Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

newsroom.ibm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 325 posts

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#91

Post by vbtemp »

rain1 wrote: post #60

It is incredibly dishonest of them to post this without any details about the noise parameters of the system. When reading "127-qubit system" you would expect that you can perform arbitrary quantum computations on these 127 qubits and they would reasonably cohere for at least a few quantum gates. In reality the noise levels are so strong that you can essentially do nothing with them except get random noise results. M…

It seems like IBM has blown their credibility so many times. As soon as I saw IBM mentioned in the lead of the title, I knew what was to follow is almost entirely actual-content-free marketing spin.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#93

Post by bnjemian »

cbozeman wrote: post #61
bawolff wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's kind of like saying, i'm tired of political news - if we all actually die in a nuclear holocaust armegedon it will be hard to miss.

Actually, what you just said is the equivalent of saying, "We just developed a quantum computer that allows us to solve not just every physical world question we have, but every metaphysical one as well." Since you're literally comparing the end of most life on Earth, I think its fair for me to compare the development of a computer that provides limitless understanding. They're both equally ridiculous, in other words…

I feel like a nuclear war is a much likelier (yet very low probability) event than your computational straw man.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#94

Post by bnjemian »

gigel82 wrote: post #75

No they didn't; there is no such thing as a quantum computer or a quantum processor outside of theoretical papers. I know I'll be downvoted by saying that (like I was last time) but that doesn't change facts; they have a random number generator that is capable of generating a lot of very random numbers... cool, cool, cool.

If you added one word of qualification – practical quantum computer or quantum processor – this would actually be a reasonable position to argue.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#95

Post by tcgv »

7373737373 wrote: post #74
tcgv wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computational power for quantum computers goes as 2^n, where n is the number of qubits, so unlike classical computing this machine should be orders of magnitude superior to Google's 53-quibit Sycamore. If you wanna learn more about the subject, a couple of years back I wrote a introduction to quantum computing for programmers which you may find useful: - https://thomasvilhena.com/2019/11/quantum-computing-for-prog...

What does "computational power" mean though? Which specific problem can these systems solve that classical computers cannot, or more effectively?

Roughly, computational power = number of operations per cycle.

Classical computers can only perform a number of operations per cycle linearly proportional to the amount of hardware architecture available (ex: one core, two cores, quad-core). Quantum computers can take advantage of superposition and entanglement to, given some restrictions, perform multiple operations per cycle, proportional to "two" to the power of the number of qubits.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#96

Post by bnjemian »

baq wrote: post #3

> IBM Quantum System Two is designed to work with IBM's future 433-qubit and 1,121 qubit processors. what's the smallest useful (as in, 'non-toy', or maybe 'worth buying time on') quantum computer?

It depends on your use case. By some measure, the Google collaboration that demonstrated a time crystal was a practical quantum advantage in the space of condensed matter research. But in that space, practical means validating theory with experiment. That's a much lower bar for a quantum advantage than, say, showing that you've implemented a quantum algorithm that can, with high statistical likelihood (e.g. an error rate of 1/10e5), provide fleet routing solutions for a logistics company that are 10% more efficient than any known classical routing algorithm.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#97

Post by ghaff »

NegativeLatency wrote: post #82
jes wrote: post #34

For me, the name 'Eagle' reminds me of the book "Soul of a New Machine" by Tracy Kidder. That book is about the design and bring-up of another new (at the time) computer system, the Data General MV/8000, which was also code-named Eagle. I wish IBM great success with their work. edit: Clarified that the MV/8000 project was also code-named Eagle.

Haven’t read that yet but I read “House” by him recently and it was quite good

House is his other book that clicked with me given I had bought a fixer-upper at the time I read it. I really liked both books but none of the topics of his other books really clicked with me.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#98

Post by newsbinator »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #33

Quantum Computers sitting in their cryogenic chambers are such works of art, stacks of giant brass plates and hundreds of heat pipes (or coolant pipes? liquid helium I suppose) twisted and coiling throughout the structure hanging like some steampunk chandelier (why do they hang from above anyway?) EDIT: changed to a few direct links to pics: [0][1][2] The esoteric design reminds me of the Connection Machine blog post…

Someday when quantum computers are the size of dust particles and we're surrounded by them there'll be some version of a steampunk subculture that values decorating their homes with these ancient beautiful and laughably incapable devices.

Maybe in 30 ~ 50 years or so.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#99

Post by dougSF70 »

gigel82 wrote: post #75

No they didn't; there is no such thing as a quantum computer or a quantum processor outside of theoretical papers. I know I'll be downvoted by saying that (like I was last time) but that doesn't change facts; they have a random number generator that is capable of generating a lot of very random numbers... cool, cool, cool.

I am all in for down votes. I am not a physicist but the cost of cooling must astronomical for the output you get. CF. When autonomous vehicle technology gets released into production it is likely they won't make your car look like its wearing a dunce's hat whereas when quantum computers enter production we will still need mK temperatures for them to operate. The cost of cooling will burn the planet up further, just so someone can crack a SHA-256 encrypted password in seconds...random numbers indeed.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#100

Post by bnjemian »

zoover2020 wrote: post #46
rwmj wrote: post #13

Interesting that the number of qubits is approximately doubling every year according to the article.

How do we call this 'law'?

A quanta article (prematurely in my view), tried to dub this Neven's law: https://www.quantamagazine.org/does-nevens-law-describe-quan...
Post reply on HN