Physicist explains quantum computers | Guillaume Verdon and Lex Fridman

Lex Fridman Podcast full episode: • Guillaume Verdon: Beff...
Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors:
- LMNT: drinkLMNT.com/lex to get free sample pack
- Notion: notion.com/lex
- InsideTracker: insidetracker.com/lex to get 20% off
- AG1: drinkag1.com/lex to get 1 month supply of fish oil
GUEST BIO:
Guillaume Verdon (aka Beff Jezos on Twitter) is a physicist, quantum computing researcher, and founder of e/acc (effective accelerationism) movement.
PODCAST INFO:
Podcast website: lexfridman.com/podcast
Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS: lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/
Full episodes playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast
Clips playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast Clips
SOCIAL:
- Twitter: / lexfridman
- LinkedIn: / lexfridman
- Facebook: / lexfridman
- Instagram: / lexfridman
- Medium: / lexfridman
- Reddit: / lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: / lexfridman

[@LexClips]

Full podcast episode: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bpeodpWBf9SBmLc Lex Fridman podcast channel: kzbin.info Guest bio: Guillaume Verdon (aka Beff Jezos on Twitter) is a physicist, quantum computing researcher, and founder of e/acc (effective accelerationism) movement.

[@tedfryxell3666]

No clue what he said 😮

[@whatsgoingtohappennext]

Techtronics is mine. If you want to know. We can make a deal

[@whatsgoingtohappennext]

Better

[@whatsgoingtohappennext]

Lesson..( I, t. ) Can't B switched. = B can b switched. < crossroads = t×( T⁹) + ME, X , I, C, AN⁹ < mine.

[@noduslabs]

Why did you even invite this AI? It generates word sequences OK, but it's not even as good as ChatGPT and it doesn't make sense. Please, wait for a couple of years until inviting another word replicator, because it's a waste of your energy.

[@brianwade8649]

After struggling with this for hours, it finally hit me... I have absolutely no clue WTF he's talking about.

[@mcm4981]

This is why I go to comments first for vids like these...

[@markberman6708]

Neither does he.

[@unspecialist]

He is talking about something with a delivery truck

[@joshallen4848]

Bro, it took me about seven minutes to realize this wasn't a Jumanji commentary clip.

[@anms2023]

this fool says right at the end of almost every sentence

[@Twittchyy]

If this clip was in Japanese I would’ve understood the same amount

[@MrGlitch888]

that was good

[@danielharrington5690]

Konnichiwa!

[@telesniper2]

That's because he's saying nothing useful, it's just a buzzword salad

[@fudrucker5469]

Apparently the best way to explain quantum computing can be best measured by how many times you use the word quantum in the explaination

[@Spooltech]

'Teeeny tiny *@@Catastrophe9726

[@alexbenzie6585]

Yeah imagine using the name of something while explaining that very thing😅

[@ccrider8483]

Don't forget about "entropy" which or course means a lack of predictability or randomness. Just the thing one does not need when trying to arrive at an accurate result. 15 years ago the fad term was block chain, now it is AI and quantum computing.

[@alexbenzie6585]

@@ccrider8483 you're just naming things they are working on what are they supposed to call them lmao 🤣

[@aga5109]

40 years of efforts to simulate the standard model on a computer has failed so far. " To perform such a simulation, one must first take equations expresses in terms of continuum quantities & find a discrete formulation which is compatible with the bits of information in which computers trade". 🤔 How could similar operation be possible as regards QFT- the Quantum Field Theory?

[@tucowept]

Oh OK, I thought this was going to be complicated.

[@roarblast7332]

That's funny. My first thought before clicking on this video was, "nice. Another video about quantum computers I'm not going to understand."

[@SKY_FATH3R]

@@roarblast7332why do you watch the videos then if you can’t understand?

[@roarblast7332]

@@SKY_FATH3R because I exist.

[@SKY_FATH3R]

@@roarblast7332 fair fair

[@dennismenace4188]

This video very eloquently demonstrated how dumb I am. Thank god for alcohol.

[@SFH99621]

Tbf he's horrible at explaining these topics. They're way simpler than his presentation.

[@Spooltech]

And here I was thinking Planck was an old trend missed out on...

[@kurtarbuckle1730]

It’s not you @d…4188.

[@197mmCannon]

I’m just going to start inserting “quantum” into everything I talk about now.

[@tj03297]

Quantum diarrhea

[@Ottee2]

Meet my two cats: Quanta and Quantum.

[@jhidalgo_]

You are quantum right

[@manfredullrich483]

My quantum cereals this morning were quite yummy, almost quantummy😂😅😊

[@Ottee2]

Guys, I just reviewed my checking account at the bank. It seems I need a quantum infusion of cash. 😲

[@nessiepitcher]

Quantum computers face the challenge of noise, which refers to unwanted and random fluctuations in the quantum state of qubits (quantum bits). Noise can arise from various sources, such as environmental factors, imperfections in hardware components, and interactions with neighboring qubits. There are several reasons why noise is a significant obstacle for quantum computers.

