• chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    The way I understand it, and I could be very wrong, is that it’s like brute forcing the universe while wearing a blindfold. Because the power of a qubit is exponentially higher than the same number of bits, you can get a lot more information from the same amount of processing power. However, if you measure the qubit, it loses all of that information. Instead, you have to set parameters that say things like: solve for x, and then you wait for the solution to be presented from the qubits. The catch is that you can’t see how the qubits are working, because if you do, you observe them and the data is lost. You just have to hope that they solve the problem for you. In reality, it wouldn’t be that strange of a process, because you wouldn’t ask it theoreticals, you would have it solve complex problems that can be solved in some way. That’s why computer gaming gets no benefit, you aren’t asking for answer to complex problem, you are telling polygons where to be.

    • Alphane Moon@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Thanks for writing that out.

      This does make sense and it’s roughly what I’ve read previously.

      What I don’t understand is why is there even something called a qubit that have stops working if you observe it. This does not make sense to me.

      I also don’t really get the model of how qubits are programmed and quantum commands (???) are executed.