6 ms·

Unix forking the universe by running IBM's free online quantum computer

58 points by andrewp123 2y ago

ggm 2y ago
> I genuinely think it's a fun & potentially meaningful way to make a decision. what difference is there to any 50/50 choice mechanism you chose, other than being horrendously expensive to implement?
- andrewp123 2y ago
  If you roll a regular coin without any quantum effects, every version of you will either see only heads, or only tails. You need quantum in order to make the choice nondeterministic.
  - hotdogscout 2y ago
    There are no other versions of people
  - canadianfella 2y ago
    [dead]
  - OutOfHere 2y ago
    I keep getting "500 Internal Server Error" when trying to login. It's not logging in. I get this error after entering the "IBM verify code" which I receive in an email.
    - toast0 2y ago
      Ah, but in the other universe, you logged in successfully and saw there was nothing to see.
    - mise_en_place 2y ago
      I had this issue with IBM SSO many times. You may have to wait 24-48 hours before it’s resolved for your acct.
  - OutOfHere 2y ago
    How do I know they won't just give me a cached output from someone else's identical job, or from a simulator? I don't really trust IBM to not mess it up.
- dwattttt 2y ago
  I think it's time we had the quantum computing talk: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3
paraph1n 2y ago
> The outcome provably does not exist until you measure it. This is not true. It only provably does not exist in local hidden variables.
- red75prime 2y ago
  It doesn't change much in practice. If the event is influenced by a state outside of its past light cone, you (that is observer inside the universe) cannot predict the outcome even theoretically.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    I believe "in practice, theoretically" simplifies to "theoretically". In actual practice there might as well be hidden local variables here. You wouldn't be able to tell the difference, even though you could in theory.
ezoe 2y ago
1 fork per 4 seconds? That's so inefficient. Just observing Geiger counter will fork the universe faster than article's very inefficient implementation.
- boothby 2y ago
  I generally try not to comment on work-related stuff in public but I almost fell out of my chair when I saw that sampling rate. Surely they can do better, and that's just a limitation of the free API?
floam 2y ago
This is potentially useful because people can be very impressionable when it comes to quantum magic. I think if I could build some kind of shiny heavy tangible apparatus to interface with the IBM compute service, with like seven segment LEDs (resist the urge to use Nixie tubes, this is a serious, practical device) with a big loud trigger and some kind of boutique radio, I would have a potentially very persuasive magic 8 ball I could use to influence and manipulate people, with carefully chosen false dichotomies. Okay team, we’ve effectively entangled the success of our endeavor with the quantum dead man’s switch by all swearing to comply with the protocol. It’s time to start letting the universe tell us what works. QUESTION 1 for the Profit Manifold: promote yours truly to director or stay the course? Click bang hiss: 01. Note to self: cut “universe B” (or just B? It’d hurt less) into my thigh with a razor blade 6 months before demonstrating The Device, as a plot device to be exploited for purposes TBD.
- jerf 2y ago
  But why would you resist the urge to use Nixie tubes? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwIGnATzBTg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwIGnATzBTg
  - floam 2y ago
    He stole my idea, that’s why I don’t post from my GENIUS_IDEAS.txt anymore.
fred_is_fred 2y ago
And what happens when the universe runs out of pids?
- gus_massa 2y ago
  The "split" happens contantly outside the lab/quantum-computer. Just get a geiger counter, the atoms split randomly using a quantum process. Or just get a digital camera, the photons are absorved in the CCD sensor randomly using a quantum process. Or ...
paulddraper 2y ago
> The outcome provably does not exist until you measure it. My preferred interpretation: There is a density function across all possible realities (Hilbert space). Schrodinger's cat has equal density of being alive and dead. The person who opens the box can be happy or sad. The density of cat being alive is entangled with the observer being happy. And the opposite for the death. The original cat distribution did not "collapse" or "resolve" per se. The cat is still equal parts alive and dead. But it did become non-uniformly entangled with the distributions of rest of the universe. Perhaps this is the many worlds interpretation.
deadbabe 2y ago
Watch the Remedial Chaos Theory episode of Community to see why it is a bad idea to play around with making decisions that can spawn alternative worlds and timelines based off a single unnatural random event. (also probably one of the best episodes ever)
- alephnerd 2y ago
  [flagged]
- red-iron-pine 2y ago
  man we're getting Community and Rick and Morty shoutouts to OP. probably a sign there is no real discussion here :/
bitwize 2y ago