[@maskcode]

my neighbours downstairs are constantly challenging the quantum computer in my brain

[@anthonygato407]

just human observation instantly alters this. they create a clean room state for the immediate operation area but this acts as a bubble underwater pushing out that aether outside the bubble. so this then impacts the aether existing already outside of the bubble.

[@chociceandchips-xk5cc]

Gravy train IBM wont scale IQON shady Dwave smoke and mirrors Bla bla Think quasi analogue

[@ryanhughes1101]

@@chociceandchips-xk5ccwhat?

[@todaav]

@@maskcodemy neighbors upstairs the same

[@jimreplicant]

As soon as he started talking about cubits per Planck volume, I was like ok damn, this is on another level. They talk for 17 min after that😂 dude is a boss

[@hikingwithhollywood]

I know a Planck is extraordinary small unit of measurement (the fabric of the universe), but cubits per Planck volume is like asking me how many daisies per rock from Mars. That’s also where he lost me.

[@jimreplicant]

It kinda makes sense the more I’ve thought about it. When you’re trying to simulate the entire universe in a computer, you have to determine how much data there is down there at the bottom. Its like the universe in 720p as opposed to 1080p🤣

[@nathanielschmeling]

*qubits as in quantum bits. Not cubits as in the ancient measurement or cubics as in the modern measurements.

[@jimreplicant]

@@nathanielschmeling Oh right, I figured he didn’t mean like the actual ancient cubit. But I wasn’t sure what he was referring to. Thanks for clearing that up! So, if you could, what is the difference between a qubit and a regular old bit? I clearly have more reading to do🤣

[@nathanielschmeling]

@@jimreplicant Basically a bit is on or off, 1 or 0. That's why classic computers are binary, because they only have 2 states. Qubits can be on and off, which is a 3rd state. Since this 3rd state is really a combination of states, multiple operations can be run simultaneously (making quantum computers much faster and capable of operations classical computers are not--since they have an extra state). But this and the fragile nature of dealing with the subatomic makes it unstable or prone to errors by noise (unintentional flipping of states).

[@juneshasta]

Tonight I exist in a simultaneous state of watching this podcast and raising my glass to Richard Feynman, and you, and everyone.

[@justins5756]

Drink vodka

[@themafialp888]

Please ask your questions here. I don't understand why people are so confused about what Guillaume is talking about. So if you want I can answer your questions.

[@funnydashcamvideos1412]

Around the 6m mark Verdon mentions a few alternatives to do quantum… Do these alternative approaches cost less, perform better, etc?? What are the trade offs?

[@themafialp888]

Quantum Computing and Linear Algebra Quantum computing fundamentally differs from classical computing. In classical computing, information is processed in bits (0s and 1s), whereas quantum computing uses quantum bits or qubits. These qubits can exist in multiple states simultaneously, thanks to quantum mechanics principles like superposition and entanglement. Now, to understand and manipulate quantum systems, we often translate quantum mechanical scenarios into the language of linear algebra. This involves representing quantum states and operations using matrices. However, as the abstract points out, this translation can be exponentially inefficient. Why? Because the size of matrices needed to describe a quantum system grows exponentially with the number of qubits. This complexity is a significant challenge in quantum computing. Alternatives to Quantum Computing The abstract mentions several alternatives for building quantum computers: neutral atoms, trapped ions, superconducting metals, and photons at different frequencies. Each of these has its unique advantages and trade-offs. Neutral Atoms systems use atoms that have no net electric charge. They can be controlled and manipulated using lasers and magnetic fields. Neutral atom-based quantum computers are known for their scalability but face challenges in maintaining quantum coherence. Trapped Ions are charged atoms (ions) are trapped and isolated using electromagnetic fields. They offer high fidelity in qubit operations and are excellent for maintaining coherence. However, scaling up trapped ion systems is challenging. Superconducting Metals approach use circuits made from superconducting materials to create qubits. They are relatively easier to fabricate and integrate with existing semiconductor technologies. The downside is that they require extremely low temperatures to maintain their superconducting properties. Photonic quantum computing uses light particles (photons) as qubits. It's less susceptible to environmental noise and doesn't require ultra-cold temperatures. However, controlling and interacting photons for complex computations is currently a significant challenge. Cost, Performance, and Trade-offs Each of these approaches has different implications in terms of cost and performance. Technologies like superconducting qubits and trapped ions are currently at the forefront, but they are expensive, primarily due to the need for specialized equipment (like cryogenic systems for superconductors). Neutral atoms and photonic approaches could potentially offer lower costs, especially in scalability, but they're still in earlier stages of development. Performance in quantum computing can be measured in terms of coherence time (how long qubits maintain their quantum state), gate fidelity (accuracy of quantum operations), and scalability. Trapped ions lead in coherence time and fidelity, while superconducting qubits offer better scalability prospects. Neutral atoms and photons are emerging contenders with unique advantages in scalability and noise resistance, respectively. The trade-offs in choosing a particular technology for quantum computing revolve around cost, scalability, performance (coherence and fidelity), and technical feasibility. The ultimate goal is to find a balance that offers a scalable, high-performing, and cost-effective quantum computing platform. The abstract correctly highlights the ongoing exploration in this field, emphasizing that there's no one-size-fits-all solution yet. Each alternative brings something valuable to the table, and the future might see a hybrid approach combining the strengths of different technologies. @@funnydashcamvideos1412

[@aga5109]

​@@themafialp888Great explanation. Thank you!

