First Production Quantum Computer Sold to Lockheed Martin

INRM · 23rd January 2012, 06:49 PM

World's First Commercial Quantum Computer Sold to Lockheed Martin

Quote:

The world’s first commercially available quantum computer, which uses principles of quantum mechanics rather than classical mechanics, was sold to aerospace, defense and security company Lockheed Martin.

Unlike computers based on transistors, quantum computers rely on principles of quantum mechanics to conduct operations. The computers take advantage of properties like entanglement — when two particles have the same properties and behave identically while being separate — and storing data with “qubits,” or quantum bits. Typical bits store memory by registering an “on” or “off,” or a one or zero, while qubits can represent information as both memory and the state of entanglement with other particles.

It has a processing capability of 128 q-bits, and already a new computer is being developed which will possess a 512 q-bit capacity.

What does that processing power compare to modern supercomputers assuming it's not classified?

INRM
Remember to read my signature below...

Baloney · 23rd January 2012, 07:27 PM

Also, they use it store porn.

joesixpack · 23rd January 2012, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by Baloney

Also, they use it store porn.

Certainly porn will be the first widespread consumer application, if history is any guide.

Modified · 23rd January 2012, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by Baloney

Also, they use it store porn.

It will both store porn and not store porn simultaneously.

Skeptical Greg · 23rd January 2012, 09:40 PM

May 27, 2011 ?

Perhaps this story got held up in a quantum entanglement somewhere ...

The story is so full of meaningless babblespeak, I don't know where to start ..

perhaps someone else can tackle it ...

Andrew Wiggin · 23rd January 2012, 09:48 PM

Originally Posted by Modified

It will both store porn and not store porn simultaneously.

There's a function I could use, assuming it knows when and when not to have it in storage.

INRM · 23rd January 2012, 09:58 PM

Quantum Computing: A Eureka Moment

According to this statement it could solve mathematical computations that would require 320,000 years solve classically in 120 milliseconds. I'm not sure what kind of classical computation they're talking about and what of the processing power for the classical computation described is, but if this figure is correct, the processing speed for 128 QuBits would be approximately 84.1535 trillion times faster than classic computation described.

INRM

Skeptical Greg · 23rd January 2012, 10:03 PM

....already a new computer is being developed which will possess a 512 q-bit capacity.

This really looks like some kind of elaborate hoax ..

Those wafers and circuit boards do not look real, then they go on to say that 100 binary switches ( 2¹⁰⁰) represent numbers that are difficult for modern computers to handle ..

Waaaaaah ?

Sam.I.Am · 23rd January 2012, 11:08 PM

Classically probably means solving with a slide rule or earlier technology. In other word without electrical or electronic means.

BowlOfRed · 24th January 2012, 12:02 AM

Originally Posted by Sam.I.Am

Classically probably means solving with a slide rule or earlier technology. In other word without electrical or electronic means.

Classically means that the problem space has to be exhaustively searched. Each of the 2^100 states has to be calculated and the compared in some manner with the other calculations. For instance you keep track of the smallest calculation and throw away any that come up larger than what is already recorded.

In a quantum computer, all the states of the problem space could exist simultaneously within the computer and you could then "ask" for the state that minimizes a function.

Aepervius · 24th January 2012, 12:48 AM

Originally Posted by Baloney

Also, they use it store porn.

Only problem is, when you don't look at the image the actress looks beautiful, but as soon as you take a look, the image collapse , and reality set in.

Dancing David · 24th January 2012, 04:56 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

Now I am asking about this because they have supposedly sold a unit to Lockheed Martin back in May 2011.

Now one of teh critics listed in teh wiki says

Quote:

According to Scott Aaronson, a Computer Science professor at MIT who specializes in the theory of quantum computing, D-Wave's demonstration did not prove anything about the workings of the computer.

...

"Their claimed speedup over classical algorithms appears to be based on a misunderstanding of a paper my colleagues van Dam, Mosca and I wrote on "The power of adiabatic quantum computing." That speed up unfortunately does not hold in the setting at hand, and therefore D-Wave's "quantum computer" even if it turns out to be a true quantum computer, and even if it can be scaled to thousands of qubits, would likely not be more powerful than a cell phone."

So I am curious, do we know yet or is this really questionable as to it being quantum computing.

Dancing David · 24th January 2012, 04:57 AM

I think the original press release was May , 2011?

