Quantum computing explained with a deck of cards | Dario Gil, IBM Research
- Articles, Blog

Quantum computing explained with a deck of cards | Dario Gil, IBM Research

We have a very exciting
last talk coming up. Dario Gil will take us
into a quantum world. Dario is the Vice President
of Science and Solutions at IBM research, where he
leads over 1,500 engineers that are researching in technologies
and physics, math, health care, life sciences and others. And while some of
you will think, a quantum world,
that’s too far out, I’m very sure Dario
will tell us otherwise. So come up here
on stage, please. Thank you. Thank you. I was joking with
Mark that we couldn’t pick an easier topic to end
the day, on quantum computing. But I’ll try to make it
entertaining, and hopefully easy to understand. I’m going to start
with a reference to this term of beautiful ideas. And it came from hosting
a filmmaker about a year and a half ago, in the
laboratory I just showed you. At the TGA Watson Research
Center in Yorktown Heights. And he was a filmmaker
that directed this documentary called
Particle Fever, that I don’t know if you’ve had
a chance to watch, but I highly recommend it. It’s about the team
that was pursuing the discovery of
the Higgs boson, in the largest physics
experiment ever conducted. And a major
character in the film is a professor from Stanford. And at the beginning
of the film, he said something that
really captivated me. He said, “The thing that
differentiates scientists is a purely artistic ability to
discern what is a good idea, what is a beautiful idea,
what is worth spending time on, and most importantly,
what is a problem that is sufficiently interesting,
yet sufficiently difficult, that it hasn’t yet been solved,
but the time for solving it has come now.” ” So I want to tell you about
this beautiful idea, whose time for solving it has come now. And that is the possibility
to create quantum computers. If you look at how
we have created the basis of the
information revolution, and you trace it back to
other beautiful ideas, like what Shannon
taught us, to think about the world of
information abstractly. If you look at an old
punch card and DNA, we’ve come to appreciate that
both carry something in common. They carry information. And Shannon told us
that this world of bits could be decoupled from its
physical implementation. That was really interesting. But in fundamental
ways, it went too far. Leaving too much physics out. So here is two scientists that
work at IBM Research, Charlie Bennett on the right, continues
to work in our laboratory, And is an IBM fellow. And they asked the
question, at the time, of is there a fundamental
limit to how efficient number crunching can
be, computing can be? And when they asked that
question as physicists, they ended up with a
very surprising answer. And they found the
answer to be no. It turns out, that
number crunching can be thermodynamically reversible. These led to an
exploration of, what is the relationship between
physics and information? And there was a
now-famous conference that was jointly organized
between IBM research and MIT at Endicott house,
where this topic was explored in more detail. And the plenary speaker was
none other than Richard Feynman. And Feynman proposed
in that conference, that if you wanted
to simulate nature, we should build a
quantum computer. And I’m gonna explain
you what that means, and how it’s created, and the
problems that it will solve. But first I’ve got to tell you,
what is a fundamental idea? The fundamental
idea, just like we have bits in the
classical world, that can be a zero or a one. In a quantum computer,
you have qubits, which stands for quantum bits. Now, the difference
is that there can be a zero, a one, or
both at the same time. That exploits a principle
of quantum physics called superposition. And it sounds weird and
crazy, but it’s true. Now to give you this unease that
you should feel when you talk about quantum information,
and quantum computing, I’m gonna give you a
very simple example. A thought experiment that
also happens to be true. So let’s imagine that we’re
going to solve this problem. The problem involves,
you have four cards, three are identical, one is
different, one is a queen. We shuffle the cards, and
we put them face down. And the problem we’re
going to solve together, is find the queen. We’re going to be
assisted by two computers. One is a classical computer,
one is a quantum computer. So what we do, is
we turn them down, and we load them into memory. So we use four memory slots. The cards are
identical, we put zeros. The one that has a
queen, we put a one. So in our four slots, we
will have three zeros, and one is a one. We load them on
