Open positions: Quantum computing hardware startup engineering team

[Nathan Gemelke]

Anyone looking for a challenge, perhaps a great moment in tech history, and to join an incredible team of quantum physicists building machines no one has before? QuEra Computing Inc is building an engineering team now from the ground up. We are interested in a very broad skill set, ranging from project management to design and prototype of microwave electronics, opto-electronics, high-speed digital and precision analog instrumentation. If you love what you do, and want to learn new things in a fascinating new area, we'd love to hear from you! And if you know the perfect person for this job, please forward this post!

For more information, click the link above and hit "Careers", or inquire at employment a-t quera-computing.com.

[Jeroen Belleman]

On 2020-05-06 21:47, Nathan Gemelke wrote:
> Anyone looking for a challenge, perhaps a great moment in tech
> history, and to join an incredible team of quantum physicists
> building machines no one has before?

I think quantum computers are a big swindle.
There. Convince me.

Jeroen Belleman

[John Larkin]

But you are a quantum computer.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

[Nathan Gemelke]

Jeroen - We like to think of them as an open challenge and emerging opportunity - but you are right - it will take a lot of healthy skepticism and hard work to get down that long road before they are truly useful. If it's the road that matters to you, give us a call.

[Tom Del Rosso]

John Larkin wrote:
> On Wed, 06 May 2020 23:04:25 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
> <jer...@nospam.please> wrote:
>
>> On 2020-05-06 21:47, Nathan Gemelke wrote:
>>> Anyone looking for a challenge, perhaps a great moment in tech
>>> history, and to join an incredible team of quantum physicists
>>> building machines no one has before?
>>
>> I think quantum computers are a big swindle.
>> There. Convince me.
>>
>> Jeroen Belleman
>
> But you are a quantum computer.

So I've heard, but why don't our brains need cryo cooling?

[Tom Del Rosso]

There is allegedly a web portal somewhere in ibm.com that lets you
upload code that runs on one of their machines, but maybe it's just a
simulator.

[Nathan Gemelke]

Yes, real machines and simulators both. You should expect to see more in the next few years, based on multiple platforms. Some don't even need cryogenics. Early days and and many small steps ahead, but the next couple years should see some good progress.

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

"Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote in
news:r8vso8$68f$1...@dont-email.me:

They do that to keep noise and false qbit reads from happening.
We fight through the error funk.
>
Becuase we are not conducting electrons through processing
iterations and machinery. Our 'consciousness' is 'a different
animal' so we do not have "block transfers" to manage and such.
We have "block awareness" and "supressed block recall" if one wants
to call them blocks. I like bubbles.

I like the movie "Brainstorm".

I wish I could perform the same "meditation" Einstein said he did to
gain his most prized enlightenments.

Some think there is a universal consciousness and intelligence to
tap into.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

Quantum mechanics works at all temperatures.

The qbit cryo things are primitive, but the idea of finding solutions
by quantum superposition is too good for critters not to use.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, May 7, 2020 at 1:32:52 PM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Wed, 6 May 2020 22:45:24 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
> <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
>
> >John Larkin wrote:
> >> On Wed, 06 May 2020 23:04:25 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
> >> <jer...@nospam.please> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 2020-05-06 21:47, Nathan Gemelke wrote:
> >>>> Anyone looking for a challenge, perhaps a great moment in tech
> >>>> history, and to join an incredible team of quantum physicists
> >>>> building machines no one has before?
> >>>
> >>> I think quantum computers are a big swindle.
> >>> There. Convince me.
> >>>
> >>> Jeroen Belleman
> >>
> >> But you are a quantum computer.
> >
> >So I've heard, but why don't our brains need cryo cooling?
>
> Quantum mechanics works at all temperatures.

But quantum states get perturbed very easily, and higher temperatures mean more frequent perturbations.

> The qbit cryo things are primitive, but the idea of finding solutions
> by quantum superposition is too good for critters not to use.

