Quantum Computers

[John Clark]

In today's issue of the journal Nature there is a article about a Silicon based Quantum Computer that operates at temperatures as high as 1.25 degrees Kelvin with an error rate of only 0.7%. That may seem pretty cold but previous Silicon based Quantum Computers, the type corporate investors like best, needed 0.01 degrees Kelvin. Compared with that 1.25 is blistering hot.

Universal quantum logic in hot silicon qubits

John K Clark

[Philip Thrift]

The proof is always in the pudding (hot or cold).

When specific programs are shown to scale in efficiency on a QC in a lab faster than any SC (supercomputer) in a lab with actual test results, then ...

@philipthrift

  

[spudb...@aol.com]

Now all is has to do is work far better than digital computing. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3%2B3by42NefBO7ROEWtn8NELk5c57B5cK%3Dc9gypJU%3Dw0g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bruno Marchal]

On 20 Apr 2020, at 03:09, spudboy100 via Everything List <everyth...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Now all is has to do is work far better than digital computing. 

Quantum computing is still digital computing. 

A Quantum Computer does not violate the Church-Turing thesis, and it obeys to whatever we can prove (a lot) about limitations and possibilities of digital machines.

What a QC can do, and no Classical machine seem able to do, is to simulate in polynomial time any natural process, not even the quantum vacuum, but this is what classical computation theory predicts, when we assume mechanism in cognitive science, as any piece of matter is “made of” (“emerges on”) infinitely many computations. 

In my opinion, quantum computers will exist, but that might take a long time. I agree with Clark that eventually that will be a machine using quantum topological qubits, and the first one will be a gigantic machine, then they will get smaller and smaller, but that too will take sometime.

What will happen sooner will be some classical computer having some quantum gates, for some particular task. Nearby (from my office) a team works hard to just make a “true” quantum random generator, but that is already an immensely complex endeavour. 

Of course, the actual miniaturisation of the classical computer is already a prowess of quantum mechanics. Even the transistor would not have been possible without quantum mechanics.

Bruno

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1437118162.3221131.1587344960769%40mail.yahoo.com.

[spudb...@aol.com]

Very well, Professor. Yet, I brutish peasant such as myself ponders the "impact, of QC? If it is nothing more than sealing or cracking coded data, it could have an enormous economic and military impact, indeed. I am, however, was looking for it to boost the pace of technological innovation. This, or photonic, or protein computing, may yield something or something that is merely a laboratory curiosity? If QC or these other technologies do not produce vast improvements in the development and capability of our technological prowess; then I say we are as Captain Ahab, lashed by his own harpoon ropes, onto the whale, Moby Dick's back, In other words a product of our time, as with every 20th century scientist, or even science fiction writer. This, may be our fate?

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/43F6B85E-9B8E-4DDF-AAB1-5AF810B2E5C5%40ulb.ac.be

.