the two computers. Now we has to write a program
to find the queen, find the one. How would it be
done classically? You would go and
pick a random number, you don’t know where it is. You go look under that memory
slot, see if it’s a one, if not, you go to the next
slot, and so on, and so on. On average, it would take you
the equivalent of 2 and 1/2 turns to find it. It turns out, that with
a two-qubit quantum computer for this
problem, you can always solve it in one shot. So that uneasy feeling
that you have now, should be an explanation that
quantum computer is not just about building a
faster computer. It is building something
that is fundamentally different than a
classical computer. Now, a way to think about
it, an abstraction of it, is that a quantum
computer is always going to have a classical
computer next to it. They have to go together. So you have a classical
set of bits, right? The problem that you’re
trying to explore. And what that quantum computer’s
gonna allow you to do, is to explore these
exponential number of states. These 2 to the n, where n is a
number of qubits that you have. So now, we have relatively
small quantum computers, with few qubits. But just think of the
number, that by the time you have 50 qubits, you
have 2 to the 50 states. That’s a phenomenally
large number. But in the end, after you
explore these number of states, you go back to a
classical output. A string of zeros and
ones, that you interpret with a normal computer. So why is this interesting? And I think in this
audience, I don’t need to explain in
great detail, you know, what exponentials mean,
and why 2 to the 50 is a very large number. But it’s still, I think
it’s an interesting way to communicate
the power of this, and I like to map
it to some problems. But I like to go after
this apocryphal story that actually, IBM
used in the 1960s to explain to people the
power of exponentials. And it had to do
with the person who invented chess, that goes
to the emperor, and says, well here’s his wonderful game. And asks, what do
you want in return? And the person who
invented it says, give me a grain of
rice on the first day, for the first square,
and the second day you give me twice as much. And on the third square, third
day, you give me twice as much as the day before. And the emperor agrees
promptly that that seems quite reasonable. And after a week you
only have 127 grains. After a month,
you have more rice then you’ll eat in your
lifetime, for sure. But just by the time you get
to the end of the chessboard, you have more rice
than Mount Everest. So there are a large
number of problems in the world that have this
characteristic, that they blow up exponentially. And a dirty secret in
the world of computing is that we obviously talk
a lot about all the things that computers can solve, and
can solve a lot of things. But then, there’s
a lot of things that computers can not solve. And very interestingly, they
cannot solve it now, nor ever. And the reason is because they
have this exponential built into them. So take as an example, this
fairly simple equation. Factoring. So if I have a number,
M, that is made out of the multiplication of
two large prime numbers. And I only give you M, and
I ask you find me p and q. It turns out, that that
is phenomenally difficult to solve. There’s no other way but to
divide it sort of sequentially, by prime numbers. So in fact, it’s
so difficult, we use it as the basis
of all encryption. But, if you had a very large
universal fault-tolerant quantum computer, which
is many, many years away, you could solve that
problem in seconds, what would take billions of
years in a classical computer. That tells you something
about the power of what is going to be possible. Take chemistry, as a problem. Because it also has
this characteristic, that it blows up exponentially,
if you try to calculate it. This equation that you see
here is very interesting, because it’s predicted
to occur at the ocean floor near volcanic
sites, and famously has been hypothesized to be the
basis of the formation of life on Earth. But if you take a molecule
like iron sulfide, and you try to do relatively
simple calculations with a normal
machine, it turns out, that we’re not very accurate. And the reason is
that molecules form when electron orbitals
overlap, and the calculation of each orbital requires a
quantum mechanical calculation. So for that simple
molecule, you have on the order of 76 orbitals,
and two to the power of 76, is intractable with a classical
computer, so we can not solve it. Again, on this theme of our
assumptions that computers solve everything,
but they don’t. If you look at calculating
for example, the bond length of a simple molecule
