Quantum Computers Are Coming … But Why Should You Care?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 тра 2022
- Quantum computers are the future of ... everything. The first 1,000 people to use the link or my code undecidedwithmattferrell get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare: skl.sh/undecidedwithmattferre... They've been the stuff of science fiction for decades and promised by technology companies for almost as long. Although existing quantum computers can be computed on the fingers of one hand, their potential is absolutely massive. These powerful machines could help us discover more efficient carbon capture materials, make the most out of renewable energy or find the perfect formula for our next generation batteries. In other words, quantum computing could solve the most pressing issue of our time: climate change. So, when will quantum computers, with all their capabilities, begin to impact our real world? And will they really crack the code of our most puzzling enigma? Let’s see if we can come to a decision on this.
Watch The Future of Solid State Wind Energy - No More Blades • The Future of Solid St...
Thanks to Two Bit da Vinci for some of the Quantum Computer animations: • Is Quantum Computing T...
Video script and citations:
undecidedmf.com/episodes/quan...
Special thanks to Linknovate: link.undecidedmf.com/linknovate
Get my achieve energy security with solar guide:
link.undecidedmf.com/solar-guide
Follow-up podcast:
Video version - / @stilltbd
Audio version - bit.ly/stilltbdfm
Join the Undecided Discord server:
link.undecidedmf.com/discord
👋 Support Undecided on Patreon!
/ mattferrell
⚙️ Gear & Products I Like
undecidedmf.com/shop/
Visit my Energysage Portal (US):
Research solar panels and get quotes for free!
link.undecidedmf.com/energysage
And find heat pump installers near you (US):
link.undecidedmf.com/energysa...
Or find community solar near you (US):
link.undecidedmf.com/communit...
For a curated solar buying experience (Canada)
EnergyPal's free personalized quotes:
energypal.com/undecided
Tesla Referral Code:
Get 1,000 free supercharging miles
or a discount on Tesla Solar & Powerwalls
ts.la/matthew84515
👉 Follow Me
Mastodon
mastodon.social/@mattferrell
X
X.com/mattferrell
X.com/undecidedMF
Instagram
/ mattferrell
/ undecidedmf
Facebook
/ undecidedmf
Website
undecidedmf.com
📺 UA-cam Tools I Recommend
Audio file(s) provided by Epidemic Sound
bit.ly/UndecidedEpidemic
TubeBuddy
www.tubebuddy.com/undecided
VidIQ
vidiq.com/undecided
I may earn a small commission for my endorsement or recommendation to products or services linked above, but I wouldn't put them here if I didn't like them. Your purchase helps support the channel and the videos I produce. Thank you. - Наука та технологія
So are you still undecided? Do you think these kinds of advancements will help find solutions to climate change? The first 1,000 people to use the link or my code undecidedwithmattferrell get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare: skl.sh/undecidedwithmattferrell05221
If you liked this, check out The Future of Solid State Wind Energy - No More Blades ua-cam.com/video/nNp21zTeCDc/v-deo.html
Am I correct in thinking that classic computers are exact while quantum computers deal mostly with probabilities?
Last I heard, carbon capture is a scam that doesn't have a positive bottom line. Is there really a feasible way a quantum computer could find the formula for a material that makes it viable?
I got an idea for them to try, instead of measuring for spin or state in a cold environment, they could instead try measuring for lack of activity in a hot environment, at room temperature for example, the basic premise is instead of expecting them to be inactive most of the time, you instead expect them to be active most of the time and the simple lack of activity or reduction of it relative to the environment is indication of internal input's effect
Wow, so woke. You care so much about the climate. Change. Why do you pretend to care so much, for the people or the earth? Because both seem to take care of themselves and don't need you to pretend to care about them.
To be sincere I must say "climate change" is not an issue to be concerned about. We have been told time after time by this date the oceans will rise or by this date we won't have any water... Those dates have come and gone many times In your lifetime.. the only thing that is certain is that there is a socially engineered Agenda that is culminating in the next few years.. climate change is their big scare and when it fails they engineer plaques, and calculate possibilities of each and determine when and where to use them... Davos... Has been a source of most of these things. The World Economic forum is the puppet master that has been revealed. The WHO world health organization is a means to an end.. it now has power over most nations and their emergency powers... The removal of the smallpox vaccine given to children back in the 60s was planned so that the next design could be emplimented to force/scare parents into mass vaccinating their children. Drugs being activated by the stomach acids sending a signal that they have been taken will be used to ensure compliance. The timing is right... They will not give up without a fight.. the masses are blind or ignorant... All focused on climate change and the next media buzz...
I’m old enough (80 in September) to have watched computer technology go from zero to what it is today. After I left the Air Force in 1964, I studied and entered the world of computers and never looked back. I took physics classes back in my college days, but still find it daunting to comprehend quantum computing and where it may lead. I hope we realize the promise, goodness knows, the human species will need it if we expect to still be here in the 22nd Century.
Cryonically freeze your dead body to find out
Dan, quantum computing is just bs. The quantum community is trying to dupe us into this idea. They are trying to spearhead us into believing such crap so they can get funding for their losing goal.
I think the barrier to getting it right is going to be about having the numbers of educated perspectives to tackle the problem. Somehow, we have to make it easier for more people to be able to work the problem. From the sounds of it, hardware is only half the problem. After we have the hardware, then we have to figure out the software, and make the software as easy to use whilst being as efficient as possible.
I'm most worried about AI. That it will end up like terminator series. Man that would suck. Survive nuclear holocaust just to be hunted down by cyborgs.
@@jeremygalloway1348 cyborgs are humans with machine parts. You’re talking about robots.
It's difficult to separate the investor hype from the real science without having a PhD in quantum physics.
Agreed. I feel like I can separate investor hype for most tech just with passing knowledge, but quantum computing is simply on another level!
@@SaveMoneySavethePlanet Idk how accurate it is but I feel like quantum won’t become viable until a war happens. Since we are making progress but from what ik I don’t think it’s viable in the near future (10 years+). A war would flood the tech with government investments to gain an advantage. I don’t have phd just my opinion at the moments.
@@jcnt9292 definitely not a bad guess. War regularly spurs huge advancements in tech after all.
I do.
Well put! I’m in finance and I can’t keep up with the advances…
7:53 Quantum computers are suited to solve specific types of problems where it outshines classical computing - usually involving combinatorics. This does not mean thart they can replace the datacenters used today for a wide range of applications (such as internet servers or databases).
Once built at scale, they would be more like problem-specific accelerators connected to classical computers similar to how GPUs are used today.
Yes, I think the video was wrong on this point. The quantum computer consumes less but can only outperform classical computers in specific classes of problems. Also, the video fails to mention that the cooling apparatus surrounding current quantum computers consumes a lot more than the processor itself.
