• Alphane MoonOPM
    link
    23 hours ago

    I get the joke, but honestly I still don’t fully understand how quantum computing works and I’ve read multiple primers on the topic.

    “Classic” computing may be complicated, but the base principle are actually somewhat straightforward.

    • @chemical_cutthroat
      link
      22 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 MoonOPM
        link
        12 hours 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.