like calcium monoflouride, we still get it off
by a factor of two, even using the largest
supercomputers in the world. To me, this has been
very interesting, this recognition of all these
problems we cannot solve. It’s also true in
optimization problems, that are the basis of
logistics and routing, and you know,
portfolio optimisation. There’s tons and tons of
problems in which at best we do approximations, but
we’re far from optimal, because a number of
possibilities is enormous. So if there’s one message I
want to be able to come across, it’s that we have these
easy problems, which is the world where
classical computers fit, and the problem it’s solved. But then there these other
hard problems, that go outside. And if you don’t
believe that p equals np, which I would say the
majority of mathematicians don’t believe that that is the
case, that those problems are hard for a reason, the only
avenue to go and tackle that, aside from approximations,
will be to the creation of quantum computers. So where are we? We believe that small
practical quantum computers are going
to be possible, and we’re building them now. It requires reinventing
the whole stack. The device is different. It’s not the
traditional transistors. As an example,
this is the device we use for that
quantum computers that we create at IBM, based
on superconducting Josephson junctions. And you’re seeing an example
of one of these device, is superconducting device. And because it’s
superconducting, you have to cool it. So this is what a small
quantum computer looks like. What you’re seeing
here is something called a dilution refrigerator. And this quantum processor
sits at the bottom of this refrigerator,
at the nice temperature of 15 millikelvin. So that is colder
than outer space, where we have to put this
quantum processor in. This is what, for example,
a 16-qubit quantum processor looks like. And you know, inside,
you see the square where the qubits are, and you
see these squiggly lines, which is these coupling
resonators that allow you to send information
uncoupled to the qubits, To send the information. This is what the
wiring looks like, into the refrigerator going
into a quantum processor. There’s these coaxial
cables, because the way you send information
to a quantum processor, is through a series of
microwave pulses, that go in, and then you’re
able to take it out. Now, if you look at pictures
of what computers were like, right, in the ’40s
and the ’50s, it’s kind of like where
we are today, right? That’s what, you know,
quantum computer, that’s the signal processing
required to actually send all those signals down
the coaxial cables, it looks like that. But we’ve also seen
this movie before, in the sense that we know
how much progress we have made from those early system. And while we don’t anticipate
that quantum computers will be on your phone, because they
require cryogenic cooling, we definitely
believe that access to quantum computers
in the cloud will be something that people
will be able to leverage, behind the scenes,
even not knowing. Because we believe that,
we created a small quantum computer last year, and we
made it available to the world. In something called the
IBM Quantum Experience. And all of you can go and log
in and have access to this. It’s available for free. It’s a 5-qubit machine. And since we launched it,
we have over 36,000 users from over 100 countries
that have been doing it. And 15 scientific
publications have gone on it, and people are learning how
to program, and to learn about this new world, and
what is being created. And you can actually
run things on this. So I was telling you about
these chemistry problems. So this is an example of
the expected theoretical calculation, and the actual
calculation, on a small quantum machine, of hydrogen.
So we’re starting to solve small problems. And what is coming in the years
ahead, in the next few years, will be machines that
no classical computer will be able to emulate. Because by the time you
have order of 50 qubits, think about that, that’s
2 to the 50 states. And no classical machine
will be able to emulate what that can do. And that is new territory. And that’s the territory
we’re all going to enter. And now is the most
interesting part, because it’ll be the path of
discovery of what we can do, and what value we can
create, on problems we couldn’t solve before. So I’ll close with
Feynman, who proposed this original idea of creating
these quantum machines. In his inimitable
style, he said, “Nature isn’t classical,
dammit, and if you want to make a
simulation of nature, you better make it
quantum mechanical, and by golly, it is a
wonderful problem, because it doesn’t look so easy.” Thank you.