Also, IIRC, quantum algorithms have only been proven to outperform classical in quantum physics simulations. There is a quantum algorithm to efficiently factor prime numbers (Prime's algorithm), but it takes advantage of specific properties of prime numbers and is not applicable to any other optimisation problem. And no, factoring Prime's is not exactly NP complete, so solving it efficiently doesn't automatically mean we will solve all other NP complete problems.
Yes. Most of it will be used by the big, high-tech companies. Not a single person on his/her table.
Maybe in a practical sense at first, but any problem that can be efficiently solved by a classical computer can in principle be efficiently solved by a quantum computer. P is a subclass of BQP.
@@nazgulXVII "There is a quantum algorithm to efficiently factor prime numbers (Prime's algorithm)" It factors integers, you can't factor prime numbers. And it's called Shor's algorithm.
"And no, factoring Prime's is not exactly NP complete" We don't know that.
i would say: at most. or, very very specific.
Basically they violate a basic principle of computing, which is abstraction and generality. They are NOT computers, they are physical devices, like say, a mechanical or a quartz clock. You always need a lot of computing power to encode the task and decode the result.
Douglas Hofstadter put it clearly already in the beginning of the 1990ies. A physical analog computer is suffering from encoding and decoding task and he elaborated with the Spaghetti computer. The spaghetti computer is the fastest thinkable computer to sort numbers. It is independent of the problem size regarding the sorting. whether to sort 2 spaghetti by putting them upright to the table, or 500... it takes the same amount of time.
The problem however is that you have to label all spaghetti according to their length, or even prepare the spaghetti in order to reflect the numbers at hand, and later to read that from the labelings. And here they loose their advantage.
The GPU are fast in matrix math, so you can use them for anything involving matrix math. Google proposed them to use for representing neural networks. Yet the do NOT represent the neural networks in their entirety, hence they come with a huge cost of getting partially blind.
Matt, I will listen to this twice, that way I will double my 1% understanding of quantum computing. You rock , keep up the good work.
For real!! Mind blown and melted
Twice?? I think I'll leave it on repeat for a few hours/days.
powers of two you will be there in 7 steps 😆
Same here. My comupter gf couldn't explain well. So i asked my 17 yrs old son who took physic class and 1:1 physical tutor. He briefly explained what is quantum in physic. I remembered that and watched these videos to enhance my knowledge.
This video provides nothing but myths and popular misconceptions about quantum physics, plz don't listen to anyone, who's not qualified in QP and QM, and is telling u some weird bull crap about. Entanglement and superposition DO NOT work like that, not even close, and quantum computer are utterly useless for almost any modern day task, for end user they are no doubt
I'm sorry Matt, but that's not exactly how entanglement works. The way you're describing it makes it sound like you'd be able to break casualty, but in reality when you collapse the wave function of one of the pair of entangled particles, you know the spin of the other. The information still has to obey the speed of light when relaying the state of one of the entangled particles. Look up the quantum erasure experiment to get a better idea of this phenomenon.
You seem like a bright spark, so I have been pondering this for a while. Entanglement is a process achieved by some sort of catalyst, normally some sort of material that provides a fixed outcome of two particles with opposite spins, however famous people like Einstein stated it to be spooky action at a distance, what I am confused about is why that is the perception, when both particles are created in the same medium at a particle place and time, then only is one transported to another place, and the test done, how is it then a test if the medium will always yield the same specific set of circumstances of opposing spin for instance, its like dropping two balls down apposing slides, then taking the opposite spin generated by the slides and gravity, transport them thousands of miles, and call it spooky action at a distance, when in fact there is only one outcome to such an experiment, because of the medium that generated the effect, in this case being the opposing slides. I know its far of topic here, but I am curious, and somewhat convinced I am just failing to understand something fundamental here.
Isn't entanglement just a hypothesis? I think there is a reason we haven't seen quantum computers, the hypothesis is wrong.
@@AORD72 no its very well understood. The problem is the state is very fragile to outside noise. Heat, light, vibrations etc.
@@firstnamelastname59 nerd in the quantum state is a geek, or not... quantum flux makes you have both or none
your bra bomb better work, nerdlinger
If quantum computers are trying to optimize battery tech, I hope companies are also working on finding superconducting materials at a relatively higher temp.
Nope, universities and research centres are working on that. Companies just work on taking the finished inventions and figure out how to market them.
Thats contradicting as heat = resistance so superconducting won’t work unless surrounding air can dissapate the heat
@@rso823 unless you do it under the right pressure
@@rso823 the search for a room temperature superconductors has been going on for decades
@@rso823 one of key the key characteristics of superconductors is little to no heat due to zero resistance. He mentioned needing superconductors that can hold their key characteristics at higher temps because the first generation of SC materials had to be cooled down to almost 0 degrees Kelvin. We actually have had many major breakthroughs in this area of material science and have a number of high temp SC materials in labs and a few that are actually on the market.
3:10 - No, this is incorrect. You cannot change the state on one and have the other immediately change state as this would break causality. Instead once you observe one of the entangle particles, the state of the other is then also known. So no, quantum entanglement does NOT allow FTL communication.
You can visualize entanglement like this: I take a pair of gloves and put one in the trunk of a car travelling north and one in the trunk of a car travelling south. The driver of one car gets out after driving for an hour and finds he has a left glove. He then instantly knows the other driver has the right but no information was transferred in the process.
Abe Lincoln is not only a vampire hunter but also a theoretical physicist
I laughed hard man bcoz of the reply 🤣
I believe that "information transfer" does not occur in the traditional way.
If we use your own analogy, the driver with the right glove "informed" the other driver of this fact. This would be the "transfer" and not the conventional transfer that we are used to.
This has very quickly become my favorite science/engineering channel on UA-cam. You rock, Matt.
Quantum Information PhD student here: you have to be careful with the D-Wave claim, their device did take much less time, but it did not find the optimal solution! So the authors should not even be comparing the times at all. Such exponential speed up is what D-Wave has been looking for since they were founded, and this would be ground breaking news.
Asides from that great video!
You want to explain how google, nasa and oak ridge found the D Wave to use 0.002% of the same power used for the worlds largest super computer considering the D Wave is based on freezing the microprocessor to ~ -471F? Getting things that cold DO NOT take less electrical power. i ask you this because I do not think the video creator is serious about answering serious questions against his ideas.
As a physics major I loved the coin-flip analysis to describe a qubit in superposition: As long as it's in the air it has a chance of landing on heads or tails which isn't necessarily 50/50.
But then it turned into an analogy for a bit and I got sad 😂
Yup.
I fell foul of all the false analogies when I tried to program a quantum computer. They really are nothing like a transistor bit cruncher...
It's not either heads or tails; it's neither heads nor tails; it's both, and both branches of computation continue interacting with all other branches. There's really no classical analogy for the quantum world, so the analogies always fail.