Farsight · 24th January 2012, 08:07 AM

I've got a computer science degree. A while back I bought a new backup drive. It's made by Seagate, it's a bit bigger than a fag packet, half as slim, and it was £80. It's about a million times better than the disc drives of say 1982, for a hundredth of the price. Meanwhile, quantum computing has been around all that time. And progress has been zip. And since I know a thing or two about electrons, and spin, and states, and physics, I side with Scott Aaronson. Sorry, but I now think quantum computing is just a jam-tomorrow so give-me-the-money-now wheeze that is way past its sell-by date. Especially because IMHO it is overshadowing the real future of computers, which is the use of displacement current rather than conduction current. Light instead of electrons. The thing to note is that you can make an electron out of light in pair production. Displacement current is more fundamental than conduction current. So anything you can do with electrons, or indeed atoms, you can do with light. There was an article about displacement-current circuitry in PhysicsWorld last year. It was called Taming Light at the nanoscale. See this rough-cut version.

sol invictus · 24th January 2012, 08:47 AM

Originally Posted by Dancing David

So I am curious, do we know yet or is this really questionable as to it being quantum computing.

As far as I know, the situation hasn't changed. There's considerable skepticism (that's probably putting it too mildly) among the experts as to whether D-Wave's device is really a quantum computer.

The hard part in any type of QC is isolating the qubits well enough. The power of a QC comes from entanglement between the bits. But entanglement is a very delicate thing - the slightest interaction with the environment (like bumping into an air molecule) is likely to destroy it. So there's a major applied physics and engineering challenge in developing systems that are isolated and stable enough to allow you to do computations.

I suspect that this problem will eventually be solved, but it's impossible to say how long it will take. If D-Wave are right, that will be very soon. But if not, it could be quite a while.

Skeptical Greg · 24th January 2012, 10:45 AM

Right, and you would think if there was really something to this, we would have heard a lot more about it ..

Sam.I.Am · 24th January 2012, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by BowlOfRed

Classically means that the problem space has to be exhaustively searched. Each of the 2^100 states has to be calculated and the compared in some manner with the other calculations. For instance you keep track of the smallest calculation and throw away any that come up larger than what is already recorded.

In a quantum computer, all the states of the problem space could exist simultaneously within the computer and you could then "ask" for the state that minimizes a function.

Ahhh. Ok. That makes more sense when comparing the two methods. Thanks, I'll file that away under random computer knowledge in case it comes up in my next trivia competition.

BowlOfRed · 24th January 2012, 11:03 AM

The company had a paper published in Nature. There's a non-paper article from them back in May as well.
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1105...l/474018a.html

Skeptical Greg · 24th January 2012, 11:22 AM

If you want to call what amounts to a ' Press Release ' a ' Paper ' ..

Just a lot of nothing about what it should be able to do if it works..

Quote:

So D-Wave's claims to have a working 128-qubit processor — combined with the company's former reluctance to publish details of the technique in peer-reviewed journals — have long raised eyebrows, explains Scott Aaronson, a computer scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge.

No information at all about any work it has actually done..

BowlOfRed · 24th January 2012, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

If you want to call what amounts to a ' Press Release ' a ' Paper ' ..

Just a lot of nothing about what it should be able to do if it works..

No information at all about any work it has actually done..

Is the actual Nature paper just a press release, or is it not applicable? http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture10012.html
I'm asking both because I don't have access to it, and I wouldn't be able to evaluate it if I did.

Skeptic Ginger · 24th January 2012, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by Modified

It will both store porn and not store porn simultaneously.

That could be useful.

Skeptic Ginger · 24th January 2012, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

Right, and you would think if there was really something to this, we would have heard a lot more about it ..

Not sure what you are reading but I was aware they had a very expensive working model.

Skeptic Ginger · 24th January 2012, 05:51 PM

Not that I understand much of this, but the technology has indeed arrived:

2009: Scientists Create First Electronic Quantum Processor

http://www.qubit.org/

Quote:

qubit.org was founded by members of Clarendon Laboratory of the University of Oxford to provide useful information and links to material in the field of quantum computing, information processing and more generally information science.

What we do

The discovery that quantum physics allows fundamentally new modes of information processing has required the existing theories of computation, information and cryptography to be superseded by their quantum generalisations. The Centre for Quantum Computation conducts theoretical and experimental research into all aspects of quantum information processing, and into the implications of the quantum theory of computation for physics itself.

Latest arXiv Submissions
Ultrafast entangling gates between nuclear spins using photo-excited triplet states
Vasileia Filidou, Stephanie Simmons, Steven D. Karlen, Feliciano Giustino, Harry L. Anderson, John J. L. Morton

Novel techniques to cool and rotate Bose-Einstein condensates in time-averaged adiabatic potentials
M. Gildemeister, B. E. Sherlock, C. J. Foot

Dissipative quantum light field engineering
Martin Kiffner, Uwe Dorner, Dieter Jaksch

Induced Saturation Number
Ryan R. Martin, Jason J. Smith

A Generalized Kahn Principle for Abstract Asynchronous Networks
Samson Abramsky

Links embedded in the link

2009: Demonstration of two-qubit algorithms with a superconducting quantum processor

In 2010: Quantum Computing Reaches for True Power

Quote:

In 1981 the physicist Richard Feynman speculated about the possibility of “tiny computers obeying quantum mechanical laws.” He suggested that such a quantum computer might be the best way to simulate real-world quantum systems, a challenge that today is largely beyond the calculating power of even the fastest supercomputers....

...Significantly, I.B.M. has reconstituted what had recently been a relatively low-level research effort in quantum computing. I.B.M. is responding to advances made in the past year at Yale University and the University of California, Santa Barbara, that suggest the possibility of quantum computing based on standard microelectronics manufacturing technologies. Both groups layer a superconducting material, either rhenium or niobium, on a semiconductor surface, which when cooled to near absolute zero exhibits quantum behavior.

The company has assembled a large research group at its Thomas J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, N.Y., that includes alumni from the Santa Barbara and Yale laboratories and has now begun a five-year research project.

“I.B.M. is quite interested in taking up the physics which these other groups have been pioneering,” said David DiVincenzo, an I.B.M physicist and research manager.

Researchers at Santa Barbara and Yale also said that they expect to make further incremental progress in 2011 and in the next several years.

fuelair · 24th January 2012, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by Andrew Wiggin

There's a function I could use, assuming it knows when and when not to have it in storage.

IIRC, it can't both know where to get it and how porny it is at the same time. So your enjoyment will only be virtual and/or imaginary.

Skeptical Greg · 24th January 2012, 06:45 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Not sure what you are reading but I was aware they had a very expensive working model.

So they say; but from the nature article linked above:

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1105...l/474018a.html

Quote:

....and although the company last month published a paper in Nature (M. W. Johnson et al. Nature 473, 194–198; 2011) to help verify its quantum credentials, some say that the technique used is still in doubt.

...and

Quote:

....But quantum computers are notoriously difficult to construct, with most research groups struggling to entangle more than a handful of qubits. So D-Wave's claims to have a working 128-qubit processor — combined with the company's former reluctance to publish details of the technique in peer-reviewed journals — have long raised eyebrows, explains Scott Aaronson, a computer scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge.

Quote:

...."Just because a flagship company has bought the system, doesn't mean that it now works," he says.
That mistrust goes back to 2007, when D-Wave apparently demonstrated a 16-qubit computer that could solve a Sudoku puzzle. Many computer scientists and physicists suggested that the device was actually being driven by plain old classical physics. At the time, D-Wave did not respond with any publications ruling out this possibility.

I could end up quoting the whole article so you might read it for yourself.

There doesn't seem to be any hard evidence they are doing what they claim..

The ' D-Wave ' box just sets off my woo meter..

Sam.I.Am · 24th January 2012, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

So they say; but from the nature article linked above:

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1105...l/474018a.html

...and

I could end up quoting the whole article so you might read it for yourself.

There doesn't seem to be any hard evidence they are doing what they claim..

The ' D-Wave ' box just sets off my woo meter..

Meh. If what they are doing is defense related or funded they may be precluded from giving out details. That doesn't necessarily mean that they cant do it.

Skeptic Ginger · 24th January 2012, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

So they say; but from the nature article linked above:

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1105...l/474018a.html

...and

I could end up quoting the whole article so you might read it for yourself.

There doesn't seem to be any hard evidence they are doing what they claim..

The ' D-Wave ' box just sets off my woo meter..

Do you think Lockheed Martin invested $10 million unwisely, or do you think perhaps the company that developed the working Q-computer kept its progress under wraps to prevent their research being stolen?

Captain Obvious · 24th January 2012, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by Modified

It will both store porn and not store porn simultaneously.

Schrodinger's Pussy.

Sam.I.Am · 24th January 2012, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious

Schrodinger's Pussy.

Ba-dum-dum!

Skeptical Greg · 24th January 2012, 07:19 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Do you think Lockheed Martin invested $10 million unwisely, or do you think perhaps the company that developed the working Q-computer kept its progress under wraps to prevent their research being stolen?

I don't have enough information to answer that, but they could certainly offer more evidence than they have, without jeopardizing their secrets .

Chucky · 24th January 2012, 08:23 PM

Originally Posted by joesixpack

Certainly porn will be the first widespread consumer application, if history is any guide.

And I believe you can watch them perform the act in six different positions simultaneously.

Zelenius · 24th January 2012, 08:47 PM

Based on my lack of knowledge of physics and quantum physics in particular, this still doesn't seem plausible. As far as I can tell, authentic commercially viable quantum computers are at least a decade away. Anyone can call an ordinary computer "quantum" though, to gain a marketing edge.

If Deepak Chopra can misuse this term to push his brand of health woo, why not technology companies?

Skeptical Greg · 25th January 2012, 04:44 AM

Originally Posted by Chucky

And I believe you can watch them perform the act in six different positions simultaneously.

I thought ' watching ' throws everything out of whack ?

You could try to watch porn and get anything from The Sound Of Music to Debby Does Dallas ..

Skeptical Greg · 25th January 2012, 09:12 AM

I think if this was moved to Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology, we might get some interesting input from some of our physicists ...

ddt · 25th January 2012, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by Chucky

And I believe you can watch them perform the act in six different positions simultaneously.

That's called a superposition.

Skeptic Ginger · 25th January 2012, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by Zelenius

Based on my lack of knowledge of physics and quantum physics in particular, this still doesn't seem plausible. As far as I can tell, authentic commercially viable quantum computers are at least a decade away. Anyone can call an ordinary computer "quantum" though, to gain a marketing edge.

If Deepak Chopra can misuse this term to push his brand of health woo, why not technology companies?

So based on your lack of current knowledge in this field you conclude, "authentic commercially viable quantum computers are at least a decade away"? While at the same time, people who do have expertise in the field invested 10 million in a working model. Or did I miss the sarcasm? I've been known to be Poe's Law disabled.

I'm going to go with the people who do have the expertise here.

George152 · 25th January 2012, 11:54 AM

It is here to tell of the building of a greater computer

Skeptical Greg · 25th January 2012, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

So based on your lack of current knowledge in this field you conclude, "authentic commercially viable quantum computers are at least a decade away"? While at the same time, people who do have expertise in the field invested 10 million in a working model. Or did I miss the sarcasm? I've been known to be Poe's Law disabled.

...

Where is the evidence they invested 10 million?

Again, all we have is a story ..

I could be very wrong, but I'm just suspicious of a technology and hardware that has virtually no verifiable evidence it does anything worthwhile or even exists in the form claimed by it's developers..

Soapy Sam · 25th January 2012, 01:31 PM

Been done already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_QL

Skeptic Ginger · 25th January 2012, 04:57 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

Where is the evidence they invested 10 million?

Again, all we have is a story ..

I could be very wrong, but I'm just suspicious of a technology and hardware that has virtually no verifiable evidence it does anything worthwhile or even exists in the form claimed by it's developers..

Your claim there is no verifiable evidence has been refuted with links just in this thread. You seem intent on believing that you know what you admit you don't know.

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

I don't have enough information to answer that

Did you look at the link within the link?

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION doi:10.1038/nature10012

23rd January 2012, 06:49 PM	#1
INRM Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 5,490	First Production Quantum Computer Sold to Lockheed Martin World's First Commercial Quantum Computer Sold to Lockheed Martin Quote: The world’s first commercially available quantum computer, which uses principles of quantum mechanics rather than classical mechanics, was sold to aerospace, defense and security company Lockheed Martin. Unlike computers based on transistors, quantum computers rely on principles of quantum mechanics to conduct operations. The computers take advantage of properties like entanglement — when two particles have the same properties and behave identically while being separate — and storing data with “qubits,” or quantum bits. Typical bits store memory by registering an “on” or “off,” or a one or zero, while qubits can represent information as both memory and the state of entanglement with other particles. It has a processing capability of 128 q-bits, and already a new computer is being developed which will possess a 512 q-bit capacity. What does that processing power compare to modern supercomputers assuming it's not classified? INRM Remember to read my signature below...
INRM Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 5,490	__________________ In closing, I want to remind everybody that no matter how I die, it was murder; and should I be accused of sexual impropriety, be framed for a criminal offense, or disappear mysteriously, you know who to blame