Those same critters that implemented error-detection and correction in the genetic code? It's clearly a good idea, but it doesn't seem to have happened either.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, May 7, 2020 at 7:18:37 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
> On Wed, 06 May 2020 23:04:25 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
> <jer...@nospam.please> wrote:
>
> >On 2020-05-06 21:47, Nathan Gemelke wrote:
> >> Anyone looking for a challenge, perhaps a great moment in tech
> >> history, and to join an incredible team of quantum physicists
> >> building machines no one has before?
> >
> >I think quantum computers are a big swindle.
> >There. Convince me.
>

> But you are a quantum computer.

Only if you take one of Roger Penrose's sillier speculations seriously.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Jeroen Belleman]

I can't factor large near-primes very well either.

Jeroen

[Jeroen Belleman]

Have you noticed how no one ever truly explains how quantum
computers are supposed to work? I mean, we get plenty of this
"quantum bits have multiple states simultaneously" nonsense,
but that's just embezzlement. Awe and wonder, but no substance.

In the end, to get a usable result out of a quantum system,
you have to gather statistics, run many of them, or run one
many times or for a long time. That doesn't look very efficient
or scalable.

Oh, you can build gadgets based on quantum behaviour to solve
specific problems, but those would essentially only solve *that*
problem, nothing else. They would be akin to analog computers.

I think it's all just hype.

Jeroen Belleman

[John Doe]

Jeroen Belleman wrote:

> Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>> John Larkin wrote:

>>> Jeroen Belleman wrote:
>>>> Nathan Gemelke wrote:

>>>>> Anyone looking for a challenge, perhaps a great moment in tech
>>>>> history, and to join an incredible team of quantum physicists
>>>>> building machines no one has before?
>>>>
>>>> I think quantum computers are a big swindle.
>>>> There. Convince me.

>>> But you are a quantum computer.
>>
>> So I've heard, but why don't our brains need cryo cooling?

Extremely effective power management?

> I can't factor large near-primes very well either.

Have you ever seen a math contest?

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Thu, 07 May 2020 08:10:50 +0200, Jeroen Belleman

<jer...@nospam.please> wrote:

>On 2020-05-07 04:45, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>> John Larkin wrote:
>>> On Wed, 06 May 2020 23:04:25 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
>>> <jer...@nospam.please> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2020-05-06 21:47, Nathan Gemelke wrote:
>>>>> Anyone looking for a challenge, perhaps a great moment in tech
>>>>> history, and to join an incredible team of quantum physicists
>>>>> building machines no one has before?
>>>>
>>>> I think quantum computers are a big swindle.
>>>> There. Convince me.
>>>>
>>>> Jeroen Belleman
>>>
>>> But you are a quantum computer.
>>
>> So I've heard, but why don't our brains need cryo cooling?
>>
>>
>>
>
>I can't factor large near-primes very well either.
>
>Jeroen

Actually, some people can.

There was a fad once for public demonstrations of people who could do
amazing math in their heads.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_calculator

Some people can hit a ball flying at 100 MPH with a stick.

https://www.npr.org/2016/09/03/492516937/how-a-baseball-batters-brain-reacts-to-a-fast-pitch

450 milliseconds for a ballistic calculation, using wet chemical,
millisecond logic elements.

I knew a guy who would look at the seams on an incoming tennis ball to
learn its spin, so he could factor that into his return english. That
process took a fraction of a second.

I played table tennis with the world's 16th best player. Of course I
couldn't return a single shot. That's even faster than tennis.

I analyze thousands, or maybe trillions, of possible electronic
circuits in parallel, sometimes in my sleep.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

[Phil Hobbs]

There have been published algorithms for quantum computers for yonks.

