Michio Kaku: How to Program a Quantum Computer | Big Think

Quantum computing already exists, but on a truly miniscule scale. We’ll probably have molecular computers before true quantum ones, says the physicist.
New videos DAILY: bigth.ink/youtube
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive videos: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Michio Kaku is the co-founder of string field theory, and is one of the most widely recognized scientists in the world today. He has written 4 New York Times Best Sellers, is the science correspondent for CBS This Morning and has hosted numerous science specials for BBC-TV, the Discovery/Science Channel. His radio show broadcasts to 100 radio stations every week. Dr. Kaku holds the Henry Semat Chair and Professorship in theoretical physics at the City College of New York (CUNY), where he has taught for over 25 years. He has also been a visiting professor at the Institute for Advanced Study as well as New York University (NYU).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
Michio Kaku: Andrew, you ask a question which strikes fear in the heart of every programmer. And that is, first of all, Moore’s Law, which has held for 50 years, which says that computer power doubles every 18 months, may begin to expire in the next 10 or so years. In other words, if you knew that at Christmastime, your computer was just as powerful as the last Christmas present, would you buy a computer? Would you upgrade? Most people would say, “No, why should I buy a new computer if it’s identical to last year’s model?” Well that could create a planetary recession, a planetary depression knowing that this engine of prosperity, the computer revolution, is running out of steam. But that’s just the way it is.
Last month, for example, I spoke in Zurich, Switzerland; I met with a physicist at Zurich IBM, one of their leading institutions, and they told me that, yeah, they could see it now. It’s not science fiction; it’s not in the future. They could see it now. They were beginning to sputter with regards to building more and more computer power.
So, some people are looking for a replacement for silicon power; for the post-silicon era. Some people say quantum computers will do it. Well, yes, in principle, but quantum computers require a totally different architecture and a totally different way of programming.
When you program a computer, you are basically telling one CPU, the Pentium chip, how to process information. So you have a CPU with inputs and outputs and then you have a software that controls the CPU. That’s called a Turing machine. That’s the basis for what you have on your laptop, which you have in your cell phone, all of it is based on digital Turing-type technology.
But, quantum computers are not. Quantum computers compute on individual atoms and instead of zeroes and ones, zeroes and ones, which are called bits, where you have quantum bits or q-bits, that is, sometimes one, sometimes zero, sometimes any number in between zero and one. That’s the source of the power of quantum computers, the fact that you no longer calculating on zeroes and ones. But the problem with quantum computers is precisely because you are no longer computing on zeroes and ones, how do you program this thing? It’s very difficult.
The way we do it today is with an MRI machine. We get a bunch of atoms, line them up, put them in a magnetic field, shoot electromagnetic radiation at them from an MRI machine, flip the charges, so one becomes zero, becomes a half, becomes two-thirds, and then we measure the echo. That’s how we do it today.
Well the world’s record for a quantum computing calculation is, drum roll, ta-da… three times five is 15. That is the world’s record for a quantum computer calculation. Now, you may say to yourself, well gee, that’s not such a big deal. Well it is a big deal. Go home tonight and try to multiply three times five is equal to 15 on five atoms. Go home tonight and try that. And then you begin to realize, oh my god, this is really difficult; difficult to build, also difficult to program.
What is the problem with quantum computers? Stability. It turns out that interference. Any kind of vibration will upset the vibrations of these five atoms creating nonsense. So that’s the fundamental problem, decoherence. Decoherence is the reason why we cannot break codes with quantum computers. Why - why you don’t have artificial intelligence machine as smart as the human brain. Decoherence. These are where atoms begin to decohere and turn into a random jumble of atoms, just like the atoms in your body making it useless.
So when might we have quantum computers? I don’t know. But personally, I think we’ll have molecular computers before we have quantum computers. That is, we’ll be able to compute on molecules. Molecular transistors already exist. We can already make them.

[@bigthink]

Want to get Smarter, Faster™? Subscribe for DAILY videos: bigth.ink/SmarterFaster

[@kakhakartvelishvili7959]

Can’t make people smarter with your retarded videos

[@S4R1N]

"why would I buy a new computer, when it's identical to the previous model" I don't know, why would you? *looks at apple users*

[@carlosgomezsoza]

+S4R1N Why would you buy new cars? if they are the same than the last year model, just a different case.

[@S4R1N]

+Carlos Gomez Why the fuck would I buy a new car every year Carlos.

[@WilliamEllison]

+Carlos Gomez Answer the question Carlos. Why would you need to be a new car every year. I dirve a 2010 F150 and it still run as good as the day i bought it. Before that I had a 2002 GMC and drove it for 8 years with no issues. Carlos why do you feel the need to buy a new car every year?

[@carlosgomezsoza]

+William Ellison. It is a metaphor that compares the automotive market with the computer market, there is no major difference between a late model car and one from 2 or 3 years ago . But the market still remains and people buy cars, therefore they will continue buying computers. You dont need to buy a car every year, you don't even need a car.

[@WilliamEllison]

Carlos Gomez I don't see the connection my friend. You can't compare the two markets as if they are a reflexction of each other. Two different products that serve two different functions. You stated that people buy a new phone each year as they do cars. This is not true. People buy new phones each year because their old phone only last about a year. The memory gets burned out or the battery goes to shit. You can't compare that to a car that can very easily last you 10 years. I hope you understand. Sorry for the misapelled words. I don't know how to spell without my dick-shun-nary.

[@cicalinarrot]

"...just like the atoms in your body, making it useless". I feel a little insulted.

[@cicalinarrot]

4:00

[@laurentoutang8273]

we re obviously nothing and useless don't be so narcistic

[@cicalinarrot]

Since "being" and "useful" mean only what we defined them, we can be both.

[@ericramsaran7032]

cicalinarrot

[@joynermark]

#AtomsMustFall

[@Eudaletism]

Oh no! My quantum computer decohered. Guess it's time to buy some new atoms.

[@programmer9884]

Intel Atom to your rescue!

[@aN0nyMas]

have you tried turning the universe off and on again?

[@Eudaletism]

​@@aN0nyMasI left my universe on for too long once, and before I knew it, it was all black holes.

[@19billdong96]

The more I look up about Professor Kaku, the more I realize how much of a badass he is

[@tanthecomfymodder]

The baddest of ass, indeed.

[@arah8998]

It's great to see how far quantum computers have gone in the last 9 years

[@PinkMawile]

I'd love to see an update on this video. Since quantum computers have come a long way with coherence.

[@MelindaGreen]

It described a lot except for how to program a quantum computer.

[@gerry7man555]

It explained everything.

[@MelindaGreen]

***** OK then please show me a piece of example source code that will run on a quantum computer. I'm a programmer and have zero idea what this will look like. The title is essentially a lie.

[@MelindaGreen]

***** Cool, thanks! I had no idea there was a language. That should have been in the article.

[@smartcarowner7529]

***** Jean, while there may be a language about this. I think Melinda is correct. This video didn't explain how to program a quantum computer as the title would imply. It only discusses the difficulties with programming one.

[@1NT3RL1NK]

***** So would it be possible to write a compiler of sorts that output quantum source code from normal source code. Aka. could I programm a quantum computer as I'm used to with normal ones?

[@SullyRudolph]

2100: Quarkular Computers...running on quarks

[@IgorAherne]

multiply on 5 atoms? Here, hold my beer

[@VeggyZ]

I did it, I don't know what's taking you so long. Maybe you're just not smart enough as me

[@RastaTailSpike]

"Enough as me"? Yeah, real smart.

[@JohnzeeMr]

Albert Mao Einstein: What do you expect he has no idea what he's talking about in the first place. Now what I'm interested is real Quantum Computing power, now imagine a single CPU firing a laser and powering a projector, now imagine a GPU ram attached to every of the many multiple screens or just one put wired to all the monitors. Now just imagine how much is save on every aspect is save with just one CPU. I'm only talking about monitors there are a lot more although the start should be basic such as a normal projector but with a GPU-Ram install capability. I believe the basic should be projectors and later on TV's because this could open a new arena for one of the most prolific and influential industry in the west and that is comics. Not only will this benefit comic artist but more importantly there will be room for integration between comic artist and programmers, and with minor tweaks creating a new industry Holographic industry.

[@v1kt0us]

@@RastaTailSpike «Smart enough to be able to multiply in 5 atoms, as the other is» ¬¬

[@v1kt0us]

@@JohnzeeMr wut

[@SamiLamti]

I love this guy! His ability to explain really complex things in an easy-to-understand way is amazing.

[@swirvn10]

Dr.Kaku always breaks it down for the everyday person to understand. I love this man... Ive been watching videos on quantum computers all last week amd stills couldnt understand it until this video.

[@alijabari8715]

this is by far the best quantom computer definision I've ever heard thank you so much

[@jamietherooster]

anybody think its crazy and somewhat significant, that society would rather worship the kardashians, actors etc than people like this?

[@Peralisc]

+jamietherooster don't worship anyone, seek selfimprovement

[@ntwede]

+Spiritu Sancti 666

[@tardwrangler]

+jamietherooster You're just too edgy kid

[@strangerthanfictionlucious2474]

+jamietherooster Blame media. They shove that stuff in our face every day, but RARELY promote guys like this.

[@NebulusVoid]

+Snake_XIX That's not edgy...

[@physicsimpossible73]

oh my god!!!! The smallest transistor is a carbon atom!!! That is unimaginably small!!! How on earth could you possibly build something that small?!?! Technology is incredible and it blows my mind!! :D

[@gummipalle]

You dont have to build carbon atoms... They come pre-fabricated... You can compute on anything that you can manipulate... atoms are just small and cheap... Good for something you need trillions of in a small space...

[@physicsimpossible73]

Frabbledabble oh yeah... Why didn't I think of that... I was thinking we had built a carbon atom to act as a transistor or something... But still.. how on earth can you work with something that small?!

[@autumnrain7626]

Epicnerd73 Badass fucking microscopes

[@guyonearth]

Unfortunately the mechanisms required to observe this are huge and expensive, making the whole exercise somewhat ironic at this point.

[@SniperWolf2024]

quantum mechanics rules

[@TheYasill]

"Try to multiply 3 x 5 = 15 on 5 atoms"... what the f*** does that even mean?

[@FikiFirmansyah]

It's mean get the f*ck out quantum mechanics degree. :D

[@KandaiyoR6]

Yasill Hokly he means make a computer that uses only 5 atoms to calculate 3 x 5 = 15, as its such a difficult task. FIVE ATOMS ONLY! You have 12 days, we're all counting on you.

[@frederickjohnson2116]

It means 5 atoms solved that problem

[@angryface7135]

+Yasill Hokly It means how can you compute multiplication with only five beads - (atoms)

[@alexmartineau1060]

+Fiki Firmansyah very good answer.

[@anoopsurej244]

It's my first time watching a video from this channel, and I don't why this channel isn't as popular as it should. More people should be interested in this.

[@travisslimak7445]

Is there a way of understanding where or what the different vibrations are coming from and understanding what that specific vibration will do to the atom and then reverse the nonsense. Kinda like if we have an atom that says sometimes .0001 but this specific vibration causes it to go to sometimes .0010 so then we know that the specific vibration will cause that much of a change and we can then interpret it as .0001

[@MechWarrior324]

I really like this guy. He can make such a complex subject seem decently simple.

[@tiago.alegria.315]

Always so good explaining

[@buckrogers5331]

Wow, in just a few minutes, Prof MK answered the few questions I've had on QC. Thanks! ;-)

[@pollaeng]

The question was about the need of memory if we have a quantum computer. The actual question never get addressed.

[@reginaldsamtrob1716]

Polla Fattah the answer is that we just don't know yet. the leap mankind will take once quantum mechanics become the norm is so inconceivable that we can't yet fathom it. everything from medicine to architecture to cyber intrusion. if you think we've advanced exponentially in terms of technology in the past 40 years, just wait. what's to come is immeasurable.

[@wazzup1750]

As im conducting a research on that specific subject, anyone got the actual answer to that question?

[@joejohn.]

I mean... of course. To do any meaningful computing you need to store data somewhere. Whether that data is stored as binary digits or quantum bits, you'd still need the concept known as memory.

[@InnerLuminosity]

2019...and it's here...

[@andrewherrera7735]

the first computers came in 1936 but it wasn't till 2000 that lord of the rings was able to be made. The theme of quantum computers is 'exponential vs linear' so it might take much longer than people think.

[@Dunkelseele]

That was the best and most understandable lesson about quantum computers and its problems that i've heard so far. :)

[@van_codes]

10 years after I thought I'd be a theoretical physicist and I have my homie inspiring me in my chosen field of counter science

[@makeithappen4208]

😅 I hope everyrhing is well mate

[@DaveWhoa]

the calculation wasn't 3 x 5 = 15, it was factoring 15 into 3 and 5 (and that was back in 2001, this has since been beaten several times). See RSA and Shor's algorithm for an example of why this is important

[@couchsurfingsam]

+Dave Smith , I caught this mistake as well. It bothered me that the significance of this calculation was minimized by Michio Kaku. The ability to break down a semi-prime number into its prime origins will revolutionize the way we encrypt data.

[@Barsabus]

1:42

[@TGameMaster1993]

i see what you did there :)))

[@dariousvex]

omg u are funny lol

[@smokeweedaily]

Ha Lolz XD

[@officialDJNSBch]

lmao hahaha

[@Barsabus]

officialDJNSBch fuck you

[@Maxtez]

I feels so smart that for the first time I already knew everything he was talking about in a video :3

[@psyfertech]

Definatly my favorite physicist to watch. Like other dude said i could listen to him all day, has so much interesting things to talk about

[@kgp4death]

if you programmed an AI on a quantum computer and then programmed an artificial environment on a quantum computer, then left all it all in superstate locked in a box what would you have? would it be a single superstate consciousness that "lives" all possible states of existence "ie lives every possible life" in all possible realities "ie all possible multiverses" sounds a lot like our existence if of course you make an assumption we do live in a multiverse were every possible alternative choice does get made in a another multiverse and the other not currently accepted assumption we are all the same entity locked in an almost superstate.

[@amihart9269]

There's nothing magical about superpositional states. No one has ever seen a particle that's 50% in one state and 50% in another, we have only seen large ensembles of particles where 50% of them act one way and 50% of them act the other. When you use a quantum computer you never actually see anything in some superpositional state, you only ever see pure 0s and 1s, you just run the program many times to get an ensemble of 0s and 1s which then form a probability distribution. It is an assumption that before you looked they were all in some nondeterminate state where each one individually was half in one state and half in another. It's purely a philosophical assumption to say this which contributes nothing to the math and just makes quantum mechanics more confusing.

[@kgp4death]

@amihart9269 well the double slit experiment, the shot one particle at a time it some how split and interfered with its self and all possible paths of the particular did happen, ie particle went in one slit, others slit, no slit and both slits....and quantum eraser slit experiment made particle detections some how retroactively have a weird temporal superposition state. 0 and ones would be a normal architecture, 0,1,not 0 or 1 and both 0 and 1 at same time would be quantum architecture....recently even big things have been put into these states, do you know about these experiments does you comment stand even knowing these experiments?

[@winstoncarlile6455]

I love how he didn't answer the question at all

[@cakewalk4602]

He did answer the question but your to dumb to understand it :(

[@rohitpal7836]

@cakewalk true, Winston watch again

[@JunohProductions]

How did I not know of this channel? I love it.

[@nagrajbongirwar3941]

Great video sir. I want to understand quantum field theory. Please make a video regarding this theory.

[@eichbienyermaw]

Coolest....man...on...the...planet!!!!

[@midoo_cherni]

yes but can it run daggerfall?

[@josefinartamayo8446]

Always very clear explanations from Kaku... -- Gerald R. Tamayo

[@computingatschoolTV]

Added to our favourites list.

[@GeorgeDaramouskas]

Yea but can it run crysis?

[@adityakishore4260]

It can run matrix for sure

[@CobraQuotes1]

No

[@asdfghyter]

4:00 "... just like the atoms in your body, making it useless." ;-D

[@thedailynewsonfanbox]

Some excellent points!

[@pratnama]

thanks for your explaination

[@guily6669]

Nice, now how can I make my skin atoms to process windows SO??? If someone discovers, please let me now, so I can start installing apps on my body :)

[@TheRadioactiveFX]

you can't. windows is so shitty it's impossible to port it to quantum computers, because their awesomeness repel it.

[@chickenman779]

Just wait until windows makes you crash...

[@guily6669]

Nibbs LOL. Anyway I prefer windows with its crashes than the bullshit MAC OS. Linux is awesome, but I also don't like it. Tried so many distros even the one that look like windows, but it looks so damn basic to me, can't ever like any menu of it, the mounting of HDD partitions.... Windows can be bugged, but if you go deep into it you will see that it's packed with everything. Mac OS to me feels like those toy made in china computers with a stupid simple design, i hate everything in it.

[@TheRadioactiveFX]

guily6669 Macs are atually quite reliable and well designed. the looks may be "gay" but most people will prefer that over a simplistic fluxbox window manager. Linux, yeah it is awesome and I'm sure you just didn't try the right distros or you didn't take time to learn the differences between it and windoz.

[@guily6669]

Karkat Vantas That's exactly the word of what I think Mac OS is :). Anyway mac is reliable because the system is just too simple... Looks like the first OS but just with improved visuals. The simple it is the less bugged it is. Also the fact that mac has no virus, is probably not a single hack cares about that system, and since the majority uses windows, it's the one they will target their virus. Anyway they say Apple introduced virus on windows, some say M$ makes the virus... I don't care. And Linux still looks like a very incomplete OS to me. Looks like when I had XBMC on my xbox which is something very "private". Then All the apps hacks, and things I need are supported by windows only, because most hacks\coders, only use windows or even DOS which is still lot used. And then comes DirectX. I know it's a bullshit, but directx makes the performance of 3D everywhere, and it's owned by M$ (Though I would prefer that the market used OpenGL instead and improve it even further and further). ps: Though I still think 01 binary, and directX is a very ineffective way to code, some times I wonder why I buy a 380€ graphic card and it's power is always weak for those games and in 2 years they start to get slower while the game quality doesn't even improve that much.

[@gkoknok6076]

you lost me at MRI machine

[@vygandasrazhas5177]

+kirillka LOL That's how I feel about every textbook I open too. "So this is the answer to everything you need to know in this course." *Blank* "And that's all there is to it."

[@olidata13]

+kirillka I lost myself at Andrew

[@guepardo.1]

But you had me at hello.

[@pastorpottymouthcuckadoodl4288]

Lost me when I pressed play.

[@RyanShanks]

Excellent, thanks... Do you know if quantum computers while emulating classical computers will be any faster then classical computers (if many programs continue to work in the classical way will there be any point in using a quantum computer to run these programs)

[@kilyenbalazs6398]

Interesting. I started reading up on quantum physics, like a year ago, and only starting to understand it now. By the time i see this video there might be solutions to this. Would love to hear more updates on quantum physics news.

[@hariszhr]

At consumer level, you can always increase computing power by adding more cpu cores.

[@aliazxs]

+Haris R (hariszhr) yes but to add more cores that need to fit more transistors and there is limit for how small a transistor can be and soon we will reach there

[@omegasrevenge]

+Haris R (hariszhr) The minimum size of a transistor is about 20 atoms. Any smaller and the electrons start to jump around everywhere.

[@hariszhr]

abschussrampe u don't have to go any smaller. increase the die size, put more cores on it and optimize parallel processing. There are many tricks which can be used.

[@omegasrevenge]

Haris R Doesn't change the fact that there is a hard limit to this technology. Just like switching from old CRT monitors to new TFT monitors, we will also switch from the old transistor technology to whatever comes next, whether it be molecular computing or quantum computing.

[@hariszhr]

abschussrampe depends on wheb it gets cheaper to manufacture. Until then there are many tricks that can be used by intel and amd. Processing power for consumers and technological increment are 2 diff things.

[@laurentoutang8273]

mollecule valley

[@stifflery]

.....and then Quantum Valley lol

[@thekhenthul]

carbonite valley :)

[@sampanchakraborty1946]

Dr.Michio Kaku follows me on twitter,nice video on quantum computing.

[@ultort]

What can you do with qbits? What operations are possible? What kind of instructions will it possible to execute thanks with qbits that will shorten the resolution of some problems? If you get a quantum chip, what can you do? Addition qbits?Multiply them? I have some difficulties to find answers.

[@Yohska]

it took me 7 atoms to create that calculation, damn its harder than i thought

[@Gintoki7]

yo bro did u release ur calculation as open source code?

[@Buggerme75]

+qasim mumin lol

[@GoonOnFire]

What the hell is an Atom ?

[@geogmz8277]

intel cpu? lol

[@3dstar36]

An atom is smaller than a piece of sand you can't see it but everything in the universe is made up of atoms including the universe

[@3dstar36]

It's kinda hard to explain

[@GoonOnFire]

Science is over rated. No one needs this garbage anyhow.

[@shir0783]

+GoonOnFire Well lets just say that you wouldn't be playing your precious GTA without it...Fucking idiot.

[@indraputra1935]

2:56 thats why i love michio kaku lol

[@QueStion84Mark]

Thanks for the video. If the problem is dealing with interference, why can't "we" deal with it like with deal with MRI interference: a probe whose perturbation one can "subtract" from the signal. Classical computers are still pretty good at Fourier-Transformed to figure out a timeline, or timeangle, etc

[@danieljakubik3428]

Outdated lecture. Wrong. We now have a 50 Qbit quantum computer made by intel as of 2017.

[@shivamchanana8967]

Say hello to Sycamore!

[@Trackrace29582]

Well it came out 9 years ago

[@Djorgal]

"...just as the atoms in you body, making it useless" Hey!

[@omniflicks]

nice insights, molecular if a possibility before quantum just because of the sopistication and the expense of keeping it under control, I imagine some of these ultra precise systems are in essence ultra vulnerable, anyway I got a APU, is a turing machine in those AMD A10 APU's?

[@JaySmith-ky1wb]

now going to look into it

[@vonthadentubes]

I'm just a dummy, but if vibration is the problem, why don't they not only stabilize using vibration, but program using vibration? in other words, why not resonate the atoms at subatomic sounds? Wait, I didn't just Thanos the formula for anti-life, did I?

[@TropicalPriest]

"Would you buy a new computer if it has no meaningful upgrades from the last generation?" Well, that depends. Am I a thoughtless Apple fanboy addicted to their brand of commercialization?

[@absadelakun3288]

lol

[@scottg.4472]

How about using time crystals as the the processor to keep all the atoms moving at different frequencies then by using entanglement you build as many programs as you want say ten for example, then you build 10 very different types of code that the computer uses as a resource. since the computer can read each code at the same time and on multiple planes of possibility it should be able to narrow down the the most reasonable possibility in a matter of nano seconds.

[@RieComp]

Interesting indeed

[@xsrox420]

just a theory.... what if we could reach just about absolute zero then all brownian energy and therefore vibrations would cease to exist stopping those disturbances..

[@MrRahul123412]

kaku is a frickin legend

[@TheCliffjoseph]

-_-

[@wayan11111]

The more I listen to this dudes playlist the more I worry about the faulty information he feeds people. Quantum computers can't and were never conceived to be a replacement for silicon based computer. They give you exponential or quadratic speed in certain classes of problems but are limited by the same uncertainty principle inherent in quantum physics.

[@86vibrato]

Only because we need better tech at low temperature. The fact we can do even minor computations, however impractical the machine, implies it is indeed possible.

[@gogerychwyndrobwll341]

Nick Nowlin A quantum computer will never be as fast as a classical computer. This is not technological shortsightedness on my part, but a demonstrable reality: any quantum computer can run as a classical computer if you spend less effort on preserving delicate entanglements, and being less restricted, will run faster. A quantum computer's true advantage is in the kinds of algorithms you can run, not its raw speed. Where it has an advantage, it's the difference between doing a brute force calculation really fast and a more careful, but slower search. A quantum computer will likely be an accessory to a classical computer in order to get the best of both worlds.

[@86vibrato]

Gogerych Wyndrobwll there is no evidence for such a statement. Your argument is invalid

[@markusfrisk3054]

Nick Nowlin How so?

[@86vibrato]

the largest problem right now is making a system than can cool the atoms to a few degrees above K. but due to the nature of being able to spin the electrons in different directions, you can do computations using bits at any number between 1 and 0. binary code is no longer needed and much less efficient. although i think there are other methods ( biological computers, ect.) we will eventually find ways to make super cooled entanglement. weve already made leaps and bounds.

[@TKollaKid]

That's insane. This video just blew my mind.

[@Duqawnjohnson]

Man I can listen to this man all day.

[@viciadoemhalo3]

Why people buy speakers if the technology is the same for decades?

[@donaldderp1602]

derp

[@nickv8334]

did you really do not understand or are you trolling? it is not that people wil not buy computers anymore, they will just don't do nearly as often as now. now some people buy it every 1 or 2 years because new software and programs demand more power. but if computers wont get better anymore than they wont buy new computers until the one they have breaks down. just like how you would change a normal lightbulb for a led lamp to save energy but wont change a normal lightbulb for a normal lightbulb just for the fun of changing it.

[@viciadoemhalo3]

There is the fact that not everyone is able to buy nice computers, so people buy a cheaper one and then they buy a better one, that is what happens with speakers and cars.

[@ooodragon94]

we now already have a quantum computer thing is, we are working on some procedures to make that quantum computer stable since it can make serious error just by a small outside noise (vibration), that means it cant have coolers nor a magnetized storage with a writing head.like hdd. I'm looking forward how they would encounter this problem

[@shashi10ka]

the best explanation of Quantum Computer in KZbin.. thanks :)

[@CalebTerryRED]

half of this is just wrong. terrible explanation of super position, one half 1 and one half 0 does not make 1/2 or 2/3, rather it is both at once. it's way confusing, but oversimplifications this big destroy the main idea. quantum computers can do some stuff exponentially faster, but for watching KZbin and playing games they will never be any better.

[@rajinfootonchuriquen]

He is talking about the spin of particles. And there are molecule with different spins. Also Micho is a string theory physicist. I think he understand how work an giant magnet with radio waves.

[@musictest9999]

fuck. i've been studying computer science for 3 years. if this happens i will have basically wasted 3 years of my life :((((

[@Peralisc]

+Nataly RAW no, because it would still take a while move over to the next generation of pcs

[@moar555]

+Nataly RAW well read this answer on quora qr.ae/RbPUlL

[@MrPoutsesMple]

+Nataly RAW Try taking a quantum mechanics class on EdX. Or looking for a book on quantum computing for computer scientists. There are many out there. As it seems, quantum mechanics will be in the curicculae of future computer scientists. Anyways, worry not. I'm sure web development won't die that soon.

[@JardimPedro8]

+Nataly RAW i'm in the same situation. We'll just have to adapt. Also, those 3 years will not have been wasted. I mean, we both learned something pretty cool and useful in that time. Far from wasted if you ask me :)

[@diegomolinaf]

+Nataly RAW Well.. we're still using COBOL (created on the '60s!), for FSM's sake. You can't just replace every system in the blink of an eye. For some systems it takes YEARS, mostly because they already work and the risk and cost to replace them is too big. Besides, quantum computers are not for every kind of problem (so far). Google's new computer (that is 100 million times faster than a PC) was made for some specific problems (mostly Artificial Intelligence) AND quantum computers will need people to write programs for them. Who would do that? Of course, programmers, engineers and people with computer science degrees. In this trade, you should never stop learning. Get that mindset and you will be fine :D

[@Shimus36]

If there is coherence and decoherence, could you not recohere them in another process? One not thought of yet, but manipulate them so they stay in a similar state if they start to decohere? Then you may be able to stabilize on a micro scale

[@SilverYagi]

Hi, I have a suggestion. Would it be possible to suspend these atoms in an anti-gravitational chamber? Would it reduced the vibrational interference (decoherence)? I feel its stupid but its an idea right :) And I'm sure some genius out there can be able to figure out a pattern and come up with an architecture for programming the atoms once the atoms are stabilised.

[@davektver2863]

Ha! I'm smarter than a quantum computer! I've known for years that 3 x 5 = 15. On good days, 3 x 6 = 18. That's correct, right?

[@playnow254]

+DaveKtver Well, in absolute senses. From an efficiency standpoint, a quantum computer uses 5 atoms, you use... something like 7*10^27 atoms?

[@davektver2863]

Actually, I checked....on a good day I also use only 5 atoms via a single neuron. Anything more and my head hurts. I think I'll run for pubic office! :)

[@huesam3244]

+DaveKtver gross.....

[@erewrewrewrwerewrwerwerwer3443]

the art of talking and not say anything. Never answered the question: "How to Program a Quantum Computer"

[@jimdagas5020]

The art of not understanding the video. He literally said it is too hard to program quantum computers. If he knew hot to program one he wouldnt be here

[@thekhenthul]

but it was cool wasnt it? :>

[@warrenbrandt2572]

erewrewrewrwerewrwerwer werwe It's easy with Qbasic v10000000000000

[@jessstuart7495]

He might have a career in politics.

[@ivandamico93]

XD Hey I learned QBasic on my Radio Shack TRS- Q80!

[@ecartman1214]

The main problem with making smaller and smaller transistors is that eventually small atom sized transistors also decohere like qbits due to quantum tunneling. Quantum tunneling is a phenomenon in the quantum wave function where a particles area of probability resolves itself beyond a point which it shouldn't, like when an alpha particle ejects from a nucleus. Essentially the electrons tunnel through the transistor and are a 1 when they should be a 0.

[@quantumqaucker363]

He’s so cool he made me want to become a physicist and it’s a good thing I’m thirteen because I still can make strides in that direction

[@NathanTAK]

Ah, yes. A theoretical physicist who thinks he knows what programmers fear. You know, not what we find new and exciting.

[@sahilgupta5667]

Memory management is pretty fucking important.

[@azmanfirdaus7636]

Would like to hear him again in 2022..!

[@ura239]

AWESOME STUFF.

[@thekhenthul]

will quantum computers modify something in the way the end developers code things with their ifs elses whiles etc? the algorithm logic will change in some way?

[@thetruth45678]

De-coherence sounds like a time problem. Is there a quantum equivalent of a clock in these things? What if you pushed it to de-cohere in a certain way, could it be brought back to coherence knowing how it fell apart? Perhaps you could flip it back and forth and time things to get the working computational state you're after?

