NASA and Google appear to be dabbling in Quantum Computing

SquishpokePOOPFACESquishpokePOOPFACE -21,248 posts (ignore below) Join Date: 2012-10-31 Member: 165262Members, Reinforced - Shadow
edited May 2013 in Off-Topic

There's also an in-depth paper on Quantum Computing if you want details: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1304.4595v1.pdf


tl;dr: thingy make computer go fast


Off Topic Disagree Agree 2Awesome

Comments

  • That_Annoying_KidThat_Annoying_Kid Sire of Titles Join Date: 2003-03-01 Member: 14175Members, Constellation
    if you ask me I would bet we are 5-7 years away from practical non lab applications of quantum computing. They are already playing with the controlling of electron spin and position so you can put two pieces of data on one electron

    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • baconbitsbaconbits Join Date: 2013-01-17 Member: 180124Members
    Space travel is starting to look like a possibility as well. I guess it was already figured out several years to be mathematically possible but would've required a warp drive the size of Jupiter. Now its supposed to be theoretically possible with a much smaller device.

    http://techland.time.com/2012/09/19/nasa-actually-working-on-faster-than-light-warp-drive/

    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • ezekelezekel Join Date: 2012-11-29 Member: 173589Members, NS2 Map Tester
    no idea what any of you are saying, but technically if you can travel at the speed of light somewhere, you'd be in the future. Since it'd take so many light years to travel to that destination, you'd still be the same person, but you'd be years ahead of us, and if you went backwards, you'd technically be going back in time, still being the same person!
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • ScytheScythe Join Date: 2002-01-25 Member: 46NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation, Reinforced - Silver
    baconbits wrote: »
    ... would've required a warp drive the size of Jupiter...

    Nope. The mass-energy of Jupiter. That is the amount of energy released if you converted all of Jupiter's mass to energy, E=MC^2 style.
    ezekel wrote: »
    no idea what any of you are saying, but technically if you can travel at the speed of light somewhere, you'd be in the future. Since it'd take so many light years to travel to that destination, you'd still be the same person, but you'd be years ahead of us, and if you went backwards, you'd technically be going back in time, still being the same person!

    Nope. You don't "travel in time" any more than you're travelling in time right now. As you go faster, the rate at which time passes for you from the perspective of a relatively stationary observer appears to decrease. You spend one year of your time in your journey, but from the outside perspective it actually took five.

    Also nope: The direction of the travel is not important.

    --Scythe--
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • ezekelezekel Join Date: 2012-11-29 Member: 173589Members, NS2 Map Tester
    Scythe wrote: »
    baconbits wrote: »
    ... would've required a warp drive the size of Jupiter...

    Nope. The mass-energy of Jupiter. That is the amount of energy released if you converted all of Jupiter's mass to energy, E=MC^2 style.
    ezekel wrote: »
    no idea what any of you are saying, but technically if you can travel at the speed of light somewhere, you'd be in the future. Since it'd take so many light years to travel to that destination, you'd still be the same person, but you'd be years ahead of us, and if you went backwards, you'd technically be going back in time, still being the same person!

    Nope. You don't "travel in time" any more than you're travelling in time right now. As you go faster, the rate at which time passes for you from the perspective of a relatively stationary observer appears to decrease. You spend one year of your time in your journey, but from the outside perspective it actually took five.

    Also nope: The direction of the travel is not important.

    --Scythe--

    low quality youtube video or it didn't happpen
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • mushookeesmushookees Join Date: 2008-03-26 Member: 63967Members
    edited May 2013
    That_Annoying_Kid wrote: »
    if you ask me I would bet we are 5-7 years away from practical non lab applications of quantum computing. They are already playing with the controlling of electron spin and position so you can put two pieces of data on one electron

    when it comes to technology, humans tend to overestimate what will be possible in the short term and underestimate what is possible in the long term. As for quantum computing, its more like 10-20 years away when you discover just how difficult the problems they are trying to solve are, its why Dwave went with their approach (which isnt really a real quantum computer)

    baconbits wrote: »
    Space travel is starting to look like a possibility as well. I guess it was already figured out several years to be mathematically possible but would've required a warp drive the size of Jupiter. Now its supposed to be theoretically possible with a much smaller device.

    http://techland.time.com/2012/09/19/nasa-actually-working-on-faster-than-light-warp-drive/

    Yeah warp drive is exciting however its hundreds of years away (maybe im overestimating there, i would say at least 250 years then :D)

    There are several problems, we need stupid amounts of energy, we are talking 500 kilograms of antimatter, we can barely make a few atoms of antimatter and the longest we can store it is 16 minutes. The other problem is you need some exotic form of matter with antigravity properties, we havnt found any yet. And then theres many more problems too. We are a long long long way off from achieving warp drive.


    ezekel wrote: »
    no idea what any of you are saying, but technically if you can travel at the speed of light somewhere, you'd be in the future. Since it'd take so many light years to travel to that destination, you'd still be the same person, but you'd be years ahead of us, and if you went backwards, you'd technically be going back in time, still being the same person!

    you cant go the speed of light, its impossible. So naturally its impossible to go faster than light, even for light. Space however, can bend at speeds even faster than light, its not bound by the same rules as matter. The theoretical warp drive contracts space in front of a spacecraft and expands space behind it, which allows it to travel across space faster than it would take light to travel.

    You are right that the faster you go the more your time slows down in relation to a slower moving observer. However, going backwards and and traveling back in time, thats impossible. If you traveled away from earth at the speed of light, then traveled back to earth, hundreds of years would have passed by on earth. I know which documentary you got it from too, i think you misunderstood what they were saying (however it was confusing how they were explaining it, so i can see why its easy to misunderstand :) )

    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • AldarisAldaris Join Date: 2002-03-25 Member: 351Members, Constellation
    mushookees wrote: »
    baconbits wrote: »
    Space travel is starting to look like a possibility as well. I guess it was already figured out several years to be mathematically possible but would've required a warp drive the size of Jupiter. Now its supposed to be theoretically possible with a much smaller device.

    http://techland.time.com/2012/09/19/nasa-actually-working-on-faster-than-light-warp-drive/

    Yeah warp drive is exciting however its hundreds of years away (maybe im overestimating there, i would say at least 250 years then :D)

    There are several problems, we need stupid amounts of energy, we are talking 500 kilograms of antimatter, we can barely make a few atoms of antimatter and the longest we can store it is 16 minutes. The other problem is you need some exotic form of matter with antigravity properties, we havnt found any yet. And then theres many more problems too. We are a long long long way off from achieving warp drive.
    Care to back any of that up with some evidence?

    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
Sign In or Register to comment.