@@marktrain9498 That "it's both" thing is a common misconception caused by the oversimplification of the cat-in-the-box thought experiment.
In reality, you'd say that it's not heads, nor tails, nor neither, nor both. It is in fact in another state of being called a superposition.
A spinning coin is actually a great analogy of a superposition: While spinning, it's neither heads nor tails nor neither, nor both. By careful observation you may be able to ascertain likelyhoods of the coin being observed as (landing on) heads or tails; and that stochastic distribution is what we call a superposition.
@@muizzy What about the double slit experiment? in that experiment it does show behavior that sugest that it is "both".
@@diablo.the.cheater u are fooled by MYSTERIOUS QUANTUM PHYSICS videos u've seen before, as is creator of this video, who presents a lot of myths and misunderstood facts and quantum laws, presenting them very, very incorrectly in his video. Most useful video on double slit experiment for me was that one - ua-cam.com/video/RQv5CVELG3U/v-deo.html It clears a lot of misconceptions and myths about that experiment, as well as some others, surrounding quantum phisycs and some of its phenomena
A better analogy I've heard about quantum computers vs classical computers is as follows.
Imagine a hotel with a million rooms and one needs to find a missing suitcase that is located in one of these rooms:
*Your home computer* - it's like having 1 bellhop and he has to look in each room for the missing suitcase, as you can imagine with a million rooms it would take a while.
*Classical super computer* - it's like having 1million bellhops in the lobby and they each travel to a room to look for the suitcase.
*Quantum computer* - it's like having 1million bellhops stationed in each room.
As you can see the bellhops, in the quantum computer analogy, will be the fastest to report back on which room has the missing suitcase.
more like bellhops that can exist in multiple rooms at once
@@cornoc yea because of the entanglement property of qubits i guess?
@@chuchuokeke more because of the superposition of states that they're in
I love these vids..... They give a glimmer of hope for the future. Thanks Matt
Matt another great video ! And your closing in on that 1 million milestone! I’m convinced Fbr robotics from Australia is going to be huge with its robotic construction solution. I’d love to get your thoughts on it
As someone who loves tech , your videos are always awesome and full of usefull information! keep up the good work!
Glad you like them!
Awesome video on quantum computing that I ever came across. Good job on explaining very complex topic into easy one. Thanks for putting up this on youtube.
Just a small note on Cooper Pair Qubits. Whilst the energy for switching states is much lower due to qunatum tunnelling the reason that tunneling is occuring is due to the cuper conducting nature of Cooper Pairs. Energy saved during the switch is most likely lost in lowering the temperature of the materials enough to allow for superconductivity to occur.
Great video with good explanations. I always learn something, thank you for putting in the effort and doing as much research as you can. We all appreciate the amount of hard work and dedication that takes.
7:57 what kind of a qubit does this computer (using 0,002% of traditional supercomputer's energy) use? Because I foresee cooling to single digits Kelvin as being the main problem here, unless we find room-temp superconductors... Also which is "the largest supercomputer" currently? Are you talking size or power?
Yes, I instantly wondered about the cost of cooling components to 1°K
He's likely referring to the Google Sycamore processor. In the quantum advantage (aka quantum supremacy) experiment, Google's 53 superconducting qubit processor (based on frequency-tunable transmons) outcompeted all classical supercomputers. It was estimated that 3 minutes of quantum compute time would take 10,000 years on a large classical supercomputer.
Major caveat: it was on a demonstration problem of no practical use. Quantum computers are not useful from a commercial standpoint to us at this moment.
Your estimation of cold temperature is actually off by a factor of 100. Rather than cooling to a few Kelvin, supercondcuting qubit processors are cooled to a few tens of millikelvin (e.g. 0.01 Kelvin). But its important to note that this cooling costs far less energy than running the huge classical supercomputers that the quantum supremacy experiment competed against.
My thoughts exactly. The cost of cooling is hard to judge. You have two aspects:
reaching and maintaining a low temperature by minimizing leakage
and
normal cooling to offset heat production
The first problem is just a matter of good isolation. maybe layered zones and different fluids used for cooling?
The second problem depends on inefficiency of electrical currents producing heat.
If I'm not mistaken, the second problem becomes increasingly smaller with lower temperature, approaching lossless superconducting at absolute zero.
Electricity costs arent an issue here, super computer consume a lot more power than quantum computers
@@7MPhonemicEnglish cooling can be done with liquid helium down to these low temperatures using cryostats, but once you get to the milikelvin range you need dilution refrigerators. They’re expensive, and expensive to run but I don’t think it’s so cost prohibitive that it’ll hold the tech back considering the end goal with quantum computers isn’t right now to get them in homes, but to offer them as a cloud based service where you can remotely access them.
As far as I know the big problem long term is that quantum computers are not a general computation machine. There is only handful of algorithms known which can be implemented. So it can do somethings (theoretically) pretty fast but only those things (at the moment). Therefore they are not substitutes to a regular computer but a complement.
This is partly true and partly not, in a sense. Quantum computers are general computation machines in the sense that it has been shown mathematically that whatever task a classical computer can do, a quantum computer can also do. However, to compute anything you need a known algorithm for doing so. Quantum computing is still a new field, so there is much algorithm development that still needs to be done. On top of this, there are many tasks for which there are known efficient classical algorithms, so there is not much motivation for developing quantum algorithms to do the same tasks. Quantum algorithm development tends to focus on tasks for which there are no known efficient classical algorithms. So yes, quantum computers are never going to entirely replace classical computers. This is loosely analogous to how the development of GPUs did not replace CPUs, but rather they continue to co-exist side by side to shore up each others' weaknesses.
Computers that learn how to learn will learn to take over and control everything.
Great !! Very informative video. Thank you Matt
Joined skill share. love it and love your work. Keep up the good work
Quantum computers aren't faster than traditional ones; they're completely different. They can (with very complicated math) try out all solutions simultaneously and come out to the one that works. The way I think of it is a traditional computer works serially, while a quantum computer works in parallel. Where a traditional computer would have to try all of the keys to a lock one at a time, a quantum computer would be able to try all of them simultaneously and tell you which one worked in one operation.
Didn’t he explain it that way too, with the postman example?
The whole "computing every possibility at once" thing is really not as accurate as it is said here;
In theory, a qubit can encode mutliple calculations at once in a superposition but you can still only ever measure a single bit per qubit (even in theory).
That means that in the end you get at least linear O(n) scaling, as each measured bit needs at least one qubit, which is considerably better than many classical algorithms but still not "everything at once".
(Because many classical algos are in quadratic O(n^2) or O(nlog(n)) time.)
Thank you for your video! This is super informative!
Hi Matt I've loved Your videos the last few years. I've learned so much from your channel thank u for educating me and I'm looking forward to more informative vids.
Your description of quantum entanglement is way off, by the way. If two particles are entangled, and you read the state of one, you know what the state of the other will be. But you can't "change" the state of one and have it affect the other, since interacting with an entangled particle breaks the entanglement.
The "spooky action" Einstein was referring to was the fact that quantum particles in a superposition appear to have multiple states at once. Collapsing the wave function (by observing a particle) is a statistical process - you don't know for sure of the states you're going to read. But entangled particles seem to collude with each other to always collapse the same way as each other faster than the speed of light. You could never use it to communicate faster than the speed of light though, as you can't manipulate the states after entanglement.
Couldn't the "when" of wave-form collapse be used to communicate? 😏
@@taiconan8857 The short answer is no.
The long answer is people say you can't and the math is beyond me so I'm going to take their word on it.
@@taiconan8857 No, and it probably doesn't actually "make" the other particle collapse (There's no such thing as "the same time" across space anyway). It just means you know what the state will be when you measure it.
Thanks, Martin. We may have oversimplified the explanation too much. It's always tough trying to dial in a complex topic to give the gist at a high level.
@@UndecidedMF Yeah, I imagine it's pretty hard to get balance right. Still love the rest of the video! :)
I just want to see how this will affect machine learning. It's outstanding what machine learning and AI is capable of right now with CPUs, let alone with QPUs.
I bloody love your channel mate!
Love this video and LOVE your t-shirt! ^^
Months before seeing this computer and learning a little about it, I decided to gamble and invest a little in quantum computing. This video has encouraged me to invest more into it. I look to the future, not the present nor the past in places into which to invest. This is definitely something that will be big in the future similar to the internet and the development of the computer.
Oh, yeah for sure. The problem is more of in what project to invest not is it worth investing lol.
7:34 this will very much depend on the task. Some tasks can't be solved more efficiently by quantum computers at all.
Replace SOME by MOST and you will be close to the truth.
My sense is that QC is in exactly the same stage of expectations of where robotics was in 1970s - early prototypes, vaporware projects, and lack of material science waiting to catch up. And in 2022 still no robots walking around or helping home
I like how every sentence is packed full of content. He's my favorite. I graduated as a math major.
Good gosh. Mind is officially blown. That was so far above my head, but it was incredibly interesting and makes me appreciate those behind these endeavors.
The focus on the applications to handle climate change was eye opening and gives a little hope, but it led me to wonder how many other applications it will help improve their respective developments and just how fast we may see even more technological wonderments. Amazing time to be alive!
I remember watching a video on this a few years ago. I can tell we've come along way. It still sounds like its in its infancy but I know once they develop a real applicable use for a quantum computers. They will take off like starships.
My history professor used to say that George Washington was closer to Jesus Christ than he was to today. Or put another way I heard said, we currently double our knowledge every 10 years.
My dad is 90 this year, born in 1932. He has seen the world change dramatically. When he was young their family didn't have a car and they listened to the radio at night for entertainment. He uses computers mostly to play games, but he's astounded that he can talk to his son in Tokyo from America (with hardly any latency, that which he doesn't understand).
When I was young, you got cancer you died. We now are on the cusp using CRISPR to being able to cure every cancer like magic! So we should try to imagine where quantum computers will be in 10 years from now. One thing I heard he didn't mention is being able to plug your PC or phone into one and have it create an encryption that would be impossible to crack. There are many possibilities. Like my dad, I won't be able to see many of these advances. But it is fun and interesting to imagine that the future won't be so dystopian and there may be a truly glorious future for humanity.
it is always great to watch your videos and learn sth new in science. thank you
Amazing.
This is your best video I've seen!
I wonder at what point the storage of data received from Quantum Computing becomes in and of itself a limiting factor on overall processing
It doesn't. If you have 1000-bit quantum computer, your storage needs are 1000 bits. The superposition collapses as soon as you try to read the bits out (its a "measurement" in quantum mechanics lingo), so you can never store the vast amount of information that's potentially contained within the superposition.
The trick to utilizing supercomputers is figuring out ways you can manipulate the superposition without reading it out, such that when you do finally read it out the probability that it will collapse into the answer you're looking for is very close to 100%.
Of course doing that figuring is not particularly easy and we still only have a handful of algorithms that are provably faster on a quantum computer relative to a classical computer (Shor's algorithm being the most famous - that's the one that will break the world if we haven't widely replaced RSA and elliptic curve cryptography with something more quantum-resistant before we figure out how to keep sufficient numbers of qubits entangled sufficiently long to actually run Shor's on the kind of massive numbers cryptographic systems work with).
I may be entirely missing the point of this question, but if the problem to solve is a data intensive one, you still have to get the data into it.
The term "holographic storage" popped into my head, but I don't know why, because I'm not even sure what that would look like in a practical sense.
I just said way more than I know, so I probably should have remained quiet. It might be my point is nothing, other than I wanted to say "holographic storage."
@@niftybass I think you get the size of the pipe issue I see... at some level even loading the question into the machine and reading out the answer from the machine takes up an amount of time that slows down the entire process
@@gweebara it's a good question. For certain algorithms the access to storage is already the limiting factor. For example one of the most well known quantum algorithms is Grover's algorithm for unstructured search. It can find a marked element in a database of N elements in root(N) tries while a classical algorithm needs N tries. However you first would have to build a quantum database which in itself needs N operations. So in this setting you won't have a quantum advantage as data loading is inefficient.
@@niftybass Its not really data intensive. The superposition (where the "data" is stored) is not something that can ever be stored - not as an input, and not as an output. The superposition only exists (and can only exist) while the quantum calculations are being performs.
To run a quantum computer with 1000 qubits you:
a) Initialize the system with 1000 bits (that's classical bits) of data. There is no superposition yet.
b) Do a bunch of horrifically complicated math to create and manipulate the superposition in a way that's (hopefully) useful to you.
c) Read out the results, which as noted above collapses the superposition so you're once again reading out 1000 classical bits - _not_ qubits.
Its that step (b) that makes quantum computers more useful than classical computers. Steps (a) and (c) are no different from any other computer system (in theory.. the hardware of course will be different since both steps need to interact with the qubits, but the states involved are classical everywhere we get to see them).
The main reason quantum computers are "hard" is that jumping from (b) to (c) is _extremely_ easy to do. So easy that stray particles or even photons of light that just happening to pass by can cause the superposition to collapse before we want it to and screw up the results. The fewer the strays and the lower their energy, the less likely that is to happen, which is why quantum computers are almost universally operated at cryogenic temperatures.
(Note: I'm using terminology rather loosely in order to (try to) generate some level of intuition. Hopefully I was at least somewhat successful at providing an extremely-high-level description of how these machines operate, but definitely don't take any of that as any sort of deep understanding. The rabbit hole of quantum mechanics goes very deep, and quantum computing inherits a lot of that mess. Far deeper than I could hope to describe or even fully understand myself!)
Too many potential applications of quantum computing to cover!
Another important one is designing, and controlling, nuclear fusion reactors.
One of the big challenges is control of the magnetic fields used to contain these reactions. Responding quickly enough has always been a roadblock to progress. Quantum Computing could be one of the breakthroughs that finally make practical fusion attainable.
Wondering what other potential applications of quantum you are thinking about.
Bitcoin mining perhaps?
@@brendonnoble5227 I suppose. But seems a sad use of oneof mankinds great achievements.
Kinda like how Captain America was initially used merely as a caricature to sell war bonds.
Very appropriate, since they are both happening ANY DAY NOW. LOL
Dude. You just made my week. That's a great application for quantum computing. If it is the thing that solves fusion, or at least that aspect of it, then it will be the apex accomplishment of quantum computing.
I want Fusion power, C02 vacuuming facilities like CarbonEngineering in Alberta does, Advanced materials for automated construction techniques, advanced materials for cleaning the oceans with, a new material that absorbs C02 from the atmosphere at a 100X faster rate than any other existing material,...
Wow, what a video! This felt like a top level survey of a very large subject. Someone could spend half a year drilling down into each of the things you've described here - and by the time they'd finished learning about it the subject of quantum computers will have progressed and changed again. There's so much going on.
One thing that really struck me was the "Majorana zero modes." I've never heard of them before, but if they really exist they sound like a pretty big deal for physics. It's kind of awe inspiring that Microsoft found evidence for them! I need to know more about this.
I really enjoyed that. In a convoluted way you have given me the inpiration for the Excell spreadsheet which I am about to compose.
If they're already using this in scientific research labs, we could see this in the commercial market in a few decades. Computers were a thing even in the 50s, though they were the size of a bus. Data storage was low density, drives were megabytes in size but the size of refrigerators or washing machines.
Now, 70 years later you're watching this on a machine that's more capable than anyone who was alive back then could even conceive of or imagine in any sense.
I'm optimistic about seeing these hit the market and be in reach to normal people before I kick the bucket.
I'm goona be watching on a teletype at 2 pages a minute. I'll flick through it in about 2 months
Decades? Probably not going to take that long. They estimate that we currently double our knowledge every 10 years. If you're like me you remember before that when you got cancer, you died. Now they're on the verge of curing every cancer, probably within the next 10 years.
And I heard one application for quantum computers commercially was that you could link your device to one and it would encode any password (making it about 1 million characters long) and no one would ever be able to crack it. Like you, in some ways I wish I could be around to see more of it happen, but we can be happy with these extrapolations what potential humanity will have.
When I read that physicists are all on the same page with quantum entanglement being real, and that this phenomena is science accepted fact-proven in the lab in experiments-thats when I started to realize that these new, so called quantum computers, are coming. Amazing.
This was the easiest and visually the best explanation of quantum computing that I ever watched and heard. Great job. And thanks!
Very very intriguing, the applications for exploration of all the knowledge we have to train this system are endless! There may be hope for humanity yet!!! Great video thank you!!
There is a simple solution to climate change: degrowth. Hoping for quantum computers to fix it seems a lot more risky.
Apart from the awkward framing as a cure-all, this is a really well done explainer tho. Props!
Degrowth will happen organically as population declines, which is already the case for most of the developed world. Quantum Computers just help with modelling climate change, not solving it.
Reducing consumption, or even not increasing consumption for all eternity, is a concept that capitalist economic theory can not comprehend.
Maybe the quantum computer will prove that Degrowth is a necessary component of a solution.
Do the energy reduction stats shown in this video include the cooling solutions? When I looked into quantum computing previously, I found out that they required a LOT of cooling. Like 90% of the rack space was used for the cooling solution, because the computers required -200 degrees C to operate. Has there been a breakthrough in this area, or is this still the same issue?
it's still the same issue, it's just that in certain types of computing quantum is SO much faster that it will use less power overall. It just depends on how suited to quantum computing a particular computation is.
Cooling is a capital investment provided you have good insulation.
Running a 30kW quantum computer for an hour or running a 1mW supercomputer for several weeks? The energy saving is astronomical.
@@krashd keep in mind they aren't faster at everything, only some tasks.
of course not. its misinformation as usual.
Thanks Matt. Great editing!
Great video! Incredibly well researched!
When learning about quantum computing it feels like I could just as easily be watching an Onion video, the concepts are just so crazy and so foreign!
It's very poorly researched, like VEEERY BADLY, he has no clue what he's talking about and spent 0 days trying to study
While Quantum computing has the potential to greatly reduce the time needed to solve complex, chaotic systems, that focus will certainly not be limited to environmental issues. Sadly, it can apply to a new explosive composition as easily as it could to a new battery composition. I hope we're able to apply this technology in the right places.
Couldn't this also be used to break into the most sophisticated encryption?
its perfect for breaking cyphers ( pattern deconstruction) so I wouldn’t bet the house on Crypto Currency 2024 boom!?
That requires Shor's algorithm which requires minimum of 2300 Qubits to break basic cryptography for bitcoin, but since bitcoin and other cryptocurrency is constantly growing it may take more. so not yet. In fact, it is estimate to take 300 million Qubits to hack ethereum network under 1 hour (vulnerable transaction window for ethereum networks)
Matt, you are obviously geeking out about this subject. So am I. That’s the good part. But also, I just went back to kindergarten re: the learning about this subject. Thanks for your video. Your explanations are very good, but I feel like I have to take each little bit 😊 apart and study it before moving on to the next!
Very informative. Thank you. :)
A common miss-conception about quantum computers is that they are just faster versions of normal computers using some quantum trickery. But they aren't. The superposition stuff means that they calculate all possible values (of the given qword) simultaneously. With 3 Qbit word you could simultaneously calculate all possible 8 outcomes. Scaled up to a "travelling sales man problem", the classic NP problem, with enough qbits it will produce all possible combinations simultaneously.
You might start to see the downside here. It doesn't give you the "correct" answer. It gives you ALL possible answers.
If you ask it was 0+1 is, it will give you 0, 1, 2, 3 as the possible answers. What use is that?
Well, if you have data and you know the answer you want and just need to figure out how to reproduce that answer everytime.... then give it to a quantum computer, let it do it's thing, give you all the answers, let you pick the one you want and by working backwards you can determine the logic path required to reproduce that.
This is basically supervised machine learning, except that the parallism and width/depth of the processing tree is insanely massive and almost everything (Qbit count dependant) is processed simultaneously.
This is entirely correct, but there’s an extra step at the end - not only does a qubit in superposition enumerate every potential outcome, at the end you use destructive interference to have “wrong” answers cancel each other out prior to measurement. Essentially, it goes from one to many and then back to one.
Pun overload as usual. Keep 'em coming. Quantum computing is totally over my head and trying to make predictions about the implications seem just impossible. Things can happen very quickly sometimes. Other times they are like fusion. Who knows though? Next year quantum computing suddenly leaps ahead and the next week it has a fusion nuclear reactor design that is simple, inexpensive and produces vastly more power than it requires to run.
