Historic quantum software is run for the first time

The first piece of software to show the potential of quantum computing has finally been run on a real machine, 20 years after it was initially dreamed up. Although it doesn't do anything useful on its own, implementing the algorithm could lead to more practical computers powered by the strange properties of quantum mechanics.

Historic quantum software is run for the first time

I am wondering whether recognizing this as an "historic" event will be difficult for some.

I am hopeful that it is, though. If we follow, even from a distance, the mystical world of quantum technology; we're almost always lead to a place where uncertainty takes on a new broader meaning.

I think many of our members can imagine quantum computing software to be an entirely new dimension to the technology within our reach.

One of the best-known pieces of quantum software is Shor's algorithm, which factorises large numbers into their prime components – a notoriously slow and difficult problem to solve classically. Shor's algorithm has been run in a limited way using photons sent through the air and on silicon chips – but a full-blown quantum computer capable of running it could threaten online encryption, which relies on large primes.

Current computing technology apparently can't compete with the agility of computational algorithms available to quantum calculations. I wish I could explain the materials they use, and the way they use them..., but I can see a real application for a world where people can create devices which cannot be 'fooled' or 'breached.'

Simon was a quantum computing sceptic, but in attempting to prove they would never be useful, he stumbled across a problem that showed the exact opposite. Imagine you feed a string of bits, like 0101, into a black box and get another string, like 1100, out in return. There are a finite number of possible outputs, but you don't know how the black box produces them. Simon's problem asks: does the black box give a unique output for every possible input, or do some inputs give a common output? The problem doesn't show up in any real-world applications, but Simon's algorithm for solving it inspired the more useful Shor's algorithm and the field of quantum computing as a whole.

Now this is the second snippet from the source mentions a thing called "Shor's algorithm;" Wikipedia proclaims, "Shor's algorithm, named after mathematician Peter Shor, is a quantum algorithm (an algorithm that runs on a quantum computer) for integer factorization formulated in 1994. Informally it solves the following problem: Given an integer N, find its prime factors."

I don't know about you, but I still feel like a lost lamb when it comes to this tech.

nekminnut....

SKYNET!

lol

a reply to: okamitengu

Faster doesn't mean smarter

Manny this is really interesting news! Thanks so much for the posting.

a reply to: okamitengu

Faster doesn't mean smarter

Manny this is really interesting news! Thanks so much for the posting.

At least it will now be possible to show that Qcomputers are actually able to do something.The company "DWave" build them but had some difficulties demonstrating their power.

I found it amusing that they want to use cargo ships instead of cables for cross-oceanic communications.If they really understood quantum,they'd realise that's unnecessary...merely not thinking about the information being sent would allow it to be sent.

Maybe.Quantum's a bit puzzling.

I apologise for not providing links but this accursed kindle fire seems incapable of such things.

a reply to: Maxmars

I'm going to be following this thread with *great* interest.

If we're lucky, we all may be surprised at what can be learned here.

Thanks Maxmars.

In before they start factoring the primes of large integers and breaking 2048bit encryption....or maybe they already are

How about solve for pi and find any information that might be stored there

That's where I'd start

originally posted by: Another_Nut
How about solve for pi and find any information that might be stored there

That's where I'd start

You've been watching too much contact!

Korg.

Why don't they try to 'square the circle' instead ...
That could give a new understanding on maths.

a reply to: Maxmars

This is essential research, now I am going into the twilight zone for a moment with a supposition here?,.
There is a theory that the brain is a quantum mechanism and that perhaps consciousness exists in multiple reality's at once therefore spanning multiple brain's - the same brain multiplied in parallel creating a kind of holographic consciousness if you like, well this research however primitive may one day unlock the potential to create artificial brains (not just computational devices or simulations) capable of TRULY integrating with and even hosting that quantum consciousness of self awareness and not just cybernetic implant's.
Of course this could just be stage on of skynet so let's watch our for robotic senator's.
Seriously though let's hope this is not pandora's box or at least not the bad thing in it.

a reply to: LABTECH767
Yes. All of this is quite fascinating. All we can do now is kinda stand back and observe what happens. You know that theory that somewhere in some other dimension they already turned on the quantum computer, and it linked with the quantum mind/consciousness, and thusly this, is already a projected, holographic reality, hosted by that combination, perhaps, one of many…..
because once they turned it on it was always on. But that will be discovered and repeated, yet again, and again…..