About James Carlton

Read All Posts By James Carlton

100 thoughts on “Quantum computing explained with a deck of cards | Dario Gil, IBM Research

  1. Didn't explain any quantum computing. Summed up: classic computing – slow; quantum computing – fast. Could've saved 16 minutes.

  2. Is modern Physics desperate? They now create fake pictures to prop their fancy word nonsense. Modern physics is starting to sound like a clown show. The best addition to the standard model on light is in Lesseirg papers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_73gw3Yf_Q&t=313s and the mischief of black holes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po1CwKygzyA&t=33s

  3. I still don't really believe in Quantum anything. It all still boils down to something with 90% assumptions 8% hypothesis, and 2% factual provable information.

  4. What is it they are trying to quantum compute? They already have virtual reality and holograms for games plus quantum DNA healing us back to 30 years old, replicators to replace Amazon and prepare our meals etc., free energy, ways to totally create Eden on Earth. Along with that and major major more, they have the ability to institute a global financial system that will be fair to all (no fudging, no money laundering, no crooks?) and…ta – da! they have the Singularity program to eventually program and control us to the point of knowing our every thought. They are already launching satellites for the 5G, and the 5G towers etc are being installed in a city near you. He said they are decades away from building their machine, what else do they want?

  5. So a bunch a people are using private and public money to break the foundation of much of our current infrastructure that relies on secure communication based on these unsolvable (factoring) problems?! Yeah, makes perfect sense to me. 

    What I would like to see, instead of these rather boring by now trivialised introductions, is what are we going to do to replace current cryptography systems if quantum computers ever become a reality…

    Also would be nice to get an understandable explanation how quantum computers actually work … do I write the program in Python or what 😉 how do you code an algorithm for a quantum computer…

  6. I'm glad I read the comments before wasting 16 minutes of my life watching this video. Ty commentors, I'm sorry you can't get your 16 minutes back.

  7. Quantum Computers; no one knows where they come from, or where they go to, yet, they are here…I hope that helps…

  8. Thanks mates, great work !!! (Quantum computer)
    You doing it good !!! (Quantum computer)
    But why mate you didn't explain how quantum computers work?
    I understand it's not very easy but lot of people, correlated to technology or not, physists or not, chemists or not, programmers anykind or not would like to understand what they may achieve using quantum computers and how they are really work.
    It was a good occasion to explain it better.

  9. I am disappointed. He told that the card problem requires only 1 interrogation, but he did not explain how it worked.

  10. With this deck of cards experiment, what if you ask quantum same question 2 times? Is it going to be same result?

  11. This lecture assumes the listener has some background in computer science. In the past I also read articles and watched videos about how a quantum computer would eliminate the need to do a lot of number crunching.
    My advice is check out more videos here on YouTube some of them cater to people who have no background in computer science or quantum effects.

  12. #(concerning creation…as a rule of thumb…#governments are seldom informed about creation matters)…concerning historical truths 'this is my public offering: 'I am the legal US Fed Gov King…and US Indigenous American Chieftain…legal offices were amended in 1942, but legal titles could not be…This is my Chronicle-Blog-Story conradmcummings.simplesite.com 
    concerning this now time of the earth…it's not a popular place…AS first you need to understand the basics of time, place and dimension…or read my blog comradmcummings.simplesite.com (how many territories, earths, singularities, dualities, dualities of similar and etcs.)    ?
    I originally crossed over (physical rebirth) from the flat world dimension…(this a short review…containing no details) I was The Big Red Crown King from the Big Red Crown Territory…(being reborn in this time I had no past memory of this)…The casting of round world and universe was just completed…I know because visitors from the flat world areas made portal to visit me as a child…I was living mostly in my high chair in the kitchen of our farm house…they would come from a big flash of light on the back porch…at one time some of my family were present when they made portal…and the leader said to the others…don't worry they can see us but they can't comprehend us 'unless we draw attention to them…and the family would leave the room as the speaker predicted…the first time a blond girl came before me and said: 'oh look! the big red crown king is a baby…I could speak but I didn't let them know because I was very prodigy and sensed the danger…there was 5 or 6 the last time they came…they did not come in good faith…and I was not a well liked figure from that time…they had actually come to taunt me…claiming I had caused the deaths of my two jesters before I 'crossed over'…I once got close enough to receive my old memories…but they were to horrible and unstable to receive and I pulled away…the last time the visitors came with two fake bloody jesters carrying a carafe with a big gold red crown with jewels on it…as they were coming past me with the crown my spirit said 'jump, grab it' and it will be yours…it took a lot of courage but I immediately jumped from my high chair and suddenly I was back in my high chair…and the crown was gone…(I waited a few days and discovered the purpose of the crown) everyone was half screaming: saying 'the baby has taken the crown' what are we goin to tell the boss?…one said our time is running out (usually about 14 min)…and they actually began to crawl over one another to get to the portal…(they were workers and had no permission to be there) …the 'Boss' they called him is the master tech from the flat world era…during that time he was creating living 'forever robots' that were eternal and could be repossessed by them…?
    however the event was unsuccessful…(there is much more to the story that's directly related to present day UFOs…! and to mention that the flat world dimension is where most of our nursery rhymes came from…I was of great prodigy during my youth because of my past time in the flat world dimension…ruling this world was actually less than child's play 'LOL)…I looked into the future of that now time and I had a 6 month time limit to cancel my situation…after that it would be perminate…the crown I appropriated during the last portal was not unknown…and I knew dire consequences would surely follow…and I would have no way of protecting myself unless I ended my prodigy position…so having a lot of power I canceled my own prodigy…the change was like an intense vamp that continued for about three days…taking some amount of time to get acquainted with the thing of really being 'stupid…'A True Story'?
    …'concerning some of our past historical truths (and many are still classified) 'this is one of my US historical public offerings: The whites (visitors) and the indigenous came together in the 1700s and started the 'royal program'…a program based on laws of ancient royalty and monitored by the council of Indians…however I have no indigenous DNA as US king and Indigenous chief (because of the laws of ancient royal program),…in our early beginnings we were concerned about the future of the nation as a democracy 'so the US Fed gov began the 'royal program' monitored by the council of indians…in the beginning it was used as a ploy for acceptance in world trade and commerce…because all world governments were of royalty…after leaking information of the 'royal program' we were soon accepted in the royal trade and commerce lanes…(being a demochracy it was ruled non-expedient to change our parliament to royalty)…I am legal (but unofficial) US Fed Gov King and US Indigenous American Chieftain since 1942…however US fed gov offices were amended in 1942…but legal titles could not be…on my last meeting with the US fed gov they agreed to my public disclosure of this information…relating to the reason for their seemingly lax decision…they commented: 'who'll believe it anyway'…the information has never been popular because of the old 'royal thing' relating to our separation from England…so I seldom spoke of it…then in 1999 I wrote my story chronicle blog about my heritage because of the legal history of our country…(it being confidential until 1963)…?
    This is my Chronicle True Story Blog…my legal heritage information can only be validated by US Fed Chain of Command (Library of Congress)……(Conrad M Cummings (search royal program)…This is my true chronicle story blog: conradmcummings.simplesite.com

  13. The relationship of a deck of cards to this video is In A Nutshell: Factorials of 52

    There are more possible arrangements in a deck of cards than there are stars in the known universe. The full number is 52 factorial, which is (very, very roughly) an eight followed by 67 zeroes

    The Whole Bushel:
    There are so many possible arrangements of the cards, it is statistically unlikely that any two have ever repeated in all of history. There are in fact 80,658,175,170,943,878,571,660,636,856,403,766,975,289,505,440,883,277,824,000,000,000,000 arrangements.

    A classical computer would take more time than the age of the universe to factor them all! A quantum computer would do it in a mere fraction of the time your computer could display them all in.

  14. put your dislike where your comment is.
    By the way, I'm glad I'm not the only one thinking this was a total waste of time.
    don't make much sense until 50 cubits, that's the only thing I learned.

  15. 2 Years ago
    IBM must have a 20QUBIT working
    and China a 50 one – Is a good thing
    Because all thes computers on our planet will find each other
    and findcertain solutions

  16. His "explanation" of the deck of cards solution was say "it works" without explaining it. I feel a little disappointed, as I was hoping to understand the way the quantum computer arrives at its solution.

  17. All this reminds me of particle entanglement. That is one particle is Yes, and its entangled partner is No. And no matter how far you separate them, or how often you flip them, the entangled particle will match it. Apparently this has been proven by running experiments on millions of entangled pairs. But can we make use it of, for say, faster than light communication? We are told no. And now we talk (for at least 30 years) about quantum computing, and how a qubit can have a Yes, No or YesNo state. And we can't make use of it, at least not yet. I'm having my doubts that we can ever pull out the right answer from Qubits, but no one is saying it is impossible as of yet, like with the entangled pairs.

