Maths made sense to me when it was applied to geometry. Whether that be calculus or trig, seeing the representation in 2d always was far more useful than pure numerical application.
This makes it far less useful than it was. I wouldn't have supported Amazon if I could avoid it but I would have considered it to play games of GOG remotely. I assume Amazon just aren't making enough money with other stores on the platform.
Some fantastic albums here. Clearly dedicated to his craft of recording. There are still a few quality bootleg bloggers out there that give me hope the web can still be special and enjoyable.
There are so many steps in quantum computing but there is nothing of note to suggest that we can get anywhere near building a device that outperforms HPC's at this stage.
you seem to have a misunderstanding about how quantum computing works
it isn't "faster" computing
it is "different" computing
like if you make a diagram left side "things computers can do fast", right side "thinks they can't do fast", then quantum computers are like a oval in the middle covering part of both sides
as consequence weather it "outperforms" HPC (in general) is fully meaningless, it likely won't ever do that, but also still will break cryptography anyway
and in general it's commonly used in conjunction with HPC, not as a replacement of it
quantum computers working "different" instead of "faster" is also why we won't see a slow breaking/reducing of cracking time for asymmetric crypto. Because it isn't a slow buildup of speed. It's a overcoming of technical barriers. Once done breaking RSA/ECC on a 128 bit security level will pretty much instantly jump from "infeasible per key" to "in minutes per key".
this is also why even "just" a chance of idk. arbitrary chosen 30% that it will be possible in 2030 would be too much to ignore it... especially if we consider that most computer security out there is coupled to asym. crypto not breaking in one way or another.
I am of the view the 17000 is simply referring to once they had the system set in the final stage they are happy with. They ran 17000 qubits through it over the course of testing and it led to a fidelity of 99%. Which is useful as fidelity is important, although this still isn't accurate enough, but it is no where near programmable general quantum computer.
They had something like 58000 atoms in their lattice and managed to form 17000 qubits from atom pairs.
Pretty impressive already yeah, I'm sure either their team or another research team will try to improve the qubit yield. Increasing the atom count could be harder though, I'm not an expert but at some point you run into limits from the size of your lab/cooler/trap.
And yeah 99.9% fidelity is not anything groundbreaking, but it's pretty surprising for a "first try" on a new gate implementation. In contrast superconducting systems have been worked on for years and years with ridiculous amounts of investment and also only get 3 nines of fidelity, and IonQ just recently demonstrated 4 nines fidelity, but only after working on their system for many years too.
It will be very challenging to implement their system off this paper as there are many key experimental details missing. I won't get into my hatred of this but open methodology is sorely needed in QC and it really hampers speed of development across the whole sector. As you say you will run into limitations eventually but again hard to judge where those limitations are.
Not the first time they couldn't keep to a ceasefire for even a day, let alone 24 hours. Exactly the same as what happened with Palestine last year as well.
Last year (March 18) Israel killed 174 children and 412 people in total in a day when violating a Jan 19 ceasefire to restart the genocide. Then proceeded to starve hundreds to death and severely compromise health of tens of thousands during the following months, while killing 1000s of aid seekers, that they forced into killing fields under starvation, like this:
I did a few courses across academic years that were based around this book and it's very handy skills to learn. Whilst perhaps not in the moment, it's a good introduction to implementing functions and equations, before you lead on to the next steps of specific functions and methods of analysis alongside hpc with parallelization.
reply