<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: IBM Research achieves new record for quantum computing device performance</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance</link>
	<description>Accelerating Intelligence</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 04:13:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: terry fraser</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/comment-page-1#comment-31800</link>
		<dc:creator>terry fraser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Sep 2012 18:35:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=143514#comment-31800</guid>
		<description>quantum computer extraction(QED=QCD)in the quantum computer we want both functions to operate.So a sold state device must be made.In nature everything of interest is copied or replicated =tree being oil then carbon graphene. From a software program being a system.So this sold state QED =QCD computer is an RNA  quanta extractor.You have a friut with wire leads that transmitte the electrons(QED) to graphene grid and platinuim and gold covered in hypoxy glue in a vacum in which a laser collects the change and transmits the data through an ionized optic (QCD) cable.The cable covered in graphene and oil then fracked with freon then baked.This can now be connected to an computer screen.The point is important to note that all rna and dna has to be accounted for in the QED AND QCD system for the whole operation to get stability. TERRY FRASER 13 SYDNEY DR SW CALGARY ALBERTA (10% IS FINE)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>quantum computer extraction(QED=QCD)in the quantum computer we want both functions to operate.So a sold state device must be made.In nature everything of interest is copied or replicated =tree being oil then carbon graphene. From a software program being a system.So this sold state QED =QCD computer is an RNA  quanta extractor.You have a friut with wire leads that transmitte the electrons(QED) to graphene grid and platinuim and gold covered in hypoxy glue in a vacum in which a laser collects the change and transmits the data through an ionized optic (QCD) cable.The cable covered in graphene and oil then fracked with freon then baked.This can now be connected to an computer screen.The point is important to note that all rna and dna has to be accounted for in the QED AND QCD system for the whole operation to get stability. TERRY FRASER 13 SYDNEY DR SW CALGARY ALBERTA (10% IS FINE)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gerald</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/comment-page-1#comment-9445</link>
		<dc:creator>Gerald</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2012 03:39:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=143514#comment-9445</guid>
		<description>To the editor,

Am I the only one here that sees the contradiction.

In one breathe we are saying that the total number of bits of information in a 298-qubit state is equivalent to the number of bits in the universe.  Then in the next breathe we are saying that Seth Lloyd has computed that total number of bits in the universe as ~10^90.  

Suppose in 50 years it is quite easy to create a quantum computer capable of computing a 298-qubit state.  This might be a monstrosity of a computer at first (much like the warehouse sized mainframe computers of the early to mid 20th century).  So then we move on a create a Quantum supercomputer capable of a 1000-qubit state.  This would represent a 10^301 bits of information which is vastly greater than the upper limit that seth lloyd has computed.  using this logical argument we can see that the number of bits of information that the universe can hold has always been vastly greater than 10^90.  It&#039;s probably more on the order of 10^(10^100)

Why stop at pondering the computation excellence of a 250-qubit state.  Let us imagine the computational possibilities of a 1,000,000 qubit state.  Truly astronomical implications.

-Gerald</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To the editor,</p>
<p>Am I the only one here that sees the contradiction.</p>
<p>In one breathe we are saying that the total number of bits of information in a 298-qubit state is equivalent to the number of bits in the universe.  Then in the next breathe we are saying that Seth Lloyd has computed that total number of bits in the universe as ~10^90.  </p>
<p>Suppose in 50 years it is quite easy to create a quantum computer capable of computing a 298-qubit state.  This might be a monstrosity of a computer at first (much like the warehouse sized mainframe computers of the early to mid 20th century).  So then we move on a create a Quantum supercomputer capable of a 1000-qubit state.  This would represent a 10^301 bits of information which is vastly greater than the upper limit that seth lloyd has computed.  using this logical argument we can see that the number of bits of information that the universe can hold has always been vastly greater than 10^90.  It&#8217;s probably more on the order of 10^(10^100)</p>
<p>Why stop at pondering the computation excellence of a 250-qubit state.  Let us imagine the computational possibilities of a 1,000,000 qubit state.  Truly astronomical implications.</p>
<p>-Gerald</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Editor</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/comment-page-1#comment-9214</link>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:24:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=143514#comment-9214</guid>
		<description>noonan: 

Matthias Steffen, manager of the experimental quantum computing group, provided the following: 

&quot;The calculation is straight forward: 250 qubits means 2^250 states in a superposition which is about 1.8 x 10^75 atoms!!  This is near the best estimates of the total number of atoms in the universe. There is no specific citation, but many others have used this analogy.&quot;

