## Bringing Quantum Chips To The Assembly Line 56

nutty_kong writes:

*"The National Science Foundation apparently is helping to develop a reliable way to manufacture quantum chips. So far, there has been experiments but no reliable way to reproduce or in other words manufacture the devices."*Part of the problem with the promised magic of quantum computing is that component manufacture is often custom to each project, and difficult to repeat. Eventually, they'll hit RadioShack though ...
## Posting as AC because my computer is dead (Score:1)

## too bad.... (Score:1)

## Inifite Probability (Score:1)

--Gfunk

## Re:Quantum Chips (Score:1)

## Quantum Assembly Line? (Score:1)

Or is it that they won't know if they've produced the chip or not until they sell it?

---

## Tom's (Score:1)

## Re:People don't seem to get quantum computing (Score:1)

## Re:Death of the Hert? (Score:1)

Usually you measure in MIPS(million instructions per second)

Floating point Integers

and GigaFlops and TeraFlops

## In Sweden Was:Radio Shack S*%t (Score:1)

//H

## That's the ticket! (Score:1)

It'll be great to bring quantum chips to the assembly line. Tying in with an older slashdot story, we can even ship them in rental cars [slashdot.org]. Sure, they'll know exactly how fast we're going, but they'll have no clue where we've taken their car!

## The problem with quantum computers... (Score:1)

--

## As the ad says... (Score:1)

## Re:Ordered Lists (Score:1)

but have a very small performance increase over todays computers in searching ordered lists?That's because machines similar to Turing's can already bsearch() a sorted list in O(log n) comparisons. It's not like quicksort (a sorting algorithm with O(n log n) comparisons), where lousy implementations perform badly on already-sorted data, and some implementations fall back to Shell's gap insertion sort for ranges smaller than 10 or so items.

## Re:People don't seem to get quantum computing (Score:1)

## Radio Shack's New Product (Score:1)

Schroedinger's CueCat

## Give me a break! (Score:1)

## Manufacturing Techniques??? (Score:1)

If this can be done, then the implications for non-quantum devices are awesome. You could manufacture nano-machines, specialized conventional electronic devices, etc. If these techniques could be applied to the macroscopic world, you could create specialized materials with purities unmatched by conventional techniques.

This technology bears close watching....

## Measure, but don't observe (Score:1)

--Mike

## Radio Shack S*%t (Score:1)

Yep, eventually quantum computing devices will reach radio shack...and fail three days after buying them, just like every other Radio Shack (TM) brand product I've ever bought...

Me, I'm waiting for the day when I plug the quantum computer in my coffee cup in...of course that only works until I need a caffene fix: "Oh, Hell I drank my computer science project again!"

## Re:Intriguing Reconnaissance (Score:1)

## Quantum Chips (Score:1)

## Re:As the ad says... (Score:1)

"Radio Shack... You've got questions, we've got blank stares"

## When... (Score:1)

## Re:Fucking java (Score:1)

## Re:Novel Quantum Calculation Process. (Score:1)

## Re:Radio Shack S*%t (Score:1)

## Tasty! (Score:1)

## Re:Radio Shack S*%t (Score:1)

## Re:Eventually, they'll hit RadioShack (Score:2)

## Eventually, they'll hit RadioShack though ... (Score:2)

## Re:So I guess.... (Score:2)

--

## Re:People don't seem to get quantum computing (Score:2)

## Re:I can't wait (Score:2)

## Re:Eventually, they'll hit RadioShack though ... (Score:2)

## dot nanoswitch (Score:2)

'WE put the "dot" in quantum-dot nanoswitches!'## Re:People don't seem to get quantum computing (Score:2)

## Re:Probability wave (Score:2)

## Novel Quantum Calculation Process. (Score:2)

Tiny 'big bang' performs quantum computations [eet.com]

Using a computer model that "explodes" a single particle into an infinite regress of quantum waves, University of Arkansas physics professor William Harter has demonstrated a new approach to quantum computation. "Our model reveals a fractal interference pattern emerging from quantum waves -- after what we are calling a tiny big bang -- that can perform useful calculations, such as calculating all the prime factors of any size integer," said Harter.Like I said, this could be difficult to manufacture into a chip.

;-)

Check out the Vinny the Vampire [eplugz.com] comic strip

## Probability wave (Score:2)

## I can't wait (Score:2)

Eventually, they'll hit RadioShack though ...Yeah, right between the cm cubed terabyte of storage and the ream of colour electronic paper.

