Quantum Computing - The Qubit Technology Revolution

[@Wowzersdude-k5c]

Excellent panel with an awesome moderator. He asks pertinent questions, gives the guests equal time, and lets the panelists talk. No interjecting with corny jokes or pontificating on topics beyond his expertise (unlike one past moderator whom I shall not name).

[@AurelienCarnoy]

15:06 She is really good at explaining what she does with simple analogy. I feel smart just by listening to here. That is how good she is.

[@chrisschoenfeld4414]

At first I felt I might be able to follow her, but then I realized she’s a fucking quantum computer machine architect and I am a caveman.

[@rhodeislandstudios]

Proposed question Quantumn computing? Resolving Pi - Resolving Pi (First) Say you calculate Pi to 127 decimal points and then represent that as a spiral in 3D software, then in 3D modelling software take the 127th decimal point calculation and pull it outwards along the X axis…. Would the resulting analogy be a representation of containing infinity at least mathematically speaking? So instead of using an ‘X axis’ why not compute it around a circumference equation? Would you then have an infinite loop? Does that in effect resolve Pi? (Then) Creating Entropy in Robotic Systems So if you calculate that Last Formula (The description of resolving Pi) to 128 decimal places instead of 127 and then ‘calculate’ would that then create entropic failure in robotic systems to be used as a ‘Stop all failsafe program’ ?

[@TheNaturalLawInstitute]

This conversation was one of the most useful discussions with the least 'woo woo' or 'dumbing down' that I've seen. Well done by all involved.

[@klumaverik]

You have the most amazing guest.

[@sayresyDevino]

Great panel that got me entangled...

[@WorldScienceFestival]

Glad to hear you enjoyed this panel!

[@doodelay]

Julia Kempe is the most brilliant woman I've ever seen. She's got a PhD in both Mathematics and Computer science and holds a Master's in Theoretical Physics while working on Quantum Computers and Finance.

[@michaelparham2711]

Very impressed by Jerry Chow! Way to go Jerry!!

[@b.entranceperium]

I have seen how limited my intelligence is after watching this. Amazing use of grey matter by the panel 👏 👏 👏

[@hyacinthechaigne6398]

That's amazing, this topic really interest me but I'm unable to stay focused more then 2 mins on books... Watching this video really helped me. I enjoyed it.

[@adamroach4538]

WSF is like the new Nova.

[@_John_Sean_Walker]

Like Nova, it soon will be gone.

[@adamroach4538]

@@_John_Sean_Walker Everything must come to an end, but we have a chance to enjoy it while it's here.

[@_John_Sean_Walker]

Coach Normally, I enjoy channels like Nova and WSF a lot! But on this subject I want to pull their legs as hard as I can, but only to shake things up. For twenty five years they claim to present us the quantum computer next year. We are almost ready, they say. But when you look at this video you will notice that they avoid the question how we should program this computer. They come no further than an "or" and an "and" and when we ask a little further they start talking about a "search" or a security code. Literally everything they claim here the quantum computer can do, we already can do with a standard labtop. Except maybe that security code they speak of, but that one was cracked already during the development period, right here on KZbin. And they admit that they want to crack YOUR security code, not increase your security. Who their client is, is unclear. Now imagine that you are programing a computer, and you have to jump to a subroutine (call) when a condition is true and just go on when false. When the bit is "1" you jump, and when the bit is "0" you just don't jump and go on with the rest of the program. This is the most basic and simple idea of any computer program. Now let them write the code for this conditional jump on their quantum computer when their "bit" is not 1 and not 0 at the same time. There is not a single soul on this entire planet that could answer this question. The quantum computer is NEVER going to work!

[@WorldScienceFestival]

@@adamroach4538 We hope to be here spreading the word about science to the masses for years to come. We appreciate your support.

[@malachi5813]

yah was but now its redundant and like ted, same shit nothing new.

[@himzo05]

Is it possible that World Science Festival is recorded with something like 10 year old Chinese CCTV?

