What's with this quantum stuff.Is it a new way to do arithmetic?
It’s been around for years. Physics Ph.D.s understand it. I studied history. I’ll let the physicists worry about quantum. Maybe I’ll ask my great nephew. He is a physicist…..
I know it’s a legitimate area of serious study, but I worry that hustlers and advertising shills are making “quantum” a term applied willy-nilly to all sorts of things, just to make them sound advanced—kind of like “atomic” was bandied about from the late 1940s through the ‘50s.
Quantum theory has been around for well over 100 years. Maybe Steve is asking about quantum computing, which is new enough to be of no practical use yet - but will allow much (much) faster computers when it is.
quote:
Originally posted by Bill RogersIt’s been around for years. Physics Ph.D.s understand it. I studied history. I’ll let the physicists worry about quantum. Maybe I’ll ask my great nephew. He is a physicist…..
I know it’s a legitimate area of serious study, but I worry that hustlers and advertising shills are making “quantum” a term applied willy-nilly to all sorts of things, just to make them sound advanced—kind of like “atomic” was bandied about from the late 1940s through the ‘50s.
Or like "ELECTRIC" was applied to banjos!
That banjo looks good to me...
Don't halfta..plug it in... ;0)
I was at a lecture by a quantum computer scientist a couple years ago (I don't work in that field at all). He was trying to explain how revolutionary they will become once everyone can have one. It was all very difficult to grasp but he gave one dumbed down example that stuck with me.
He said imagine a large dresser with 100,000 drawers. If someone randomly placed a pair of socks in one of the drawers, it would take a human on average 50,000 tries before they found the socks. But with a quantum computer, they could find the socks in less than eight tries.
The explanation how was over my head and I don’t think he really tried too hard, so he kind of vaguely said something to the extent of that a quantum computers can count math in a totally different way than what we’re used to.
He seemed trustworthy, so I’ll take his word for it. 
quote:
Originally posted by AndrewDQuantum theory has been around for well over 100 years. Maybe Steve is asking about quantum computing, which is new enough to be of no practical use yet - but will allow much (much) faster computers when it is.
That's it,Andrew.Quantum computing.
The newest "New Math"?
When the "Quantum" compatible hardware becomes available, I have full confidence that Microsoft will figure out a way to screw it up.
We are only lightly brushing the depth and applications of quantum physics and mechanics. THe computers will be the steppingstone. I think that other aspects, like quantum coupling will ultimately be the big contributions to human kind.
Human kind needs to grow up...
N...
Learn to play..Well...with others...
First....
quote:
Originally posted by steve davisWhat's with this quantum stuff.Is it a new way to do arithmetic?
I don't know, but if Scott Bakula teachers the course, I'll sign up!
quote:
Originally posted by steve davisquote:
Originally posted by AndrewDQuantum theory has been around for well over 100 years. Maybe Steve is asking about quantum computing, which is new enough to be of no practical use yet - but will allow much (much) faster computers when it is.
That's it,Andrew.Quantum computing.
The newest "New Math"?
It's the same old maths. 2+2 still=4. But done on a much smaller and faster scale and with added quantum weirdness that allows you to do 2+2=4 and 3+3=6 in the same place at the same time. Coincidentally I just read a short story 'Randomize' by Andy Weir ( who wrote 'The Martian'.) that describes an, as yet unavailable, consumer quantum computer pretty well.
quote:
Originally posted by steve davisWhat's with this quantum stuff.Is it a new way to do arithmetic?
Depends on how the term is used. Mostly folks associate it with the the realm of physics, very smallest micro states of energy and particles. (it's different than the normal human macro world).
Then again, since it's dealing with micro level of things humans can't see, experience, measure, easily understand; as Bill points out lot of it - "a term applied willy-nilly to all sorts of things, just to make them sound advanced—kind of like “atomic” was bandied about from the late 1940s through the ‘50s." - to sound sciencey, and used a lot with pseudoscience woo explanations; as doesn't require ability normal metrics and proof... something that can't see it or measure, must be something complex and not easy to understand that explains.
The old quote attributed to Richard Feynman -
"Anyone who claims to understand quantum theory is either lying or crazy"
I thought it was a Korean antacid ,,,, “Kwon-TUM”
Edited by - chuckv97 on 12/04/2022 11:11:09
quote:
Originally posted by steve davisWhat's with this quantum stuff.Is it a new way to do arithmetic?
It's just the seemingly impossible rules that govern how things behave on the infinitely small level.
Smaller than the nucleus of an atom and the rules of just about everything go out the window.
Yes, the smallest length is the Planck length. The ratio between a Planck length and the height of an human being is greater then the ratio between an human being and the observable universe. Things that happen in the quantum world are hard to explain using language and perception learned in the macro universe that we inhabit, so throwing the world quantum into any discussion makes it seem scientific and magical at the same time., as another poster mentioned.
The main 'fear' is that the standard encryption and privacy algorithms on current computers, which are thought to pretty much uncrackable ,as it would take centuries for a modern high performance computer to do so, are breakable by quantum computers. They're already researching encryption algorithms that would be uncrackable by a quantum computer. But it's currently a race to see which we get first; practical quantum computers or quantum-proof encryption.
There you go. Something else to worry about and start conspiracy theories about ("Do they already have quantum computers and are reading all of our encrypted traffic ?")
One of the hangout members, David Politzer, won a nobel prize in Physics based on his work in quantum mechanics. physicstoday.scitation.org/doi....1878324. He has published dozens of technical papers about banjo acoustics. Perhaps he will develop a quantum banjo. That would be cool, although it might require a PhD in physics to play it.
