O brave new quantum world!
An article today in the New York Times describes a cool experiment with “backwards propogating light.” It’s a cool experiment, but what I love best from the article is the following line:
However, the pulses were in a shape known as Gaussian, which is, in principle, infinite in width, though in practice not quite that wide.
Winner of the understatement of the year?
The KITP is hosting a conference on Topological Phases and Quantum Computation which starts today. The talks should be appearing online this week here. Wish I could be there, but hopefully most of the talks will appear online, thus allowing the teaching bound like me to follow the conference from afar.
It’s Bacon! (Warning: the linked site may lead to abnormally clogged arteries.)
Update: From the comments,
Bacon, Bacon, Bacon
www.baconrobots.com – Because the only thing better then Bacon is a hot animatronic lady cooking it for you.
www.ratethebacon.com – A site for bacon lovers who love to talk about bacon.
www.baconspectator.com – Home of the Bacon of the Month Club.
www.craftyplanet.com/bacobuddies.htm – Bacobuddies – how cool is that.
www.blacktable.com/bacon030515.htm – Bacon soap.
www.makinbacon.com/welcome.htm – I’m sorry, but microwaving bacon is just wrong.
www.cookingforengineers.com/article.php?id=3 – Or is it? Scientific Bacon.
www.cockeyed.com/inside/bacon/bacon.html – The economy of bacon.
www.bayoudog.com/04kitchen/bacon.htm – Bacon as heroin.
www.iheartbacon.com – for the Bacon obsessed
Lately I have been pondering how I would teach quantum computing to computer science undegraduates. Imagine the class was made up of juniors and seniors who are majoring in computer science or computer engineering. How would you teach such a class?
My first thought is that I would attempt to structure the class more around programming and simulating quantum circuits than on the more abstract course that one normally sees in quantum computing. Certainly this would have the advantage of stressing the students previous strengths (leaving out, unfortunately, the theory students. But if they are really destine to be theory students they should try to take the graduate level course, no?) It would also give them hands on access to the abstract ideas of quantum computing. What I’d really like to use for this would be somethign akin to a hardware description language combined with a simulation synthesis tool. It would also be awesome if a CAD tool could also be developed. However, I haven’t seen anything quite resembling this in the quantum simulation world, but I’d certainly be happy to find out if such programs exist.
Which would you rather have, breadth or depth? Suppose I give you the choice between the following two directions in experimental research in quantum computing in the next five years: either a few (say ten to thirty) qubits with extremely low decoherence and high control precision (perhaps even a high enough to perform quantum error correction) or a huge number of qubits (say hundreds to thousands to millions) with fairly poor decoherence and control. Assume that in both cases, fabrication can be done with a fairly high degree of sophistication. Of of these two options, which would you perfer to see in the near future?
D-Wave Systems, those crazy Vancouverites trying to build a quantum computer, have a new CEO:
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA, May 9 /CNW/ – D-Wave, developer of the world’s most advanced computers, has appointed Silicon Valley technology executive and entrepreneur Herbert J. Martin as chief executive officer.
Which makes me dream of the day when I will be able to include in my grant proposal a request for dollars to buy a quantum computer.
In tonight’s quant-ph a keen eyed colleage finds a paper wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a koan:
Quantum Physics, abstract
quant-ph/0605070
From: Yu Shi [view email]
Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 12:02:44 GMT (16kb)
High Energy Quantum Teleportation Using Neutral Koans
Does this mean that Deepak Chopra was right? 😉
In this sprit:
Two students were watching an atom. One students said to the other: “look the electron is a particle, right?” The other said, “no most definitely a wave!” A wise master came along, so the students decided to ask the master his opinion on the matter. They both discussed with the master why each thought that the electron was what it was. The master thought for a while and then replied: “I’m not a physicist you damn fools.”
On a somewhat related note: This weekend we went to see Julia Sweeney and Ira Glass. Julia Sweeney does quite a routine about losing her religion (part of which is available from a “This American Life” show here here.) At one point in her routine she describes how after leaving her Catholic faith, she learns about all the new age mumbo jumbo. She is very excited by this: a blend of science and religion. But she makes the mistake of getting interested enough to actually go out and learn about quantum theory. Paraphrasing: “sure there is a lot about the behavior of atom particles and waves we don’t understand, but there is no quantum consciousness. Deepak Chopra is full of shit!” Ouch, new age slam!
For those local to Seattle, Seth Lloyd is in town tonight giving a Seattle Science Lecture:
Monday, May 8 at 7:30 pm.
Seth Lloyd: ‘Programming the Universe’
Seth Lloyd is a professor at MIT who works in the vanguard of research in quantum computing – using the quantum mechanical properties of atoms as a computer. He believes once humans have a complete understand the laws of physics, quantum computing will allow a complete understanding of the universe as well. His new book Programming the Universe explains how the creation of the universe involves information processing. His hypotheses bear implications for the evolution vs. intelligent design debate since he argues divine intervention isn’t necessary to produce complexity and life. Downstairs at Town Hall, enter on Seneca Street.
The Economist predicts that in 15 years time there will be quantum computers: “But quantum computing does now seem to be acquiring a momentum of its own. Give it 15 years, and who knows what will result.” Okay, not quite, but there is an article about building quantum computers which can be found here
A rock star chemist sends me word of a company which has a product calledThe Qubit Quantitation System (You’ll have to say what country you are connecting from to see this page.) Those biologists have stolen our “qubit!” I wonder if they realize that their product will get horrible placement on search engines because they are using a very common and highly linked word. Doesn’t seem like the best strategy to me. (On another note, am I the only one who is annoyed by the word “assay?”)