Comments for Wavewatching http://wavewatching.net Observations on the nascent quantum computing industry & physics Wed, 15 Oct 2014 20:02:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0 Comment on Progressing from the God Particle to the Gay Particle by Henning Dekant http://wavewatching.net/2014/10/05/progressing-from-the-god-particle-to-the-gay-particle/#comment-81824 Wed, 15 Oct 2014 20:02:35 +0000 http://wavewatching.net/?p=3304#comment-81824 In isolation these are great achievements but I just don’t see how they are going to scale this up (i.e. getting several qubits across a chip to interact in a controlled fashion). That’s why I am still not very bullish on quantum dots for QC.

]]>
Comment on Progressing from the God Particle to the Gay Particle by Henning Dekant http://wavewatching.net/2014/10/05/progressing-from-the-god-particle-to-the-gay-particle/#comment-81823 Wed, 15 Oct 2014 19:58:01 +0000 http://wavewatching.net/?p=3304#comment-81823 Good question. The way I think about it, this is just another way of sampling which behaves slightly different than in classical systems. In my view the differences arise from the fact that classical probability can be understood as a sub-set of the broader quantum one. That’s why I always regarded weak measurements as not particularly interesting.

At first glance the weak value argument in the first paper seems sound, I think they really pin-point a mistake there, but I don’t think that this mistake applies to most of the sampling that goes under the name ‘weak measurements’ (I may be wrong though, as I really haven’t paid much attention to this field).

]]>
Comment on Progressing from the God Particle to the Gay Particle by bettingman http://wavewatching.net/2014/10/05/progressing-from-the-god-particle-to-the-gay-particle/#comment-81812 Mon, 13 Oct 2014 12:26:41 +0000 http://wavewatching.net/?p=3304#comment-81812 More news:
http://phys.org/news/2014-10-physicists-silicon-quantum.html#jCp

]]>
Comment on Progressing from the God Particle to the Gay Particle by Elangel Exterminador http://wavewatching.net/2014/10/05/progressing-from-the-god-particle-to-the-gay-particle/#comment-81805 Sun, 12 Oct 2014 08:26:41 +0000 http://wavewatching.net/?p=3304#comment-81805 Yeah, but then they shouldn’t be able to do quantum computing with it, should they? Or is there anything fundamentally wrong with all of this?

http://iopscience.iop.org/1367-2630/13/5/053024

]]>
Comment on Progressing from the God Particle to the Gay Particle by Henning Dekant http://wavewatching.net/2014/10/05/progressing-from-the-god-particle-to-the-gay-particle/#comment-81804 Sat, 11 Oct 2014 13:56:56 +0000 http://wavewatching.net/?p=3304#comment-81804 Certainly feeds into my perception that this was always pretty weak tea :-)

]]>
Comment on Progressing from the God Particle to the Gay Particle by Elangel Exterminador http://wavewatching.net/2014/10/05/progressing-from-the-god-particle-to-the-gay-particle/#comment-81797 Fri, 10 Oct 2014 08:38:21 +0000 http://wavewatching.net/?p=3304#comment-81797 Here’s a new deal. Anything “weak” is classical!

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2014/oct/09/are-weak-values-quantum-after-all

]]>
Comment on Progressing from the God Particle to the Gay Particle by Quax http://wavewatching.net/2014/10/05/progressing-from-the-god-particle-to-the-gay-particle/#comment-81783 Mon, 06 Oct 2014 17:54:49 +0000 http://wavewatching.net/?p=3304#comment-81783 Things are really getting more real much quicker, aren’t they? Topological computing was always way out there, lots of good theory but the essential building block was missing. It’s still a long way but now it’s something that feels much more tangible.

]]>
Comment on Progressing from the God Particle to the Gay Particle by bettinman http://wavewatching.net/2014/10/05/progressing-from-the-god-particle-to-the-gay-particle/#comment-81782 Mon, 06 Oct 2014 17:33:36 +0000 http://wavewatching.net/?p=3304#comment-81782 Interesting stuff!

]]>
Comment on What Defines a Quantum Computer? by bettinman http://wavewatching.net/2014/09/21/what-defines-a-quantum-computer/#comment-81767 Sun, 28 Sep 2014 12:16:02 +0000 http://wavewatching.net/?p=3287#comment-81767 interesting article

]]>
Comment on What Defines a Quantum Computer? by Sol Warda http://wavewatching.net/2014/09/21/what-defines-a-quantum-computer/#comment-81761 Thu, 25 Sep 2014 21:56:09 +0000 http://wavewatching.net/?p=3287#comment-81761 Hi Henning: Here is a lot of hype from a couple of folks at D-Wave. We shall see if they will “make history soon” in CS as they claim: http://recode.net/2014/09/25/d-wave-ceo-our-next-quantum-processor-will-make-computer-science-history-video/

]]>