[content] => 
    [params] => Array
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/do-quantum-computers-have-a-serious-flaw.15049/

    [addOns] => Array
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021071
            [XFI] => 1050270

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html

Do Quantum Computers Have a Serious Flaw?

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


It's a paradox for philosophers.

Quantum computers are already effecting our lives. If someone wants to hack your cellphone and know everything on it they can in seconds.
Once they can assemble enough qubits. Still expecting to need ~1000 physical per logical qubit for error correction. So we still seem to be a long way from practical applications


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:,
Nov. 2021)

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.


They're here

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.