[@crazieeez]

32:08 I have been looking for a simple video explanation of Grover's algorithm running on a quantum computer. Jerry Chow explained it clearly. I am very grateful. Seems like in quantum programming, you start with all possible answers express in the number of entangled qubits and the encoded problem or your search for the answer is in the Oracle. Through a combinations of quantum gates, from all possible answers, one answer comes out as the right answer.

[@ChintanPandya01]

WSF gives me hope and entertainment.

[@WILEY104]

awesome panel awesome moderator

[@naimulhaq9626]

50 Qubit QC of IBM can't solve problems or error correct and even if they do, we don't know. In the next 100 years we may study parts of QC function, but we will never know how coherence is achieved, in other words, we will never know the algorithm. The NSA guy said it: I hope it never work.

[@m.hassan9157]

salam .can plant routes play role in communication because wood of different plants have specific frequencies .

[@algonte]

That an electron in the same quantum state can be seen in different location after several measurement doesn't mean that before measuring the electron was in several places "at the same time". Maybe is more adequate to say that the electron before measurement is "nowhere" precisely.

[@pdelong42]

Is it just me, or was there an awkward silence at 46:00 (when Seth recounted how the NSA would "want the first one")? Everyone's like, "um, yup, no shock there, nothing more to say... moving on..."

[@ponyperson7513]

I'm just wondering, how would a quantum playstation work? would be AWESOME, but I'm still curious

[@ChintanPandya01]

High end graphics complex simulation games. That's about all, practically.

[@ponyperson7513]

@The Truth of the Matter thank you good sir, you illustrated exactly what I was saying, the misconception of new technology is far to widespread

[@ponyperson7513]

@The Truth of the Matter the problem is, most people don't look into it and the words of popular figures as fact, they don't get that it is simplified to make it more accessible to more people

[@biniamyifter1139]

Can we use a quantum computer to predict the possible long term outcomes of interspecies mixing of genes ?(Eg releasing genetically modified mice to the wild, trying to grow human organs in pigs...).

[@Liam-fu4ly]

This is great, thank you

[@WorldScienceFestival]

Thanks for your support!

[@yusriplanner4666]

15:00 light sabres

[@hannibalbarca8689]

What is the functional difference between a quantum computer and Quaternary based computer?

[@BurningDownUrHouse]

Watch the video and find out.

[@gregurbanek186]

It is never wise to put the cart before the hoarse. A quantum computer operates in a nexus. The laws of physics do not apply in the gray area of this nexus.

[@vrzrea795]

Thanks for the work done!

[@stephenmneedham]

Different ways of doing the same thing. Regardless of how you're doing it, what can you do with it?

[@BurningDownUrHouse]

It's about doing it faster. The same computation that would take a classical computer billions of years to do would take a quantum computer minutes to do.

[@MrZyphose]

Who uses computers to perform computations? I would say, Your average person uses computers for gaming or for social interactions. These are "underneath" computations. They serve a purpose but almost nobody really understands how or why they work. If you had a computer that runs every possible variation at once instead of three to five per a finite number of processors.

[@MrZyphose]

..it would take forever. The answer has to have an an intelligent question. The answer would be "42" because they don't know what the question is?

[@btno222]

Wow something learned, neurons and ions and super positions through by either microwave or laser beam now from traditional, Si which i believe this can be improved by utilizing/ achieve on the Diamond type element(Graphene) cpu with its infostructure now can contain atoms and neuron and by photo phosphorus light infared or laser beam maybe microwave my vision of the Diamond carbon cpu looks way more like a diamond cube with is facets internally to be better controlled of what you guys are trying to explained with is gases encomppassed in this diamond processor cube, the size is 7"x7x"7" cube and thensolve temperature problems

[@HughMartell]

During the floods in Winnipeg -2008, God told me to build an ark. ME: whats an ark? GOD: it's a boat and I want you to build it 38 cubits by 22 cubits. ME: what's a cubit? GOD: gee I used to know what a cubit was. Well, when you get that done, I want you to find and load all the animals on to the arc. And when you get to the rabbits, take TWO and ONLY two!

[@3rdeye795]

So exciting 😝!

[@Badmanxl5]

I still can't figure out how they overcome the decoherence problem.

[@ferlim1551]

Im not sure either but i think they overcome decoherence with creating a very controlled enviroment,is that what you wondering?

[@truthseeker1364]

So they are trapping spirits from a parallel universe

[@meows_and_woof]

Can’t wait to have quantum PC at home That would the whole different level

[@johngray3494]

The lack of software!

[@BurningDownUrHouse]

@@johngray3494 For now.

[@stephenmneedham]

Took a while buy they got there.

[@boonga585]

57:52

[@btno222]

Its almost as if this type of computer will not give me a direct answer, but rather a machine language answers of probabilities of what our questions are or in order to solve is, neither a yes or a no but rather, how?, then it seems if we want it(qubitcpu) to act like a traditional computer in the software created for this type of computing if its as simple as a question the quantum computer will according to what we want to do it almost as if it will created the gui interface for us of probabilities to check off as a control to come up with the defiabale 1, 0, binary in traditional computing anser that we can understand and envoke with like a few probabilities when it spits out the factoring gui then opions and then have to like in math reduce its answer to its simplest form.

[@honestcheetah]

Well someone helped themselves to the backstage mimosas. =)

[@annabeatasohalmy9612]

A nép boldog=csapat építő tréning, elegedettebben dolgozik, épül a cég, nem mellesleg jó lesz a légkör. Dicsőség Istennek.

[@boonga585]

27:25

[@boonga585]

17:17

[@glutinousmaximus]

There is a great deal of hype surrounding quantum computing, but really, the results so far have been rather disappointing. The potential is there - but it's so difficult (and expensive!) to do the engineering, to create the software and get the performance that will outstrip any normal computers. But if that's what you want, don't hold your breath :0)

[@pauldriscoll6319]

Anyone worry that if these guys get this stuff to work all our bank accounts belong to them :P

[@nicolaywoods4987]

The real question is.... can quantum computer play doom

[@amnesiai]

Just let our future AI overlords figure it out...wait please don't do that.

[@3lapdog637]

Weird how this feels like an advertisement...

[@zackblack1824]

I gained ten I.Q. points just from liking this video.

[@johngray3494]

I wonder if you calculated that on a quantum computer, because they are still full of bugs.

[@curtiswalton8784]

Is the IBM guy using an apple?

[@tru-b1o]

The smartest women I have ever seen.

[@thekaiser4333]

Is it edible?

[@donfox1036]

Nobody explains why it took so long to develop a useful quantum computer..

[@johngray3494]

They are afraid to lose their jobs.

[@AlexiLaiho227]

mathematicians always write about having a "maximally entangled system of n qubits" but we aren't even sure if that's physically possible. right now the primary problem is fidelity: if we had perfect quantum bits that never interacted with their environment unless we wanted them to, then we would've already achieved quantum supremacy at around the 40 qubit mark. but as he said during the video, we need to build ones that are like 400 qubits in order to make ones that have the same computing power as 40 idealized qubits, because of all of the wavefunction collapse. the main barrier is fidelity and isolating the system from outside influence.

[@bntagkas]

listen at 1.5x speed...much better oh wait its just me

[@sexyrebel8542]

Right, can I worship you now?

[@annabeatasohalmy9612]

Nem árulok én zsákba macskát. Se szó szerint, sem képletesen. Dicsőség Istennek.

[@paulgacina7076]

Someone friend me and teach me quatum physics,, there is so much...

[@dreed7312]

Nope. I'm 10min into this and think its a flop. This would be a weird group of people to be in a lifeboat with.

[@christinewhite4583]

certainly more reassuring though i think.

[@whirledpeas3477]

It is sad times when we need to build computers to tell us what truth and love is.

[@TonyMontana-bm3np]

Bad sharpness. :(!