Rick: OK, Morty, this program runs by spawning a new universe for each parallel subtask, destroying the universes that throw an exception instead of returning a value, and then aggregating the remaining results. Are you ready to experience quantum hyperspatial optimization, Morty? This'll strap a warp drive to the ass of your gamer shit for sure. Morty: Aw, geez, Rick, I don't think we ought to-- Rick: Nothing ventured, nothing gained, Morty. Let's goooooooooooo! [He clicks the mouse, and Solitaire comes up] Rick: Haha, nice. [He starts playing.] [We are shown a 16x16 grid of the same moment happening in 256 alternate universes.] Ricks: Nothing ventured, nothing gained, Morty. Let's goooooooooooo! [They click the mouse.] Rick 183: Oh, sh-- Rick 39: Jesus Chr-- Rick 201: NO! We've gone too fa-- [237 of the alternate universes disappear in a white-hot light, their squares replaced by static.]
olooney 2y ago
Superposition does not fork the world. This common misconception arises due to confusion between superposition and the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, but it’s easy to see that the two are only superficially similar. States in a superposition still interfere—that's the essence of the double-slit experiment. In contrast, when arguing that the timeline 'splits' due to measurements, the resulting universes do not interact at all and remain completely unaware of each other—they can never even know if the others exist. If quantum computers truly 'forked' the world, they would be equivalent to non-deterministic Turing machines (capable of solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time), but quantum computing experts agree that they can still be modeled as deterministic Turing machines. It's better to think of quantum computers as a type of analog computer, capable of solving certain problems that fit their model well, but not generally more powerful. It’s like an Intel CPU having SIMD or AVX instructions that allow it to perform certain operations faster, but these don't fundamentally change its capabilities. The no-free-lunch theorem applies.
- snarkconjecture 2y ago
  Quantum computers are generally more powerful in the sense that they can solve a larger set of problems in polynomial time. i.e. BPP is contained in BQP but the converse is thought to be false.
  - andrewp123 2y ago
    Yep, they're essentially giant brute force machines. You can find the period of a function by passing all the inputs through it at once and destructively interfering the result. Why is there a speedup in quantum, though? Why can't you just brute force classically? The answer is that whether quantum or classical, you can always build a hard-coded circuit that essentially swaps the time and space complexity - just make it so that for every operation you were doing in time, instead, every operation happens at its own place in space. Quantum is special because it also takes the "log" of the space complexity b/c n qubits represent 2^n bits. So quantum lets you swap space with time and then take the log of time, lol. Superposition, interference, etc aren't really even needed in the explanation.
- 2y ago
gruntThenPunt 2y ago
[flagged]
- superb_dev 2y ago
  Do you think quantum computer just aren’t real?
classified 2y ago
We are all incessantly forking the universe with every single decision we make. We probably have at least as many universes by now as the number of atoms in this one. And now it's one more, where I decided to leave this comment.
josecastillo 2y ago
Relevant short story from Ted Chiang, exploring some possibilities around this idea: https://onezero.medium.com/anxiety-is-the-dizziness-of-freedom-b5ab45cae2a5 https://onezero.medium.com/anxiety-is-the-dizziness-of-freed...
brna 2y ago
@andrewp123 cool blog post, tried the experiment like this (the result - 0 is kinda of anticlimactic): Statement: I will make a minimal BTC transfer today, May 11. 2024, as near noon UTC+2 if the outcome is 1/true. Result: [ { "0": 0.5140027374683648, "1": 0.4859972625316353 } ] So now we have(will) also split the bitcoin hash forever in more than 2 different branches (I guess way more than 2). @andrewp123 Check my blog post. https://initsix.dev/in-finite-central-curve/ https://initsix.dev/in-finite-central-curve/ ,feedback appreciated :D
StanislavPetrov 2y ago
Useful for generating truly random numbers?
captaincrowbar 2y ago
Just waiting now for someone to find a spectre exploit in quantum mechanics.
hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
Here's a better reduction of CC vs. QC: QC doesn't introduce a new type of magic computing. It only accelerates certain algorithms that a CC could also compute. The present state of manufacturing technology has relegated these to essentially toys because they do not yet contain sufficient numbers of QDs to meaningfully threaten cryptography through accelerated prime factorization or matrix inversion. And I'm sure QC devices also release magic smoke, albeit cryogenically-cooled smoke, when excessive voltage is applied. (ElectroBOOM should investigate.)
nitwit005 2y ago
> it's one of the few useful (maybe) things we can do with quantum computers today. It's theoretically useful, but quantum random number generation has been around for a long time. All you need is a way to detect nuclear decay.