23rd January 2012, 07:27 PM	#2
Baloney Muse Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: America! (F, yeah!) Posts: 666	Also, they use it store porn.
	__________________ _{When I think about woo, I detect myself.}

23rd January 2012, 08:19 PM	#3
joesixpack Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Edge of the continent, Pacific county, WA Posts: 3,408	Originally Posted by Baloney Also, they use it store porn. Certainly porn will be the first widespread consumer application, if history is any guide.
	__________________ I never got in trouble by bein' ignorant, I always got in trouble 'cause I thought I wasn't.

23rd January 2012, 09:40 PM	#5
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	May 27, 2011 ? Perhaps this story got held up in a quantum entanglement somewhere ... The story is so full of meaningless babblespeak, I don't know where to start .. perhaps someone else can tackle it ...
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Last edited by Skeptical Greg; 23rd January 2012 at 09:51 PM.

23rd January 2012, 09:48 PM	#6
Andrew Wiggin Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: A small planet named for its dirt. You'll find it filed under 'mostly harmless' Posts: 2,914	Originally Posted by Modified It will both store porn and not store porn simultaneously. There's a function I could use, assuming it knows when and when not to have it in storage.
	__________________ "Everyone takes the limits of his own vision for the limits of the world." - Arthur Schopenhauer "New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled, the humiliating question arises, 'Why then are you not taking part in them?' " - H. G. Wells

23rd January 2012, 08:29 PM	#4
Modified Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: SW Florida Posts: 4,062	Originally Posted by Baloney Also, they use it store porn. It will both store porn and not store porn simultaneously.

23rd January 2012, 09:58 PM	#7
INRM Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 5,490	Quantum Computing: A Eureka Moment According to this statement it could solve mathematical computations that would require 320,000 years solve classically in 120 milliseconds. I'm not sure what kind of classical computation they're talking about and what of the processing power for the classical computation described is, but if this figure is correct, the processing speed for 128 QuBits would be approximately 84.1535 trillion times faster than classic computation described. INRM
INRM Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 5,490	__________________ In closing, I want to remind everybody that no matter how I die, it was murder; and should I be accused of sexual impropriety, be framed for a criminal offense, or disappear mysteriously, you know who to blame Last edited by INRM; 23rd January 2012 at 10:02 PM.

23rd January 2012, 10:03 PM	#8
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	....already a new computer is being developed which will possess a 512 q-bit capacity. This really looks like some kind of elaborate hoax .. Those wafers and circuit boards do not look real, then they go on to say that 100 binary switches ( 2¹⁰⁰) represent numbers that are difficult for modern computers to handle .. Waaaaaah ?
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

23rd January 2012, 11:08 PM	#9
Sam.I.Am Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hunting Moose and Squirrel Posts: 4,154	Classically probably means solving with a slide rule or earlier technology. In other word without electrical or electronic means.
	__________________ "Swift, silent and deadly" was a part of my job description Upon hearing me say that my friend asked me "So you're a fart?"... About my avatar.

24th January 2012, 12:02 AM	#10
BowlOfRed Muse Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Silicon Valley Posts: 535	Originally Posted by Sam.I.Am Classically probably means solving with a slide rule or earlier technology. In other word without electrical or electronic means. Classically means that the problem space has to be exhaustively searched. Each of the 2^100 states has to be calculated and the compared in some manner with the other calculations. For instance you keep track of the smallest calculation and throw away any that come up larger than what is already recorded. In a quantum computer, all the states of the problem space could exist simultaneously within the computer and you could then "ask" for the state that minimizes a function.

24th January 2012, 12:48 AM	#11
Aepervius Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Bierland. I mean , germany. Posts: 7,758	Originally Posted by Baloney Also, they use it store porn. Only problem is, when you don't look at the image the actress looks beautiful, but as soon as you take a look, the image collapse , and reality set in.
	__________________ Omnes Blessant Ultima necat "I want, and this is my last and most dear wish, I want that the last of the king be strangled with the guts of the last priest" (Jean Meslier / 1664-1729 / Testament) A very early french atheist, a catholic priest in life.

