Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Quantum annealing
32 views
Skip to first unread message
Peter Fairbrother
May 16, 2013, 8:29:07 PM5/16/13
to
Seems the D_Wave multi-qubit quantum computer is actually working,
though it's not the "classical" quantum computer but a quantum annealing
machine.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22554494
I was wondering whether it would be of use in a brute-force attack
against a good modern cipher?
First thoughts, I kind-of think not, as there is nothing which says this
superposition is closer to a result than that one - there is only
correct and wrong. So it would have to go from all states to one state
all at once, and thence there would be no annealing, and I don't think
it can do that.
But I could well be wrong, and would like to know other people's opinions.
-- Peter Fairbrother
though it's not the "classical" quantum computer but a quantum annealing
machine.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22554494
I was wondering whether it would be of use in a brute-force attack
against a good modern cipher?
First thoughts, I kind-of think not, as there is nothing which says this
superposition is closer to a result than that one - there is only
correct and wrong. So it would have to go from all states to one state
all at once, and thence there would be no annealing, and I don't think
it can do that.
But I could well be wrong, and would like to know other people's opinions.
-- Peter Fairbrother
David Eather
May 17, 2013, 3:07:48 AM5/17/13
to
tests required by Nasa and Google), it is very fast indeed at finding the
optimal solution to a problem that potentially has many different
combinations of answers."
That bit sounds like, on day, it might be useful for brute forcing
symmetric ciphers.
Jan Panteltje
May 17, 2013, 4:10:52 AM5/17/13
to
On a sunny day (Fri, 17 May 2013 01:29:07 +0100) it happened Peter Fairbrother
<zenad...@zen.co.uk> wrote in <519579db$0$1126$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk>:
OK, MY opinion:
Total crap.
'superposition' reminds me of the old analog computah.
It had huge error rates, was difficult to program,
and had very limited applications.
Anything that has a less than 90% accuracy for single units / operations CANNOT be used to solve complex problems
as errors MULTIPLY.
It is all hype, and I am sure many people live off that con funded by the poor tax payer.
IIRC IBM ever had a quantum computah factor the number 15 WITH HELP.
That was the best result so far.
It is a bit like better batteries, not a week goes by without somebody coming up with an improvement
to battery technology that gives a 50 to 100% increase in capacity.
If you multiply all those 'improvements' you could now power NY city from a cell the size of an ice cube.
Not a week goes by without somebody claiming a breakthrough that brings the quantum cumputah / quantum memory / quantum whatever,
so much closer, it should be super powerful now and crack any cipher in seconds.
NOT SO.
It is a self supporting industry by and for clueless physicists that do not
realize all they have is an idea for the old analog computah, obsoleted when people still knew what they were doing.
Of course after typing this it is very possible that NSA or whoever is already using one to listen to the most secret secrets of them all and deciphering SETI noise with
it, and claim I am an idiot etc...
Prove it!
I bring more than half a century experience with computahs, I call you bluff.
As to quantum, QED, it is all about probabilities, and based on the idea that things are 'quantized',
that light for example is a particle.
Light is NOT a particle, the quantization is just energy fluctuation where the waves interact with matter.
For sure EM 'waves' must wave in something, but we are not there yet by any means.
A theory that gives in many cases the right answer QM is (yedi speak), but it is not a correct description of reality.
Physics has been on a dead end road ever since Einstein postulated photon as a particle.
That man was an idiot, or payed by intelligence to spread nonsense.
Again, if humanity lives, society does not collapse (as it does on a regular basis it seems), technology is lost,
dark ages, THEN maybe in a few thousand years we look at these follies just as we now look a the Greeks idea of finance ^H^H^Hetc eeeh earth water and fire
being the basic elements.
So, let them factor some larger number, or even solve the traveling sales man's problem,
or any other much simpler thing, THEN I will review my opinion.
NSA .. CIA, fell of my chair laughing, it collapsed, bought a new better chair.
TEST IT.
LOL
:-)
<zenad...@zen.co.uk> wrote in <519579db$0$1126$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk>:
Total crap.
'superposition' reminds me of the old analog computah.
It had huge error rates, was difficult to program,
and had very limited applications.
Anything that has a less than 90% accuracy for single units / operations CANNOT be used to solve complex problems
as errors MULTIPLY.
It is all hype, and I am sure many people live off that con funded by the poor tax payer.
IIRC IBM ever had a quantum computah factor the number 15 WITH HELP.
That was the best result so far.
It is a bit like better batteries, not a week goes by without somebody coming up with an improvement
to battery technology that gives a 50 to 100% increase in capacity.
If you multiply all those 'improvements' you could now power NY city from a cell the size of an ice cube.
Not a week goes by without somebody claiming a breakthrough that brings the quantum cumputah / quantum memory / quantum whatever,
so much closer, it should be super powerful now and crack any cipher in seconds.
NOT SO.
It is a self supporting industry by and for clueless physicists that do not
realize all they have is an idea for the old analog computah, obsoleted when people still knew what they were doing.
Of course after typing this it is very possible that NSA or whoever is already using one to listen to the most secret secrets of them all and deciphering SETI noise with
it, and claim I am an idiot etc...
Prove it!
I bring more than half a century experience with computahs, I call you bluff.
As to quantum, QED, it is all about probabilities, and based on the idea that things are 'quantized',
that light for example is a particle.
Light is NOT a particle, the quantization is just energy fluctuation where the waves interact with matter.
For sure EM 'waves' must wave in something, but we are not there yet by any means.
A theory that gives in many cases the right answer QM is (yedi speak), but it is not a correct description of reality.
Physics has been on a dead end road ever since Einstein postulated photon as a particle.
That man was an idiot, or payed by intelligence to spread nonsense.
Again, if humanity lives, society does not collapse (as it does on a regular basis it seems), technology is lost,
dark ages, THEN maybe in a few thousand years we look at these follies just as we now look a the Greeks idea of finance ^H^H^Hetc eeeh earth water and fire
being the basic elements.
So, let them factor some larger number, or even solve the traveling sales man's problem,
or any other much simpler thing, THEN I will review my opinion.
NSA .. CIA, fell of my chair laughing, it collapsed, bought a new better chair.
TEST IT.
LOL
:-)
Bruce Stephens
May 17, 2013, 4:52:51 AM5/17/13
to
Peter Fairbrother <zenad...@zen.co.uk> writes:
> Seems the D_Wave multi-qubit quantum computer is actually working,
> though it's not the "classical" quantum computer but a quantum
> annealing machine.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22554494
For a more negative view (which still emphasizes there's been a real
> Seems the D_Wave multi-qubit quantum computer is actually working,
> though it's not the "classical" quantum computer but a quantum
> annealing machine.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22554494
advance): <http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1400>
[...]
unruh
May 17, 2013, 5:51:44 PM5/17/13
to
Read Aaronson's blog post (listed in this thread). Reportage is not
neccesarily truth.
neccesarily truth.
David Eather
May 17, 2013, 7:55:27 PM5/17/13
to
On Sat, 18 May 2013 07:51:44 +1000, unruh <un...@invalid.ca> wrote:
> Read Aaronson's blog post (listed in this thread). Reportage is not
> neccesarily truth.
I used to be married to a journalist - I know th only thing that counts is
> Read Aaronson's blog post (listed in this thread). Reportage is not
> neccesarily truth.
the headline. I did place some emphasis on 'one day'
0 new messages