[@seditt5146]

Dude... Quantum computers are the dumbest shit I can think of after I learned Standing waves are considered to be in Super position. If one has ever seen the surface of Water as a bowl is vibrated they are seeing the Equivalent of their Qbit. Why the hell do we go through this BS to stabilize when it would be far easier on a Macroscopic scale. Yes it would be a bit slower but that is kind of a relative term anyway/.

[@hanniffydinn6019]

Proof of parallel worlds people.......!

[@hanniffydinn6019]

zztop3000 yes !

[@johngray3494]

My world is parallel to your world, but the quantum computer has nothing to do with it Dinn.

[@hanniffydinn6019]

John Gray of course not, accept that they show parallel worlds exist.

[@johngray3494]

Dinn, when your brain sees parallel worlds, it means that your brain is half way in a learning process.

[@edzardpiltz6348]

@@johngray3494 you shouldn't tease people like that. That is not spiritual! But then again, maybe it is... ;)

[@naimulhaq9626]

Like Lloyd said, it sucks. The state of QC is such that you do not know what you are doing and what you want done (besides factoring huge primes). Maldecena claimed that the universe acts like a QC. Better still our senses, our brain (pineal gland) and all our cells have QC capabilities simulating protein production, moulding our behavior, sentiment and emotions etc., enabling us to make decisions, choices etc. No one studies these naturally occurring QC. Sure it is difficult to scientifically simulate and show how QC can help us invent new medicines or new algorithm etc. It is like when we discovered telescope we had to study the eye and find out how optics works (Ibn Haytum).

[@_John_Sean_Walker]

I asked my old ICT professor, and he said that you can never find a programmer for that nonsence computer.

[@germenexsagitario]

👽👽👽

[@theoschijf8155]

There is soo much poppycock in this discussion. Funders can rest easy .... there will be no quantum decrypting for a few hundred years to come. It is not going to happen next year, salaries do have to be payed, so keep funding please, otherwise the fun stops. Even when quantum decryption is getting closer (in a hundred years) we just make the keys a factor 1000 larger (doubling is not enough, I know) and decrypting is out of reach again. Let’s keep doing the research on quantum ‘computers’, let’s not make these idiotic promises for the near future. However, I do sleep much better now the QC has computed that 15 = 3 x 5.

[@gregurbanek186]

Dear Seth Lloyd, the world does not need another comedian. Please stay focused on science. Take a brake from the mind altering substances. Remember Seth, vanity is the devils favorite sin.

[@d3bbi339]

I won

[@texantom49]

Each one of these people give me the creeps

[@sorg3ns]

Why?

[@_John_Sean_Walker]

They are the flat earthers of computer science. They deny the processor.

[@EvikeMVo]

never has water in the form and shape of cloud fall down, much less remain held to ground-level from being not pulled by "gravity" or better called: graflirty -the imaginary, made-up, unreal down-motional pull-force made-up by Masonic-based, Devil-praising, wicked liar: Isaac Newton who died in 1666... (last 3 digit of the year corresponding to Number of the Beast or Antichrist as written and forecasted about in Bible Revelation)

[@gnair124]

I am a big fan of WSF, but this was the worst hosting of all the sessions I have seen.

[@lillianrose4658]

The pushy handball correspondingly enjoy because servant socially ignore anenst a steadfast patch. necessary, thirsty handle

[@brianasasthap9041]

The pathetic range approximately push because coat tinctorially admire per a coherent word. chunky, befitting year

[@sofyantaim3672]

بسمك اللهم اعني على قول الحق من السذاجه ان تنضر لشخص يتصنع الكلام وبنفس الوقت يحاول ان يشتري الغير في كلام يقصد به انه غير مبالي يعني انه ناقص اَي مشرع رجل فاشل حسبي الله ونعم والكيل والا اله الا الله وحده لا شريك له سبحانه

[@timoth88]

Pretty terrible. I've seen much better from WSF.

[@ChintanPandya01]

Of course there is an Asian American on this panel😜