  18. I must be missing something. He talks about 50 qubits providing 2^50 states as a revolutionary concept that classical computers have difficulty replicating, but a standard computer already gives us 32 bit and 64 bit (2^32 and 2^64 respectively) states by default and there's no reason why you couldn't chain together to get even more states if you need. 32 bit float calculations are already blazingly fast, and depending on a number of factors 64 bit calculations are also extremely fast, so I guess I'm not connecting what the difference would be.

  19. Wishing that was all it took to explain QM but alas a Feynman said, whoever says they understand it etc. etc
    One another level, it might bring us closer to solving [what] built the Giza Pyramids, how and why… dammit!

  20. E=MC2 NOT E=MC(2×50) This video does not explain anything about how a quantum computer works or functions but rather how any "quantum computer" is literally bottle necked on both ends by a conventional computer an a massive amount of hardware overhead for cooling and interfacing the conventional computers at both ends of the quantum cores. He just told us that quantum computers at this point are quite useless due to the volume of overhead support structure (cooling and interfacing with conventional computers) lending to cost over-runs for such, making quantum computers an economical disaster area due to the cost of supporting overhead energy cost. It would be cheaper energy wise to run multiple "super computers" in tandem thus increasing throughput and processing power at a lessor carbon footprint (supportive structure overhead). E=MC2 NOT E=MC(2×50)

  21. A total waste of my time; I don't understand quantum computing more now than when I started watching this useless video.

  22. pick a card any card, don't look at it, now shove it up your bung, you now have a probability wave in your ass!, now squeeze your cheeks as hard as possible and watch the wave collapse, now you're a less grifty than DWave super quantum computer, no error correction required!

  23. Many people complaints about how this explanation DOESN'T explain QC. I think the information was enough for a person who is a real scientific researcher. In college, professor don't give you everything, but enough for you to know where to look at for. I just entered the IBMQ page, and everything is there. Of course, you have to read.

  24. My GF is a quantum computer, she always has three different states at the same time: She is OK, she is NOT OK, She is UNKNOWN

  25. That didn't really explain anything lol. At least not for the questions I have. That was more of a sales pitch.

  26. Cryptography as we know it is meaningless given a quantum with enough qubits. Imagine brute-forcing a key and having all of the possible outcomes at once.

  27. Quantum computing also brings hell of a lot of problems. If people use it right, it might solve most of our problems, like hunger (with quantum computing replicators – like from Star trek are a possibility), and dissease (drugs which simmulate exact mollecules – therefore cells in time…). But I have a strange feeling that humans won't use it right (well maybe simmultanously too). They'll use it for creating drugs to completely control someone, and creating an identical to human A. I. – to build slaves (they'll say they're just machines, and so on).

    EDIT; now when I read back what I wrote (I thought of all of what I wrote in one second), I think I could start writing Sci-fy books :))

  28. Room temperature superconductivity means yeah, you'll have it on your phone, in your watch, in your ear buds, in your car and on top of the street lights.

  29. Seeing as Quantum Mechanics is a fraud, so is quantum computing. I have a quantum toilet. I can shit and pee at the same time. That pretty much sums it all up. Eat sleep shit piss, rinse and repeat.

  30. chess, 8*8=64 squares, only 32 squares populated initially. Rules vary depending on geography and circumstances

  31. Doesn’t use the deck of cards to explain anything. I kept waiting for him to because of the title. Maybe he doesn’t know how QM works well enough to do what he wanted too.

  32. EXPLAINED WITH a deck of cards?…you explained how a classical computer would find the queen by looking in each memory bank one at a time. You said the quantum computer can find the queen in one shot….but never explained how that was done.

