Quantum Computing does work...

[Guest Kloaked]

Snip

All jokes aside this is really cool, although I don't quite understand it (at all)

I love that movie!

[TOMPPIX]

so the quantum processor is doing the calculations at the speed of light??? 

[holytoledo]

Found an explanation: http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.200501 The explanation is there if you open the images

 

 

"Using an all-optical setup and modifying the bases of single-qubit measurements..."

 

From the article.

 

Does this mean they used lasers or optical fiber switches (faster reads/writes) and then changed the "language" from a base 2 to something like a base 10? Aren't those performance tweaks of some sort?

 

Anyone kind of understand this crap?

[ionbasa]

"Using an all-optical setup and modifying the bases of single-qubit measurements..."

 

From the article.

 

Does this mean they used lasers or optical fiber switches (faster reads/writes) and then changed the "language" from a base 2 to something like a base 10? Aren't those performance tweaks of some sort?

 

Anyone kind of understand this crap?

I believe they aren't referring to a radix 'base', but rather the quantum mechanical states described by linear algebra.

So, no not like like converting a number in radix 2 to radix 10. They also aren't using a switch, but polarizing the laser light, the light and photon pairs are then filtered, attenuated and coupled.

[holytoledo]

So in photons that would be the equivalent to combining a blue and yellow light source and reading the green while interpreting both values?

 

Neat.

[HippY]

The thing that had been on my mind is that it took us a long time to continually refine classical computer architecture to get to where we are with it.

Quantum computing right now is in its infancy, and, as far as I know, has potential to be a lot faster than classical architecture in certain regards. When it eventually does become mainstream, I'm worried what it will mean for software developers and computer languages.

do not worry, Computer Science is a (way too) popular course there will be new languages

 

it is, for example look at the first computers. we can easily say that they were created in controlled environment as experience. then silicone came and it started to evolve at a blistering speed.

And now, we are at the end of the silicone soon, as the components can be such small only (= you need 3 atoms if I remember well to create a transistor theoritically)

as soon as they will get THE breakthrough ( as silicon for mass producing Electronics) a new booming will start.

 

And do not worry, there will be computers everywhere that will break and needs fixing. the whole math side will be more complicated, but they should figure out something for it, as for example this Simon`s equation existed a long before too

[ionbasa]

So in photons that would be the equivalent to combining a blue and yellow light source and reading the green while interpreting both values?

 

Neat.

Erm, no. Its like measuring the spin of the photon or whether the photon is 'up' or 'down' (imagine north pole vs south pole).

Also, the photons don't necessarily have to be pointing completely up or down, it can be fractional as well, such as 3/4 up and 1/4 down.

 

If I remember correctly from my physics classes, this is because particles are dictated by a probability theorem. Ie: electrons and photons can have an up or down spin, or have some of both in fractional terms, the combination of up or down is based off a probability.

[holytoledo]

Erm, no. Its like measuring the spin of the photon or whether the photon is 'up' or 'down' (imagine north pole vs south pole).

Also, the photons don't necessarily have to be pointing completely up or down, it can be fractional as well, such as 3/4 up and 1/4 down.

 

If I remember correctly from my physics classes, this is because particles are dictated by a probability theorem. Ie: electrons and photons can have an up or down spin, or have some of both in fractional terms, the combination of up or down is based off a probability.

 

 

Just wow. I'm amazed that that is even possible.

[Extingquish]

I wish I could help out with this thread a lot more Hopefully when I've made it through school, gone to university and got some experience I'll understand a whole lot more

[StingBull]

I feel like what's wrong with modern physics, the reason why so many people including me couldn't give a crap about it, is that the language used has turned into something convoluted with all these terms that only have any meaning in the field of physics. You basically have to learn another language now.

[kacper]

Wow , this is pretty big. Like really big for some people. I'm sad that my QM professor couldn't live long enough to see this.

 

I'm happy that finally something is going on with qCPU's . It's still a long road. Graphene most likely will faster hit consumer market than qCPU's . But then again - quantum computing would literally change the world we live in. Banking , security - everything that we have now could be easily cracked by consumer grade qCPU.

 

Now I want to live through singularity - then I can die in peace

[kacper]

I feel like what's wrong with modern physics, the reason why so many people including me couldn't give a crap about it, is that the language used has turned into something convoluted with all these terms that only have any meaning in the field of physics. You basically have to learn another language now.

Physics is as easy and as difficult as any other problem solving science. Without solid fundamentals , it's hard to get grasp of it. 

QM is completely different thing .At first it feels like everything you know up to this point was wrong. The moment when you begin to understand it and connect with everything you know up to this point - it's one of the most beautiful feelings I've ever had. Then again- there's nobody on Earth that truly understands QM . That's part of its beauty:)

[ionbasa]

Physics is as easy and as difficult as any other problem solving science. Without solid fundamentals , it's hard to get grasp of it. 

QM is completely different thing .At first it feels like everything you know up to this point was wrong. The moment when you begin to understand it and connect with everything you know up to this point - it's one of the most beautiful feelings I've ever had. Then again- there's nobody on Earth that truly understands QM . That's part of its beauty:)

While it is true that a solid foundation in physics (concepts) is needed to understand physics, it also requires a strong knowledge of calculus, to take advantage of.

 

With quantum mechanics, at least Energy survived the 'quantum revolution'. Not so much for newtonian laws, but it still helps knowing about the basics!

 

In terms of quantum computing, I'll admit, some of the concepts do elude me. While I do know differentials of equations and some concepts and theories from a Physics C / III class, it still surpases some of what I know in terms of the theory of operation behind quantum computing, but I do try to help everyone understand!

[kacper]

While it is true that a solid foundation in physics (concepts) is needed to understand physics, it also requires a strong knowledge of calculus, to take advantage of.

 

With quantum mechanics, at least Energy survived the 'quantum revolution'. Not so much for newtonian laws, but it still helps knowing about the basics!

 

In terms of quantum computing, I'll admit, some of the concepts do elude me. While I do know differentials of equations and some concepts and theories from a Physics C / III class, it still surpases some of what I know in terms of the theory of operation behind quantum computing, but I do try to help everyone understand!

By fundamentals I meant  algebra, calculus, propability ,chemistry ,physics  

It's all well connected . Besides , flexibility is the most important thing in any discipline

[deathjester]

not gonna pretend that i understand this becuase i dont.

 

It means that they claim more proof than D-Wave has offered as far as it actually being a quantum computer to begin with, let alone speed. D-Wave has been blasted as shenanigans by many academics and their claims when benchmarked, have been laughable. Their giant D-Wave box got annihilated by a single core of a Sandy Bridge Hexa and academia has questioned the claim as to whether it is even a quantum computer at all.

 

This will be picked apart as well. Early claim. You can claim anything. Those claims actually have to work and be vetted and something observed can be mistaken for something else (which people are already alluding to in the comment section).

 

Bit early to say "quantum computing does work". Better title would be "possible breakthrough in Quantum Computing". Time, repeated experiments, pointing out possible flaws in the experiment, will determine whether the claims have any validity.  

[ionbasa]

It means that they claim more proof than D-Wave has offered as far as it actually being a quantum computer to begin with, let alone speed. D-Wave has been blasted as shenanigans by many academics and their claims when benchmarked, have been laughable. Their giant D-Wave box got annihilated by a single core of a Sandy Bridge Hexa and academia has questioned the claim as to whether it is even a quantum computer at all.

 

This will be picked apart as well. Early claim. You can claim anything. Those claims actually have to work and be vetted and something observed can be mistaken for something else (which people are already alluding to in the comment section).

 

Bit early to say "quantum computing does work". Better title would be "possible breakthrough in Quantum Computing". Time, repeated experiments, pointing out possible flaws in the experiment, will determine whether the claims have any validity.  

From reading the article, they don't use an D-Wave. They basically made their own 6 qubit computer with lasers. This article will most likely also be picked apart as well, but it provides an interesting dilemma for D-Wave as well. 

If Simon's problem fails to run on D-Wave's system, or runs with an higher than expected iteration rate, then it concludes that D-Wave's system in fact has no quantum speedup. 

 

After all, if simon's rule finishes in less iterations on an 6 qubit computer than a traditional binary processor, why can't D-Wave's system do the same? This of course is a hypothetical scenario, but you can see where I am trying to get at...

It could essentially blow a hole in D-Wave's marketing and reputation (ohh wait, thats been done already).

[Osmium]

Someone should seriously do a quantum computer documentary(they probably already have). Explaining the principles behind it. All I know is that it is 1 0 or a 01 so it has 3 states. Also does anyone know if it's only possible with light, is it possible with other em waves and such?  

 

It operates under the spin of an Electron. It spins one way that is a 1, if it spins the other way a zero. However everything in the Quantum universe gets really hard to comprehend and I know that there are supposedly infinite states between 1 and 0 (which it can all be simultaneously or something). Basically I don't really think anyone really understands it.

 

My step father works for Northrup Grumman and they are right now developing a Quantum Computer for the NSA and they have been for some time (this is public data so I am not giving away anything top secret here). From what I hear the prototype is totally done except for one piece which is a massive array of magnetic RAM. Northrup won't know if any of the pieces work until they have ALL of them built so we are just waiting on the magnetic RAM really. Plus the whole dilemma on observing the operation of the machine causes it to cease to function (they think) so that adds a whole new problem nobody has ever really had to deal with ever. however it is not common(practically unheard of) for NG to invest as much money as they have into the project so I think that it more than likely will be a success. 

[deathjester]

From reading the article, they don't use an D-Wave. They basically made their own 6 qubit computer with lasers. This article will most likely also be picked apart as well, but it provides an interesting dilemma for D-Wave as well. 