That's kinda the "game" theory of quantum consciousness, I think.
Or at least it is somewhere. To tell you the truth, I frequently feel I've lived in a few of these simulated realities and came from some other one….
Probably shouldn't admit that hereabouts, but there it is, and for some reason this thread brought it to mind very strongly. Lol.

Thanks, I think, OP.
tetra

a reply to: Maxmars

Thanks OP, great thread.

Just making a quantum comp, that would run at the level of todays regular home PC's would be a game changer, because of the way they process information.

Our comps at present use 1's and 0's, this language is known as binary.

Quantum computers would have 0's 1's and 2's, because quantum bodies can only be measured in 3 ways, direction, spin and charge.

So by adding just one more character to the language, you increase its ability to compute by factors.

Which is why a quantum computer the size of a pack of cigarettes, could have more processing power than all the comps on earth today combined.

Going to read the article.

SnF OP.

This could prove useful for cryptography, with current silicon based hardware platforms you have to brute force using a dictionary attack and its really slow.

I could have used one of these the other day, cracking Beckys password wouldn't have resulted in an intermediate result like BotticellI.

a reply to: Maxmars

Nice...

I can hear the discussion now -
Pong has never looked so good - boop

a reply to: Maxmars

I'm both excited and terrified about quantum computing... it has a lot of ramifications both good and bad.

For example, Quantum computing would render passwords useless since they could brute force a password almost instantly .. it would also make breaking encryption a lot easier as well.. so think about the privacy implications when the NSA has that kind of capability..

( standard computers )Assuming that enough computing power was amassed to test 1 trillion keys per second, testing all possible keys would take 10.79 quintillion years. This is about 785 million times the age of the visible universe (13.75 billion years). On the other hand, you might get lucky in the first 10 minutes.

But using quantum technology with the same throughput, exhausting the possibilities of a 128-bit AES key would take about six months. If a quantum system had to crack a 256-bit key, it would take about as much time as a conventional computer needs to crack a 128-bit key.

A quantum computer could crack a cipher that uses the RSA or EC algorithms almost immediately.

www.computerworld.com...

originally posted by: oblvion
a reply to: Maxmars


Our comps at present use 1's and 0's, this language is known as binary.

Quantum computers would have 0's 1's and 2's, because quantum bodies can only be measured in 3 ways, direction, spin and charge.

Sorry to say that this explanation is not correct. qbits are less than binary due to quantum supposition and thus potentially faster. Your explanation of having three states would actually be slower than binary….

Just sayin.

a reply to: Maxmars

I am wondering whether recognizing this as an "historic" event will be difficult for some.

That's an understatement.

I've read about molecular processing and that nearly melted my brain. From what i've read these forms of processing have the potential to increase computations by at least sevenfold. Instead of using binary which is only limited to ones and zeroes, these new fangled processors could use every number from 0-6 using molecular structures.

Apparently the problem is making sure the laws of thermodynamics don't interrupt the process. Now my brain is melting again...

"Unlike a classic computer, which uses ones and zeroes, a quantum machine uses quantum bits, or qubits, that can be both a one and a zero. It doesn't work in an orderly or linear manner. Instead, its qubits communicate with each other and calculate all the possibilities at the same time.

If a quantum machine has 200 qubits, it's calculating at 2 to the 200th power at the same time."

This is going to be a game changer.

Link

originally posted by: okamitengu
nekminnut....

SKYNET!

lol

Scoff not, my friend! There is an eerie aspect to the advent of this kind of understanding and application of quantum mechanics. I wouldn't think it too far-fetched to imagine a "new order" of computational power... exponential seems to be the consensus among many.

Consider this:

Because of the spread of the calcium wave packets, the wave function of the brain is a linear combination of trillions of different possible thoughts and signals for bodily actions. The Mind, if one subscribes to that interpretation, can ‘freely’ ‘control’ the thoughts and actions by choosing one of those neural states to concentrate on. But the organizational problem, how to pick out just the right combination of firing neurons to cause a particular thought or bodily movement, is formidable. It must presumably be solved by some combination of the structure of the physical brain along with a set of organizational templates that are indigenous to the ‘non - physical’ Mind.

A Primer on Quantum Mechanics and I ts Interpretations

Quantum computers may allow for the modelling of a human mind (as far as we will know); this may seem a alarming stretch... but I'm inclined to think otherwise. Whether you can believe that such computational power may end as a self-aware mega deathbot is up to you...