You are currently viewing SemiWiki as a guest which gives you limited access to the site. To view blog comments and experience other SemiWiki features you must be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
This question could be critical to the future of quantum computing and its ultimate usefulness. Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated. I know this is behind a pay wall, but anyone working in quantum computing should have access to discussions on this issue.
Arthur - quantum behavior is a mind-bending domain in which I'm not sure anyone has a handle on objective reality. Early on, the Copenhagen interpretation simply declared that we should "shut up and calculate". In other words, don't try to discern a reality, just run the equations. After about a century of attempts to discern a reality, perhaps the Copenhagen group had it right all along. We only confuse ourselves more by insisting on an "intuitive" explanation. Perhaps we should just take quantum behavior as axiomatic. That said, quantum behavior is very well defined and repeatable, so no concerns about it being a solid basis for semiconductors, quantum computing, high-energy physics, etc
I've seen the product of quantum computers myself. More powerful motors, batteries and "spying" for a lack of a better word on employees. Cameras can use artificial intelligence to determine if someone has the symptoms of meth for example.
We're living in a different world. Some for the better and some for the worse.
The question of the possibility of quantum computers (QC)
ever being built is unclear Of the very large number of papers
published in the QC area, more are skeptical of the possibility of QCs
being built that are faster than classical computers than pro
QC papers. Some papers depend on interpretations of quantum
mechanics but some do not. Here is a paper giving a classical
algorithm that is faster than the Google PR algorithm for which
quantum supremacy was claimed (Reference: Pan, F., Chen, K. and Zhang, P.
"Solving the sampling problem of the Sycamore quantum supremacy
circuits", arXiv:2111.03011, URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.03011,
I am working on a paper showing impossibility of quantum computing, but
it is not easy because there are so many papers skeptical of QC and there
is no objective peer refereeing because of the huge amounts being spent on
research and on company investments.
I'll say it logistically it would take a large spacecraft to carry a quantum computer but something like classiq that uses a process would be more likely. It's bizarre 10 years after 14 nm quantum computers are here.