Google Moves Closer to a Universal Quantum Computer

A lot of people tried to put down D-Wave computers but there's a reason Google, NASA and others invested in these computers. They're not universal quantum computers but they're putting places like Google on the path to universal quantum computers and they alsa help with Google's deep learning and A.I. research.

For 30 years, researchers have pursued the universal quantum computer, a device that could solve any computational problem, with varying degrees of success. Now, a team in California and Spain has made an experimental prototype of such a device that can solve a wide range of problems in fields such as chemistry and physics, and has the potential to be scaled up to larger systems.

Both IBM and a Canadian company called D-Wave have created functioning quantum computers using different approaches. But their devices are not easily scalable to the many quantum bits (qubits) needed for solving problems that classical computers cannot.

Computer scientists at Google’s research laboratories in Santa Barbara, California, and physicists at the University of California at Santa Barbara and the University of the Basque Country in Bilbao, Spain, describe their new device online in Nature.

“It’s terrific work in many respects, and is filled with valuable lessons for the quantum computing community,” says Daniel Lidar, a quantum-computing expert at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles.

The Google prototype combines the two main approaches to quantum computing. One approach constructs the computer’s digital circuits using qubits in particular arrangements geared to solve a specific problem. This is analogous to a tailor-made digital circuit in a conventional microprocessor made from classical bits.

Much of quantum computing theory is based on this approach, which includes methods for correcting errors that might otherwise derail a calculation. So far, practical implementations have been possible only with a handful of qubits.

www.scientificamerican.com...

Google is using the approach from D-Wave to help build a universal quantum computer. The key here is error detection and correction. With quantum computing it's tougher to correct errors as you scale up because you have to correct errors without checking for errors in a classical way. This is because if you disturb the system then superposion is lost.

This could also point to the universe as a simulation. You have Physicist asking is spacetime a quantum error correcting code and Physicist James Gates found error correcting codes in the equations of String Theory.





They're discovering anomalies in simulations and they're starting to look for some of these anomalies in Nature. The error correcting system could make certain aspects of our universe highly preserved while others are subject to bigger variations.

They can start seeing digits that start off very precise then they allow for more variation towards the end. Something like:

.000000121123122321198976986

Of course the digits will be much longer and more precise but this could show we either had some lazy Programmers or the Programmers saved on processing power because they realized the Avatars in the simulation would just explain these small variations away as coincidences.

So something like the constant of gravity or the speed of light would be higly preserved while other small things are subject to variable change. So if the universe has a frame rate or refresh rate we could theoretically be in a new universe every minute or however long the universe takes to refresh itself. There could be 10 years between each movement. That means it takes the universe 10 years to refresh itself but it will still seem continuous to us.

The point is, small things could change. For instance, you could set your keys on the table and then when you go to get your keys later, the universe has refreshed itself, but in this universe your keys are on top of the TV. Now we explain these things away and say,"I could have sworn I left my keys on the table but I must be mistaken."

I remember years ago I lost a set of keys. I set them next to my bed as I laid down. When I looked for the keys later I couldn't find them. I have never found those keys. Most people explain this away but I asked, what if when the universe refreshed itself, my keys didn't exist in the refreshed universe? We explain things like this away all the time.

Anyway, the article ends like this:

The Google device is still very much a prototype. But Lidar says that in a couple of years, devices with more than 40 qubits could become a reality.

“At that point,” he says, “it will become possible to simulate quantum dynamics that is inaccessible on classical hardware, which will mark the advent of ‘quantum supremacy’.”

a reply to: neoholographic

Here is a rather technical post on the same story: Room Temperature Quantum Entanglement in Semiconductor

As stated, writing the quantum algorithms is going to take some time since QM is totally different than the AND/NAND/OR/XOR mindset of computer scientists. Already the 5-qbit IBM machine is providing insight to coming to terms with quantum algorithms.

a reply to: neoholographic

Like your source says, once we build a small workable quantum computer we can use that one to work out the calculations on how to build a larger more powerful one.

The computing power of a large quantum computer has the potential to drastically change the world. We can use it for true AI, and all we have to do is ask it questions about how to fix our problems, like energy, food and environmental issues to name a few.

Do you guys think the U.S. government already has one in secret? If they do then they are obviously grossly misappropriating the technology.

The OP seems to describe what some on here are calling the Mandela Effect.

I personally havent had any ME moments and hadnt put much stock in it but whats descibed above does make some sense, at least more sense than some higher power randomly changing a few letters around or moving countries a few hundreds Kms from where theyre meant to be haha

Here is a good story on qbit error correcting using a passive technique.

The new passive error correction circuit consists of just two primary qubits, in contrast to the 10 or more qubits required in most active approaches. The two qubits are coupled to each other, and each one is also coupled to a "lossy" object, such as a resonator, that experiences photon loss.

"In the absence of any errors, there are a pair of oscillating photon configurations that are the 'good' logical states of the device, and they oscillate at a fixed frequency based on the circuit parameters," Kapit explained. "However, like all qubits, the qubits in the circuit are not perfect and will slowly leak photons into the environment. When a photon randomly escapes from the circuit, the oscillation is broken, at which point a second, passive error correction circuit kicks in and quickly inserts two photons, one which restores the lost photon and reconstructs the oscillating logical state, and the other is dumped to a lossy circuit element and quickly leaks back out of the system.
...
The new method can correct photon loss errors at rates up to 10 times faster than those achieved by active, measurement-based methods. In addition, the passive method can partially suppress noise, so that there are fewer errors in the first place. In its current version, the method can correct only one error at a time, so if a second photon loss occurs before the correction is complete, the method cannot fix the resulting error.

Source: Phys.org, April 29, 2016 - Autonomous quantum error correction method greatly increases qubit coherence times

Not exactly "this week" news but it is appropriate. The work is theoretical. The inventor envisions coupling active and passive correction together (the best of both worlds). That this (passive) method keeps errors from happening, is faster, and simpler is quite the accomplishment. Yet another step towards our quantum computing future.

As far as ME goes... well, there seems be passion on both sides (I will leave it at that. Too many electrons have been spilt over the topic!)

a reply to: neoholographic

I saw this a little over a month ago, but never posted it. I can't find the original article, this is a start.

IBM Is Now Letting Anyone Play With Its Quantum Computer

Today, IBM unveiled an online service that lets anyone use the five-qubit quantum computer its researchers have erected at a research lab in Yorktown Heights, New York. You can access the machine over the Internet via a simple software interface—or at least it’s simple if you understand the basics of quantum computing.

Indulge for a minute.... If the whole 'thing' is a simulation, the controller would be "God' essentially, wouldn't it ? Which begs the question... with such a ponderous intellect, wouldn't the "Unified Field Theory" be a 'known' ? And if so, available for incorporation into our 'simulated' lives. I suppose the God/controller could choose the timing of the revelation event... ! ?

a reply to: Liquesence

Got the story from CNET on ATS link over here. The story was out around May 4 (that is when I posted it at least. For my own sanity I started including the dates on posts. Makes it easy to share info).

I think the hope is computer scientists will go check it out and write algorithms that can be collected for use in larger quantum computers. As stated, you need to know computational algebra to get rights/access. But it is awfully cool for IBM to put it out there for Joe Anybody to use!

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Yeah, the article I originally saw was from around the same time (early May).

I know next to nothing about code, computing, algorithms, etc, but that IBM is offering this to the public in indeed cool.

The sharing of information and technology is indeed key to advancement: we all benefit from it.

From what I have read, I thought normal computers are actually better at some things? And we can simulate quantum computers on normal computers too...?