Microsoft Expects to Construct a Quantum Supercomputer Within a Decade

[TumbleGeorge]

In Astronomy, when a distant star is dimmed under observation, nobody claims that it "disappeared" and then "reappeared". Naturally, the human experience with the Sun helps to avoid falling into the mystical. But since we don't have a counterpoint in quantum study, everything that emerges from it is said to be fact. By the term MYSTIC I refer to the way science itself defines its observations on subatomic events:

it is wave or particle depending on whether it observes or not; it can measure speed or location but never both, one or the other; sometimes it's here and sometimes it's there, probabilistically. Etc, etc, etc!

Oh dear! You see, the intoxication of quantum scientists lies in the tendency to never want to refute the data with a very simple question: the acuity of the tools in the measurements of quantum events are sufficiently refined not to present distorted results due to an inadequacy to the demand of precision that the fundamental elements impose? And here is the reason why the alleged "quantum computers" from D-Wave, IMB, Google, among others, are always associated with a constant struggle by engineers to make the produced data stable and without errors; they implement a colossal myriad of algorithmic corrections and structural redesigns to get around the errors in the calculations, but they never manage to eliminate them. The quantum computing practiced until today is, in my view, an analogical computation on the margins of the quantum scale but that never safely enters it.

Oh, this is not a mystical or mathematical problem, but a semantic and political problem. According to the principle of "divide and conquer", we try to increase the resolution of our description at scale by force. It is no accident that we build giant cyclotrons (Cern) and smash streams of matter into each other.

 

[Leavenfish]

Fixed

No...China. Japan isn't pouring near that amount of money and effort....mark my words, it's China.

 

[Deleted member 185088]

It absolutely could be, for certain workloads. They will never be general purpose processors though.

Like some sort of ASIC.

Quantum supercomputers have the potential to provide significant benefits to our society in various ways. Here's a concrete example of a practical use:

One area where quantum supercomputers can make a big difference is in the field of drug discovery. Developing new medicines can be a long and expensive process. Scientists need to analyze large amounts of data and simulate how different chemicals interact with our bodies. This process often takes a lot of time and resources using traditional computers.

With a quantum supercomputer, researchers could perform complex simulations and calculations much faster. They could better understand how different molecules behave and interact, leading to the discovery of new drugs more efficiently. This could potentially accelerate the development of life-saving medications, helping people with diseases and improving healthcare overall.

For instance, imagine a scientist working on finding a cure for cancer. They could use a quantum supercomputer to simulate the interactions between thousands of different molecules and cancer cells. This would allow them to identify potential drug candidates that are more likely to be effective. With the speed and computational power of a quantum supercomputer, the scientist could make progress in a matter of weeks or months instead of years.

In summary, quantum supercomputers have the potential to revolutionize fields such as drug discovery, materials science, optimization problems, cryptography, and more. They could help us solve complex problems faster, leading to advancements that benefit society as a whole.

At the same time complex to get there.

The question how? And more importantly how they are (not could be) faster than traditional computing.

They might but also might not be as revolutionary as some people makes them seem to be. In chemistry not everyone agrees they'd be so much better, the same goes for cryptography.

 

[mechtech]

Well if the first computer was...........let go with the Atanasoff–Berry computer (ABC) was the first automatic electronic digital computer. (1942)
And the first 'modern' consumer PC was.........maybe say an IBM 286 (1983)??

So 10 years for working quantum pc, then another 40 years on top of that before a consumer item?

 

[TumbleGeorge]

Well if the first computer was...........let go with the Atanasoff–Berry computer (ABC) was the first automatic electronic digital computer. (1942)
And the first 'modern' consumer PC was.........maybe say an IBM 286 (1983)??

So 10 years for working quantum pc, then another 40 years on top of that before a consumer item?

No, that's the wrong way of thinking. You expect a copy of the implementation deadlines, but today we no longer work "by hand" with a trigonometric ruler.

 

[Wirko]

Well if the first computer was...........let go with the Atanasoff–Berry computer (ABC) was the first automatic electronic digital computer. (1942)
And the first 'modern' consumer PC was.........maybe say an IBM 286 (1983)??

So 10 years for working quantum pc, then another 40 years on top of that before a consumer item?

Any such comparison will inevitably be a flawed one. In 1942, storage and transmision of digital data, as well as data entry and presentation to humans, were long solved problems, even if impractical. Can you say anything similar about quantum data in 2023?

Humans are also able to think and act algorithmically, and do things like manually executing a simple BASIC program, written on paper, with the help of a pencil and a bag of beans. Not all people but I'd expect that ability from most STEM-educated people and others who were good at maths in high school, with some additional training. How many can do that with a quantum algorithm? Here's an example, I don't understand anything, not even what input and output data looks like.


There are other issues. Superconductivity at room easily achievable temperatures, or QC without superconductors, may not become available in the next 40 years. And we have no reason to assume that a quantum computer could ever become a general-purpose computer, or even an accelerator universal enough to have its place in PCs.

 

[Frick]

Like some sort of ASIC.

Sure, but much much faster. Will try to find some sources, but if it works stuff becomes possible that currently is not feasible. It is still theoretical of course, but if there is a chance to do something wicked with it it is definitely worth investigating. They should be good at things loke the traveling salesman problem, which would have real world implications. As for the how ... there are different kinds of systems. One start is here.

 

[mechtech]

No, that's the wrong way of thinking. You expect a copy of the implementation deadlines, but today we no longer work "by hand" with a trigonometric ruler.

My slide rule scoffs at you sir.

Any such comparison will inevitably be a flawed one. In 1942, storage and transmision of digital data, as well as data entry and presentation to humans, were long solved problems, even if impractical. Can you say anything similar about quantum data in 2023?

Humans are also able to think and act algorithmically, and do things like manually executing a simple BASIC program, written on paper, with the help of a pencil and a bag of beans. Not all people but I'd expect that ability from most STEM-educated people and others who were good at maths in high school, with some additional training. How many can do that with a quantum algorithm? Here's an example, I don't understand anything, not even what input and output data looks like.
View attachment 302488

There are other issues. Superconductivity at room easily achievable temperatures, or QC without superconductors, may not become available in the next 40 years. And we have no reason to assume that a quantum computer could ever become a general-purpose computer, or even an accelerator universal enough to have its place in PCs.

agreed

If MS is throwing around 10 years, I'm throwing around 50 years before something tangible to the everyday person..........if anything..........comes to fruition.