I did a bit of work with the IBM quantum computing group about a dozen
years ago--David di Vincenzo (the local quantum computing theory guru)
and I came up with a scheme for using my antenna-coupled tunnel
junctions and Roger Koch's superconducting interferometers for quantum
communications at room temperature. (David came up with the math, I
came up with the devices. Details are at
<https://electrooptical.net/static/eoi/patents/US07889992__.pdf>)

We both left for greener pastures before I got those ones working. The
normal ACTJ detectors worked great.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

[George Herold]

Grin, I remember playing with ping pong with two experts.
(both physics professors, well now at least, one was a grad student
at the time.) We were playing doubles and I'm trying to return serve
from a master.. Nada...
"Hold your paddle like this", my expert partner says...
Face essentially parallel to the table... ~90 degrees from my
typical orientation. Serve comes in and bang, I get (for me)
a perfect return. Master across the table changed the serve
next time and the ball again went off in some random direction.
But I got one back!

George H.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

Lim was showing off, so applied full spin. The ball hit my paddle flat
and headed off at 90 degrees, into a wall or the ceiling. Better than
hitting me, which bruised.

But the wasn't a very good engineer.

[Jeroen Belleman]

That looks like it would undermine quantum cryptography, would it not?

Jeroen Belleman

[George Herold]

At some level all science these days is hype... which is too bad.
The Google team made some milestone that Scott Aaronson blogged about.
This is good for us in the lay public,
https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=4317
I know nothing of the details, but I still think it's pretty cool.

George H.

[Phil Hobbs]

Well, you're pushing me on the math that I don't understand, which is of
course perfectly fair. ;)

I don't think it would, FWIW. Quantum communications allows exchanging
data that cannot be intercepted without disrupting the communication
channel, which ISTM is a helpful adjunct to crypto rather than an
antagonist.

I resisted working on quantum computers for several years because
undermining strong crypto would be A Bad Thing, but it turns out that
there are a lot of quantum-resistant crypto algorithms available.

Whether the 'perfect forward secrecy' property of previously-existing
algos will survive quantum attack, I don't know.

[David Brown]

Neither can quantum computers.

[David Brown]

Yes. There are plenty of algorithms that run fine on conventional
computing and don't have any fast quantum algorithms for breaking them,
even in theory.

But there is also the practice - a standard, well-known RSA algorithm is
completely unbreakable (with any current algorithms) if the bit size is
big enough. A 2048-bit code is going to be unbreakable with any
conventional computer in practice (765 bits is the current record, I
believe). Breaking 2048-bit code with a quantum computer would take a
20-million q-bit computer, running continuously for 8 hours (in theory).
Current models can run about a dozen q-bits for a few milliseconds.

And no matter how big and powerful conventional or quantum computers
get, any calculations always have a minimum energy required. Moving to
4096-bit RSA is peanuts - but cracking it would probably take all the
energy from the sun's lifetime, no matter what type of computer is used.

Smarter algorithms for factoring big numbers are a risk for current
popular encryption algorithms, and could change things dramatically.
Quantum computers are not a risk.

[George Herold]

Oh these were two good physicist's. Hung was a new hire,
and went on to be chair. (he was rumored to have had some
Chinese PP scholarship.) And on my side, (or I should say
crippled by me.) was J. Kono, now at Rice. Shaliesh and I
were about evenly matched... (I did grow up with a PP table in
the basement.)
Anyway we all had fun and I think the experts were trying their hardest
to win. Which is exactly what you want. So try doubles next time. :^)
(little dinks shots are the safest...)

George H.

[Jeroen Belleman]

They choose their problem well: Generating 'certified' random
sequences. Unverifiable.

Jeroen Belleman

[George Herold]

Jeroen, Do you think entanglement is real?
Bell's inequality.
The entangled 2 photon system is the cleanest I know of.

It's the next gen two slit interference exp.
Available in (college/uni) adv. labs all over.
(If 1 photon interference didn't f with your mind...
try 2. :^)

George H.

[Jeroen Belleman]

Entanglement, certainly. Spooky action at a distance, no.

Jeroen Belleman