[@phebrian]

Take a drink every time you hear quantum. 🍻

[@rezadaneshi]

:54 … we put many cubits per Planck volume …? “Some qubits are tiny (like the electron) whereas superconducting qubits can be upto centimeter sizes” Planck volume 10^-105 cubed meter. Electron radius is 2x10^-13 meters!

[@uhohDavinci]

He's straight up bullshitting. Mixing esoteric topics and buzzwords(quantum,a.i.) and hoping no one notices.

[@itsyaboyskinnnypimp42069]

I just realized im high like a mudafucka

[@jacqueslaurent]

🤣🤣🤣

[@reasontruthandlogic]

When trying to explain anything about quantum mechanics it’s difficult not to alienate most people in the first sentence, but I would say that this talk at least tried to keep non specialists onside. I have experience with maths and AI computing and only a casual familiarity with quantum computing, but this talk raised a few questions I’d like an opinion about. 1. The only computation which a quantum computer is so far known to be capable of which no fully deterministic digital computer is theoretically capable of in finite time is the generation of a genuinely random number, as opposed to a pseudo random number. Are there any other known tasks which a quantum computer is capable of theoretically which a digital computer is not? 2. If the answer to question 1 above is no, then is there any useful computation a quantum computer can theoretically compute, or otherwise generate a result for, which a digital computer cannot also compute given time? 3. An analogue computer operating under deterministic physical laws has the same range of comparable tasks as a digital computer, which Turing showed can compute any task which is theoretically computable. Therefore is there a theoretical need to digitise the operation of a quantum computer? 4. If the answer to question 3 is no, would it potentially be easier to construct a powerful quantum computer which was fully analogue rather than forcing it to perform discrete operations? 5. Wouldn’t it be fare to say that the physicist in this interview was failing to distinguish clearly the crucial difference between objective physical reality and its representation in our awareness of it?

[@reasontruthandlogic]

“comparable tasks” in question 3 here should read "computable tasks".

[@aga5109]

For an answer to your 5th question, please refer to a brilliant book, "The matter with things" by Iain McGilchrist. I'm finishing the first volume. He also wrote a chapter on the Quantum Field Theory referring to expertise of the experts from this field. I think we don't really know what reality contains and how it works on the most fundamental level. Different experts use different paradigms to interpret the phenomena. Quantum fields, morphogenetic fields. Ultimately, what we perceive and process is the left hemisphere of the brain's representations of the world we take in. With the Quantum Mechanics, it is not linear, but still, "the computation" is mechanical, which is only the part of the picture as opposed to the right hemisphere's take/ processing, which is more in touch with the reality as it is. It is as far as l understand for the moment. P.S. Lex, if you read it, would you mind recording one episode that refers to quantum computing, if possible, where the technical terms are explained? We will appreciate it! Thanks!

[@robertFat804]

I believe quantum computing would be useful in codebreaking as well.

[@dr_UiD]

"The best way to predict the future is to invent it" i will ad this to my vocabulary

[@WokerThanThou]

Wasn't that Alan Kay's quote in the 1980s?

[@bat__bat]

Anyone that actually knows a system well enough to teach it SHOULD be able to form analogies to compare the components of the system to other more familiar systems that people likely already understand. There's no bedrock anywhere in his explanation to compare/contrast how a quantum computer works LIKE a modern day desktop computer or like a server or even like a data center. I know he used a few analogies, but they had nothing to do with computers. I think the focus of the conversation is more about the difficulty of making a Q computer, not much on how it works. There's nothing that can't be made more understandable, tho. But of course the student plays a part in that. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt because viewers of this video could be any range of education level so he's probably given up on finding what level of education he needs to explain within. If he's explaining at a +graduate school level, then I'll admit I'm lost because of ignorance. I can explain how a pilot excited synchronous generator's system is analogous to a gas water heater for people to more easily understand, but I can't make any sense of this. 😂

[@Sif3r]

Because it's nothing like our current systems.

[@gl0bal7474]

agreed

[@phoenixmodellingphotography]

He gave a very quantum explanation. I don't have a quantum fuckin clue what he was talking about either though

[@ryanhughes1101]

Lex mocked him at one point based on the same sentiment.