It’s pretty darn over my head as well. The only thing that I can comment on is my concern that we’ll just have a rebound effect where we create loads more computing power with quantum computers, but then end up using all that extra computing power on silly stuff.
For example: look at how much better internet bandwidth has gotten over the last 20 years, but also look at how we’ve transitioned everything over to streaming and the cloud so we’re still using almost all available bandwidth.
It’s a lot like someone figures out how to make a better pizza for $7 Billion. Got it?
Quantum computing is over everyone’s head
Quantum Computing will really take off when the huge amount of funding starts to pour in to the first QuantumConnection to Ultra-Realistic Porn, plugged directly into your brain.
@@bheppes lol
Hey Matt, I'm really enjoying your content. You're really good at explaining difficult concepts. Quantum computing & AI will go together. When that happens, I think we'll see a very pronounced technological snowballing effect. I think that we'll see technological breakthroughs double every year.
Thanks! Glad you’re enjoying the videos. And I agree. The rate of technological innovation is increasing and will continue too with this.
Nice synthesis of the state of the art in quantum computing. Thanks :)
The more capable quantum computers become the more capable they will become. What I mean by this is thier computing ability help resolve their own problems. There are a few issues cross a quantum computer with AI and you could create really intelligents. Encryption QC's could break any level of encryption which is not a good thing. So while they have their pluses the downsides have huge implications
We say things like "real intelligence" without recognizing how far behind the vast majority of humanity is on this subject. A huge amount of people, perhaps even the majority of humans, would say that "only God" can create intelligence. And even the more intelligent ones among us will still consider certain skills as "magic" such as Charisma.
I say this because the implications of building "real intelligence" or a kind of intelligence that looks human shouldn't be understated. Engineers love to talk about the control problem and turn this into a binary discussion. Yet what we're talking about is essentially the second coming of God from a cultural standpoint.
Not in a literal sense, but in a cultural sense, God is really what we're talking about here. Forget encryption, super intelligent AI with superhuman charisma is probably going to be more of a threat to our identity as individuals and as a species.
But, encryption is a problem we deal with today, so I get why it's the go-to subject.
Quantum Tunnelling sounds a little bit boring to me
lol
@@jonathanozik5442 Ty, I am glad it made someone laugh :)
@@rogerstarkey5390 It is for me, for my friends and family it can be an ordeal lol
Dear Matt, Love the channel and so on.... I have found the last couple of videos really stretching, to try to connect the subject matter, to the channel's usual content. I think that most of your regular viewers, would be up for some deeper dives, rather than trying to connect two fascinating subjects in a channel that is only about one of them. An examination of how Japan, or China, or Germany, ...OR the US, proposes to reach 'Net zero'; how well are they doing, how realistic are their stated aspirations. I'd love that. If you are going to talk about quantum computers and global warming, then start with the problem, why it's so difficult to sollve and, Then, how quantum computers can solve it. 'We need an enzyme! (to... improve the rate of reaction in some battery.) But how to find one? There are an almost infinite number of ways that a protein can fold, so trying to produce one that is consistently the shape we want is impossible.... damn you serial computers!!' 'Well- Hey! This quantum computer can check every possible combination AT THE SAME TIME! So... that'd be useful. We'll buy one, please.' (Like that, except.... better,...... much better.' Thank you. Keep up the good work. (I know. I know... Everyone's a critic.)
Your videos seems like Marvel Cinematic Movies. Loads of love for such an amazing presentation.
You mentioned the Power consumption of Quantum computers vs. binary computers. Is this only the Computers power or is the power consumed by the cooling system included?
Standard computers need large amounts of cooling. I live in Western New York, which is home to one of Yahoo's largest server farms. The cooling systems required are enormous.
Either way it won’t have a meaningful effect on overall world power consumption, since as the video says data centers are only 1% of global power usage. Shaving pennies doesn’t solve anything.
@@ElmwoodAl of course they do. But the cooling system neccessary for quantum computing have huge refridgerating units to achieve the operating temperature of 1 Kelvin. I find it interesting to ask how these power consumptions stack up next to each other, either in total or in W/Tflop
Quantum computers are an interesting tech, that will have wide ranging effects. But trying to force the discussion into a narrow focus on climate related topics did a gross disservice to the tech.
This is a rare downvote from me.
Glad I'm not the only one that noticed this. 👍
Using this to predict where to put wind turbines seems ridiculous to me. Use this tech to develop something that will actually work better then wind and solar panels.
Ditto. I'm surprised to see you're the first one to bring this up. I see several comments in favor of environment protection that are replies to people who's comments no longer exist. I'm wondering if the anti-climate change perspective isn't being suppressed somehow.
Please dig deeper into this topic I would love to know more
Great video. I’ve been following quantum computing for awhile now. It’s endlessly fascinating for me.
Good video overall but any energy savings in the current chips themselves are easily lost due to the massive cooling infrastructure needed to make them functional. Hope this can improve over time but they are not less energy intensive than our traditional binary systems.
True for superconducting, though other approaches can operate at room temperature. E.g. trapped-ion, photonic, atomic array, etc.
They are much less energy intensive than binary systems. Running a quantum computer for 16 minutes while it completes it's task costs only a tiny fraction of the energy it would require a football field-sized supercomputer the 5 weeks it would take to complete the same task.
@@krashd 100% agree for the time period where we collectively use these computation where they make sense. We all know that quantum is already becoming a corporate/marketing buzz word. I fully expect to start hearing about Quantum ML, and the like soon when there is no reason to use it.
Fascinating! One note: if entanglement could communicate information, it would be able to do so faster than the speed of light, which would violate the principle of causality (the "speed of light" speed limit).
Yes this is true. As far as I'm aware, so don't quote me on this. The way it works is by the law of the conservation of energy and Equivalent Exchange. Essentially the electrons at one end are destroyed, in order to create electrons at the other end. It happened simultaneously and seamlessly. If you're thinking A-bomb, don't worry. Those work off of the destruction of matter to release vast amounts of energy. These just transfer matter and/or energy from A to B.
That would be true if there was something transferring between the entangled Qubits. Entanglement implies they share the same state at the same time including forced changes. Force one to change, the other changes. Not by something transferring from the one changed to its entangled counterpart, but by their very nature of being entangled the counterpart changes at the exact same time for no other reason than the source being changed. This is effectively 4th dimensional thinking; trying to understand and perceive that defiance of our three-dimensional space and linear progression of time. We cannot truly comprehend it any more than we can comprehend true infinity. We can measure and observe it though, and in a way that we can comprehend.
But does everything abide by the speed of light in the first place though? To our knowledge, only physical elements (smallest being a photon) abide by this speed, because they physically have to move from one point in space to another - the time it takes is determined by that speed.
