Quantum Supremacy: How the Quantum Computer Revolution Will Change Everything

Product Information

It is horrifying how far Edward Teller was able to convince the President, Congress, Pentagon and the public into his hare-brained visions ( “Brilliant Pebbles”, “Excalibur”, and so on). One of the most famous algorithms in quantum computing, Shor’s algorithm, does indeed allow quantum computers to factor large numbers efficiently, which threatens the widely used RSA encryption scheme.

We’re hearing this week from two very different parts of the string theory community that quantum supremacy (quantum computers doing better than classical computers) is the answer to the challenges the subject has faced. This provocateur displayed an impressive amount of adaptivity, dialing down their disagreeableness until you responded, and repeating the tactic to elicit further responses. The expectation that the book’s target audience would never visit this blog seems a little pessimistic (although I haven’t read the book beyond what you’ve quoted here). I am not sure what Feynman thought quantum computers could do, but they gain you no formal power over classical machines: any problem which can be solved with a quantum computer can be solved with a classical computer, and vice versa.Kaku makes valiant efforts to explain these mechanisms in his book, but it’s essentially impossible for a layperson to fully grasp. First there’s page after page breathlessly quoting prestigious-sounding people and organizations—Google’s Sundar Pichai, various government agencies, some report by Deloitte—about just how revolutionary they think quantum computing will be. Nope, that’s strongly believed to be false, just like the analogous statement for classical computers. You seem to be missing Scott’s point and then using a straw man argument to suggest that he doesn’t appreciate science popularization.

Are there really that many people with the patience to read this stuff but who refuse to dig any deeper? seeing these quasinormal modes from a quantum simulation of the quantum system under discussion, would be a convincing evidence that we have created something that behaves as a black hole in the laboratory.And if criticizing this sort of thing risks substantially damaging the quantum computing industry, then the industry is far more being driven by a hype bubble than even some of its ore vocal critics would likely suspect. I was under the impression that it was an established theorem and not an interpretation / hypothesis. The many world theorem says that each possibility is realized in a different universe / wave-function branch, so the whole thing about picking a random outcome from the superposition is outdated science. In particular, one can try to choreograph a pattern of constructive and destructive interference, so that the contributions to the amplitude of a wrong answer mostly cancel each other out, while the contributions to the amplitude of a right answer reinforce each other.

So to summarize, IF many worlds theory is right, then a quantum computer can solve any problem instantaneously, because it can do a superposition merging all the solutions in different universes? Yes, Kaku didn’t delve deep into the world of post-quantum cryptography or new trapdoor functions, but should he have?His book about QFT isn’t half bad, it doesn’t add anything to the Weinberg or Zee but has a very interesting historical foray into simmetries and all the work in the post war era, citing the japanese effort that i knew nothing about.

One rather hopes this highly speculative AdS/CFT-inspired “tabletop black hole” stuff doesn’t end up killing interest in the entire field once the backlash reaches a critical level. That could be anything from predicting the financial markets, to improving weather forecasts, to modelling the behaviour of individual electrons: using quantum computing to understand quantum physics. If “what QCs will and won’t be able to do” is to be the criterion one sets for understanding quantum phenomena, then, to quote, he would have to break his pen and throw it away. By far the most amusing thing you wrote was that I’m “missing an important aspect of quantum computing here: the principle of superposition. Conversely, the book’s target readers have probably never visited a blog like this one and never will.In this disappointing outing, theoretical physicist Kaku ( The God Equation) argues that quantum computers (machines that compute on atoms rather than transistors) will transform the modern world. Let me put it this wa Superposition is like a spinning coin, and it’s one of the things that makes quantum computers so powerful. He’s also appeared on countless TV specials, in many cases to argue that UFOs likely contain extraterrestrial visitors.