## Great for word processing... (Score:2)

Aunt Millie will buy a quantum computer at Radio Shack and use it for sending e-mail.

## They don't even exist yet, you know... (Score:2)

## Re:Radio Shack S*%t (Score:2)

Or is that tea?

This has been another useless post from....

## Imagine Windows on a Quantum CPU... (Score:2)

Windows Quantum. Able to function correctly AND crash an infinite number of times simultainously so fast you won't even know it.... Hope my old DOS programs still run...## Quantum Programming (Score:2)

## Re:Death of the Hert? (Score:2)

## Re:People don't seem to get quantum computing (Score:3)

You are ignoring Quantum Cryptography, where Quantum methods are used to encrypt data.That's what "unbreakable (by the laws of physics) encryption" is.

Luckily, this looks like it will be possible much sooner than actual quantum factorization engines. It only requires one qubit, and has been successfully demonstrated. Hopefully someone will develop a method that does not need line of sight photon transfers. Although, when I think about it, that's integral to the encryption method.

The whole thing with quantum cryptography is that it virtually eliminates the value of mathmatically based encryption algorithms. There is no present algorithm using superposition to generate even stronger encryption, and I'm not even sure if it would be mathematically possible to develop one.

The only safe encryption methods will be the ones that use the properties of the quanta themselves. Hopefully someone will find a way to finagle a PKI out of that, or we go back into the Dark Ages of encryption.

## Devices are possible with todays quantum dots. (Score:3)

So far one the most interesting use of quatum devices I have seen involved taking a wafer with an esentially random distribution of quatum dots and then using a neural net type arrangement to learn how to control it to get useful results out. I can't remember all the details but I think the setup was part of an optical light switching system.

I thought it was an interesting way of getting use out of devices that we are still not able to produce with accuracy.

## Eventually, they'll hit RadioShack (Score:4)

Eventually, they'll hit RadioShackOh, I can just see it now, hanging there on a swinging-door display, alongside all the other parts: RS part number 14-2847, in a little blue blister pack labeled

7404 TTL Hex Quantum Gate. On the back of the cardboard is printed a pinout and a Feynman diagram. I can almost smell the 60/40 now...Radio Shack: You've got questions, we've got blank stares.--Jim

## Excuses (Score:4)

## Death of the Hert? (Score:4)

Not that Hertz are really that terribly usefull or anything.... but they do give an idea, however vauge. Any thoughts on what new buzzword we'll be dealing with?

This has been another useless post from....

## So I guess.... (Score:5)

Damn, those /. trollers are going to have to find a new tag line... :-)

## We must ban Mac OS from this technology! (Score:5)

## Uh Oh. (Score:5)

------------------------

## People don't seem to get quantum computing (Score:5)

First off; the "size" doesn't really matter. A lot of the article focuses on how the qubits will be XYZ times smaller than modern implementations of regular bits. Well, of course they will be!! The whole thing about quantum computing is that it uses the properties of a single atom; if the infrasturucture were much bigger than that it wouldn't make much sense.

Almost as an aside, the article mentions the superpositioning of 1 and 0. This is. So what, you might say, what difference is it if a bit can hold a little more information? Think of this: Take 8 qubits. If these were normal bits they would be able to hold any one number from 00 to FF. When you have 8 qubits, they can hold ALL the numbers from 00 to FF. So you can run algorithms on all the numbers at once rather than just one at a time.

HUGEOf course, it can only return one number at a time (meaning it might contain both numbers, but when you test to see which number it holds it will return one or the other). There are ways to get around this, though. In the mid 90s Peter Shor at IBM developed an algorithm [att.com] for prime factorization in polynomial time using qubits. Normally prime factorization is an exponential (or "hard") problem. RSA and almost all widely used public encryption algorithms rely on prime factorization for their security. This is important stuff.

Some proposals for quantum computing use the "tunneling" method described in the article, but my hopes are with the NMR [stanford.edu] crowd. This seems the most promising using current technology.

And as far as being able to buy this stuff at Radio Shack; I would be

verysurprised if that happened any time remotely soon. Think about it this way: unbreakable (by the laws of physics) encryption, and virtually instantaneous cracking of encryption, just for starters? Hmm, I can't think of any super-powerful world governments who would want to get their hands on that and keep it away from anyone else...## Re:Quantum Programming (Score:5)

if (true) printf("true\n");

else if (false) printf("false\n");

else printf("I am a quantum computer !\n");