But other elements (or rather, forces) may work in different means entirely. Take gravity for example, is gravity instantaneous? Or does it abide by the speed of light? Lets make a theoretical example: You are teleported into an alternate dimension - now does gravity from this alternate Earth affect you instantaneously, or does it take a fraction of time before you're actually affected by it?
Information in of itself is not physical, its observational. It's a force that affects something physical so we can observe it. So the question is whether the force of entanglement follows the rules of speed, or not. I have not been able to find any credible source that either proves or disproves this hypothesis, so if anyone has a credible answer to counterargue my hypothesis then feel free to enlighten me.
Ladies and gentlemen, the principle of causality is a fundamental principle of modern physics. If you're going to call it into question, you need a long series of very dependable experiments repeatedly showing exceptions, or the like. Internet woo-woo speculations about alternative dimensions or the instantaneous transmission of "energy" are not going to suffice. Those kinds of things barely move the needle of credibility.
My favorite theoretical application of entangled information would be to send an a camera with entangled sensors on an unmanned interstellar spaceship and then centuries later be able to instantaneously see what exists at the destination using the entangled sources of those sensors. Could it possibly work that way?
The thing with quantum computer is that they are analog machines, the prospect of keeping operations at a level of precision high enough to not get noise at the output is quite daunting, especially as the number of qubit increases : each term of the superposition comes with an amplitude to be controlled.
Stuff like quantum error correction will help with that task, but last time I checked (that is 2021) we haven't reached the level of precision required to make it work in a real chip, the best we have is partial error detection on a seven qubit chip or something along those lines. Getting a single error corrected qubit would require to increase the base level of precision of two qubit operations on low qubit chips, or managing to scale the best precision we can get with low qubit counts into the 50 qubit range, and then upscale this into the thousand qubit range.
You left me in the superposition state of understanding and not understanding at the same time
Quantum computers will make having a secure password for any of your resources unlikely. They are significantly faster than our most powerful computers today.
true.
then again just think generating a crypto key pair with a quantum computer..
only other Quputers will stand a chance to break the encryption algorithm.
The quantum crypto digital ID is just inevitable..
* at very specific tasks. Classical computers will still be the most useful for many other tasks. Also there are already quantum resistant encryption algorithms so no need to panic
Quantum transistors/computers are really analog computers.
Really more of a science experiment, than a practical computer.
Not correct. That could be said about quantum annealing but not quantum computing. You can also perform classical computations on quantum computers as quantum gates are functionally complete.
@@w760grz No. You don't know what quantum gates are.
You don't know.
@@MarkBarrett I am pretty sure I know what quantum gates are. I am currently doing my PhD in Quantum physics. A Toffoli gate with the third qubit initialized in 1 reproduces the action of the NAND gate. Which is functionally complete.
@@w760grz They are analog. Variable angle of direction, is the quantifiable result.
@@MarkBarrett you could indeed think of a quantum computation where you get an angle as a result but you also get an angle when you calculate the arcsine on your phone- that does not make it analog ;) Practically you always measure in the computational basis and get a digital result. The important distinction between digital and analog computing devices is if it is general purpose or not. And quantum computers are general purpose.
Quantum computers speed are only applicable in certain applications so can not replace data centers and such. So energy savings would be minimal as most computing power is used in data centers that simply hold the raw data.
Another EXCELLENT video. Geesh, you must be weary of so much clapping and ppl offering kudos from the many, many times you pull off such well done research, content, editing, presentation and style!
2:30 That's an misunderstanding of what Shor algorithm does. It does not do "all paths in parallel at the same time" we need to stop spreading this misconception... Doing all paths at once is not what it does!.
What a quantum computer does is fast "prime number factorization" and uses Fourier transformation and number theory to cleverly solve it.
The factorization uses a module function that divides a number and get a remainder. Instead of doing a division, it uses properties found in number theory like periodicity and repetition that gives a same remainder. Because of it's periodicity it is possible to use forrier transform to represent theses operations as harmonics of a wave and sum constructively the desired harmonics and destructively the undesired ones, leaving the desired factors at the end.
So for a QC to work you need to rewrite a problem and reduce it to the shor's algorithm form first. Not all problems are easily reduceble...
(Also sorry for the half assed summarization, this is what i could get with my bad english and writing in a hurry. if you really need a good answer look up "shor algorithm" on wikipedia.)
It would be a beautiful world if climate change actually were the most pressing issue of our time.
You don’t think increasingly frequent natural disasters and potential mass extinction is pressing?
@@grimaffiliations3671 Poverty and corruption cause much more human suffering. I do think climate change is an issue, just definitely not "the most pressing issue of our time".
@@lugano7329 mass extinction is definitely a little more pressing
@@grimaffiliations3671 How could climate change cause mass extinction?
@@lugano7329 because it disturbs ecosystems, and could lead to the exctinction of certain keystone species. Key stone species are species that, if they were to disappear, would wipe out many other species. There are many keystone species we haven’t identified yet, anyone of them dissaperaring could lead to a knock out effect that wipes out whole ecosystems. Climate change has already caused irreversibly losses to terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems
Great Video Matt and sign me up! I want my own QPU running my computers! heh heh. Honestly, this is some of the best news to hit in the past 5 years! The technological leaps we're going to witness, to feel the impact from the current development will be 5-10 years from now as long as we stay focused and FUNDING stays fluid for the R and D on all subjects correlated around the forward progression of Q-Technologies. I can hardly believe I've lived long enough to see this become a reality!
The only problem I have with quantum computing is that I’ve been excited about it for almost 10 years and I still haven’t seen anything exciting happen with them. They seem like highly specialized machines designed for specific computational problems like simulations, encryptions, or machine learning… or are they I have no idea. All I know is that I’ll probably never have one on my desk helping me with productivity or enabling mind-blowing graphics for my games. So I’m less excited. I think I’m also not impressed because I was promised that the computational power of quantum computers goes up exponentially the more q-bits you have and so far, I haven’t seen that. If you really could compute 2^1033 bits of data all at once, you’d be able to simulate the universe, and that’s just not the case at all. So I just don’t understand what these computers are actually doing or what it even means for them to have 1033 q-bits as far as practical applications. Is that better? Is it the same? I mean it hasn’t solved anything significant as of yet and it totally should be if it can compute 2^1033 flops/second. Like none of this means anything to me. I feel like it’ll be part of a massive computer of the future that uses all kinds of highly specialized and optimized hardware that people can pay to use like a utility. So if anyone has a use for quantum computing, they can just buy compute time for their research or whatever. But it’s not going to change personal computing anytime soon, or ever. Maybe it can help with climate change, I have no idea. To the extent that computers can help us solve any problem, I think they will.
