Slashdot Mirror
Open Qubit [Open Source Quantum Computing Group]
skwp writes "Open Qubit is a Open Source project for a Quantum Computer simulation API. It has recently bought its own domain and is currently (judging by mailing list) has reached a size of 103 members. The list is a place for physicists, mathematicians, computer people, and laymen to ask each other questions, and collaborate on this project. No Quantum Mechanics experience is required to join up; just a desire to learn. OpenQubit is currently holding a logo contest. "
This is cool!
This is cool!
join the openqubit IRC channel on efnet, #openqubit
Quantum Computing will never happen boys and girls.
Do something useful with your time and stop living
in the lala land with lepricons and fairies.
Finally, something for people who aren't physicists... Non-technical books are already hard enough to find.
What are these folks smoking? Cause I want some...
I don't know if this will happen or not, but if it does, it will suck. Cyrptography as we know it will cease to exist.
Get out your one-time pads, boys and girls.
besides electrocuting horses and pigs in order
to claim the new fangled AC electricity was safter
than his own companies DC electricity, he
used his workers and claimed their ideas as his own,
he was a fascist sympathizer and a jerk
he also thought recording was not for music
but only for speech and dictation.
For those idiots who referred to landing on the moon and various discoveries:
You are simply ignorant, you braindead chimps! Go back to school kiddies!
Maybe next you will figure how to land on the surface of the sun, by conducting the mission...uhh...at night?
What you have to realize is that QM is an incomplete theory and is as close to reality as Einstein's SR & GR and Newton's Mechanics (not close at all).
Secondly, the idea of calculating machines (ie.: computers) was not created overnight unlike this nonsensical pile of BS. Mechanical calculators devloped during the Renaissance, punched cards operated machines, the pre-IBM's tabulating machine all paved the way towards computer science.
QM is nothing but yet another attempt by retarted CS monkeys to apply their oh-so-very-useful pseudo code techniques to yet another pointless project, as well as by idiot physisists who love to play with dice. Go to Las Vegas next time.
Signing Off -- Dr. Smokey.
HAHAHAHAHA
You idiot. ROTFL
E=mc^2 is not Special Relativity MORON.
Special Relativity involved Lorentz transformation in non=inertial frames and is one of many papers which Einstein published. Other papers included the photo-electric effect and Brownian motion.
Once again: go back to school you idiot.
-- Dr. Smokey strikes again.
>E=mc^2 is not Special Relativity MORON.
Actually, E=mc^2 is a direct consequence of the changes to the equations for kinetic energy made by SR. It very easy to derive (using only algebra).
A point that is valid, however, is that SR, from a technical point of view, really isn't all that important for the development of the atom bomb; all E=mc^2 did was give the scientist an equation that told them what the upper limit was on the amount of energy that could be released. Even without SR, all the elements were in place (radioactivity, nuetrons, critical mass, etc.) to create the bomb. IOW, even if Einstein hadn't written his famous paper on SR, the bomb could have been built pretty much when it was. Whether it would have been built is debatable though. In this instance, Einstein's scientific prestige due to SR (and GR) gave him enough credibility to assert some political influence via his letter to the president encouraging the creation of what ultimately became the Manhattan project.
Randy Weems
Actually, MORONS, when you apply the rest energy mc^2 in SR it BECOMES:
E = mc^2 / sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
You guys are unbelievably stupid.
dR sMOKEY oWNZ yEW
HAHAHAHAHA. Your faulty logic amazes me. What is more surprizing is that you are capable of forming sentences in standard english, you monkey.
/\t' = /\t / sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2). Thus, the total energy of a particle travelling at speed v, using the rest energy (mc^2) as applied to SR would become:
Here SteveM tries to impress us with his limited high school knowledge on physics:
On the contrary, E=mc^2 is consequence of Special Relativity, and is easily derived from the definitions of relativistic mass and kinetic energy.
We are not impressed. Try again.
I never said it was not related to special relativity. I said it AIN'T SR:
SR involves motion of bodies in non-inertial frames of reference where
E = mc^2 / sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
Your lack of knowledge is overwhelming.
I recommend you read the books you referred too.
Also, read the thread. It seems you did not grasp what I was trying to state.
Dr. Smokey -- Ph.D. in gONJA.
oh sorry i guess you haven't read my other post.
pHEAR nOT, DrSmokey is still king.
Shutup first.
What you have to realize is that QM is an incomplete theory and is as close to reality as Einstein's SR & GR and Newton's Mechanics (not close at all).
Quantum Mechanics is single most successful scientific theory humans have devised. The predicted values from thoery don't vary from the experimentally measured values until the 10th decimal place!* That's pretty damm close to reality.
You are correct in saying QM is incomplete. Every theory is incomplete! However, given the success of QM, any new theory will be an extention of, not a replacement for, QM. Just as relativity is an extention of Newtonian mechanics.
SteveM
*references (two that I quickly pulled off my book shelf, I'm sure there are better ones):
QED by Feynman
Dreams of a Final Theory by Weinberg
One problem with QM is that creates various paradoxes,
...
...
one of which was introduced by Einstein and his colleague.
The Einstien-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) experiment is the basis for
the quantum teleportation of a photon's spin (see here ).
This property of entanglement is what wires together the qubits
in a quantum computer (see Scientific American, June 1998).
Pretty handy that paradox.
What we forget is that Newton's mechanics "laws" which are
supposedly wrong (according to Einstein's theories) also work.
Of course they work. Newton's laws are derivable from Einstein's
under the assumptions of relatively (no pun intended) slow speeds
and low masses. Newton's and Einstein's laws both break down in the
quantum domain. Thus the search for a theory of quantum gravity.
One big problem with Quantum Computing is that,
we require an entire industry scale laboratory to
store _1_ bit!@$$@
Curious
ENIAC required 150 KW of power and filled a room 30x50 feet.
It stored numbers in decimal format, using ten flip-flops
to store a single decimal digit. The machine could store twenty
digits. But for some reason, the developers went ahead even
though abaci, slide rules, and even mechanical calculators
were available!
Electromechanical calculators were also available, but they
were somewhat on the larger side also. For example, the
IBM Automatic Sequential Calculator, aka the Harvard
Mark I, weighed five tons, and was 51 feet long.
Today,commercial NMR spectrometers are used for experimenting
with quantum computing. I don't know exactly how large such
devices are, but the NMR equipment I used as an under grad was
somewhat smaller than an "industry scale laboratory". In any
case, Neil Gershehfeld (at MIT) and Isaac Chuang (at IBM) are
currently building a desktop quantum computer.
The ENIAC project started April 9, 1943. The PalmPilot
Professional, which is somewhat more portable, uses two
AAA batteries, and has 2M RAM, was introduced in 1997.
Pretty good for 54 years. I expect we'll see similar reults
with quantum computing.
I don't expect a GR based computer either
The entire universe could be considered a GR computer.
Although it is somewhat larger than that "industry scale
laboratory"
Steve M
There are some things that quantum computers cannot do, and while factoring large numbers is one thing they can do (leading to the end of all known secure public key encryption) it is possible to make codes that cannot be effectively attacked by a quantum computer. In addition, programming a quantum computer (as they exist now) is a NASTY thing, so any complex and ugly algorithm would be secure for as long as it takes to devise a quantum method of doing it. Make it nasty enough and it could be just as secure as triple-DES or IDEA is today.
If you have solid proof of why it "will never happen", present it. Otherwise you can just shut up until you have something constructive to say.