Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations derfloh on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
quantum mechanics based computers
- Thread starter DGA15
- Start date
I have to say, I love the idea of quantum computing. I think it's a long way off, yet. Probably at least another 10 years before we even get an operational computer, and another 10 years before they become commercial. The one thing I'll say about it, though, is that to become a computing professional in a world of quantum computers, people are going to have do a qualification in computing AND a qualification in physics! 
Having done a degree in Astrophysics, I understand the quantum theory a little more than the average person (but I'd be lying if I said I completely understood it!), and I'm very interested in the ideas. I'm even thinking of doing my dissertation for the Masters degree in Information Systems on Quantum Computing. At least if I don't get much computing theory into the report, I'll at least be able to confuse and bewilder the assessors with the qm theories, so much so, that they may give me a good mark!!! [sig][/sig]
Having done a degree in Astrophysics, I understand the quantum theory a little more than the average person (but I'd be lying if I said I completely understood it!), and I'm very interested in the ideas. I'm even thinking of doing my dissertation for the Masters degree in Information Systems on Quantum Computing. At least if I don't get much computing theory into the report, I'll at least be able to confuse and bewilder the assessors with the qm theories, so much so, that they may give me a good mark!!!
[sig][/sig]And yet, Schrodinger would be be totally bewildered if he ever sat at an ordinary desktop PC, trying to email Einstein with an update on the "Many Worlds" view.
We have already unravelled the meaning of "Many Worlds". The substance is only a mouse-click away.
The Internet reveals dimensions unimagined by our ancestors. I find it likely that a "quantum" computer already exists and the friendly folks at Radio Shack are just waiting for us to walk in with a wad of cash.
LOL
[sig]<p> <br><a href=mailto: > </a><br><a href= plain black box</a><br>"Suffice it to say that adding disk drives and a disk operating system to a personal microcomputer is guaranteed to increase its power dramatically."<br>
<u><b>CP/M and the Personal Computer</u></b>[/sig]
We have already unravelled the meaning of "Many Worlds". The substance is only a mouse-click away.
The Internet reveals dimensions unimagined by our ancestors. I find it likely that a "quantum" computer already exists and the friendly folks at Radio Shack are just waiting for us to walk in with a wad of cash.
LOL
[sig]<p> <br><a href=mailto: > </a><br><a href= plain black box</a><br>"Suffice it to say that adding disk drives and a disk operating system to a personal microcomputer is guaranteed to increase its power dramatically."<br>
<u><b>CP/M and the Personal Computer</u></b>[/sig]
For those new to this science or doubters
Read about it here:
Computing, One Atom at a Time
By GEORGE JOHNSON
After reading this I am convinced it is very near a reality.
Read about it here:
Computing, One Atom at a Time
By GEORGE JOHNSON
After reading this I am convinced it is very near a reality.
Quantum computers have far more potential(perfect theoretical potential) than this article says, as a single atom of iron (being the most stable element) has 26 protons 30 nuetrons and 26 electrons. Each able to similtaneosly form a set pattern used for calculation. Altering the energy states of 92 different objects means you can, with just one atom of iron, perform 91*90*89* ... *3*2*1 (91!) seperate 1 or 0 calculations by firing different energy photons at it as this is the number of unique combinations that can be stored.
Thus meaning that a thirteen atom quantum computer at current understandings maximum potential could render in 3D one life size model universe and a 100 atom quantum computer could do the same for every person and animal larger than a mouse that has ever lived on this planet.
However at the moment this is all still a little bit beyond us and the ability to reach this theoretical limit requires a precision in directing photons in the 10^-14m range.
Quantum computers are dependant on the quantum world and the quantum world is wacky. Einstein said the quantum world was to wacky to be true, but unfortunately he was wrong.
