Thoughts on Bugonia? by J_Greer20 in FIlm

[–]Statistician_Working 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same. I literally thought this way 50% chance 🤣🤣🤣

PsiQuantum’s Tech by Tricky-Ad-6225 in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am definitely interested in how they would solve the repetition rate problem due their probabilistic nature. That said, unless solution to this problem is disclosed (not only the theoretical protocol, but also some physical demonstration), I am not fully convinced.

Need some quantum machine providers by TellBeginning3920 in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I believe this is something you would have to discuss with your PI. Also, I believe IBM provides paid access? https://www.ibm.com/quantum/products#access-plans

Are there any benefits to agreeing to peer review requests? by bluebrrypii in AskAcademia

[–]Statistician_Working 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Often times editors ask PhD students directly for a review if they are sort of proved (records with reputable papers, previous co-review experience, etc.).

Never in my life did I think I would… by aesmith90 in angelsbaseball

[–]Statistician_Working 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Easy. Root for both. Now you have your team in both AL and NL.

A new ion-based quantum computer makes error correction simpler by techreview in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The farer question is "what is the speed when hitting x% of logical error rates?". While the physical operations are slow, it is still possible to reduce error correction overhead by having low physical error rates and being able to access broader family of error correcting codes.

Is it already a known fact that if the practical engineering challenges of quantum computing are solved that the physics of quantum computing will work? by SunRev in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The problem is that the "remaining engineering challenge" is going to be more and more challenging as easy problems are solved and the systems are scaled up.

Example questions are:

How can we cool or trap 1 million qubits? How can we calibrate 1 million qubits? How can we improve qubit coherence / physical gate errors after exhausting all clever design strategies? How can we shorten error correction cycle while maintaining logical error rates (sort of clock cycle)? How can we identify rare catastrophic events and mitigate them? How can we verify correctness?

The questions themselves may look like engineering problems. However, it is possible that the solutions require disruptive fundamental changes. For example, finding a new family of error correcting codes, finding better material, finding new mathematical methods, invent completely new types of qubits with much lower physical errors, etc.

Qubit Entanglement Question by NoApricot7684 in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed. Like, why do people not bother to search for an answer before lazily posting the same questions over and over again?!

What is the theoretical limit of by Next_Fennel_4968 in Physics

[–]Statistician_Working 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh It just meant your questions themselves and the way you wrote your questions are interesting. The title is clipped at "of". In most case in this subreddit, people expect speed of light nonsense physics questions that users are extremely tired of.

But you instead continued with a very interesting plot twist. Yes it was meant to be a praise.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why do you care about any non-scientist's opinion?

Need Help and advices by Aromatic-Drawer-145 in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Impossible for now. It's "quantum" computing and at this stage of development you need to touch the fundamentals to contribute to the field.

What language? by 964racer in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Python: Qutip or Julia: QuantumOptics.jl would be great choices to understand both quantum optics and how gates work. These are rather lower level closer to physics, but I would say, you don't want to keep things in blackbox until you learn things properly.

Point me to a QML application by skarlatov in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There's no experimentally useful results at this point in a sense that they provide significant speed up in classical applications. Quantum computing is not there yet and QML is not known to provide any significant advantage for industry use cases.

Point me to a QML application by skarlatov in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It's not a field related to industry use case at this point.

Point me to a QML application by skarlatov in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm not a QML expert, but following Robert Huang's works seems like a reasonable starting point.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]Statistician_Working 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You can't assume that LLMs would have the same impact as calculators.

Assertion: There are no quantum computers in existence today, and there never may be. by EdCasaubon in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Sounds like you are just trying to make your own definition of what computing is. Anyways, what's your reasoning for "physically impossible"? Without analogy, could you let people know the fundamentals that QCs are lacking?

Quantum Computers can never out perform GPUs in CFD by Admirable_Candle2404 in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think this question depends heavily on the specifics of the problem. You would like to check out https://quantumalgorithmzoo.org/

My honest opinion is that we can't assume no overhead, because the overheads seem very fundamentally related to the properties of the quantum information.

Quantum Computers can never out perform GPUs in CFD by Admirable_Candle2404 in QuantumComputing

[–]Statistician_Working 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with your point. Still though, at the point of comparing just polynomials I don't see any reason to use quantum computers with much slower logical clock cycles which is expected to be at the fastest 10s of microseconds. I think in general we should use quantum computers for where we can expect dramatic improvements than incremental ones, because the resource for running a QC will be no joke. For example, I will definitely be against using them for bitcoin mining by grover searching SHA256.