[@nzer19]

He sounds like someone who doesn’t really understand what he’s talking about. Anyone with true understanding would be able to use analogies (even imperfect ones) to connect with the listener. He even seems to avoid answering lex’s questions and throws in superfluous use of the word “quantum” to deflect.

[@slamminsammons8615]

Finally! Lex hasn’t posted a video since last year

[@daniel4412]

You must be a teacher

[@PrOphetOp]

Speak for yourself future human

[@martinwagner7361]

Indeed, Lex is such a bad & lazy boy....😋

[@scottmattern482]

What's 2024 like?

[@osiris654]

HNY everyone 🇨🇦

[@Chris-sl6op]

Lex's face at 6:01 is priceless 🤣 Seriously wtf am I listening to? This clip reminds me that when im feeling smart, actually, I am not! Lol

[@aga5109]

There are different types of smart, meaning different types of intelligence and expertise.

[@imPyroHD]

People mocking the speaker for having a hard time simplifying the concepts can't even begin to understand how hard it is to do such a thing at a level this high while maintaining a certain level of rigor in your explanation. I taught classical mechanics at uni level to maths/comp sci students, and trust me, conveying physics to people who arent familiar with the field is quite hard if you're not used to it, there is a fine line between explaining things as they truly are and simplifying so much that your explanation becomes wrong. If its not easy for a topic like classical mechanics then i cant imagine how hard it must be for Guillaume Verdon to do that with a topic as complex as quantum computing.

[@IIGappleJaxII]

You must admit this sounds almost like he is lying😂 and making up big words

[@imPyroHD]

from an outsiders point of view i can understand that it sounds like that yes, but my first comment's point was to say that its not the speakers fault, its the topic thats to "blame"@@IIGappleJaxII

[@Spooltech]

fair@@imPyroHD

[@mrsugar2352]

Exactly. So many silly people putting their hands up for the stupid register without even realising

[@Papageno123]

yeah, but then you look that he actually publishes cited research. It also depends on ur level of laymen knowledge. I am a laymen, but I understood everything he was saying. Although personally I'd want more detail into specific research. @@IIGappleJaxII

[@scottt3269]

I love the comparison between using quantum computers for classical computing and using a space rocket for delivering something across the city. That one line really helped bring the issue into perspective for me. We want to use quantum computers for the computing equivalent of space travel (calculating quantum systems and entanglement), not for the computing equivalent of delivering packages across a city (running quake).

[@orion789]

He needs to write for Star Trek. I'm sorry. He's incomprehensible.

[@user-gh3su9nt7l]

I thought this would be tough but it was as simple as it gets .... I can now totally build a quantum systems from water

[@ashawalker5986]

That made me laugh 😂

[@stupidity_incarnate]

Just make sure you get plenty of investor money for your startup before you do 🤑

[@user-gh3su9nt7l]

@stupidity_incarnate already explained to them that a great is always a mystery, as does my quantum benediction for a quantum system built by a quantum conscious being

[@francocastan7451]

I’m still amazed at how Lex always stays in the conversation given the varying complexities to what he discusses on the podcast.

[@juliocortez5209]

why? hes an mit grad...not exactly the guy next door

[@armandiic791]

Im definitely the neighbor

[@paulbradbury5792]

I've watched a LOT of similar videos and this was one of the better ones. After watching this a quantum computer as I understand it is the digitization of a lot of (seemingly interdisciplinary) physical systems at the subatomic level and assembling that data such to model this physical system in I suppose an attempt to try and predict it's behavior. What he said about error correction and entropy, this makes much more sense to me now how that is the challenge with quantum computers. I think of it like seeing a car and not knowing how a car exactly works but breaking it down into each individual component of what a car is made of, assembling it into a model of a car, running that model and seeing if it can help predict the behavior of a real car and when it doesn't or doesn't exactly predict it you then try to find and correct the errors of why it didn't predict this behavior. I can see how AI and machine learning could aid in digitizing the physical world into data, as if you imagine a large language model AI like chat GPT how it can fundamentally give you a correct response when you ask it a question there must be something more there than just the millions of bits of data on the internet it analyzed to provide that response that if you could repeat it but without the need for the large language data then you could integrate it into a model of say climate change or geopolitics to help build a better model and this have better predictions. It is interesting to recognize that quite counterintuitively looking at massive volumes of data can give you an understanding of the most fundamental aspects of the world. I can see why others have noted that the future of such quantum systems and any practical application they may have will depend on the cooperation of or the integration of many disciplines at once, chemistry, biology, engineering, physics, computer engineering. Hell my heart doctor can't even talk to my damn kidney doctor about what is the best blood pressure medication for me to take both so my heart doesn't explode and so my kidney doesn't fail. If this is what we need to rely on for the success of quantum computers is interdisciplinary cooperation, we are a LONG way off from any practical applications!

[@ryanhughes1101]

So basically they are proving free will doesn’t exist.