I was glad to see someone above saying they understood more than most but that they would be lying to say they fully understood it. This is absolutely true as nobody understands it and if anyone tells you that they do they are either diluded, from another parrallel dimension sent to annoy us or super intelligient and haven't been pouched by the system yet and you must see to it that the scientific community get to them ASAP as I am in great need of quantum speed computers. This would be a good way to cut down netwrok traffic, you would have you job done a set back to you before you had released the mouse button.
Think of the storage capabilities of a quantum computer as well. Its something like (another theoretical perfect model) 10^100 Terrabytes per atom.
However despite all this dreaming it will probably be a couple of hundred years before we can safely say we understand what is actually going on in the quantum world and at least that long before anywhere near the quantum potential is reached so heres thinking.
Booiinnggg ... Zebbeddee ... Booiinnggg
Thus meaning that a thirteen atom quantum computer at current understandings maximum potential could render in 3D one life size model universe and a 100 atom quantum computer could do the same for every person and animal larger than a mouse that has ever lived on this planet.
However at the moment this is all still a little bit beyond us and the ability to reach this theoretical limit requires a precision in directing photons in the 10^-14m range.
Quantum computers are dependant on the quantum world and the quantum world is wacky. Einstein said the quantum world was to wacky to be true, but unfortunately he was wrong.
I was glad to see someone above saying they understood more than most but that they would be lying to say they fully understood it. This is absolutely true as nobody understands it and if anyone tells you that they do they are either diluded, from another parrallel dimension sent to annoy us or super intelligient and haven't been pouched by the system yet and you must see to it that the scientific community get to them ASAP as I am in great need of quantum speed computers. This would be a good way to cut down netwrok traffic, you would have you job done a set back to you before you had released the mouse button.
Think of the storage capabilities of a quantum computer as well. Its something like (another theoretical perfect model) 10^100 Terrabytes per atom.
However despite all this dreaming it will probably be a couple of hundred years before we can safely say we understand what is actually going on in the quantum world and at least that long before anywhere near the quantum potential is reached so heres thinking.
Booiinnggg ... Zebbeddee ... Booiinnggg
Actually I got the potentials wrong, apparently there are more things to influence than one, in a single atom, and you can have multiple detectable energy states. Meaning that every atom can store for example a byte pattern meaning its potential combinations rises to (91*2^3)*(90*8)* ... *(2*8)*(1*8) which is about 2*10^220. This is a lot and that's all I can say.
guestgulkan
Technical User
This quantum stuff is way beyond the genuine requirements of just about any possible commericial application I could can think of.
But then history has shown that programmers seem obliged to fill any available amount of memory storage or CPU speed with crapware.
But then history has shown that programmers seem obliged to fill any available amount of memory storage or CPU speed with crapware.
People at the moment complain about bloat ware with with quantum storage you'd get people trying to fill thier memory up by getting every bit of software on the planet. And it wouldn't matter anymore, you would never get close but because with all the powers of ten even if you filled 10^80 Terrabytes you still have to get 100'000'000'000'000'000'000 times that to fill up the space and 10^80 is enormous but we wouldn't have to worry about slow transactions or disk space anymore.
Booiinnggg ... Zebbeddee ... Booiinnggg
Booiinnggg ... Zebbeddee ... Booiinnggg
Spot on guestgulkan,
As memory, processor speed and hard drive space increase, more and more programs are released which use them (without any real gain on a version that might have been suitable for a 486). I swear it's down to poor/ lazy coding.
Thus meaning that a thirteen atom quantum computer at current understandings maximum potential could render in 3D one life size model universe
Until of course you install "Windows QTM" when your speed is halfed, and you need to pay for a new license with every planet render.
That aside I seriously doubt we will see a working quantum computer in my life time (I'm optimistic on timescale here) or even the next. We were afterall promised flying cars and house-cleaning robots by 2000
As memory, processor speed and hard drive space increase, more and more programs are released which use them (without any real gain on a version that might have been suitable for a 486). I swear it's down to poor/ lazy coding.
