Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   Things NASA might or might not be doing with its new quantum computer   ( io9.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, NASA, quantum computer, Ames Research Center, light curves, weather predictions, quantum systems, quantum superposition, qubits  
•       •       •

2262 clicks; posted to Geek » on 20 Nov 2013 at 7:18 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



42 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-11-20 05:49:32 PM  
I think we found a machine that can finally play Crysis at max settings
 
2013-11-20 06:37:54 PM  
It can't do shiat! I keep getting "++ Out of Cheese Error. Redo From Start. "
 
2013-11-20 07:25:02 PM  

cman: I think we found a machine that can finally play Crysis at max settings


Even though that meme is finally dated, it really is impressive how long it took.
 
2013-11-20 07:29:16 PM  
I was foolishly optimistic that there would be at least one "Here's a damn cool problem we solved with this thing" tidbit of information in there.

/silly optimist
 
2013-11-20 07:29:23 PM  
Figuring out how to squirm through the sequester without dropping projects?
 
2013-11-20 07:30:45 PM  
Killing Schrödinger's kittens?
 
2013-11-20 07:31:38 PM  
Porn. Obviously.

Quantum porn.
 
2013-11-20 07:36:46 PM  
36 min is the longest they have sustained a full on quantum algorithm.  Think i read that from an article here a few days ago actually.

If they ever get it to go full time 100% sustained operation I'm pretty sure it would at least be able to figure out why kids like the taste of cinnamon toast crunch.
 
2013-11-20 07:37:04 PM  

Smoking GNU: Porn. Obviously.

Quantum porn.


Schroedinger's Panties.
 
2013-11-20 07:39:23 PM  

Dhusk: Smoking GNU: Porn. Obviously.

Quantum porn.

Schroedinger's Panties.


Is the penis in the box or no?
 
2013-11-20 07:40:48 PM  

Smoking GNU: Porn. Obviously.

Quantum porn.


Oh, boy...
 
2013-11-20 07:45:37 PM  
I'm quite enjoying this thread.
 
2013-11-20 07:48:30 PM  
Naw naw ya idjit, it's Schrödinger's Pussy.

Cat.

Hah.
 
2013-11-20 07:50:51 PM  
I'd like to see them start with something that even the lowliest of us plebeians could wrap our head around.  Like disproving Fermat's Last Theorem.  Then when you prove how powerful it is, it would be easier to get the Congress Critters to cough up the money for even more powerful computers.

/And Quantum porn.  One tentacle in two chicks at the same time?
 
2013-11-20 07:51:25 PM  

Smoking GNU: Porn. Obviously.

Quantum porn.


I'd be awesome at that!

/she never knows whether it's in or not.
 
2013-11-20 08:06:18 PM  
i243.photobucket.com
 
2013-11-20 08:13:11 PM  
Shouldn't that be "is and is not doing"?
 
2013-11-20 08:16:31 PM  
It's hard to tell since the computer stayed in the box after delivery.
 
2013-11-20 08:22:11 PM  

TheSwizz: I'd like to see them start with something that even the lowliest of us plebeians could wrap our head around.  Like disproving Fermat's Last Theorem.  Then when you prove how powerful it is, it would be easier to get the Congress Critters to cough up the money for even more powerful computers.

/And Quantum porn.  One tentacle in two chicks at the same time?


Uhh, Fermat's Last Theorem was proven in 1995.

Basically, Quantum Computers look at all possible solutions at once, and once their waveform collapses, you get an answer.  Now, it might not actually be the best answer that you get, in fact it might be the worst possible, but it will give the best answer a certain percentage of the time, with the best answer having the highest likelihood because it's the lowest energy state of the system, and merely good answers being local minimums.  So, it has applications for any problem where people would usually iterate through many possibilities to find the answer, like shortest route problems, or space packing problems, or pathfinding, or what have you.

For instance, if you asked a normal computer to find the smallest amount of, say, fiber optic cables, that can connect all cities in the continental US, it's basically going to have to exhaust all possible routes til it finds the guaranteed shortest path, which will probably be quite a very long time given the sheer size of the data set.  With a quantum computer, you could pose the same question and get an answer in a few seconds, but you might have to do it a few times til it gives you the best answer.

Here's a video of someone solving a simpler version of that problem using what is perhaps the simplest working quantum computer available: soap films.  (last half of the video really)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAyDi1aa40E
 
2013-11-20 08:33:55 PM  
Yes, but can it solve the DFW airport problem of leaving from Terminal C always returning to Terminal D from the same city?
 
2013-11-20 08:48:06 PM  

LrdPhoenix: TheSwizz: I'd like to see them start with something that even the lowliest of us plebeians could wrap our head around.  Like disproving Fermat's Last Theorem.  Then when you prove how powerful it is, it would be easier to get the Congress Critters to cough up the money for even more powerful computers.

/And Quantum porn.  One tentacle in two chicks at the same time?

Uhh, Fermat's Last Theorem was proven in 1995.



Well, I'll be damned.

But did Wiles take Quantum Tentacle porn in to account?
 
2013-11-20 08:48:11 PM  

FabulousFreep: 36 min is the longest they have sustained a full on quantum algorithm.  Think i read that from an article here a few days ago actually.

If they ever get it to go full time 100% sustained operation I'm pretty sure it would at least be able to figure out why kids like the taste of cinnamon toast crunch.


But will we ever find out why Apple Jack's don't taste like apples?
 
2013-11-20 08:55:00 PM  

TheSwizz: LrdPhoenix: TheSwizz: I'd like to see them start with something that even the lowliest of us plebeians could wrap our head around.  Like disproving Fermat's Last Theorem.  Then when you prove how powerful it is, it would be easier to get the Congress Critters to cough up the money for even more powerful computers.

/And Quantum porn.  One tentacle in two chicks at the same time?

Uhh, Fermat's Last Theorem was proven in 1995.


Well, I'll be damned.

But did Wiles take Quantum Tentacle porn in to account?


No, I think he only took into account all integers greater than two.

BadReligion: FabulousFreep: 36 min is the longest they have sustained a full on quantum algorithm.  Think i read that from an article here a few days ago actually.

If they ever get it to go full time 100% sustained operation I'm pretty sure it would at least be able to figure out why kids like the taste of cinnamon toast crunch.

But will we ever find out why Apple Jack's don't taste like apples?


Yes, and the answer is: because the people who make them don't flavor them with apples.
 
2013-11-20 08:56:40 PM  
Scott Aaronson writes a lot about this topic.
 
2013-11-20 09:22:03 PM  

Smoking GNU: Porn. Obviously.

Quantum porn.

"

I am not sure that I want to see all variations of a sexual act at once.
 
2013-11-20 09:32:20 PM  
How about calculating all possible offspring genomes from two would-be parents?
 
2013-11-20 09:36:45 PM  
hubby's seadline gis enius.
 
2013-11-20 09:40:28 PM  

Nem Wan: How about calculating all possible offspring genomes from two would-be parents?

"


That would serve absolutely no purpose.

Likely genomes, helpful.  Calculating all would only generate noise.
 
2013-11-20 09:43:48 PM  

unyon: I'm quite enjoying this thread.


I'm uncertain.
 
2013-11-20 09:48:53 PM  

LrdPhoenix: TheSwizz: I'd like to see them start with something that even the lowliest of us plebeians could wrap our head around.  Like disproving Fermat's Last Theorem.  Then when you prove how powerful it is, it would be easier to get the Congress Critters to cough up the money for even more powerful computers.

/And Quantum porn.  One tentacle in two chicks at the same time?

Uhh, Fermat's Last Theorem was proven in 1995.

Basically, Quantum Computers look at all possible solutions at once, and once their waveform collapses, you get an answer.  Now, it might not actually be the best answer that you get, in fact it might be the worst possible, but it will give the best answer a certain percentage of the time, with the best answer having the highest likelihood because it's the lowest energy state of the system, and merely good answers being local minimums.  So, it has applications for any problem where people would usually iterate through many possibilities to find the answer, like shortest route problems, or space packing problems, or pathfinding, or what have you.

For instance, if you asked a normal computer to find the smallest amount of, say, fiber optic cables, that can connect all cities in the continental US, it's basically going to have to exhaust all possible routes til it finds the guaranteed shortest path, which will probably be quite a very long time given the sheer size of the data set.  With a quantum computer, you could pose the same question and get an answer in a few seconds, but you might have to do it a few times til it gives you the best answer.

Here's a video of someone solving a simpler version of that problem using what is perhaps the simplest working quantum computer available: soap films.  (last half of the video really)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAyDi1aa40E


I read that twice and I'm still not certain if that was comedy or serious; maybe this is a quantum comment and I need to read it again for a more desired result...
 
2013-11-20 09:54:06 PM  

Mjeck: LrdPhoenix: TheSwizz: I'd like to see them start with something that even the lowliest of us plebeians could wrap our head around.  Like disproving Fermat's Last Theorem.  Then when you prove how powerful it is, it would be easier to get the Congress Critters to cough up the money for even more powerful computers.

/And Quantum porn.  One tentacle in two chicks at the same time?

Uhh, Fermat's Last Theorem was proven in 1995.

Basically, Quantum Computers look at all possible solutions at once, and once their waveform collapses, you get an answer.  Now, it might not actually be the best answer that you get, in fact it might be the worst possible, but it will give the best answer a certain percentage of the time, with the best answer having the highest likelihood because it's the lowest energy state of the system, and merely good answers being local minimums.  So, it has applications for any problem where people would usually iterate through many possibilities to find the answer, like shortest route problems, or space packing problems, or pathfinding, or what have you.

For instance, if you asked a normal computer to find the smallest amount of, say, fiber optic cables, that can connect all cities in the continental US, it's basically going to have to exhaust all possible routes til it finds the guaranteed shortest path, which will probably be quite a very long time given the sheer size of the data set.  With a quantum computer, you could pose the same question and get an answer in a few seconds, but you might have to do it a few times til it gives you the best answer.

Here's a video of someone solving a simpler version of that problem using what is perhaps the simplest working quantum computer available: soap films.  (last half of the video really)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAyDi1aa40E

I read that twice and I'm still not certain if that was comedy or serious; maybe this is a quantum comment and I need to read it again for a more desired result...


Why would it be comedy when it's absolutely true.
 
2013-11-20 09:55:16 PM  

Jeng: Smoking GNU: Porn. Obviously.

Quantum porn."

I am not sure that I want to see all variations of a sexual act at once.


I am.
 
2013-11-20 09:57:16 PM  

Jeng: Nem Wan: How about calculating all possible offspring genomes from two would-be parents?"


That would serve absolutely no purpose.

Likely genomes, helpful.  Calculating all would only generate noise.


Well, you couldn't help but calculate them all.  Since the offspring would have a random selection of 23 chromosomes from each parent, each switch you could do would be nearly equally likely.  Hence, all solutions are very nearly the same energy state, thus it would just spit out random samplings of chromosomes.  Really, a normal computer could pretty easily figure out all possible combinations, since there are only 223 of them, or 8,388,608 combinations.
 
2013-11-20 10:01:21 PM  

LrdPhoenix: Why would it be comedy when it's absolutely true.


I dunno; things can be comedy and true, right? I find it funny to think of computers in terms of guesstimation work.

I dunno, maybe I'm a dork.  I mean, when you mention Fermat's Last Theorem being proven; all I can ask myself is, "Was it really proven?" He used Infinite Sets to prove; which were not available to Fermat. Maybe I'm a purist; even though I Cantor is my fav Mathematician
 
2013-11-20 10:04:36 PM  

Jeng: Smoking GNU: Porn. Obviously.

Quantum porn."

I am not sure that I want to see all variations of a sexual act at once.


img.fark.net
 
2013-11-20 10:23:44 PM  

Mjeck: LrdPhoenix: Why would it be comedy when it's absolutely true.

I dunno; things can be comedy and true, right? I find it funny to think of computers in terms of guesstimation work.

I dunno, maybe I'm a dork.  I mean, when you mention Fermat's Last Theorem being proven; all I can ask myself is, "Was it really proven?" He used Infinite Sets to prove; which were not available to Fermat. Maybe I'm a purist; even though I Cantor is my fav Mathematician


Yes, well, quantum mechanics is all "guesstimation", or well, really, probability.  All quantum mechanical problems are infinite series with each term being a different possibility.  All infinite possibilities count in the end, but the farther out you go, the less likely they are and the less they contribute, and the more and more they counteract one another, since they're vectors, and they don't all go in the same direction.  This is actually why you see things in mirrors at equal angles from reflection, because at that point the travel time is changing the least, so the vectors are all mostly pointing the same way in that spot, despite the fact that the entire mirror contributes, but mostly cancels out.  If you remove portions of the mirror that cancel other portions out, you actually get a lot more light back from the whole mirror, but then you have a diffraction grating.  There's a set of rules to figure out the contribution of a possibility of an event from a Feynman diagram depending on how many interactions there are in the diagram.

In fact, here you go, everything you could ever want to know about quantum electrodynamics without needing all the major math in a ~4 hour long 4 part series, from the horse's mouth, as it were, Feynman himself, in all his glory:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLQ2atfqk2c&list=PLgPyhvuVB-yPv7oOjNW tx nX3X8U6aGcEQ

As to Fermat, yes it was proven, proven in a rather roundabout way, but still proven.
 
2013-11-20 10:31:58 PM  
They want hard things to optimize? I know FedEx and UPS spend lots of computing time optimizing delivery routes, but how about optimizing traffic lights across a city? I'll even throw in optimizing school and municipal start times in conjunction to allow further optimization.

Of course, that might be a dangerous problem to hand to an AI with a sense of humor. Might use a nuke to detangle a bad traffic interchange.
 
2013-11-20 11:34:24 PM  
We keep hearing about how Wall Street hires rocket scientists and about how NASA has no money. I don't get it. We should just allow NASA to invest in the stock market, then let them take all the crazy amount of money they make and use it to go to space.

It's not like if the banks lose money the government doesn't socialize the losses anyway.
 
2013-11-21 12:04:35 AM  
We want you to tell us -- the Answer!

The Answer?...to what?

You know. The answer...To Life...the Universe...Everything!

Tricky,,,
 
2013-11-21 07:05:58 AM  
I'll tell you what these computers will be used for.

1. National "security": scanning every single email sent and building a database on "threats" and other interesting bits of information, never mind what

2. Figuring out how to entice you to spend 5% more on every internet purchase

And later, if they become more affordable/accessible:

3. Cracking the security of every SSL website on the planet and stealing everything
 
2013-11-21 10:26:27 AM  
i want a computer that i can pour software into.
 
2013-11-22 02:43:23 AM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: It can't do shiat! I keep getting "++ Out of Cheese Error. Redo From Start. "


Well, keep it out of the high-energy magic building, then.
 
Displayed 42 of 42 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report