[@TheScrewdriver09]

Take care of your heart and kidney, till they find a way to explain it dumbasses like me

[@alexortiz7446]

If he would have said this, i would have understood it way easier. Thanks 4 the explanation smart 0ne. Breed more

[@dahero35]

I enjoy feeling like I am back in kindergarden

[@khgriffi]

happy new year!!

[@flynntaggart7216]

0:05 "entinglement"

[@johnelwoodclarke5366]

I'm afraid that though I understand some of the words used being a physicist I didn't understand the meaning of the questions or answers.

[@theclop24]

When pumping entropy out of a quantum subsystem where does it go? Does it dissipate into the atmosphere?

[@davidagnew8465]

It just makes the world more random, much as your air conditioner warms the outdoors (very slightly).

[@robertFat804]

I understood the 'pumping out' as happening in the code within code ie digital? So in a way preventing the entropy in the physical ?

[@wooddog7128]

Oh ok, I think I have a handle on it... so with quantum mechanics, if you have a....oh look, a squirrel!

[@thelocalsmithy7266]

could quantum computers and hydrogen colliders with enough energy combined figure out how to warp space for lets say jump drives? I have been thinking that a more compressed hydrogen collider would be the key for space travel, idk just a fun thought i've had for a while. Like a hydrogen collider for the energy, then a quantum computer to figure out how to guide the energy into a bubble.

[@eddiemena1006]

Put the weed down

[@jimwest63]

A more fruitful approach would be to have someone prosaically explain what quantum computers can actually DO currently. If that is a bit underwhelming (as I strongly suspect), go on to explain WHY they can't do anything worthwhile yet, and what is likely to change that. At least at the end of that discussion, we'd get an idea if it really is something worth spending time even trying to understand.

[@marcinhibner9507]

All it is is volume of information transportation in with super large memory transportation in quantum bounce in which our time is our time super position has also time but not our time it's tiny sizes which are responsible for our time we can feel and calculate this all is controlled here at frozen state which gives control in frequency algorithmic sequenced towards input output. I think it's hard to get a good 100% equation output since its suporting calculations in cold state which has very delicate overal conditions of not knowing if your output is calculated the right way if its so huge and entropy and all well its cosmic and hence never ending eternally well nothing is something calculate that lots of hidden never perfect calculations are in equations especially working with quantum computers.

[@aga5109]

Thank you for your additional explanation. Thank you, Lex and Guillaume, for talking on this topic.I'm interested in it. It is not easy to understand for someone from outside of the area of expertise, not knowing the technical language. Nonetheless, it's very interesting. I will think it through & find out more to try to understand it.

[@bigmurph762]

This made me feel like I’m watching a foreign film without subtitles

[@MrTruman18]

Tim Ferris did an interview in 18’ with steve jurvetson, a Quantum Computer investor. That interview was interesting and allowed me to understand quantum computing without my eyes glazing over. This is all Chinese to me.

[@d1d234]

I followed what he was saying when he was saying it. I could not speak it back, but I can envision, very generally, what he was saying. He kept using the phrases/words “Representations”, “Algorithms”, “Removing Entropy to a zero energy state”, “Deep Machine Learning”. At no time did he answer the question, which is - What is a Quantum Computer or How do you make a Quantum Computer. He described the difficulties, which are prodigious. He also mentioned how much exquisite control they were able to develop over the machines and, I suppose that means the Quantum Sensors. This is where it gets interesting - the Quantum world, it seems to me, is ALL about either Zero Choice or Randomness. If everything was decided at the moment of the Big Bang (or whatever that moment really was) then all that we are doing and learning and thinking was all pre-determined and therefore Quantum Computing is just executing what was originally intended or made and all we are doing is useless and a chasing after the wind. If the Quantum world is RANDOM, then the effects of our actions and words and thoughts scatter the Quantum world and it’s constituents and all is governed by Schroedingers Equation, BUT, the effect of these Exquisite Controlled machines/sensors would be to disrupt the Superpositions (by measuring the Quantum items). In the end, it seems to me, are the Algorithms which are guiding the computations that computers are making, even in the AI’s - which are REALLY, at this point in time, just Brute Force Computing Systems. It seems to me that what is really going on at this point is more sophisticated Algorithms. Sophisticated Algorithms created by human beings being assisted by Brute Force Computing, UNLESS I AM COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTANDING the nature of Quantum Computing - if each Qubit contains an infinite number of possible states, when it is measured, doesn’t that Qubit drop into a Classical State and the Algorithm or Error Correction becomes the Definer of information. Even if one creates the ability to do these infinite state computations in a zero energy state grouping of Qubits processing manifold energy state Qubits at close to light speed rates, how does one KNOW that the answer is correct? It’s all up to the Error Correcting. Essentially an Algorithm. Perhaps I misunderstand the basics.

[@BillyBreezeArt]

Can I get one at Best Buy or Amazon ?

[@siddharthbirdi]

Ill need a msters degree in physics to undestand this.

[@Vshamann336]

Intelligence can perceive quality not just quantity. Computation is just dealing important, not quality for the most part.

[@B.E.Z.nOtLayZ]

13:11 That "theoretical thing", he just described, sounds kewl. An atom being manipulated to go between, what one might call, solid-state, and quantum state, to bring back information from the quantum realm to the solid-state realm.

[@naseemnasir]

The last time so many words were put together in such a meaningless manner we ended up with bitcoins.

[@Larrymh07]

Well, remember, there's always Jordan Peterson lectures.

[@Ottee2]

🤣

[@thephilosopher7173]

Although that is funny, the truth is, Bitcoins were the answer to a corrupt financial system (also backed by nothing). Unfortunately it was the greed of ppl that kept it from being that solution long needed. Well, at least the banks are hard at work figuring out a way to capitalize on its use.

[@naseemnasir]

Let's hope that it ends up being a force for good. And run spreadsheets. 😆

[@diegoyotta]

His explanation relating entropy to Ai, as Ai systems basically trying to represent the world with encodings, is spot on

[@aaronturner2234]

Happy new year from aus 🎉

[@TheAxtrex]

Great VIDEO! I didn't understand sh1t tho

[@MrDhalli6500]

Is it just me or was this like watching the turbo encabulator? Don't get me wrong I wish them total success getting a quantum computer to work, but explaining it to the average Joe, he may as well be speaking Greek.

[@karmaandkerosene2885]

Say what?

[@parousia2771]

lex what're your thoughts on non terminating decimals. also I solved Riemann hypothesis!

[@Heirpusher]

11:54 sounds like he’s describing what the computer is doing/process it’s using in that scene in DEVS where the characters are rendered out from the dead rat.

[@xaviergms2225]

I saw the title and got excited, 3:45 minutes in started to get a serious migraine trying to get my little brain to understand what was being said. Commented and went back to video games.

[@tarmicachiwara2973]

I think I now understand when my friends hear me talk but don’t understand me. I feel it now

[@hwago123]

Can he change a tire and hammer a nail though?

[@100NER]

what if black holes are making the expansion of universe , by catching and prosessing matter and then putem on bond of our universe?

[@Ragingcapitalist92]

I wonder if A.I observing the path of photons would effect its path like it does when we observe it?

[@TheToxicTank]

I would speculate that the outcome would be the same. I think this because the devices used now to observe wave/particle functions is already not human. I imagine that any observation would qualify.

[@WeighedWilson]

What happens to the path if I close one eye?

[@Ragingcapitalist92]

@@WeighedWilson if you’re not aware of what is being discussed you should probably move along so you don’t look ignorant

[@WeighedWilson]

@@Ragingcapitalist92 thanks for confirming something.

[@casanico2082]

This is more of the Lex needed in the world

[@BigMTBrain]

This was actually quite riveting to listen to.

[@VisibletoanyoneonYoutubes]

Did he change his curtains? Never seen that white patterned curtains before

[@Reticuli]

He spent a lot of time talking in circles, and said some things that are totally false, like as to what you can actually simulate.

[@paqman777yt]

Thermodynamic and Shannon entropy coupled in a Yin and Yang illustrates the harmonious yet dynamic relationship between the consumption and transformation of energy and information in the universe and the continuous journey of understanding by intelligent entities.

[@davidagnew8465]

Don't call us. We'll call you.

[@gwalchirk2072]

All it means is that ir could be 0 or 1 at the same time it spins . And until u srop it or neasure it u cant determine anything because they are linked or what they call entangled

[@alextaylor2551]

Pffff! Who would ever conflate classical and quantum deep learning?! It’s all about phase kick unoptimization of one’s super position.

[@joeroscoe3708]

Duh.

[@ChristopherSadlowski]

Even little babies in kindergarten know this...

[@ScoriacTears]

12:01 . . . the Fonz whacks the juke box says way hey points and winks.

[@vincentx8076]

Can you make a deep learning quantum computer to explain what a quantum computer is to humans writing a code redundancy algorithmic fridgirator aero corrections qbits frictionnal quality tresh hold maybe a quantum learning simulation like alphafold. To understand to pump entropy but not classical deeplearning because overhead sufficiabt systems that are relevant that are more quantum processing inputs from quantum sensors mechanical image of the world. Like fermi lab detecting dark matter (side quest) perception simulation probability perception of protein of electrons

[@vincentx8076]

I think i got it guys YAY! Happy new years yall

[@vincentx8076]

😂

[@JohnW704]

16 years ago i had an epiphany that realty is a simulation... the big bang started time? but it goes for ever, infinitely, so how could it possibly have a beginning? but what if you programmed a simulation with the sole purpose of trying to figure out how it started, (infinity)[everything came from nothing] what better way to make a simulation run forever than to give it an unsolvable problem...now it has a beginning with no end.

[@Eizenz]

I have questions. So a quantum computer is just a beefy computer? What I get from this is - people wrote/write code that is so difficult for normal machines to run they super cool this machine so that it doesn't melt itself while running? Is there essentially a simulation of our world (all the maths of what why how) and that is used to reverse engineer things essentially? It's interesting but reminiscent of Wizard of Oz.

[@DieTreppenwitz]

It's not a beefy computer. It's a computer in the sense that it can "compute". You're not gonna like watch KZbin videos on it. The main thing is that you can run a bunch of calculations in parallel. I think. That's about the most i could understand. With certain specific types of mathematical computation, traditional computers take forever. For instance, brute forcing an encryption or a password. A QC would be able to do this faster than a normal computer on orders of magnitude

[@wnllkmusic6842]

well, not really. there are apples and there are oranges - both are fruit, but have different tastes. quantum comluters are not better at what normal computers are good at and normal computers are not very good at certain things that quantum computers manage relatively easily (millions of years of runtime vs few seconds) - similar to why you need a GPU instead of using just a cpu for graphical processing. Because quantum computers are so different, code written for them is different than what normal code would look like - you woudn't be able to play video games on a quantum computer for ex. So, to summarize, quantum computers just opens up a bunch of new doors of data processing that is not practically possible with normal computers making them not necessarily better but just a distinct computer type that uses quantum mechanics rather than classical, similar to how GPU's allow extrodinary graphical processing like asvanced real-time ray tracing that would take a CPU a lot longer.

[@mattlange00]

I think words and speech are just inadequate here, we need like a 3D VR illustration along with it to increase the bitrate.

[@Al-gv5uw]

I think a good area of research for quantum is to make it more useable and understandable

[@snakejazz]

Just ask chatgpt to explain it however you would prefer

[@euclidofalexandria3786]

What if one can predict with 100% the next dice rolled on a d20-d100, or the next card pulled in a deck of cards... ive shoffled decks of cards and ordered them while shuffling...

[@supernewuser]

bro you can just say you don't know, we won't hold it against you

[@scabthecat]

Right, enough words. I need to see something.

[@mortram]

MRG-B5000B-1JR if anyone is wondering what watch he’s wearing

[@TheJlosupra]

These guys are on another level.

[@Dogscatsbikes]

“Spooky action at a distance” - Einstein on quantum entanglement

[@Ryuu0u]

So if i get this right he's basically talking about quantum computing + AI will lead to singularity basically? In a sense we would reach a new age?

[@jimmysnuka941]

Can’t wait to play Grand Theft Auto 15 on my new quantum PC

[@mrj3217]

How do computers that are just metal and plastic (the very basic parts that are the computers inner parts) take electricity and convert that in to what coding is? How do I play video games made on a computer. How?? Can that become anything???

[@nachooooo7019]

"Explains" 😂😂

[@ericchastain1863]

and the particles as schrödinger equations as is only a multiplexification.

[@FeralgenXwoman]

He looks just like any one of guys my step dad worked with at the OG Hewlett-Packard (Santa Clara Plant IYKYK) in the 1970's, right down to that jacket. :0) The same mind too.

[@victorcontreras5703]

I feel like he’s just using large jargon to do everything but answer the questions asked to him

[@trapsquad593]

I'm about to start this rabbit hole

[@travisk6212]

Uploaded precisely at the start of the new year 👀

[@jackkelly8677]

Time zones lol

[@marcinhibner9507]

Quantum computers are extremely delicate and superimposed with flaws in calculations on other states in superpositiong and things come int play that calculations might and will have more errors the higher the volume ftom smallest flactuations. Neutrinos are penetrative and more stuff that is setting itself from entropy states comping into play and will error quantum computers more then we can have feasible processing power to be used for our use. I think computer bio real like our brains maybe lab grown so thye are fresh:) unused like need to be placed into use rather then quantum computers in these cold states to much quantum maintance involved not feasible at all.

[@tu1469]

All you have to do is use extreme gravity to pack information into a point of almost singularity.

[@albin2232]

Quantum computers function by not existing.

[@Tim31NJ]

I'm convinced that I can learn Chinese from scratch before I'll even begin to understand 1 sentence about how a quantum computer works.

[@RoldanRR00]

AI will make understanding complex subjects easier and quantum computers will make computations faster. I can't see either reinventing the wheel in a meaningful or practical way. He said a quantum computer will eventually be able to simulate the universe, but at the same time it will be handicapped by not knowing if the universe is an infinite system or not. We should always be wary of GIGO (garbage in, garbage out).

[@MagruderSpoots]

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. He said if you had several qubits per planck volume you could simulate part of the universe. There are more planck volumes in the volume of a grapefruit than there are atoms in the universe.

[@RoldanRR00]

@@MagruderSpoots Call me a skeptic, I just don't think it will bear much fruit.

[@MagruderSpoots]

@@RoldanRR00 Definitely not if you run out of atoms before you finish building it.

