Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by ben6993 » Thu Sep 19, 2024 8:47 pm

Hi Fred

I think that what you are looking for isn't there in the paper. If Ballentine could have produced the QM formula using classical conditional probabilities and Bayes formulae then he would have done so. But he has pointed to a lesser target in a refutal that the classical formula for the 2-slit is as simple as had been assumed. He is saying that the condition that slit 1 only is open is condition c1, and for slit 2 only to be open is c2, and for both slits to be open together is c3. He is saying that the relationship between c1, c2 and c3 is not straightforward.

I think Fred's question about the existence of superpositions goes to the heart of the problem. A video has Roger Penrose saying (my words) that superposition is not reality. A very recent New Scientist article has Spekkens arguing for a return of reality (which I assume would remove superpositions from reality).

That is not to say that superpositions have no place in QM as they are fundamental to QM. Superpositions are important in statistics and for example the Monty Hall issue, but they exist in the minds or calculations on paper or screen. You can calculate how likely a horse is to win a race, but the reality is found after the race when the horse either won or did not. So you need superpositions but it is wrong to assume they are a reality.

Bell experimental results are, unfortunately, now being used to imply that the reality of superpositions is confirmed.

Quantum Computers do not use reality as when a measurement is made, the calculations are over. But it should be possible to use superpositions in calculations even when you know the reality is Bertlmann's socks with no superpositions. But you do not need a Quantum Computer to do that.

Having said all that, my version of the Bell experiment results is a very exotic idea which by-passes the Bell Inequalities and gives importance to the Bell results as providing an obstacle to be circumvented.

Austin

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by FrediFizzx » Thu Sep 19, 2024 6:32 pm

Joy Christian wrote: Thu Sep 19, 2024 5:59 am
FrediFizzx wrote: Wed Sep 18, 2024 9:29 am Interesting paper but I don't see how VI.A disproves number 1. What am I missing?
Number 1 claim is that two slits interference pattern can only be explained if each particle is in a superposition of passing through slits simultaneously. In other words, the claim of 1 is that classical probability theory cannot explain it. Not so, says Ballentine: it can be explained by classical probability theory.
Sorry, I read the section again and don't see how classical probability theory explains it.
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Thu Sep 19, 2024 5:59 am

FrediFizzx wrote: Wed Sep 18, 2024 9:29 am Interesting paper but I don't see how VI.A disproves number 1. What am I missing?
Number 1 claim is that two slits interference pattern can only be explained if each particle is in a superposition of passing through slits simultaneously. In other words, the claim of 1 is that classical probability theory cannot explain it. Not so, says Ballentine: it can be explained by classical probability theory.
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by FrediFizzx » Wed Sep 18, 2024 9:29 am

Interesting paper but I don't see how VI.A disproves number 1. What am I missing?
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Tue Sep 17, 2024 1:40 am

FrediFizzx wrote: Mon Sep 16, 2024 6:40 pm The existence of quantum superposition is supported by several key experiments and theoretical principles in quantum mechanics. Here are a few notable examples:

1. **Double-Slit Experiment**: This classic experiment demonstrates the wave-particle duality of particles like electrons and photons. When particles pass through two slits, they create an interference pattern on a screen, which can only be explained if each particle is in a superposition of passing through both slits simultaneously¹.

2. **Stern-Gerlach Experiment**: This experiment shows that particles such as electrons can exist in a superposition of spin states. When a beam of particles passes through a non-uniform magnetic field, it splits into two distinct paths, corresponding to the spin-up and spin-down states. This splitting indicates that the particles were in a superposition of spin states before measurement¹.

3. **Bell's Theorem and Bell Test Experiments**: These experiments test the predictions of quantum mechanics against those of classical physics. The results consistently support the quantum mechanical prediction of entanglement and superposition, ruling out local hidden variable theories¹.

4. **Quantum Interference**: Experiments involving quantum interference, such as those with photons in interferometers, show that particles can interfere with themselves, a phenomenon that can only be explained by superposition¹.

These experiments, along with the mathematical framework of quantum mechanics, provide strong evidence for the existence of superposition. The principles of quantum mechanics, such as the Schrödinger equation, inherently include superposition as a fundamental aspect¹.

From Copilot. Number 3 is no good; you ruled that out. 1 and 4 seem the same and I don't think 2 proves anything. So, number 1 needs to be disproven. But how?
.
Koopman in 1955 and Ballentine in 1986 disproved number 1. See Section VI.A of Ballentine's paper. A lot of modern physics is based on unjustified beliefs.
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by FrediFizzx » Mon Sep 16, 2024 6:40 pm

The existence of quantum superposition is supported by several key experiments and theoretical principles in quantum mechanics. Here are a few notable examples:

1. **Double-Slit Experiment**: This classic experiment demonstrates the wave-particle duality of particles like electrons and photons. When particles pass through two slits, they create an interference pattern on a screen, which can only be explained if each particle is in a superposition of passing through both slits simultaneously¹.

2. **Stern-Gerlach Experiment**: This experiment shows that particles such as electrons can exist in a superposition of spin states. When a beam of particles passes through a non-uniform magnetic field, it splits into two distinct paths, corresponding to the spin-up and spin-down states. This splitting indicates that the particles were in a superposition of spin states before measurement¹.

3. **Bell's Theorem and Bell Test Experiments**: These experiments test the predictions of quantum mechanics against those of classical physics. The results consistently support the quantum mechanical prediction of entanglement and superposition, ruling out local hidden variable theories¹.

4. **Quantum Interference**: Experiments involving quantum interference, such as those with photons in interferometers, show that particles can interfere with themselves, a phenomenon that can only be explained by superposition¹.

These experiments, along with the mathematical framework of quantum mechanics, provide strong evidence for the existence of superposition. The principles of quantum mechanics, such as the Schrödinger equation, inherently include superposition as a fundamental aspect¹.

From Copilot. Number 3 is no good; you ruled that out. 1 and 4 seem the same and I don't think 2 proves anything. So, number 1 needs to be disproven. But how?
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Sat Sep 14, 2024 10:58 pm

FrediFizzx wrote: Sat Sep 14, 2024 4:47 pm Is there any proof that superposition doesn't exist? That seems to be the difference.
No.

Neither is there an observationally direct proof that superposition exists.
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by FrediFizzx » Sat Sep 14, 2024 4:47 pm

Is there any proof that superposition doesn't exist? That seems to be the difference.
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Sat Sep 14, 2024 2:25 am

FrediFizzx wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 9:26 am
Joy Christian wrote: Thu Sep 12, 2024 7:46 am .
The lure of "quantum computers" is one of the most lucrative scams, with scammers well placed in both academia and the industry of quantum technology. These scammers are earning millions in prizes and salaries. But here is a rare talk by Mikhail Dyakonov that debunks all the hype about quantum computers:

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/jpRZtM6TgTQXHy76/
So, qubits are not real?
A qubit can always be represented by a unit bivector, which is a perfectly classical object. This bivector can be either "up" or "down" with respect to another unit bivector, just as a qubit is "up" or "down." Therefore, what any quantum computer can do, can always be done with a classical computer.
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by FrediFizzx » Fri Sep 13, 2024 9:26 am

Joy Christian wrote: Thu Sep 12, 2024 7:46 am .
The lure of "quantum computers" is one of the most lucrative scams, with scammers well placed in both academia and the industry of quantum technology. These scammers are earning millions in prizes and salaries. But here is a rare talk by Mikhail Dyakonov that debunks all the hype about quantum computers:

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/jpRZtM6TgTQXHy76/
So, qubits are not real?

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Thu Sep 12, 2024 7:46 am

.
The lure of "quantum computers" is one of the most lucrative scams, with scammers well placed in both academia and the industry of quantum technology. These scammers are earning millions in prizes and salaries. But here is a rare talk by Mikhail Dyakonov that debunks all the hype about quantum computers:

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/jpRZtM6TgTQXHy76/
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Fri Jul 05, 2024 6:05 am

.
A non-quantum computer crunches the numbers several times faster than Google’s quantum computer, and uses far less energy doing so:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/24 ... y-smashed/
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Fri Feb 09, 2024 2:48 pm

.
Researchers show that classical computers can keep up with, and surpass, their quantum counterparts:

https://phys.org/news/2024-02-classical ... parts.html
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Tue Jan 09, 2024 12:31 am

.
Is this the beginning of the end of quantum computing hype?

https://www.hpcwire.com/2024/01/05/baid ... lier-move/
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Wed Jan 03, 2024 2:10 pm

.
Quantum Computing’s Hard, Cold Reality Check:

Hype is everywhere, and practical applications are nowhere!

https://spectrum-ieee-org.cdn.ampprojec ... 2666638802

Happy New Year!
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Sat Mar 25, 2023 10:44 am

.
Grover's Algorithm Offers No Quantum Advantage: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.11317
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by kev01 » Wed Nov 09, 2022 9:26 pm

The principle issue for this site is not whether quantum computers are ever to be real world problems viable.
It's whether already done demonstrations of quantum computing have established that entanglement is essential to explaining the results of such early days demos.
Where has a refutation of that ever been convincingly shown?
Specifically focused on the published 'quantum supremacy/advantage' (PC correction!) demo results?

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by gill1109 » Wed Nov 09, 2022 12:29 am

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Sat Nov 05, 2022 1:22 pm

.
The Quantum Computing Hype Bubble Is About To Burst, according to Sabine Hossenfelder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBLVtCYHVO8.

Sabine does not say this, but I will say it: Quantum Computing is mostly a fraud, run by some academic and non-academic thugs and gangs!
.

Re: Quantum Computers are doomed all over again!

by Joy Christian » Fri Aug 05, 2022 1:52 am

kev01 wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 1:14 am
Joy Christian wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 7:52 am .
Quantum Computers are dead all over again: https://www.science.org/content/article ... -after-all
.
Last paragraph in quoted article:
"Still, the Google demonstration was not just hype, researchers say. Sycamore required far fewer operations and less power than a supercomputer, Zhang notes. And if Sycamore had slightly higher fidelity, he says, his team’s simulation couldn’t have kept up. As Hangleiter puts it, “The Google experiment did what it was meant to do, start this race.”"

Joy, if your original boast that QC would never achieve anything beyond conventional computing capabilities were true, Zhang's commentary there should read a lot differently. You picked up elsewhere, much later than my own posting on it, the touted Kish et. al. advantage of NBL (noise based logic) over QC e.g.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.03162

The latest article on that points out a roadblock where some fundamental issues still need to be solved.
But all of that aside, every time you have posted an article lampooning the 'Quantum supremacy' hype (true enough), none of those article authors, or the authorities they quoted, claimed there was a theoretical flaw in the basic premise that intrinsically quantum principles of superposition and entanglement were at play.

What say you Joy?
The "quantum principles of superposition and entanglement" are 20th-century relics. They are not here to stay. Therefore the QC hype is much more fundamentally misguided than the quantum supremacy dogmatists like Scott Aaronson (who is quoted in the article) or Zhang are capable of grasping.
.

Top