If Simon's problem fails to run on D-Wave's system, or runs with an higher than expected iteration rate, then it concludes that D-Wave's system in fact has no quantum speedup. 

 

After all, if simon's rule finishes in less iterations on an 6 qubit computer than a traditional binary processor, why can't D-Wave's system do the same? This of course is a hypothetical scenario, but you can see where I am trying to get at...

It could essentially blow a hole in D-Wave's marketing and reputation (ohh wait, thats been done already).

 

Well let's put it this way. I trust these guys more than D-Wave. I will have to see more and yes it will be picked apart, by people at Stanford and MIT and they are probably already commenting on it. Like I said. POSSIBLE. Still early though. It might be wrong observation, faulty scientific method and a honest mistake, or it could be the real deal.

 

D-Wave on the other hand seems like a cheap magician magic show. I don't believe D-Wave's claims at all, or it even being Quantum computing to begin with, after reading a lot of research papers that examined it and the speed claims have been shown to be absurd as you mentioned.

[kacper]

It operates under the spin of an Electron. It spins one way that is a 1, if it spins the other way a zero. However everything in the Quantum universe gets really hard to comprehend and I know that there are supposedly infinite states between 1 and 0 (which it can all be simultaneously or something). Basically I don't really think anyone really understands it.

Normal bit used in convensional programming is either 1 or 0 . There's no in beetwen.

Quantum bit is linear superposition of 1 and 0. What I mean by that is - there's propability of each state.

In "ket" notation

|Psi> = a|0> + b|1>  

a & b are amplitudes of propability of corresponding state (they can be complex or real)

propability is amplitude squared so |a|^2 is propability of state 0 

 

So yeah, there are infinite states , but some are more propable than others

 

Many of you have seen visual representation of electron orbitals at chemistry. They told you that electron can be in cloud of certain shape - electron can be anywhere but the most propable position is in that shape. 

 

Then there's Heisenberg's uncertainty principle . Particle or relatively small group of them have quantum properties (nobody knows when the amount of particles in group loses it's quantum properties). When you observe it/them you must use something - for example photons. The thing is photons are very energetic so try to imagine what happens when you hit one billard ball with another (analogy) . You can't observe it without messing up with results . So you can't both measure position and momentum and momentum with certainty. 

 

I tried to write this as simply as I could - I oversimplicated thing quite a bit (lol, pun intended), but I hope that this cleared some of You subject . I hope that maybe some of You might find this interesting and continue to find informations about subject.

[ionbasa]

Normal bit used in convensional programming is either 1 or 0 . There's no in beetwen.

Quantum bit is linear superposition of 1 and 0. What I mean by that is - there's propability of each state.

In "ket" notation

|Psi> = a|0> + b|1>  

a & b are amplitudes of propability of corresponding state (they can be complex or real)

propability is amplitude squared so |a|^2 is propability of state 0 

 

So yeah, there are infinite states , but some are more propable than others

Not trying to call you out on this, but that was more or less (copy/paste) paraphrasing from this Wikipedia section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qubit#Representation

... Nonetheless, it is how it works.

Edited November 18, 2014 by ionbasa

[kacper]

Not trying to call you out on this, but that was more or less (copy/paste) paraphrasing from this Wikipedia section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qubit#Representation

... Nonetheless, it is how it works.

As long as someone finds this useful - who cares ? I'm not native English speaker , and I was taught in Polish so I didn't want to create more confusion than necessary.

[Kingofpants]

Please explain dafuq is happening in this.

Change the phrase to

"It's not quantum computing"

Cause this is worse than Quantum physics and Rocket science by a long shot.

[kacper]

Two photonic crystal fibers produce photon pairs, which are fused using a polarizing beam splitter (PBS) to generate the five-qubit entangled cluster state plus additional qubit 6 . The cluster state consists of three polarization qubits 1, 3, and 5 (s1, i2, and s2). The paths of photons s1 and s2 represent qubits 2 and 4, respectively. The algorithm is executed by measuring the path qubits in the Z or Y bases depending on the oracle’s black box using a Sagnac configuration (dashed regions). The output of the algorithm resides on qubits 1 and 5, and is obtained via polarization measurements. 

[ionbasa]

Please explain dafuq is happening in this.

Change the phrase to

"It's not quantum computing"

Cause this is worse than Quantum physics and Rocket science by a long shot.

There is a laser emitter (TiSa). That chart is a graphical representation of the experiment. It shows the path the light beams from the laser traveled and to where it terminated. The photons 'that mattered' were read on sensor 1 and 5.

[HippY]

- magic-

Thanks, it helped clarifing it!

so basically if we measure it, we are going to change the outcome and put it into a finite system ( let say measured in photons) thus it will not be true quantum state

So how do they calculate with something if they cannot measure the units?