The Ugly Truth About Quantum Computing

The two sources you use are over 4 years old.

For a field of research that's rapidly developing I don't get it.

a reply to: luthier

Oh, I totally agree. When it is controllable and not noisy, QC is the future. But we are not there yet. Special purpose devices like D-wave are cool and all but the real cool stuff is a ways off (despite my enthusiasm at this stage!)

Cohesion is hard right now. But what is being done is scalable. That is why IBM and google are letting us plebes play with the stuff- they want the algorithms that will define QC! When it is scaled then having the algorithms means money!!

I look forward to our future! I may not make it but that is good too! Fleshy bags of mostly water slows me down anyway!!

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Agreed. Sometimes I feel people think it's hype because you can't play 3d halo yet and it's a giant lab worth of equipment.

As far as a tool for physicists because of what it is theorized to do, and apparently the theories are sound as progress is showing, the size or conditions it needs to operate in are not of huge concern. That would certainly make availability easier when they are easier to manufacture.

However the holometer, and particle colliders don't seem to have people saying "but they need laboratories to function.

Even if we never leave sub zero, which isn't requires by theory at least, the equipment even in a huge lab, if functioning correctly and with the processing power theorized is an incredibly useful tool for scientists for simulations.

Edit just to make clear for other readers. I don't view this as a "computer" in the same sense as a laptop. This is more like a particle collider, or a theoretical physics observation equip, like a satellite, the theory here is from the very tip of QM applied science. It's not a computer 2.0. It's like moving from a mechanical typewriter to an iPad.

biggest threat to our existence.