58 points by andrewp123 2y ago

ggm 2y ago

> I genuinely think it's a fun & potentially meaningful way to make a decision. what difference is there to any 50/50 choice mechanism you chose, other than being horrendously expensive to implement?

andrewp123 2y ago
If you roll a regular coin without any quantum effects, every version of you will either see only heads, or only tails. You need quantum in order to make the choice nondeterministic.
- hotdogscout 2y ago
  There are no other versions of people
- canadianfella 2y ago
  [dead]
- OutOfHere 2y ago
  I keep getting "500 Internal Server Error" when trying to login. It's not logging in. I get this error after entering the "IBM verify code" which I receive in an email.
  - toast0 2y ago
    Ah, but in the other universe, you logged in successfully and saw there was nothing to see.
  - mise_en_place 2y ago
    I had this issue with IBM SSO many times. You may have to wait 24-48 hours before it’s resolved for your acct.
- OutOfHere 2y ago
  How do I know they won't just give me a cached output from someone else's identical job, or from a simulator? I don't really trust IBM to not mess it up.
dwattttt 2y ago
I think it's time we had the quantum computing talk: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3

paraph1n 2y ago

> The outcome provably does not exist until you measure it. This is not true. It only provably does not exist in local hidden variables.

red75prime 2y ago
It doesn't change much in practice. If the event is influenced by a state outside of its past light cone, you (that is observer inside the universe) cannot predict the outcome even theoretically.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  I believe "in practice, theoretically" simplifies to "theoretically". In actual practice there might as well be hidden local variables here. You wouldn't be able to tell the difference, even though you could in theory.

ezoe 2y ago

1 fork per 4 seconds? That's so inefficient. Just observing Geiger counter will fork the universe faster than article's very inefficient implementation.

boothby 2y ago
I generally try not to comment on work-related stuff in public but I almost fell out of my chair when I saw that sampling rate. Surely they can do better, and that's just a limitation of the free API?

floam 2y ago

This is potentially useful because people can be very impressionable when it comes to quantum magic. I think if I could build some kind of shiny heavy tangible apparatus to interface with the IBM compute service, with like seven segment LEDs (resist the urge to use Nixie tubes, this is a serious, practical device) with a big loud trigger and some kind of boutique radio, I would have a potentially very persuasive magic 8 ball I could use to influence and manipulate people, with carefully chosen false dichotomies. Okay team, we’ve effectively entangled the success of our endeavor with the quantum dead man’s switch by all swearing to comply with the protocol. It’s time to start letting the universe tell us what works. QUESTION 1 for the Profit Manifold: promote yours truly to director or stay the course? Click bang hiss: 01. Note to self: cut “universe B” (or just B? It’d hurt less) into my thigh with a razor blade 6 months before demonstrating The Device, as a plot device to be exploited for purposes TBD.

jerf 2y ago
But why would you resist the urge to use Nixie tubes? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwIGnATzBTg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwIGnATzBTg
- floam 2y ago
  He stole my idea, that’s why I don’t post from my GENIUS_IDEAS.txt anymore.

fred_is_fred 2y ago

And what happens when the universe runs out of pids?

gus_massa 2y ago
The "split" happens contantly outside the lab/quantum-computer. Just get a geiger counter, the atoms split randomly using a quantum process. Or just get a digital camera, the photons are absorved in the CCD sensor randomly using a quantum process. Or ...

paulddraper 2y ago

> The outcome provably does not exist until you measure it. My preferred interpretation: There is a density function across all possible realities (Hilbert space). Schrodinger's cat has equal density of being alive and dead. The person who opens the box can be happy or sad. The density of cat being alive is entangled with the observer being happy. And the opposite for the death. The original cat distribution did not "collapse" or "resolve" per se. The cat is still equal parts alive and dead. But it did become non-uniformly entangled with the distributions of rest of the universe. Perhaps this is the many worlds interpretation.

deadbabe 2y ago

Watch the Remedial Chaos Theory episode of Community to see why it is a bad idea to play around with making decisions that can spawn alternative worlds and timelines based off a single unnatural random event. (also probably one of the best episodes ever)

alephnerd 2y ago
[flagged]
red-iron-pine 2y ago
man we're getting Community and Rick and Morty shoutouts to OP. probably a sign there is no real discussion here :/

bitwize 2y ago

Rick: OK, Morty, this program runs by spawning a new universe for each parallel subtask, destroying the universes that throw an exception instead of returning a value, and then aggregating the remaining results. Are you ready to experience quantum hyperspatial optimization, Morty? This'll strap a warp drive to the ass of your gamer shit for sure. Morty: Aw, geez, Rick, I don't think we ought to-- Rick: Nothing ventured, nothing gained, Morty. Let's goooooooooooo! [He clicks the mouse, and Solitaire comes up] Rick: Haha, nice. [He starts playing.] [We are shown a 16x16 grid of the same moment happening in 256 alternate universes.] Ricks: Nothing ventured, nothing gained, Morty. Let's goooooooooooo! [They click the mouse.] Rick 183: Oh, sh-- Rick 39: Jesus Chr-- Rick 201: NO! We've gone too fa-- [237 of the alternate universes disappear in a white-hot light, their squares replaced by static.]

olooney 2y ago

Superposition does not fork the world. This common misconception arises due to confusion between superposition and the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, but it’s easy to see that the two are only superficially similar. States in a superposition still interfere—that's the essence of the double-slit experiment. In contrast, when arguing that the timeline 'splits' due to measurements, the resulting universes do not interact at all and remain completely unaware of each other—they can never even know if the others exist. If quantum computers truly 'forked' the world, they would be equivalent to non-deterministic Turing machines (capable of solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time), but quantum computing experts agree that they can still be modeled as deterministic Turing machines. It's better to think of quantum computers as a type of analog computer, capable of solving certain problems that fit their model well, but not generally more powerful. It’s like an Intel CPU having SIMD or AVX instructions that allow it to perform certain operations faster, but these don't fundamentally change its capabilities. The no-free-lunch theorem applies.

snarkconjecture 2y ago
Quantum computers are generally more powerful in the sense that they can solve a larger set of problems in polynomial time. i.e. BPP is contained in BQP but the converse is thought to be false.
- andrewp123 2y ago
  Yep, they're essentially giant brute force machines. You can find the period of a function by passing all the inputs through it at once and destructively interfering the result. Why is there a speedup in quantum, though? Why can't you just brute force classically? The answer is that whether quantum or classical, you can always build a hard-coded circuit that essentially swaps the time and space complexity - just make it so that for every operation you were doing in time, instead, every operation happens at its own place in space. Quantum is special because it also takes the "log" of the space complexity b/c n qubits represent 2^n bits. So quantum lets you swap space with time and then take the log of time, lol. Superposition, interference, etc aren't really even needed in the explanation.
2y ago

gruntThenPunt 2y ago

[flagged]

superb_dev 2y ago
Do you think quantum computer just aren’t real?

classified 2y ago

We are all incessantly forking the universe with every single decision we make. We probably have at least as many universes by now as the number of atoms in this one. And now it's one more, where I decided to leave this comment.

josecastillo 2y ago

Relevant short story from Ted Chiang, exploring some possibilities around this idea: https://onezero.medium.com/anxiety-is-the-dizziness-of-freedom-b5ab45cae2a5 https://onezero.medium.com/anxiety-is-the-dizziness-of-freed...

brna 2y ago

@andrewp123 cool blog post, tried the experiment like this (the result - 0 is kinda of anticlimactic): Statement: I will make a minimal BTC transfer today, May 11. 2024, as near noon UTC+2 if the outcome is 1/true. Result: [ { "0": 0.5140027374683648, "1": 0.4859972625316353 } ] So now we have(will) also split the bitcoin hash forever in more than 2 different branches (I guess way more than 2). @andrewp123 Check my blog post. https://initsix.dev/in-finite-central-curve/ https://initsix.dev/in-finite-central-curve/ ,feedback appreciated :D

StanislavPetrov 2y ago

Useful for generating truly random numbers?

captaincrowbar 2y ago

Just waiting now for someone to find a spectre exploit in quantum mechanics.

hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago

Here's a better reduction of CC vs. QC: QC doesn't introduce a new type of magic computing. It only accelerates certain algorithms that a CC could also compute. The present state of manufacturing technology has relegated these to essentially toys because they do not yet contain sufficient numbers of QDs to meaningfully threaten cryptography through accelerated prime factorization or matrix inversion. And I'm sure QC devices also release magic smoke, albeit cryogenically-cooled smoke, when excessive voltage is applied. (ElectroBOOM should investigate.)

nitwit005 2y ago

> it's one of the few useful (maybe) things we can do with quantum computers today. It's theoretically useful, but quantum random number generation has been around for a long time. All you need is a way to detect nuclear decay.