Quantum Computers

>>8291194

Only with the shaders on medium

>>8291197
boo

>>8291194
some guy was answering questions about quantum computers a couple months ago and said they could run games, but its no better than current hardware.

>>8291269

What's the point then?

>>8291281
quantum computers are currently meant for things like complex algorithms requiring millions of different values to be tested. this alone applies to cryptography, drug studies, market predictions, and tons of other cool shit. in other words its good for tasks normal people will never need to do.

>>8291281
they didnt make quantum computers so you could play videos pleb

>>8291194
No.
>>8291295
It is debateable that Dwave's computer is quantum.

That thing is designed for solving optimization problems, meaning it can't play videogames.

>>8291367
>It is debateable that Dwave's computer is quantum.
I think it's been shown to definitely have a quantum but it's only good for annealing problems

>>8291475
*have a quantum speedup

>>8291269
Well either you or the guy is retarded, because QC cannot run shit. The surrounding hardware might, but they can't do crap.

The only thing Quantum computers generate is literally noise. Some retarded physics grad takes the random output, develops "error correction" algorithms and pretends they have a working computer.

>>8291194
Maybe a thousand instances at 1fps.

File: canvas.png (495KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 1280x720px

>>8291194
Only if classical part of it is capable to do so. There is no quantum algorithms used in Crysis that could be ran on quantum processor.

>>8291480
>The only thing Quantum computers generate is literally noise. Some retarded physics grad takes the random output, develops "error correction" algorithms and pretends they have a working computer.
Leave /sci/, please.

>>8291480
>The only thing Quantum computers generate is literally noise.
wew lad

Add the only person in here who has working experience with the machine, No

Honest question.

I've read that qubits take advantage of the superpositions of the last valence electron in a phorsphorus atom. Since its in a super position, does that mean the bit can be simultaneously 1 and 0? So you could have one output saying 110, the next 101 and the next 001, and get those representations at the exact same time?

>>8291820
>. Since its in a super position, does that mean the bit can be simultaneously 1 and 0?
No, it means we're uncertain about the state.
However some retard thought it means it's "both 1 and 0" and created quantum computers.
They clearly don't work and never will.

>>8291904
What is Bell's Theorem

Superposition is a real thing, not just unknown variables.

Also entanglement, one of the main things that make QCs work, has been shown to behave just as we think it does time and time again.

>>8291942
>What is Bell's Theorem
Not what you think it is, apparently.

>>8291904
>No, it means we're uncertain about the state.
>still believing in ψ-epistemic interpretations
get bent
https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6213

We're asking the wrong question here lads.

Nothing can pass the test until it can run d00m

>>8291949
No theory of hidden variables (i.e. classical uncertainty instead of quantum superposition) can reliably predict the behaviour of quantum systems

>>8292011
Local hidden variables, that is

>>8292014
Not him but, elaborate please

>>8291480
Oh, you must be a bready good quantum computer then! :^]

>>8291480
>noise
define 'noise'
random or not?

>>8292537
>define 'noise'
It's the beautiful melody of COMPLETE GARBAGE
It's not purely random but it's a modified random distribution.

>>8292547
>It's not purely random but it's a modified random distribution.
So, like any digital transmission? It's noise but because of it's properties we can receive messages perfectly.

>>8292029
Basically, for a while a bunch of people (including Einstein) thought that the seemingly random nature of quantum phenomena was just because there was something we couldn't measure about an object that defined what it was "actually" in.

A guy called Bell came along and came up with some expressions that MUST hold if that was indeed the case (Bell's inequalities). These were violated by experiment, thus showing that local hidden variables are not what's happening.

>>8291194
Yes and not. But only if you are not looking. I am uncertain.

>>8291194
It can both run and not run at the same time.

>>8291194
>>8293534
It runs, you just can't look it it.