(Note: Seth Lloyd has calculated the maximum number of bits available for computation n the observable universe as ~10^90 in his book Programming the Universe. That corresponds to 2^298 in base 2, or 298 qubits. See Computational capacity of the universe, http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0110141v1.pdf  -- this is a correction to this comment.) </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>noonan: </p>
<p>Matthias Steffen, manager of the experimental quantum computing group, provided the following: </p>
<p>&#8220;The calculation is straight forward: 250 qubits means 2^250 states in a superposition which is about 1.8 x 10^75 atoms!!  This is near the best estimates of the total number of atoms in the universe. There is no specific citation, but many others have used this analogy.&#8221;</p>
<p>(Note: Seth Lloyd has calculated the maximum number of bits available for computation n the observable universe as ~10^90 in his book Programming the Universe. That corresponds to 2^298 in base 2, or 298 qubits. See Computational capacity of the universe, <a href="http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0110141v1.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0110141v1.pdf</a>  &#8212; this is a correction to this comment.) </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Editor</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/comment-page-1#comment-9192</link>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=143514#comment-9192</guid>
		<description>&quot;My previous comment was pruned by your editor, btw, WHEN WILL WE HAVE THE POSSIBILITY TO PREVIEW, EDIT OR ERASE OUR COMMENTS?&quot;

melajara: Your comment was not pruned. It was automatically held by the Wordpress spam detector and I approved it. We will look into your request.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;My previous comment was pruned by your editor, btw, WHEN WILL WE HAVE THE POSSIBILITY TO PREVIEW, EDIT OR ERASE OUR COMMENTS?&#8221;</p>
<p>melajara: Your comment was not pruned. It was automatically held by the WordPress spam detector and I approved it. We will look into your request.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: melajara</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/comment-page-1#comment-9190</link>
		<dc:creator>melajara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=143514#comment-9190</guid>
		<description>My previous comment was pruned by your editor, btw, WHEN WILL WE HAVE THE POSSIBILITY TO PREVIEW, EDIT OR ERASE OUR COMMENTS? 

I wanted to comment

Indeed weird math as 
10 power 80 is more than 2 power 250

However 2 power 270 is more than 10 power 80

So no big deal as one could surely build up a 270 qubits computer scaling up from a 250 one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My previous comment was pruned by your editor, btw, WHEN WILL WE HAVE THE POSSIBILITY TO PREVIEW, EDIT OR ERASE OUR COMMENTS? </p>
<p>I wanted to comment</p>
<p>Indeed weird math as<br />
10 power 80 is more than 2 power 250</p>
<p>However 2 power 270 is more than 10 power 80</p>
<p>So no big deal as one could surely build up a 270 qubits computer scaling up from a 250 one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: melajara</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/comment-page-1#comment-9189</link>
		<dc:creator>melajara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:04:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=143514#comment-9189</guid>
		<description>Indeed, weird math as
10 ^ 80  10 ^ 80

So no big deal as one could surely build up a 270 qubits computer scaling up from a 250 one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Indeed, weird math as<br />
10 ^ 80  10 ^ 80</p>
<p>So no big deal as one could surely build up a 270 qubits computer scaling up from a 250 one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Editor</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/comment-page-1#comment-9177</link>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 07:53:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=143514#comment-9177</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve asked IBM to clarify the bits computation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve asked IBM to clarify the bits computation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Noonan</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/comment-page-1#comment-9164</link>
		<dc:creator>Noonan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 03:17:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=143514#comment-9164</guid>
		<description>Yeah, that&#039;s what Siri told me too ;)  The article is vague though.  They need to show their math.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, that&#8217;s what Siri told me too ;)  The article is vague though.  They need to show their math.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RobinSongs</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/comment-page-1#comment-9163</link>
		<dc:creator>RobinSongs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 03:00:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=143514#comment-9163</guid>
		<description>According to WP, there are nearly 10^80 bits of atoms in the observable universe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to WP, there are nearly 10^80 bits of atoms in the observable universe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: noonan</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/ibm-research-achieves-new-record-for-quantum-computing-device-performance/comment-page-1#comment-9158</link>
		<dc:creator>noonan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:38:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=143514#comment-9158</guid>
		<description>&quot;For example, a single 250-qubit state contains more bits of information than there are atoms in the universe.&quot;

Are we talking about the Observable Universe?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;For example, a single 250-qubit state contains more bits of information than there are atoms in the universe.&#8221;</p>
<p>Are we talking about the Observable Universe?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