24th January 2012, 04:56 AM	#12
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 34,720	D Wave quantum computer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems Now I am asking about this because they have supposedly sold a unit to Lockheed Martin back in May 2011. Now one of teh critics listed in teh wiki says Quote: According to Scott Aaronson, a Computer Science professor at MIT who specializes in the theory of quantum computing, D-Wave's demonstration did not prove anything about the workings of the computer. ... "Their claimed speedup over classical algorithms appears to be based on a misunderstanding of a paper my colleagues van Dam, Mosca and I wrote on "The power of adiabatic quantum computing." That speed up unfortunately does not hold in the setting at hand, and therefore D-Wave's "quantum computer" even if it turns out to be a true quantum computer, and even if it can be scaled to thousands of qubits, would likely not be more powerful than a cell phone." So I am curious, do we know yet or is this really questionable as to it being quantum computing.
	__________________ Hell, dynamiting fish in a barrel is more challenging. - Ladewig I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager

24th January 2012, 04:57 AM	#13
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 34,720	I think the original press release was May , 2011?
	__________________ Hell, dynamiting fish in a barrel is more challenging. - Ladewig I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager

24th January 2012, 08:07 AM	#14
Farsight Suspended Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Poole, UK Posts: 1,956	I've got a computer science degree. A while back I bought a new backup drive. It's made by Seagate, it's a bit bigger than a fag packet, half as slim, and it was £80. It's about a million times better than the disc drives of say 1982, for a hundredth of the price. Meanwhile, quantum computing has been around all that time. And progress has been zip. And since I know a thing or two about electrons, and spin, and states, and physics, I side with Scott Aaronson. Sorry, but I now think quantum computing is just a jam-tomorrow so give-me-the-money-now wheeze that is way past its sell-by date. Especially because IMHO it is overshadowing the real future of computers, which is the use of displacement current rather than conduction current. Light instead of electrons. The thing to note is that you can make an electron out of light in pair production. Displacement current is more fundamental than conduction current. So anything you can do with electrons, or indeed atoms, you can do with light. There was an article about displacement-current circuitry in PhysicsWorld last year. It was called Taming Light at the nanoscale. See this rough-cut version.
	Last edited by Farsight; 24th January 2012 at 08:09 AM.

24th January 2012, 08:47 AM	#15
sol invictus Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Nova Roma Posts: 8,419	Originally Posted by Dancing David So I am curious, do we know yet or is this really questionable as to it being quantum computing. As far as I know, the situation hasn't changed. There's considerable skepticism (that's probably putting it too mildly) among the experts as to whether D-Wave's device is really a quantum computer. The hard part in any type of QC is isolating the qubits well enough. The power of a QC comes from entanglement between the bits. But entanglement is a very delicate thing - the slightest interaction with the environment (like bumping into an air molecule) is likely to destroy it. So there's a major applied physics and engineering challenge in developing systems that are isolated and stable enough to allow you to do computations. I suspect that this problem will eventually be solved, but it's impossible to say how long it will take. If D-Wave are right, that will be very soon. But if not, it could be quite a while.

24th January 2012, 10:45 AM	#16
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Right, and you would think if there was really something to this, we would have heard a lot more about it ..
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

24th January 2012, 10:51 AM	#17
Sam.I.Am Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hunting Moose and Squirrel Posts: 4,154	Originally Posted by BowlOfRed Classically means that the problem space has to be exhaustively searched. Each of the 2^100 states has to be calculated and the compared in some manner with the other calculations. For instance you keep track of the smallest calculation and throw away any that come up larger than what is already recorded. In a quantum computer, all the states of the problem space could exist simultaneously within the computer and you could then "ask" for the state that minimizes a function. Ahhh. Ok. That makes more sense when comparing the two methods. Thanks, I'll file that away under random computer knowledge in case it comes up in my next trivia competition.
	__________________ "Swift, silent and deadly" was a part of my job description Upon hearing me say that my friend asked me "So you're a fart?"... About my avatar.

