quantum computers

Off Topic (Everything besides dubstep)
Forum rules
Please read and follow this sub-forum's specific rules listed HERE, as well as our sitewide rules listed HERE.

Link to the Secret Ninja Sessions community ustream channel - info in this thread
Locked
User avatar
sigbowls
Posts: 11188
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:31 am
Location: sigland

quantum computers

Post by sigbowls » Tue Oct 14, 2014 12:44 am

http://www.gizmag.com/unsw-silicon-quan ... rds/34220/

New records bring super-powerful quantum computers closer to reality

In what are claimed to be new world records, two teams working in parallel at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Australia have each found solutions to problems facing the advancement of silicon quantum computers. The first involves processing quantum data with an accuracy above 99 percent, while the second is the ability to store coherent quantum information for more than thirty seconds. Both of these records represent milestones in the eventual realization of super-powerful quantum computers.

Each of the teams produced two types of quantum bits (the vertical and horizontal polarization of an electron representing the binary state of 1 and 0 – known as qubits) in their research. One qubit, developed by the team led by Professor Andrew Dzurak, using an "artificial atom" produced in a MOSFET (Metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor), and the other, developed by the team led by Associate Professor Andrea Morello, used a "natural" phosphorus atom to develop their qubit.

In both cases, keeping qubits in their fragile quantum states long enough to use them to store information and accurately read the results whilst ensuring that tiny error rates don’t quickly add up when millions of computations are performed, are integral factors in creating future quantum computers and the accuracy of the quantum algorithms that will drive them.

i just posted some stuff because theres a bunch of stuff
blazen the raisin

User avatar
wysockisauce
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:07 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: quantum computers

Post by wysockisauce » Tue Oct 14, 2014 1:22 am


Phigure
Posts: 14134
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 5:55 am
Contact:

Re: quantum computers

Post by Phigure » Tue Oct 14, 2014 2:10 am

There's a lot of controversy about the d wave though, most likely it isn't a "true" quantum computer (although it is very fast at certain types of computations)
j_j wrote:^lol
Soundcloud | Twitter

User avatar
sigbowls
Posts: 11188
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:31 am
Location: sigland

Re: quantum computers

Post by sigbowls » Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:07 am

the video games with those computer would be nuts
blazen the raisin

Phigure
Posts: 14134
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 5:55 am
Contact:

Re: quantum computers

Post by Phigure » Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:19 am

hate to disappoint but quantum computers are just good at doing certain types of problems

like the ones involved in cryptography and encryption ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integer_factorization ). with a quantum computer you could break basically any of the encryption algorithms used today. meaning i could finally crack the dsf admin password and ban jaydot
j_j wrote:^lol
Soundcloud | Twitter

deadly_habit
Posts: 22980
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:41 am
Location: MURRICA

Re: quantum computers

Post by deadly_habit » Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:25 am

With what's been going on with fiber optics, physics and such things are getting closer. We can only fit so much nano or mini on a processor without compensating.

deadly_habit
Posts: 22980
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:41 am
Location: MURRICA

Re: quantum computers

Post by deadly_habit » Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:28 am

Phigure wrote:hate to disappoint but quantum computers are just good at doing certain types of problems

like the ones involved in cryptography and encryption ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integer_factorization ). with a quantum computer you could break basically any of the encryption algorithms used today. meaning i could finally crack the dsf admin password and ban jaydot
The thing about quantum physics is it's always the Schrodinger cat argument (at basic level, though we've gotten further in older layman terms in audio compared to gribbon's intro to quantum), the closer we get closer questions like that will no longer be quantum physics like the problem of dark matter as a stand in for we don't get it with astrophysics.

Phigure
Posts: 14134
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 5:55 am
Contact:

Re: quantum computers

Post by Phigure » Wed Oct 15, 2014 3:26 am

deadly_habit wrote:The thing about quantum physics is it's always the Schrodinger cat argument (at basic level, though we've gotten further in older layman terms in audio compared to gribbon's intro to quantum), the closer we get closer questions like that will no longer be quantum physics like the problem of dark matter as a stand in for we don't get it with astrophysics.
your post is a bit unintelligible but if im interpreting it right:

things like bell's theorem are basically overwhelming evidence that quantum mechanics isn't just "oh we don't understand it yet," but rather that, whether we like it or not, quantum phenomena like uncertainty, superposition, entanglement, etc are just the way the universe works. (also schroedingers cat is supposed to be absurd: it was made to point out that the copenhagen interpretation of QM doesn't make sense because it implies a cat could be dead or alive at the same time. other QM interpretations don't have the same problem)

also dark matter isn't really a "stand in for what we don't get with astrophysics." it's very obvious that it isn't an astrophysics problem - that implies that it's just a matter of figuring out some unknown phenomenon to explain the discrepancies in galaxy rotation curves, the shape of the bullet cluster, etc. the only proposed cosmological / astrophysics solution is a borderline crackpot theory. we know that the problem is that dark matter is composed of some as of yet unknown type(s) of particle(s), which is a field theory / particle physics problem.
j_j wrote:^lol
Soundcloud | Twitter

User avatar
topmo3
Posts: 4657
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:14 am
Location: Finland

Re: quantum computers

Post by topmo3 » Wed Oct 15, 2014 11:48 am

^ fuk u are smart
Image

User avatar
kay
Posts: 7343
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:50 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: quantum computers

Post by kay » Wed Oct 15, 2014 1:02 pm

Phigure wrote:
deadly_habit wrote:The thing about quantum physics is it's always the Schrodinger cat argument (at basic level, though we've gotten further in older layman terms in audio compared to gribbon's intro to quantum), the closer we get closer questions like that will no longer be quantum physics like the problem of dark matter as a stand in for we don't get it with astrophysics.
your post is a bit unintelligible but if im interpreting it right:

things like bell's theorem are basically overwhelming evidence that quantum mechanics isn't just "oh we don't understand it yet," but rather that, whether we like it or not, quantum phenomena like uncertainty, superposition, entanglement, etc are just the way the universe works. (also schroedingers cat is supposed to be absurd: it was made to point out that the copenhagen interpretation of QM doesn't make sense because it implies a cat could be dead or alive at the same time. other QM interpretations don't have the same problem)

also dark matter isn't really a "stand in for what we don't get with astrophysics." it's very obvious that it isn't an astrophysics problem - that implies that it's just a matter of figuring out some unknown phenomenon to explain the discrepancies in galaxy rotation curves, the shape of the bullet cluster, etc. the only proposed cosmological / astrophysics solution is a borderline crackpot theory. we know that the problem is that dark matter is composed of some as of yet unknown type(s) of particle(s), which is a field theory / particle physics problem.
Bring back the Pilot Wave conjecture I say!

Phigure
Posts: 14134
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 5:55 am
Contact:

Re: quantum computers

Post by Phigure » Wed Oct 15, 2014 1:24 pm

kay wrote:Bring back the Pilot Wave conjecture I say!
Honestly it's a shame that the Copenhagen interpretation is the default that everyone clings to, I've always felt the way that it treats observation / measurement is a bit of a cop out
j_j wrote:^lol
Soundcloud | Twitter

Phigure
Posts: 14134
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 5:55 am
Contact:

Re: quantum computers

Post by Phigure » Wed Oct 15, 2014 6:21 pm

topmo3 wrote:^ fuk u are smart
im about to get my ass kicked by this electromagnetism exam
j_j wrote:^lol
Soundcloud | Twitter

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests