vtomole

5 ms·

1.
by vtomole 9mo ago
You're right. I didn't sufficiently separate experimental physics QC from engineering QC. On the engineering end, the question on if a large-scale quantum computer can be built is leaning to be "yes" so far. DARPA QBI h
2.
by vtomole 9mo ago
Quantum theory predicts this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_theorem . An experiment can show that this prediction is false. This is a scientific problem not an engineering one. Physical theories have to be ver
3.
by vtomole 9mo ago
Good point. I didn't sufficiently delineate what counts as a scientific problem and what counts as an engineering problem in QC. Quantum theory, like all physical theories, makes predictions. In this case, quantum theory predicts that
4.
by vtomole 9mo ago
Sure, I'm not disagreeing that this processor is noisy, just providing enough context to say that it's fine. Historically, these devices improve enough to be under threshold at which point it doesn't matter that they are nois
5.
by vtomole 9mo ago
This processor is state-of-the-art for silicon quantum computing. It's where modalities like superconducting were 15 years ago, and superconducting does not create noise these days https://www.nature.com/articles/s
6.
by vtomole 9mo ago
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09848-5 performs CZ gates on up to 256 qubits with fidelities of 99.5%, which is good enough to run surface codes below threshold.
7.
by vtomole 9mo ago
Quantum theory is so unlikely to be wrong that if large-scale fault tolerant quantum computers could not be built, the effort to try to build them will not be a dead end, but instead a revolution in physics.
8.
by vtomole 9mo ago
Quantum theory says that quantum computers are physically plausible. Quantum theory lies in the realm of physics, not mathematics. As a physical theory, it makes predictions about what is plausible in the real world. One of those prediction
9.
by vtomole 9mo ago
Depends on what we mean by "early days on hardware". If we mean "we've have been working on this for almost 3 decades. That's a very long time to be working on something!". I agree. If we mean "We just now
10.
by vtomole 9mo ago
"early days" means that the 1998 computer didn't have qubits that were below the error correction threshold. Now we have hundreds of qubits below threshold. We'll need millions of qubits like these for quantum computing
11.
by vtomole 9mo ago
> Is there a guarantee that these things can and will work given enough time? Quantum theory predicts that they will work given enough time. If they don't work, there is something about physics that we are missing.
12.
by vtomole 9mo ago
The graphs aren't telling you that QC hardware is not improving at a super-exponential pace? There are no real world use cases today. The hardware is not advanced enough yet, but it's improving exponentially.
13.
by vtomole 9mo ago
Oops, updated. Thanks!
14.
by vtomole 9mo ago
QC progress happens super-exponentially: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46383233
15.
by vtomole 9mo ago
Silicon is not one of the leading modalities for quantum computers, but it has progressed a lot in the past ~2-3 years. Here are a few key advancements that have happened as of late: - Intel can now do 2D which means a Surface code can be r
16.
by vtomole 9mo ago
No, and Shor's is not a good benchmark for these early quantum computers: https://algassert.com/post/2500
17.
by vtomole 9mo ago
Which version did you read? I read this one: https://www.amazon.com/Meditations-Penguin-Classics-Hardcove... , which provides a lot of context. Here are my thoughts on it: https://vtomole.com/blog/2025&#
18.
by vtomole 9mo ago
Turns out, a lot of Plato this year. See https://vtomole.com/ for the list.
19.
PsiQuantum Raises $1B, Says Its Quantum Computer Will Be Ready in 2 Years(wsj.com)
2 points by vtomole 1y ago|0 comments
20.
Honeywell's Quantinuum raises funds from Nvidia, others at $10B valuation(reuters.com)
2 points by vtomole 1y ago|0 comments
21.
Tracking the Cost of Quantum Factoring(security.googleblog.com)
3 points by vtomole 1y ago|0 comments
22.
How to factor 2048 bit RSA integers with less than a million noisy qubits(arxiv.org)
3 points by vtomole 1y ago|0 comments
23.
by vtomole 2y ago
Yes, QC is far enough that it's "anyone's guess", but the field is actively working on sliding the answer to this problem from "anyone's guess" to "a bit more certain". It will never be 100% cert
24.
by vtomole 2y ago
One application we care about is using quantum computers to build high resolution telescopes https://arxiv.org/abs/1107.2939 . A wide area network is required because the telescopes need to be far apart.
25.
by vtomole 2y ago
You're welcome.
26.
by vtomole 2y ago
A quantum internet is absolutely necessary for creating a useful quantum computer, the same way the internet (LAN) is needed to create a supercomputer. A supercomputer is essentially many computers connected together. A quantum computer tha
27.
by vtomole 2y ago
Right. We are now arguing over the nuances of what would make quantum computers useful, which I address in a comment where I say "Everything matters" later in this thread. Most people who work in this field doubt that every quantu
28.
by vtomole 2y ago
Yes. It's a spectrum. In the worst case, quantum computers only help us gain a deep understanding of quantum physics. In the best case, they beat classical computers on optimizations problems as well. Materials science falls somewhere
29.
by vtomole 2y ago
The people who claim that current quantum computers are useful for classical problems contribute to "Quantum hype" which is frowned upon by most members of the community.
30.
by vtomole 2y ago
I agree. "Everything" matters when it comes to these applications: complexity theory, heuristics, constant factors, quantum error correction overhead, qubit quality, improvements in classical algorithms, CPU and GPU improvements e

More ›