News: A step towards a quantum computer

[quote]Many teams are looking for ways to build quantum computers, which process data using quantum particles such as photons, electrons and atoms.

Each particle carries a single bit of quantum information, or qubit, and the strange laws of quantum mechanics can be used to perform calculations at vastly greater speeds than are possible on conventional computers.[/quote]

News source: Atom trap is a step towards a quantum computer

It is really hard to picture how a quantum computer would work and how it would influence on human life.

A quantum computer basically works by doing different calculations in parallel universes, which is how subatomic particles can be in 2 places at once.
A bit has 2 possible states, 0 or 1; a qubit has some possible states, 0,1 or both at the same time, and niether. Or something.

I’m not making that up.

[quote=“Big Fluffy Matthew”]A quantum computer basically works by doing different calculations in parallel universes, which is how subatomic particles can be in 2 places at once.
A bit has 2 possible states, 0 or 1; a qubit has some possible states, 0,1 or both at the same time, and niether. Or something.

I’m not making that up.[/quote]

I thought you were joking at first. The idea, parallel universes, only exists in some science fictions.
After I did some study online, I realized you were right!

A Brief History of Quantum Computing

Think of the possibility. An ipod that would be 100x faster. You could go through you entire playlist in a quantum second.

[quote=“Big Fluffy Matthew”]A quantum computer basically works by doing different calculations in parallel universes, which is how subatomic particles can be in 2 places at once.
A bit has 2 possible states, 0 or 1; a qubit has some possible states, 0,1 or both at the same time, and niether. Or something.

I’m not making that up.[/quote]

A quantum computer has nothing to do with parallel universes. The word quanta refers to the smallest increase or decrease in energy possible at the molecular level. A quantum computer, rather than operate on the switches in a microchip, would process data by the charge or spin of it’s component particles.
Neither can particles be “in two places at once”. There are some interesting experiemental results that seem to indicate that data transfer can occur instantaneously between two vastly seperated particles (a violation of Einstein’s “nothing faster than light speed” rule), and some other unresolved results that suggest a discrete “particle” can still behave with wave-like properties.
Much of the confusion that attends discussions of quantum anything (especially among us lay folk) stems from the fact that we have a very solidly ingrained notion of particles behaving much like wee billiard balls whirring in orbit about the nucleus. They are not that sort of particle, nor can they be usefully described as such. All those graphics you rememeber from high school science showing the electrons zipping around the nucleus were crap.
As for parallel universes, some theorists (notably David Deutsch) have coined the term multi-verse and gone running off madly with it in order to develop an idea which explains the aforementioned unresolved experimental results. There is NO evidence whatsoever to support the idea, and no way to test the validity of the idea with present technology. The true death of the idea ought to plainly reside in the sheer number of “multi-verses” required to accomodate the idea. It’s simply far too ugly and messy to be remotely true. Of all the things Albert got right, I’m always struck by this one: “I always know when I have found the correct solution because it’s so elegantly beautiful.”
The multi-verse is not elegant. Personally, I see no need for N-to-the-Nth-power universes when we have such an amazing, seemingly infinite and little understood one already.

I don’t think anyone “gets” quantum physics, not even the scientists, they just follow the equations. And I certainly don’t get it, Hawking’s book is as far as I managed. I do have a passing interest in this sort of thing.

the best book on the subject as far as I know is by Julian Brown, “The Quest for the Quantum Computer” (Touchstone Books, through Simon & Schuster) 2000. (first edition originally published as Minds, Machines and the Multiverse).

there arre two separate areas of development mentiponed in this thread so far. one is entanglement, where data about the state of the other electron in an entangled pair is transmitted ‘faster than light’ to the second member of the pair when it is observed. the second is the parallel computing idea, where all possible outcomes are processed simultaneously by using qubits (quantum bits) that exist in a multitude of states unitl resolved by the act of observation (the so-called Schrodinger’s cat conundrum). The ‘multiverse’ idea developed from this, but this belief does not necessarily imply that there are separate universes of ‘fact’ but of ‘possibility’. still, it is an area ripe for cross fertilisation into science fiction, and a lot of speculation has grown on from that.

it’s still a pretty fluid area as far as theory goes, and the number of different interpretations out there shows you that the theorists are often at a loss how to best describe what they see or think of. experiments often reveal only what you ask of them, not the ‘truth’, so unravelling what is going on is tricky. (what is the ‘truth’ anyway?)

And even once we actually get such a beast, the next problem will be a) programming the damned things, and b) data in and output.

Quantum computing is just a model of states and operators that explicitly rely on quantum mechanical properties of physical systems as opposed to using macroscopic classical states derived from massive aggregation.
Every once in a while, there is news like this that says we’re one step closer to a quantum computer. Well, not really. The theory is all there. A reliable physical system is not. I think the best that anybody can do with a quantum computer now is to factor 15.

FINALLY! I knew all this research would have to, sooner or later, provide humankind with a big bang for the buck. Think of it…my God…fifteen finally factored. I’m gettin’ a little verklempt here.
Next up, getting that little even bastard TWO off the list of prime numbers.

Yes, but what happens if you open your quantum computer to install a new hard drive and the cat inside either dies or doesn’t? Do you have to get a new computer?

This is funny!! :slight_smile:

But if we really had a quantum computer, we definately would need not only a new hard drive but also new software. Quantum computer will bring about hardware and software revolution!
I still can’t have the picture of the future quantum computer.

This has already happened in a parallel universe somewhere, you can bet on that.

I was pooped on by a bird today.

Ya think that happened in a parallel universe also?

Wife said I should immediately buy a lottery ticket.

Because that’s just, like, good luck, isn’t it? :wink:

So the Tai tai says…but I shouldn’t post that on this thread.
True thought it is.

Waaay off topic. Sorry.

[quote=“TainanCowboy”]I was pooped on by a bird today.

Ya think that happened in a parallel universe also?

Wife said I should immediately buy a lottery ticket.[/quote]

No, in a parrallel universe it was a gorilla that shit on you.

I think a quantum iPod is one that you swallow, so your intestines absorb the mp3s and then you start to hear the music, which you can adjust by licking your molars or your incisor teeth or something.

And if you do this in an unobservable room, you can exist in both the living and dead state at the same time.

I love science story dumbed down to my level.

This morning there is a story on quantum computer.

npr.org/2013/05/22/185532608 … thing-else

You have to keep the computer at near absolute zero. Imagine that.

Entanglement has a totally different meaning here. Love it.

NO WAY!! Forumosa talking about my field of work! :slight_smile: