Area 51 » Technology

The first part to this appears to be a duplicate of this question on whether quantum computers could prove P=NP. I'm not sure what you mean by the second part of your question - the significance and difference of what? – Mithrandir24601 Oct 24 '17 at 13:31

up vote -2 down vote

added by EvgeniyZh Oct 19 '17 at 16:02

This is extremely broad - entire books have been written on this subject, so it would be helpful if you could narrow down the question a fair bit as there are lots of interesting topics within 'error correction' – Mithrandir24601 Oct 19 '17 at 23:19

I think at this level of proposing questions you could just modify this question to "What is X in quantum error correction ", and maybe add "How is it implemented?", or to "I have a problem with Y in the error correction circuit of X". I can't think of what the word instead of circuit can be in the above. – snulty Oct 30 '17 at 22:09

up vote -1 down vote

added by Maxim Oct 18 '17 at 7:19

>Or would there really be any gain in doing it? Like would there be much benefit if it could do so. – snulty Oct 30 '17 at 22:10

up vote -1 down vote

added by Aniket Oct 17 '17 at 16:22

I think this could be added to by even asking what kind of information would a quantum computer need to store. Is some data required to be stored classically and the quantum computer mainly used for computational purposes - or maybe that would be a separate question – snulty Oct 30 '17 at 22:12

up vote -1 down vote

added by Dhruv Saxena Oct 14 '17 at 22:52

Question looks unclear and has cyclic arguments. Please specify what you exactly want to simulate using what. – Aniket Oct 24 '17 at 6:16

up vote 10 down vote

added by Chan Bae Oct 1 '17 at 22:56

up vote 9 down vote

added by Henry WH Hack v3.0 Sep 26 '17 at 16:06

up vote -1 down vote

added by Henry WH Hack v3.0 Sep 22 '17 at 16:10

up vote 10 down vote

added by kenorb Sep 21 '17 at 10:31

up vote 0 down vote

added by Henry WH Hack v3.0 Sep 20 '17 at 17:41

closed as duplicate of Can a quantum computer run an operating system? by Robert Cartaino Nov 29 '17 at 16:06

This question covers exactly the same ground as another question in this proposal.

up vote 10 down vote

added by snulty Sep 11 '17 at 23:52

I was thinking of something along the lines of Nielsen and Chuang's chapter 7. Roughly something about two level systems that retain quantum effects, ability to create initial states, and implement operations etc. Seemed like a question that might be asked. – snulty Sep 11 '17 at 23:56

up vote -1 down vote

added by kenorb Sep 11 '17 at 10:44

up vote 1 down vote

added by oldMammuth Sep 1 '17 at 16:23

Just in terms of notation is q[0] just some qubit, and x a bit flip operation on it for example? – snulty Sep 11 '17 at 23:59

q[0] is the first qbit of the register q (like the AX, BX, ... registers in MASM/NASM) and x is a flip, if I understood correctly, because it performs a NOT operation... but so does y and the u3(pi,0,0) where pi is the radius of turning the qbit pi = 180° = flip upside-down. But as to the real difference between these operation, I genuinely don't know: I'm a software developer, didn't take classes on quantum mechanics, but I wish to learn more. If this place gets accepted on stack exchange I think that many programmer will want to get in touch with the subject even not knowing the mechanics... – oldMammuth Sep 12 '17 at 6:01

I think it's a good question, I was just making sure I understood the notation :) I'm sure when there's a question body available it would be helpful! – snulty Sep 12 '17 at 9:15

up vote 10 down vote

added by Henry WH Hack v3.0 Aug 23 '17 at 22:17

up vote 10 down vote

added by ratchet freak Aug 16 '17 at 14:54

up vote 10 down vote

added by Chan Bae Aug 14 '17 at 18:04

up vote 10 down vote

added by DanTheMan Aug 10 '17 at 16:27

up vote 7 down vote

added by Mithrandir24601 Aug 3 '17 at 22:32

up vote 9 down vote

added by heather Aug 2 '17 at 23:51

up vote 10 down vote

added by heather Aug 1 '17 at 15:17

up vote 9 down vote

added by heather Jul 31 '17 at 23:42

up vote 10 down vote

added by heather Jul 31 '17 at 23:42

up vote 10 down vote

added by kenorb Jul 31 '17 at 22:32

up vote 5 down vote

added by kenorb Jul 31 '17 at 22:31

up vote 9 down vote

added by kenorb Jul 31 '17 at 22:31

Rather than limiting to "D-wave" computers, it is should be about quantum computers in general. – Nisarg Shah Aug 12 '17 at 16:30

up vote 10 down vote

added by asettouf Jul 25 '17 at 12:59

up vote 10 down vote

added by Itamar Green Jul 24 '17 at 16:45

up vote 10 down vote

added by tuskiomi Jul 7 '17 at 18:27

closed as duplicate of Are Cryptographic hash functions quantum secure? How is quantum computer going to effect the modern Cryptographic primitives? by Robert Cartaino Oct 16 '17 at 14:11

This question covers exactly the same ground as another question in this proposal.

While this may not be closed as an "exact duplicate" on the actual site, for the purpose of evaluating the scope of this proposal, combining questions all asking, essentially, how quantum computing affects cryptography helps assure we have a sufficient breadth of subject matter to actually create this site. – Robert Cartaino Sep 8 '17 at 16:33

@RobertCartaino Howso? I Think that there are suffecient child questions to be asked here. For example, there is not a single "What is Ohm's law?" Question on Electronics.SE that Nullifies all Power management questions. This is not more different than that. While there are questions with power management that contain redundant info about ohm's law on other questions, they're still not even close to off topic, nor are the bigger questions which ask about the topic as a whole. Closing this limits the attempt to see the bigger picture that this site provides as a whole, and stunts fundamentals. – tuskiomi Sep 8 '17 at 16:35

@tuskiomi You don't want to fill a proposal with a lot of "child questions". The purpose of the proposal process is to help define the scope. There were a lot of repetitive questions all asking, essentially, if/how QC will break encryption, so I picked a representative example to cover that space. Trying to keep them all open here despite my explanation does not strengthen the case for building this site. – Robert Cartaino Sep 8 '17 at 16:42

@RobertCartaino So you're saying that they'll likely be on topic if the beta launches, but it is not appropriate here, where we try to discern what IS on topic? – tuskiomi Sep 8 '17 at 16:45

Correct, although I wouldn't call them "inappropriate." More like repetitive or redundant where outlining the basic scope is the goal of this exercise. This is just a routine cleanup activity to help flesh out a stronger proposal moving forward. – Robert Cartaino Sep 8 '17 at 16:49