24th January 2012, 11:03 AM	#18
BowlOfRed Muse Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Silicon Valley Posts: 535	The company had a paper published in Nature. There's a non-paper article from them back in May as well. http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1105...l/474018a.html

24th January 2012, 11:22 AM	#19
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	If you want to call what amounts to a ' Press Release ' a ' Paper ' .. Just a lot of nothing about what it *should* be able to do if it works.. Quote: So D-Wave's claims to have a working 128-qubit processor — combined with the company's former reluctance to publish details of the technique in peer-reviewed journals — have long raised eyebrows, explains Scott Aaronson, a computer scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. No information at all about any work it has actually done..
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

24th January 2012, 04:09 PM	#20
BowlOfRed Muse Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Silicon Valley Posts: 535	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg If you want to call what amounts to a ' Press Release ' a ' Paper ' .. Just a lot of nothing about what it *should* be able to do if it works.. No information at all about any work it has actually done.. Is the actual Nature paper just a press release, or is it not applicable? http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture10012.html I'm asking both because I don't have access to it, and I wouldn't be able to evaluate it if I did.

24th January 2012, 05:37 PM	#21
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,587	Originally Posted by Modified It will both store porn and not store porn simultaneously. That could be useful.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

24th January 2012, 05:39 PM	#22
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,587	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg Right, and you would think if there was really something to this, we would have heard a lot more about it .. Not sure what you are reading but I was aware they had a very expensive working model.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

24th January 2012, 05:51 PM	#23
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,587	Not that I understand much of this, but the technology has indeed arrived: 2009: Scientists Create First Electronic Quantum Processor http://www.qubit.org/ Quote: qubit.org was founded by members of Clarendon Laboratory of the University of Oxford to provide useful information and links to material in the field of quantum computing, information processing and more generally information science. What we do The discovery that quantum physics allows fundamentally new modes of information processing has required the existing theories of computation, information and cryptography to be superseded by their quantum generalisations. The Centre for Quantum Computation conducts theoretical and experimental research into all aspects of quantum information processing, and into the implications of the quantum theory of computation for physics itself. Latest arXiv Submissions Ultrafast entangling gates between nuclear spins using photo-excited triplet states Vasileia Filidou, Stephanie Simmons, Steven D. Karlen, Feliciano Giustino, Harry L. Anderson, John J. L. Morton Novel techniques to cool and rotate Bose-Einstein condensates in time-averaged adiabatic potentials M. Gildemeister, B. E. Sherlock, C. J. Foot Dissipative quantum light field engineering Martin Kiffner, Uwe Dorner, Dieter Jaksch Induced Saturation Number Ryan R. Martin, Jason J. Smith A Generalized Kahn Principle for Abstract Asynchronous Networks Samson Abramsky Links embedded in the link 2009: Demonstration of two-qubit algorithms with a superconducting quantum processor In 2010: Quantum Computing Reaches for True Power Quote: In 1981 the physicist Richard Feynman speculated about the possibility of “tiny computers obeying quantum mechanical laws.” He suggested that such a quantum computer might be the best way to simulate real-world quantum systems, a challenge that today is largely beyond the calculating power of even the fastest supercomputers.... ...Significantly, I.B.M. has reconstituted what had recently been a relatively low-level research effort in quantum computing. I.B.M. is responding to advances made in the past year at Yale University and the University of California, Santa Barbara, that suggest the possibility of quantum computing based on standard microelectronics manufacturing technologies. Both groups layer a superconducting material, either rhenium or niobium, on a semiconductor surface, which when cooled to near absolute zero exhibits quantum behavior. The company has assembled a large research group at its Thomas J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, N.Y., that includes alumni from the Santa Barbara and Yale laboratories and has now begun a five-year research project. “I.B.M. is quite interested in taking up the physics which these other groups have been pioneering,” said David DiVincenzo, an I.B.M physicist and research manager. Researchers at Santa Barbara and Yale also said that they expect to make further incremental progress in 2011 and in the next several years.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

24th January 2012, 06:44 PM	#24
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 28,954	Originally Posted by Andrew Wiggin There's a function I could use, assuming it knows when and when not to have it in storage. IIRC, it can't both know where to get it and how porny it is at the same time. So your enjoyment will only be virtual and/or imaginary.
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 28,954	__________________ There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed. Wash this space! We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!

