WTF is it?
>>54122198
It's just a money making money meme that bankrupt tech schools and startups use to gain more funding.
>>54122198
Transistors working with 2 states 1 and 0.
Quantum computing works with 3 states 0 1 2.
You know the shrodingers cat experiment right?
There is only 2 possible outcomes of the experiment however until its observed it's in juxtapose and it can be either?
Thats exactly how quantum computing works.
>>54122237
>Thats exactly how quantum computing works.
Wow I didn't know it what so simple. So why is it that scientists and tech giants are saying that it is the most difficult technological milestone to achieve?
>>54122236
>It's just a money making money meme
I don't think so buddy. I'm sure there's more to it than that.
>>54122328
TOP KEK. Welcome to capitalism you retard. Money rules the world I hope you can get that through your thick skull.
Downvoted
>>54122198
A meme. Has no use and will never have any use outside research projects. And maybe, MAYBE, some tech giants.
>>54122298
Gotta cool that shit down to a fraction of absolute zero.
>>54122553
Wow, I wonder how people who are supporting this to make money and tricking people sleep at night.
>>54122237
That is just wrong. Ternary computers do already exist, btw.
>>54122445
>just a meme to get funding
Google doesn't get funding from research grants or anything, and they're dumping money into it.
I wouldn't call Yale and Stanford bankrupt either.
>>54122743
>Google doesn't get funding from research grants or anything, and they're dumping money into it.
>I wouldn't call Yale and Stanford bankrupt either.
EXACTLY BECAUSE WE'RE ALL PAYING FOR IT (WE ARE THE 99%) Remember that.
>>54122838
You're retarded. Stanford and Yale have literally hundreds of millions stowed away in financial assets from alumni donations and profits off those financial assets. They would be better off making things that'd bring more money in the long run by being useful.
I don't even know what you're implying with Google. You think a company is going to piss away their revenue?
>>54122237
Seriously, this is just the stupid "oh look, can be zero, one or both!".
>>54122198
I'd say that you shouldn't wait to be spoonfed by some autists /g/entleman, but here we go.
The theory behind quantum computers is highly complex and most of points seems impractical. Quantum computers work using "qubits", that is a superposition of possible states. Basically, this is the part about "could be 0 or 1", because you can work with not known values. Therefore, until you measure the qubit, it could be in any state of your base (normally 0 and 1) and it's described as a two dimensional complex vector. Also, you know what are the odds to "collapse" to each base state. People use, for example, spins of electron to try simulate these qubits.
BUT, THIS IS NOT WHAT MAKES IT POWERFUL. What really makes quantum computing so freaking fast (in some aspects), it's something called qubits entanglement. I have no proper way to simplify it, so try reading about "spooky action at distance", and search for this shit if you wanna learn why.
But, the point is, no one until now really created a quantum computer that really follows the theory. Most are workarounds that use some magic to perform at some decent speed the simulation of a quantum computer.
One more thing: quantum computers are fuckin slow compared to" normal" computers to execute MOST of same operations. Every quantum operator must be reversible, and that's a pain in the ass. (For example, imagine that every AND would be reversible. You can know go back to your inputs, no matter if it's a fuckin 0 or a fuckin 1 as result). But, yeah of course it performs some shit fast as fuck. Just remind it's not better in everything.
Also, never forget that quantum computers are probabilistic. And that the only reason that big companies started to pay people to study this shit it was because of Shor's Algorithm, that breaks the most used cryptographies of the world.
tl;dr
Mostly used for math, common folk wouldn't need.
>tfw /g/ didn't fund the 4-dimensional quadnary OS
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1784334872/4-dimensional-operating-system/description
You've literally killed computing, nice job faggots
>>54122237
>Quantum computing works with 3 states 0 1 2.
