Like any good design problem- it really depends on what the priority is.
In terms of some simple classes of circuits, you probably could get away without clocking anything- just like certain types of digital or analog circuits today don't require a clock. But when you make the leap to anything state driven, you would absolutely need a clock. I suggest looking at the research of the atips group. With the sophistication of what they're trying to develop using the same type of technology, yes, you need a clock:
http://www.qcadesigner.ca/tutorials/QCATutorial.ht ml
It sounds like the terminology is confusing a few people here. As I understand it, there are two kinds of quantum computer being researched- the one that everybody seems to be familiar with (ie. the ones that can solve cryptographic problems very quickly), and the other kind, which involves using the physical properties of individual quanta to create quantum wires, transistors, and gates to form clocked, general purpose architectures. This article is talking about the second type of QCs. Currently, the biggest challenges (from what I've read) associated with implementing the second type of QCs has to do with manufacturing tolerances required to create quantum wells capable of keeping quantum data encapsulated and determinsitic. The other challenges include finding ways to clock these quantum circuits, and ways of inputting/outputting the data. So, from my interpretation, this article is really just talking about some potential solutions for aspects related to the second type of QCs I mentioned.
Having a program to grade your papers is nothing new... I remember being in junior high, using Word for Windows which could give your paper a couple of "grade level" marks. Word obviously didn't grade it based on content, but on style- which is somewhat subjective. After a while I figured out what style Word wanted my papers to conform to, and wrote to that. This didn't influence my content at all, but it did help me use different sentence structures and better grammar.
I don't know... using something like that for grading the technical elements of language is one thing that I don't mind too much, but grading content that way is something different.
I'm a fourth year Comp Engg. student taking a compilers course this semester, and all of our assignment testing is done with scripts (they aren't provided before the assingments are due). Even with a well thought out set of tests, one misplaced byte can often cost between 10-40% on your total mark, and a minor misinterpretation of a contradicting spec could easily cost the same. This test policy has caused a lot of people with valid assignments to get vary poor grades on the labs.
While the grading program at issue here probably has more brains behind it, I can't help but think that nuances in an individuals writing style could cause completely valid papers to get marked poorly as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Like any good design problem- it really depends on what the priority is. In terms of some simple classes of circuits, you probably could get away without clocking anything- just like certain types of digital or analog circuits today don't require a clock. But when you make the leap to anything state driven, you would absolutely need a clock. I suggest looking at the research of the atips group. With the sophistication of what they're trying to develop using the same type of technology, yes, you need a clock: http://www.qcadesigner.ca/tutorials/QCATutorial.ht ml
It sounds like the terminology is confusing a few people here. As I understand it, there are two kinds of quantum computer being researched- the one that everybody seems to be familiar with (ie. the ones that can solve cryptographic problems very quickly), and the other kind, which involves using the physical properties of individual quanta to create quantum wires, transistors, and gates to form clocked, general purpose architectures. This article is talking about the second type of QCs. Currently, the biggest challenges (from what I've read) associated with implementing the second type of QCs has to do with manufacturing tolerances required to create quantum wells capable of keeping quantum data encapsulated and determinsitic. The other challenges include finding ways to clock these quantum circuits, and ways of inputting/outputting the data. So, from my interpretation, this article is really just talking about some potential solutions for aspects related to the second type of QCs I mentioned.
Having a program to grade your papers is nothing new... I remember being in junior high, using Word for Windows which could give your paper a couple of "grade level" marks. Word obviously didn't grade it based on content, but on style- which is somewhat subjective. After a while I figured out what style Word wanted my papers to conform to, and wrote to that. This didn't influence my content at all, but it did help me use different sentence structures and better grammar. I don't know... using something like that for grading the technical elements of language is one thing that I don't mind too much, but grading content that way is something different. I'm a fourth year Comp Engg. student taking a compilers course this semester, and all of our assignment testing is done with scripts (they aren't provided before the assingments are due). Even with a well thought out set of tests, one misplaced byte can often cost between 10-40% on your total mark, and a minor misinterpretation of a contradicting spec could easily cost the same. This test policy has caused a lot of people with valid assignments to get vary poor grades on the labs. While the grading program at issue here probably has more brains behind it, I can't help but think that nuances in an individuals writing style could cause completely valid papers to get marked poorly as well.