The main problem is that quantum computers are limited to the speed of light just like everything in the universe. The over the top calculation was done without time being part of the equation. The 4 dimension was discovered to be time so that tells you what the equation was missing. Quantum clocks exist today and they work well.
I'd like to point out an issue I have with this and many other videos... Quantum computers (or any computers, really) can't solve global warming. The most they can do is give us a roadmap of the best / easiest / most cost-effective path to take. The infrastructure and hardware still has to be built and installed as well as operated and maintained. All this takes huge sums of money and the political will to implement. So, yes, Q computers could be a useful tool, but it's really just a single step on a very long journey.
It may seem rather pedantic of me to point this out but I've seen the "computers will solve this or that" trope in countless videos and articles. It's highly misleading.
Honestly, I'm looking have to agree with you. I hate being the "Glass half empty" guy, too.
This video was very much forcing a general purpose tool into being laser focused on an absurdly narrow category where the effects will end up being relatively minor as a result.
I am interested to see how safely we transition from classical computing to quantum computing with regards to current encryption technology.
I am concerned that if the wrong people have access to quantum computing they could bypass all current classical encryption creating a huge security risk for billions of systems worldwide.
Also things like Quantum Cryptocurrencies may exist that will instantly devalue Classical Cryptocurrencies and destroy current blockchains.
People need to be aware that we are right in the middle of the 4th industrial revolution, the 1st one changed things on such a massive scale, this one will change things even more.
I doubt anyone is prepared for what is on the horizon but we have already opened Pandora's box so it is sadly too late to do anything about it.
Some say that intelligence stems from complex systems, I agree, machine sentience may be just around the corner.
Humans work on a linear basis they can't comprehend exponential growth very well, but here we are allowing these technologies to grow by large exponents not really understanding where it will lead.
Prepare for madness :)
Fundamentally, the types of tasks you want and need to do with neural networks and quantum computers are largely the same. They're about doing things massively in parallel and thinking about a problem not as a procedural run of true/false questions, but taking in a lot more data and asking the question 'Close enough?'. Just like neural networks are more efficiently implemented in analog circuits in many ways, they'd likewise probably be a great fit for quantum computing, if not basically the same thing to begin with.
Great explanation.
Great video, loved the update in the field! Only thing i would have added than current computations on quantum computers need to run many times due to the errors to make sure it's correct so just including the time to run a simulation without mentioning that is a little misleading even though you talked about the decoherence and new quantum error correcting.
Hi Matt! Outstanding video, as they all are. My only pushback, which is not central to the topic of quantum computing itself, is the axiomatic statement that the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is our foremost concern. In terms of environmental problems, I am troubled that this has become the single metric on which we are all fixated. Plastic pollution in the ocean, for example, is not captured in this definition. You mention fertilizer, when in fact increasing fertilizer run-off is responsible for dead zones in oceans. Wind and solar are mentioned as solutions to climate change, when as your other videos describe, we are rapidly running into boundaries with the ability to store the energy captured (in batteries, etc), or the materials to make the wind turbines (rare earth magnets) or solar panels themselves. We also have the social dynamics of far less energy availability in a post-fossil fuel world; it seems unlikely to me that the population will simply and peacefully accept the drastically reduced material quality of life that will accompany the downstream effects of decreased energy consumption. Not to mention biological threats, like antibiotic resistant bacteria. Also as a planet we have completely failed at nuclear disarmament. I’m simply listing a few of many existential threats, within environmental issues and beyond, and wish the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere had been presented as one application of quantum computing, rather than the unequivocal greatest threat there is. Focusing on the one metric of atmospheric CO2 will cause massive and damaging externalities (rapid mineral depletion and pollution from solar/wind/batteries; and the habitat destruction that accompanies the installation of these facilities), and the neglect of other pressing problems. Once again, this is a very non-central criticism to your excellent video, which I enjoyed very much. Please keep up the great work.
I've been watching watched your videos for a while and love your fact based delivery mixed with the futuristic popular science stuff.
I recently watched a youtube video regarding Robert Lazar and was thinking what would Matt Ferrell say about this.
I realize that this may not be your cup of tea but hope I can convince you to add your 2 cents.
If nothing else I bet you will find the Robert Lazar video interesting.
in the end, all they want is to sell more ad to us. what a waste.
The part that interests me is the impact on information security. Quantum computers will Crack our existing encryption easier than ever.
Our power grid and other tools needed for human life will be vulnerable. We need to be prepared to protect ourselves better from bad actors.
Not true. Only some algos are vulnerable to Quantum brute-forcing, not all.
Quantum encryption of the blockchain is the next step!
I heard all about the same things 15 years ago, when the NSA was testing a quantum processor/computer.
As near as I can see, they're right alongside fusion power, a few more years, take out, rinse and repeat promise a few years later. Always, with the same promises, rinse and repeat.
Maybe, just maybe in a decade. New bleeding edge things are like that. We started our space program in in earnest 1957, JFK promised a lunar landing in 1961, we landed, with massive expenses from 1961 through the program's first lunar landing in 1969 and that, only because it became national priority #1.
Quantum computing's a far, far, far back burner priority.
I figure we'll get quantum computing at a production machine level around when we get fusion power.
Hey Matt, im curious what sources you used during the vid? I have to write a essay about it and would like to know where you found the information
And this is why I hold IBM, Microsoft, and NVidia stock. Some of my top tech stocks.
Great content thanks
I'd like to add to the postman in the maze and think of the postman sending a wave and having a way to find where the wave is leaving out of and then finding the path followed by the wave .
nice video Matt.
Thank you.
It's important to mention that quantum computing isn't some wonder-tech that is a straight upgrade over binary computing
For one, it's only faster on very specific tasks. Think of it as a GPU, it's much MUCH faster than a CPU but only on specific highly parallelizable tasks. Same goes for QCU, it will be ideal for specific calculations but for generic ones traditional computing will still be king
Secondly the computations themselves consume a lot less energy but, until a room-temperature superconductor is discovered if it even exist, quantum computers require massive cooling systems that eat a ton of power
yes can be used in my laptop so finished my work load alot faster.
Sir thanks for your knowledge sharing very nice Technology 👍👍👍
I been hera of movement called #SaveSoil... Sadhguru speaking of top soil and the years left of agriculture left on the planet. You've probably heard about already. All about soil first for climate change.
There's so much going on... Thanks 👏
How would one ‘program’ this type of system? That should be a video of its own. Thanks for a great channel and informative videos!
Matt means well, but you need a different type of channel for that question. he is a tech evangelist, not a quantum scientist.
Someone told me this about Quantum a very long time ago and I find it's very appropriate; when trying to get into anything Quantum make sure you don't keep failing your sanity checks!
Great video! I absolutely believe that quantum computers will revolutionize our knowledge in all fields of research. Especially since they have already begun to. Its harder simulations of issues that we havent been able to reach yet.
Wow! A relevant video! With only fractions of over-repeated information.