Nah, that's just unbalanced ternary. And ternary computers already exist, though they may all use balanced ternary (-1, 0, 1). Creating an unbalanced ternary computer wouldn't be that hard, however. And quantum computer isn't even infinite states between 0 and 1, we already have that, it's called analog. Quantum computing goes even further and somehow lets it be two states at once or something.
>>54122237
I thought it was more like rather than 0 or 1 you could have 0(0) 0(1) 1(0) and 1(1) because of entanglement or some shit.
>>54122962
This guy knows what's up.
Afaik you can use quantum computers to reverse the output of a highly complex function back to its input.
What that means for the near future is that you'll be able to quickly find the prime factors of an exponent, which nullifies a lot of current crypto.
>>54122237
I dont think so
iirc:
Binary works by having instead of 2 states(no/low voltage versus yes/high voltage)
Quantum has X states (around 20 iirc) where each one is a quantic state. Plus, quantum computers will be much much faster than their digital counterparts.
I may be wrong tho.
>>54123305
>I may be wrong tho.
You are.
>>54122198
Binary works with base 2 - 1 or 0 - 2 possible numbers. We can choose between 2 values per character when sending a signal.
in ordinary maths we use base 10 - 0 to 9 - we can represent 10 different values per character.
Imagine if we could move away from binary so that we can represent an almost unlimited amount of data per character. Then imagine that that signal can carry multiple characters in the same transmission.
We are moving away from 1's and 0's into incredibly high bandwidth computing.
At least that's my understanding of it. I remember hearing about Ternary when I was at school and it's the only logical way to continue to improve chips when we hit the limits of miniturasation.
>>54122962
This is actually a very good description, but it lacks a feel of the true complexity. Think of a 1,000-qubit board, that represents a substantial challenge. To avoid this error the qubits are grouped into sets of eight. Within a group, each qubit is connected to four other qubits. For two neighboring groups of eight, four qubits from each group are connected pair-wise to each other. Effectively, each group of eight is strongly coupled to each other, while qubits from different groups are weakly coupled.
To demonstrate tunneling within the strongly coupled groups, faux-'quantum' computers like the D-Wave set up a problem involving just two groups. The true minimum energy solution involves all spins in both groups pointing in the same direction (e.g., 16 ones or 16 zeros, depending on how you define one and zero). A second solution is a local minimum, consisting of one group of spins pointing up and the other pointing down.
Once in the local minimum, it is very difficult for a classical annealer to exit because eight bits must be flipped, and the first seven flips increase the energy of the group. This is statistically highly unlikely. But if tunneling is allowed, all eight bits can flip simultaneously, passing through that high potential barrier rather than going over it.
In effect, at high temperature, a classical annealing process can exit the local minimum because the thermal energy is enough to punt the bits over the barrier. But at low temperature, there is insufficient energy, so it always falls back to the local minimum. Similarly, at high temperature, tunneling should be destroyed by noise, so it shouldn't help. At low temperature, it should enable the annealer to avoid the wrong
>>54122198
Imagine that you're voting and that instead of just one vote, you're given 3 and complete freedom to vote on whoever you want.
Some people would vote all three to their candidate, some people would vote for three separate candidates, and some people would do a splite 2 to one and 1 to the other.
This is basically the potential of quantum computing.
Instead of having a binary yes or no situation of which candisate would win, you get a division of percentages, all pseudo calculable at the beginning, with the margins of errors (and even potential upsets of/from/to projected data) created from the get go.
It's meant for research giants.
M-maybe someone should ask /sci/
>>54123347
QCs are not ternary... baka
simplest example of their benefits would be this:
for x in range(2^n):
if binary(x) do whatever...
you should be able to do this in O(1) with a quantum computer since you can just allocate n qubits and check all dem states all at once. At least thats what the popular science says...maybe its bullshit lol
>>54122962
>that breaks the most used cryptographies of the world.
no
factoring primes does not a crypto system break
major quantum computing research groups have been monitored (and compromised) by various intelligence agencies since their debut
This is a great video. It aptly explains any questions you could have.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhHMJCUmq28
>>54123314
TOP FUCKING KEK.