[@andramoie]

+thedrew4you Decoherence is more or less the loss of information to the enviroment and is therefore not reversible. However there is a thing, that is called quantum error correction, where you implement the q-bits in such a way, that you can guess quite well, what the state of the q-bit was, before some error happened to it. However this only works well if your noise is beneath a certain and also requires much more q-bits for storing the same information. At the moment we are neither able to get our noise low enough, nor are we able to provide enough q-bits, so we can't use it at the moment.

[@oysteinsor]

I don't have to know one bit of electronics to program in assembly language. But you have to know elecronics if you are going to make a cpu, or make a chipset etc.

[@peterpratsch7223]

How does one create a more stabile environment or where can a more suitable one be found.

[@jessstuart7495]

The thing about quantum computers is that you have to specially configure them for the problem you want to solve. The 3 and 5 numbers are "hardwired" into the computer's architecture. A useful general-purpose computer will have to be able to store and process data, so I don't see the need for memory going away anytime soon. Using quantum properties to exponentially increase database query speed would be an interesting application. Decoherence and noise are huge problems quantum computer folks don't like to talk about.

[@CockatooDude]

Well now we have the D-wave, so that's a start. I mean it has done some pretty amazing calculations so far.

[@PineNutButter]

great video.

[@dhimanroy1671]

Very Amazing!!!

[@dragons10000]

So if you shoot atoms from the MRI machine, that means you have to control the MRI in someway, and this can be also done by typing in a keyboard how much atoms to fire. Programmers wont go away, they just have to evolve a little bit to the new tech.

[@sonofhendrix1618]

There's also something called optical light speed computing, where they shine a laser through a liquid crystal display and measure the interference pattern.

[@82spiders]

I think there is a problem with optical computing involving traditional 'and' gates.

[@optionsking8623]

My question is, if will quantum computers result in, say, quantum powered robots? And if so, how will this change research in this field e.g. will there be major differences or will it be the same with higher power and slightly different/ the same programming languages?

[@dhruvgandhi1262]

I tried to use this but it didn't work, I keep getting the message This option is not available. Please see --help for all possible usages.

[@tas6967]

Well said

[@kathypetty8996]

Interesting topic

[@pisse3000]

I love this guy so much.

[@devilsMovieBull]

does this mean computer wil be incredebly cheap in the future? :D, or do i have to hurru up if i want to buy e new laptop?

[@aimanhujazi]

I don’t know why this is showing in my feed, but hey, we broke the world record for quantum computing by an order of magnitude just 9 years after this video

[@melcans4865]

thats what im thinking about the quantum computing the first time ive heard about it.. STABILITY... transistorized microchip might be slower than that of quantum but.. you can calculate everything.. whilst atomic chip cannot be predicted because electrons are moving so fast that you cant see or guess its movement.. quantum can be done but theres a bif BUT along the road,.. i see bigger microchip though to make it more faster performance and reliability wise..

[@Zer0Mem0ry]

Can you for example; implement C/ASM for quantum processor? Could someone give me example of 'quantum assembly code' ?

[@RoswellNight]

Those languages were created specifically for controlling a Turing machine kind of computer - sequences in memory. QCs don't have a sequence of memory and instructions. One would need to devise an entirely new paradigm of programming, one that throws out any kind of classic turing machine notions... Unless there was an external control unit. Then ASM would be necessary for speedy control and timing of qubit manipulation. Does this make sense? XD

[@astroferreira]

VirtualCoder You would need first to understand how QM operators operate in quantum states to develop a type-set programming language for QC. You can run a quantum algorithm in paper like Shor's using the advantage of the Quantum Fast Fourier Transform and such, but the catch here is to use phenomena from quantum mechanics that are essentially very diferrent from what we are used to in classical physics. If you do understand quantum mechanics, its mathematical language of linear algebra will be your 'quantum assembly code'.

[@helluvaRoman]

No, he did mention using an MRI machines to align the atoms and program them.

[@martinhirsch94]

Interesting video, and quite useful, but it doesn't answer the question posed in the title, "how to program it." Classical computers perform math and logic operations based on boolean algebra, which I understand quite well, having been trained as a computer technician on pre-microprocessor systems. How do the logic and architecture and hardwired instruction sets compare between classical computers and quantum computers?

[@martinhirsch94]

In other words, show me a diagram, a flow chart and/or truth tables that explain their ability to process information.