Thus meaning that a thirteen atom quantum computer at current understandings maximum potential could render in 3D one life size model universe
Until of course you install "Windows QTM" when your speed is halfed, and you need to pay for a new license with every planet render.
That aside I seriously doubt we will see a working quantum computer in my life time (I'm optimistic on timescale here) or even the next. We were afterall promised flying cars and house-cleaning robots by 2000
guestgulkan
Technical User
Anyway - I would have thought that the uncertainty principle would render quantum computrs impossible to use
and therefore pointless.
Even if it was possible - I think it would be an economic disaster.
and therefore pointless.
Even if it was possible - I think it would be an economic disaster.
The Uncertainty principle applys only if your not looking or when the object is in motion so as long as you don't kick your computer or take your eyes off it your OK. Just joking. Quantum computers will be a thing of the far future, but seriosly the uncertainty principle only limits the number of detectable changes that you can use to store data on a single atom meaning that an each atom has a limited potential storage per particle within it.
There is a lot more we have to understand and lots of things to re-understand before our playing around in the quantum world is really grasped. Above I said Einstein thought quantum physics to be too wacky to be true, a it is so bizzare e.g. things happen before they happen, things aren't thier unless your watching, empty space is more filled than anything else and forces are enacted by invisible and undetectable forces.
That's about enough to bewilder most people and please don't ask me to explain it because i'd have to invent a new language to define what happens and also understand it myself, which I don't.
There are plenty of good books on quantum theory if your interested but most of them deal with conjecture and are mostly unfounded theory. So it, for the time being, shall remain Quantum Theory.
There is a lot more we have to understand and lots of things to re-understand before our playing around in the quantum world is really grasped. Above I said Einstein thought quantum physics to be too wacky to be true, a it is so bizzare e.g. things happen before they happen, things aren't thier unless your watching, empty space is more filled than anything else and forces are enacted by invisible and undetectable forces.
That's about enough to bewilder most people and please don't ask me to explain it because i'd have to invent a new language to define what happens and also understand it myself, which I don't.
There are plenty of good books on quantum theory if your interested but most of them deal with conjecture and are mostly unfounded theory. So it, for the time being, shall remain Quantum Theory.
We are reaching the limits of silicon technology and are limited by the speed of light(at which electricty flows) which is ONLY 30cm per nanosecond(10 ^ -9 seconds) and so other things will have to replace it.
There is only so much you can do to shrink a chip and shorten wires between components so I think we shall see quantum computers within the next 10 years being put to use but not in any major commercial application for another thirty years and these will be only a fraction of the theoretical model discribed above but they'll out perform your desktop machine at a breeze.
However this forum is for developments to take place in the next five years so hears to hoping that it won't be long.
And, oh, i do think that it would spell economic disaster to have so much power on a single device. Encryption currently thought unbreakable would be shredded in seconds. We would have to convert to 1.2 *10^24 bit encryption or something else ridiculously large.
And think of the amount of spam one could recieve (i mean it's bad enough already) and all the monitoring systems that exist could watch everything that anyone was doing anywhere. The ramifications are unthinkable but not debatable.
Booiinnggg ... Zebbeddee ... Booiinnggg
There is only so much you can do to shrink a chip and shorten wires between components so I think we shall see quantum computers within the next 10 years being put to use but not in any major commercial application for another thirty years and these will be only a fraction of the theoretical model discribed above but they'll out perform your desktop machine at a breeze.
However this forum is for developments to take place in the next five years so hears to hoping that it won't be long.
And, oh, i do think that it would spell economic disaster to have so much power on a single device. Encryption currently thought unbreakable would be shredded in seconds. We would have to convert to 1.2 *10^24 bit encryption or something else ridiculously large.
And think of the amount of spam one could recieve (i mean it's bad enough already) and all the monitoring systems that exist could watch everything that anyone was doing anywhere. The ramifications are unthinkable but not debatable.
Booiinnggg ... Zebbeddee ... Booiinnggg
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question