>>54122886
Their endowments are each over 20 billion. They can do whatever the fuck they want, but that doesn't mean they aren't financing this research on someone else's dime. Why would they spend money from the endowment when they can watch the number go up and up?
>>54123830
This is a very, very good video. It leaves a few things vague, but it gives you a very good idea what quantum computing is supposed to do.
>>54123677
>factoring primes does not a crypto system break
Well, it does in systems that security are based on this, like RSA.
>no one has posted the Trudeau video
C'mon, /g/
>>54122198
>>54123830
This is a better video. Should answer all questions anyone has ever had.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eak_ogYMprk
>>54123305
You literally have no idea what you're talking about.
>>54122198
that's a dope shirt desu
>>54122237
No it doesn't compute with 2 but instead a state that exists as 1 and 0 simultaneously.
>>54122629
What? They're not tricking anyone. These computers are as accessible as the hardware from the LHC hence why there isn't one sitting on your desk rn.
>>54123560
Would any computer actually have an arbitrary number of qubits though? And wouldn't you still be limited in how many the processor could actually work on at once? Because the whole point of complexity theory is how things work with arbitrarily large quantities, like theoretically you could make a computer architecture that can get very fast timing on problems up to size n, but above that you'd fall back down to the normal complexity.
>>54122198
http://math.nist.gov/quantum/zoo/
some shit can be done faster with it
and faster means of course in terms of algorithmic complexity
>>54124597
Thanks senpai.
>>54122198
imagine a computer, but like fast
>>54124715
TOP KEK
>>54122198
it's a meme invented to milk the government for money
>>54122198
Too lazy to read if someone gave this response already:
BASICALLY the chips in a quantum computer are so small that data can be in 2 places at once. In normal computing processes can be on and off (0 and 1), in quantum computing, processes can be both on and off at the same time.
idk tho
>>54125777
to clarify what he's saying about data and processes, the way data can be both "0 and 1" at the same time is by the atoms being so small that they are in 2 places at once, kind of like passing through walls.
basically conventional computers are deterministic, operations need to be given to the processor step by step. Quantum would allow for non-deterministic computing. This is achieved theoretically using qubits which as others have said can have more than just 2 states like a conventional bit. The main problem at this point is developing algorithms that can be reliably and quickly run on hardware that allows for non-determinism.
>>54122198
Imagine there's an infinite number of universes. In one of those universes, the problem you're trying to solve has already been solved by random chance. In quantum computing, you try isolate that universe and get your answer.
![tehran-nuclear-deal-revives-hope-for-pakistan-iran-gas-pipeline-1436965800-6496[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/4IZ0QKw.jpg "tehran-nuclear-deal-revives-hope-for-pakistan-iran-gas-pipeline-1436965800-6496[1].jpg")
>>54122198
a series of tubes
>>54125777
You're not only lazy as fuck to read the thread and also speak shit you heard about "it could be both at same time" without having any idea what's the meaning of this.
Try harder, kiddo
3 x 5 = 15. Best quantum computer yet.
>>54122198
mathematical trickery taking advantage of how quantum mechanics works to solve certain problems faster then it can be done classically.
>At least thats what the popular science says...maybe its bullshit lol
it is.
I think if you start to think of them as computers that can solve numerical methods type problems combined with the power of brute-force quantum behavior, then they start to make sense for some problems.
>>54122445
> cans.wav
>>54127490
How is that a quantum computer?
>>54127707
Probably related to this:
http://www.news.ucsb.edu/2012/013340/ucsb-researchers-demonstrate-153x5-about-half-time
>>54122237
>There is only 2 possible outcomes of the experiment however until its observed it's in juxtapose and it can be either?
isnt anything un-observable until it's observed?
>>54125941
Underrated and genuinely thought provoking post
