What is your suggestion for introductory quantum computing book?
I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
141–150 of 373 posts
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure it makes sense - a qubit is canonically a quantum spin system, which has two eigenstates, up and down.
What about superposition? Or is that not considered a 'state'?
They're states but not eigenstates. It's like the difference between RGB colour and greyscale. In both cases there are infinitely many possible colours, but in greyscale they're all mixtures of two "primary" colours (black and white) whereas in RGB they're mixture of four (black, red, green and blue).
In a qubit the infinitely many superposition states are all mixtures of just two eigenstates.
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure it makes sense - a qubit is canonically a quantum spin system, which has two eigenstates, up and down.
What about superposition? Or is that not considered a 'state'?
A superposition is indeed a state, comprised of linear combinations of the basis states.
Further, (and anyone, please correct me where I'm wrong), the eigenfunctions (which could actually be called eigenstates) of an operator ARE the basis set, as they are orthonormal. (Right?)
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#144[deleted]
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#145Hi Scott, Shtetl-Optimized's tagline is famously "Quantum computers would not solve hard search problems instantaneously by simply trying all the possible solutions at once". What phrase do you think should replace 'trying all the possible solutions at once' in the public conciousness as a succinct description of the mechanisms of a quantum computer? Or is this topic simply too complex to be distilled into a neat syn…
Exactly the question I would love answered. Edit: this seems roughly answered to a question by user r4um
I don’t see where it’s answered?
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#146Thanks for doing this AMA, Scott. My question is: Could I ever get a job in quantum computing (or related) being 100% completely self-taught?
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#147How's that quantum supremacy coming along? I heard it was supposed to take a year. And it's been a year.
Also, are you planning to write another book at some point?
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#148Will the power of 2^72 complex numbers working for me cause gravitational collapse? Has anyone calculated holographic bound limitations on quantum computers?
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#149Hi Scott, Shtetl-Optimized's tagline is famously "Quantum computers would not solve hard search problems instantaneously by simply trying all the possible solutions at once". What phrase do you think should replace 'trying all the possible solutions at once' in the public conciousness as a succinct description of the mechanisms of a quantum computer? Or is this topic simply too complex to be distilled into a neat syn…
I'll just point to this https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3 which was posted as an answer to a similar question I had on a previous discussion about a blog post of his.
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#150Do you think modern PhDs overspecialize?