[@aga5109]

Very good point! Thank you. Additionally : "To perform such a simulation, one must first take equations expressed in terms of continuous quantities and find a discrete formulation with is compatible with the bits of information in which computers trade...It remains one of the most important, yet rarely mentioned, open problems in theoretical physics. This suggests not necessarily that the simulation could not never be made but even if it could, it would involve translating the inherently continous nature of reality into the inherently discrete nature of machine process - a problem which might or might not prove intractable".

[@Sif3r]

​@@RoldanRR00GIGO, much like your analysis.

[@DanielSiemek]

This guy is the life of parties.

[@nathanielperrine782]

This guy needs to go watch a video on how to effectively communicate with other human beings

[@patrickcarter1820]

I think he doesn’t realize most people aren’t smart enough and or dialed into his level of expertise to follow his speech.

[@jasonkwatkins]

Worst voice cadence ever…

[@chesshooligan1282]

@@jasonkwatkins Have you ever tried to listen to Chomsky?

[@avvery8593]

@@jasonkwatkins He said on twitter this was directly after a flight from south korea which he did not sleep on.

[@AlburpCatstein]

Jesus Christ, Nathaniel 😂

[@Jjjjjjjjrrrrr]

Yet he still needs quantum Redbull drinks

[@michaelhendriksen3122]

Red Bull Entanglement

[@ryanarmasu4162]

I always thought I genius is a guy that can explain the most complex concepts in simple terms any body can understand. No geniuses around here!

[@IsendielBobLea]

He is indeed a hardworking dude more than a charismatic fast flowing brain but he good boii he tryin and work a lot respect lol

[@anastasiawhite7482]

Definitely wrong. Not every concept can be simplified for the layman, even the great Richard Feynman said this in one of his online lectures. He is talking directly to Lex Friedman who knows a lot about this stuff so it is easier to have a conversation with Lex than with you.

[@FullCircleTravis]

For everyone who is scratching your head, here's a explanation of some of the things he was talking about. Here's an easier way to understand quantum systems. You're looking at a screen. What is the screens image? Right now it's my comment on KZbin. It can also be a picture of a woman, a landscape, etc... A quantum explanation is that the image of the screen is any image that can be produced by the screen. This limited, but massive range of images that can be observed is the superposition of the screen. Intelligence, is the ability to observe a discreet image from the range of possible images, which makes the screen useful. You might see KZbin, but the superposition of the screen remains to be every image it can produce. You observe a useful image by ignoring everything else. We create reality the same way, by observing our conscious state and ignoring all other possibilities that can be created by the collective output of the superpositions of our neurons. So what does a quantum computer do. It calculates based on possibilities, while a traditional computer calculates based on defined values. The problem with defined values is that to reduce resources used, you have to scale the inputs down which massively effects resolution, especially when very minute measurable difference effect the output of an algorithm. So by using a quantum computer, you don't sacrifice resolution of variables used by the computer. Your answers can be very wrong when you use numbers that have been scaled, as small changes in very large systems can have a butterfly effect, and the point between chaos and order can be a single molecule on a razors edge.

[@feliksplotnikov6408]

Who on Earth, except specialists, can understand what he is talking about? This should be popularization of science

[@sunshineinarizona1726]

Great. Now, I've got to ask an AI to explain a quantum computer to me as if I'm a sixth grader.

[@ABDER333]

"We can simulate the whole universe, as long as we select a finite volume" Now im not a physicist but come the fuck on dude

[@robertFat804]

I believe he said assuming it's finite volume.

[@dbeelee8564]

Use of quantum sensors suggests communication. So, a quantum computer would parallel humanity, with a twist . Humanity being the collective of minds (sensors) communicating through something. The something includes language, emotional perceptions and or ideas, but being regulated by authorities (plural). The quantum computing twist is in the singularity of authorzed communication. Whether considered binary or entangled, it's still a choice by the coder. Restating his conquest: to make all computer virtuality parallel to physical reality in every way. Problem occurs when attempting to source ideas. Should identifying such a source and the access to it make quantum computers obsolete? Yes, yes it would.

[@aga5109]

40 years of effort to simulate the Standard Model on a computer have failed so far. "To perform such a simulation, one must first take equations expressed in terms of continuous quantities and find a discrete formulation with is compatible with the bits of information in which computers trade...It remains one of the most important, yet rarely mentioned, open problems in theoretical physics. This suggests not necessarily that the simulation could not never be made but even if it could, it would involve translating the inherently continous nature of reality into the inherently discrete nature of machine process - a problem which might or might not prove intractable". Iain McGilchrist "The matter with things". How does it translate to quantum computing ?

[@samik83]

Please explain it to me like I'm not a quantum computer scientist....No, explain it to me like I'm a 5 year old with ADHD

[@bananabrosinc.7357]

Lex is like this guy is giving me everything..

[@adigitalsmith]

I tried Extropic tropical flavor it made me more smarter and it tasted yummy