Binary algebra for qubits
-
A google search on this topic returns mostly academic papers. Binary algebra is something my school covered at a fairly young age. It's the glue of our digital world. Will quantum computing change how we (especially people in IT) do our stuff? Or will it be abstracted out of sight and simply mean our code will now be executed wicked-fast? If Google is to be believed, quantum computing is close and it's about to change... EVERYTHING. Good read, enjoy: Google's Quantum Processor May Achieve Quantum Supremacy in Months[^]
-
A google search on this topic returns mostly academic papers. Binary algebra is something my school covered at a fairly young age. It's the glue of our digital world. Will quantum computing change how we (especially people in IT) do our stuff? Or will it be abstracted out of sight and simply mean our code will now be executed wicked-fast? If Google is to be believed, quantum computing is close and it's about to change... EVERYTHING. Good read, enjoy: Google's Quantum Processor May Achieve Quantum Supremacy in Months[^]
google will say anything to distract you from reality.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
google will say anything to distract you from reality.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
I "may" make contact with an alien civilization :laugh: A little less funny, Google may play a large role in who wins the next presidential election. Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent “Trump situation” in 2020 on Hidden Cam – Project Veritas[^]
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
A google search on this topic returns mostly academic papers. Binary algebra is something my school covered at a fairly young age. It's the glue of our digital world. Will quantum computing change how we (especially people in IT) do our stuff? Or will it be abstracted out of sight and simply mean our code will now be executed wicked-fast? If Google is to be believed, quantum computing is close and it's about to change... EVERYTHING. Good read, enjoy: Google's Quantum Processor May Achieve Quantum Supremacy in Months[^]
interesting read...thanks
Give me coffee to change the things I can and wine to accept the things I cannot! JaxCoder.com
-
I "may" make contact with an alien civilization :laugh: A little less funny, Google may play a large role in who wins the next presidential election. Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent “Trump situation” in 2020 on Hidden Cam – Project Veritas[^]
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
I "may" make contact with an alien civilization :laugh:
We already have, for thousands of years. They landed in Egypt with their flying saucer, and quickly proceeded to have some temples built for them, let their behinds be put on cushions and only got up to eat or go hunting for sports. And now we build quantum computers to post more pictures and videos of them.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats. His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
-
A google search on this topic returns mostly academic papers. Binary algebra is something my school covered at a fairly young age. It's the glue of our digital world. Will quantum computing change how we (especially people in IT) do our stuff? Or will it be abstracted out of sight and simply mean our code will now be executed wicked-fast? If Google is to be believed, quantum computing is close and it's about to change... EVERYTHING. Good read, enjoy: Google's Quantum Processor May Achieve Quantum Supremacy in Months[^]
I'm not a quantum expert.. It changes because, if you work with it at a low level, you would have to think in terms of complex probability amplitudes and unitary transformations and such, instead of pure bits and arbitrary boolean operations. Mere mortals will probably just be invoking higher level algorithms that use some quantum subroutines deep inside of them. I feel like the article oversells QC a little. RSA will indeed be in trouble, but then I see this: > For any given number of qubits n in a quantum processor, they do the same work or hold the same amount of data as 2n classical bits But that's pretty misleading. It would take exponentially more storage to describe those quantum states, but they are not exponentially more powerful. It's not the case that you can just take any old classical algorithm, apply QC magic, and have it be exponentially faster - which I think they are indirectly implying, though they didn't quite come out and say it. Simulating quantum computers and other quantum systems does get exponentially easier, but are you doing that? Many search and optimization problems can be dramatically improved (though not exponentially) and that is quite general, but not universal.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
I "may" make contact with an alien civilization :laugh:
We already have, for thousands of years. They landed in Egypt with their flying saucer, and quickly proceeded to have some temples built for them, let their behinds be put on cushions and only got up to eat or go hunting for sports. And now we build quantum computers to post more pictures and videos of them.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats. His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
CodeWraith wrote:
They landed in Egypt with their flying saucer
CodeWraith wrote:
all of them were cats
:cool:
Software Zen:
delete this; -
I'm not a quantum expert.. It changes because, if you work with it at a low level, you would have to think in terms of complex probability amplitudes and unitary transformations and such, instead of pure bits and arbitrary boolean operations. Mere mortals will probably just be invoking higher level algorithms that use some quantum subroutines deep inside of them. I feel like the article oversells QC a little. RSA will indeed be in trouble, but then I see this: > For any given number of qubits n in a quantum processor, they do the same work or hold the same amount of data as 2n classical bits But that's pretty misleading. It would take exponentially more storage to describe those quantum states, but they are not exponentially more powerful. It's not the case that you can just take any old classical algorithm, apply QC magic, and have it be exponentially faster - which I think they are indirectly implying, though they didn't quite come out and say it. Simulating quantum computers and other quantum systems does get exponentially easier, but are you doing that? Many search and optimization problems can be dramatically improved (though not exponentially) and that is quite general, but not universal.
I always thought that they were going for something different, more like a normal processor, but with its complete internal registers and states built with QC magic. With n superimposed sets of states it would behave like a multicore processor with n cores. If they get this to work and if they can really raise the number of superimposed quantum states to such astronomical levels, this would mean supercomputers on a single chip.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats. His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
-
I always thought that they were going for something different, more like a normal processor, but with its complete internal registers and states built with QC magic. With n superimposed sets of states it would behave like a multicore processor with n cores. If they get this to work and if they can really raise the number of superimposed quantum states to such astronomical levels, this would mean supercomputers on a single chip.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats. His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
It doesn't work comparably to parallelism, despite such claims in popular science. You only get one result out per "run". Prior to measurement you can have some massive superposition of all states, but only one of them will be the actual output, selected randomly from the possibilities, with probability proportional to the square of its amplitude. If those amplitudes are not carefully controlled with a clever algorithm that specifically targets quantum computing, you would just get one of the results with no particular control over which result.