  33. How about solving the problem of getting rid of the old fashion ☔ umbrella and come up with a new tech replacement??

  34. America mus't not forget that the chinese have already quantum computer.
    Don't tink the chinese are stupid té are match smarter than we tink.
    Don't underestemate china.
    If there are break out world war III we al going to die .
    God see everyting and now war are coming.

  35. Been trying to get my mind over this for over a year and this is the first talk that made it really clear! Thank you.

  36. This is dumb. Nothing is explained – except maybe how a quantum computer is built/assembled. Nothing at all about how it works. Thumbs down!

  37. I'm not sure (quantum uncertainty) this guy knew what was he talking about. He didn't seem comfortable with the slides, skip any real explanation, went for the chess story and basically avoided explaining at all! What a joke.

  38. He did go over the most important slide, but it was probably an accident. Surely if he wasn't happy with it, he wouldn't have included it in the first place.

  39. 1:30 give me a fucking break! There are so many scientists that spent their entire life studying things that look totally banal and stupid to almost everyone but their work form an important basis for something totally different later on. Science does not have to be interesting or beautiful and most importantly it doesn't have to be solving a problem. One might just want to be understanding something and documenting everything. I've already watched this stupid video a year ago and disliked it. So why the hell YouTube/Google still trying to show this to me!?? WTF!!!

  40. A useless non-explanation. But, there is enough traction here to guess that maybe IBM and others do understand it and the upside really does seem to be astonishing. NOW…Will someone PLEASE explain how the hell it works?

  41. No, it's not explained here. This video is full of generalities. Maybe it's OK for your average click-baity article. But not for anyone who understands how classical computers work. For instance, how would a logical OR or AND gate work with those Q-Bits? Also how would you convert classical bits into Q-Bits? And then what? How would you make them compute or produce any result? It seems like no video can explain it that I can understand.

  42. I mean yes, if I load the bits, and use a normal algorithms, it also takes one shot to read a two bit coordinates of the queen. Where is the quantum advantage? I don’t think those examples are good. There is another video on the card 1 shot queen quantum spotting. And again, two qbits are put in the blur state, 1 first filter (let’s give it a quantum feeling) entangles the two qbits to hide the queen on the last position, then another complex filter is applied, then the two qbits are measured and collapse on 11 queen on the last position. So no gain against simple algorithme, more filters, same bites to read….. not a good example at all. They should emphasize the fact that having entanglement in complex system, once collapsed, can solve for multiple states at once, but I am still looking for a good example. If someone has one?

  43. CLICKBAIT !!!! There is ONE example of a quantum computer picking a card, one of four, compared to a classical computer. That's it. The rest of the video is an explanation of the CAPABILITIES of quantum computing.. ZERO explanation of the process itself.

  44. He gets right up to the point of almost addressing the title (explaining quantum computing) about the 6:15 mark when he notes that it could find the queen in 1 step. Then at 6:27 you see him skip past a slide with graphics on it and also skip the explanation as to WHY it can do it in one step. That one slide he skipped past would have been all we needed to see to give the answer the title of this video claims it gives.


  46. A lot of talk with no substance. As they used to say in the old TV ads, "Where's the beef?!" His card example explained noting, except to tell us how fast quantum computing is. If you haven't watched this video yet, save 17 minutes of your life and find something more educational, I wish I had!

    As for the quantum computer they offer, it doesn't work. I tried the circuit and it shows the job running, but never finishes. Another 5 minutes of my life I will never get back.

  47. Things I learned from this video is that the use of Qubit(Quntum Bits) allows supercomputers to simulate more states(0,1,both) than classical computer(0,1). Thereby quantum computer can solve problem with exponential complexity (On^m) in less time than classical computers.

    To do so quantum computer make use of Josephson effect in Superconductors which requires temperature cooler than outer space. Use of superconductors in quantum computer makes them impractical to use as personal computer. However we can use clouds to crunch numbers in one of this quantum computer.

  48. By the time the video got started, I thought to myself: "how long it will take until he mentions an Ashkenazi?"

    It took 4 minutes.

  49. Maybe the explanation only collapses in to reality when we viewers are not looking at the screen,
    or something like that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *