prohibitive for the question of basing computers mostly on JJs. That is not to say these things are not useful or do not have applications. They are just not suitable to revolutionize computing, as they are special-purpose devices.
Quantum technology is in quite a few things as well these days, such as in SQUIDs and quantum-dot LEDs and even FLASH memory (erasing is by tunnel effect). That is fine. But when we are talking about Quantum Computing, that means replacing CPU and memory with all-quantum tech that is all entangled together (well, enough memory to do to actual computations, so maybe more like a very large register-set CPU or the like) and that is a whole different kind of thing.
There are a lot more of these "UFOs" in Computer Science, that turn up from time to time but never deliver on their grand claims: holographic memory, alternate gates, alternate logics (MLC and TLC in FLASH being the only viable example), optical on-chip interconnect, AI in many forms, many of the promises of public clouds, mem-resistors, etc. I am merely pointing out the pattern that can be observed here to put the credibility-level of the claims made into perspective.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
True.
There was also a point where solving a math problem on paper was faster than using a computer to solve the same problem. Once the technology is established they can work on pushing the needle forward in regards to efficiency. I am sure a horse was much better than the first automobile as well. You just looked a lot cooler riding in the automobile no one else had yet.
it is indeed a golden age, for grandiose claims about quantum computing made for the purpose of scamming investors
There seems to be confusion as to what Quantum Mechanics is.
Quantum Mechanics is accurate enough that it is necessary to modern semiconductor design. There is no other model humankind has invented that works. Therefore it is a good answer to the GGGP's question, "So why is this nonsense still science?".
Your misgivings about entanglement are not actually relevant to whether Quantum Mechanics is a real thing. Consider: Classical mechanics makes predictions about how GPS satellites should work that are empirically incorrect, which is why General Relativity is involved in GPS systems. Thus, even though Classical Mechanics makes a prediction that we are uncomfortable with, it's still not nonsense.
The retort "Make QM based computing work. Ever." is also irrelevant. Doesn't matter whether QM based computing is practical. The existence of entanglement doesn't mean that quantum computers are a good idea, any more than the explanation for how sunlight reaches the Earth means that classical computers are real. They happen to be real, and they both operate on electromagnetism, but there is a huge disconnect between those two things.
As for entanglement itself, it's a confusing subject but the GGGP didn't do a great job refuting it.
"Flying" yes.
"Car" no.
but don't look directly at parent or it will collapse
Sent from my ENIAC