Loki009: can someome explain it to me like i am 7 how quantum computers are so more awesome? I get bits and peices of the idea but for some reason i reach a mental block how exactly everything falls into place and is usable.
pueblonative: I see what u did or did not do there or here.
Olympic Trolling Judge: Loki009: can someome explain it to me like i am 7 how quantum computers are so more awesome? I get bits and peices of the idea but for some reason i reach a mental block how exactly everything falls into place and is usable.Let's say you're doing a brute force search for a number that has some property, because you don't have any better way to find it. You just test 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and so on until you find the one you want. What quantum computing lets you do is test multiple numbers at the same time, because science. The reason entanglement is so important is because it determines how many numbers you can run at once. For each additional "qubit" you entangle, you double the amount of numbers that can be tested at a time. 1 qubit can do 2 numbers at once, 2 qubits can do 4, 3 can do 8, and so on. Hopefully you don't need the for-dummies version of the exponential function to see why that's so awesome.The only problem is that entangled states are ridiculously fragile, so the exponential performance boost is offset by an exponential difficulty curve in getting the qubits to cooperate. The current record according to the Googles is 14 qubits (16k numbers at once), which is impressive but not nearly enough to do all the fancy crap quantum computing is often advertised as being able to do.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Aug 23 2017 21:27:30
Runtime: 0.448 sec (448 ms)