24th January 2012, 06:45 PM	#25
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Not sure what you are reading but I was aware they had a very expensive working model. So they say; but from the nature article linked above: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1105...l/474018a.html Quote: ....and although the company last month published a paper in Nature (M. W. Johnson et al. Nature 473, 194–198; 2011) to help verify its quantum credentials, some say that the technique used is still in doubt. ...and Quote: ....But quantum computers are notoriously difficult to construct, with most research groups struggling to entangle more than a handful of qubits. So D-Wave's claims to have a working 128-qubit processor — combined with the company's former reluctance to publish details of the technique in peer-reviewed journals — have long raised eyebrows, explains Scott Aaronson, a computer scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. Quote: ...."Just because a flagship company has bought the system, doesn't mean that it now works," he says. That mistrust goes back to 2007, when D-Wave apparently demonstrated a 16-qubit computer that could solve a Sudoku puzzle. Many computer scientists and physicists suggested that the device was actually being driven by plain old classical physics. At the time, D-Wave did not respond with any publications ruling out this possibility. I could end up quoting the whole article so you might read it for yourself. There doesn't seem to be any hard evidence they are doing what they claim.. The ' D-Wave ' box just sets off my woo meter..
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Last edited by Skeptical Greg; 24th January 2012 at 06:48 PM.

24th January 2012, 06:50 PM	#26
Sam.I.Am Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hunting Moose and Squirrel Posts: 4,154	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg So they say; but from the nature article linked above: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1105...l/474018a.html ...and I could end up quoting the whole article so you might read it for yourself. There doesn't seem to be any hard evidence they are doing what they claim.. The ' D-Wave ' box just sets off my woo meter.. Meh. If what they are doing is defense related or funded they may be precluded from giving out details. That doesn't necessarily mean that they cant do it.
	__________________ "Swift, silent and deadly" was a part of my job description Upon hearing me say that my friend asked me "So you're a fart?"... About my avatar.

24th January 2012, 06:54 PM	#27
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,587	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg So they say; but from the nature article linked above: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1105...l/474018a.html ...and I could end up quoting the whole article so you might read it for yourself. There doesn't seem to be any hard evidence they are doing what they claim.. The ' D-Wave ' box just sets off my woo meter.. Do you think Lockheed Martin invested $10 million unwisely, or do you think perhaps the company that developed the working Q-computer kept its progress under wraps to prevent their research being stolen?
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

24th January 2012, 07:03 PM	#28
Captain Obvious Suspended Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Phone kiosk / Penthouse suite / Arctic ice palace Posts: 333	Originally Posted by Modified It will both store porn and not store porn simultaneously. Schrodinger's Pussy.

24th January 2012, 07:05 PM	#29
Sam.I.Am Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hunting Moose and Squirrel Posts: 4,154	Originally Posted by Captain Obvious Schrodinger's Pussy. Ba-dum-dum!
	__________________ "Swift, silent and deadly" was a part of my job description Upon hearing me say that my friend asked me "So you're a fart?"... About my avatar.

24th January 2012, 07:19 PM	#30
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Do you think Lockheed Martin invested $10 million unwisely, or do you think perhaps the company that developed the working Q-computer kept its progress under wraps to prevent their research being stolen? I don't have enough information to answer that, but they could certainly offer more evidence than they have, without jeopardizing their secrets .
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

24th January 2012, 08:23 PM	#31
Chucky Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 324	Originally Posted by joesixpack Certainly porn will be the first widespread consumer application, if history is any guide. And I believe you can watch them perform the act in six different positions simultaneously.
Chucky Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 324

24th January 2012, 08:47 PM	#32
Zelenius Muse Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: East coast, U.S Posts: 623	Based on my lack of knowledge of physics and quantum physics in particular, this still doesn't seem plausible. As far as I can tell, authentic commercially viable quantum computers are at least a decade away. Anyone can call an ordinary computer "quantum" though, to gain a marketing edge. If Deepak Chopra can misuse this term to push his brand of health woo, why not technology companies?

25th January 2012, 04:44 AM	#33
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by Chucky And I believe you can watch them perform the act in six different positions simultaneously. I thought ' watching ' throws everything out of whack ? You could try to watch porn and get anything from The Sound Of Music to Debby Does Dallas ..
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

25th January 2012, 09:12 AM	#34
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	I think if this was moved to Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology, we might get some interesting input from some of our physicists ...
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

25th January 2012, 10:43 AM	#35
ddt Mafia Penguin Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 10,324	Originally Posted by Chucky And I believe you can watch them perform the act in six different positions simultaneously. That's called a superposition.
	__________________ Proud member of the Solipsistic Autosycophant's Group