Yup, that’s exactly right! The tricky thing is getting something useful out of that big final state. Usually you can’t- but annoyingly all the information really has been calculated. There’s only a handful of special cases known when you can get some useful info out of the final state

Yes, the quantum computer works on the different basis states in parallel but keep in mind that the number of basis states in a superposition scales _exponentially_ with the number of qubits. This means that for n qubits, you can get a superposition of 2^n states which get treated separately by part of the algorithm until they are recombined. For example, for 10 qubits, you can get a superposition of 1024 states. So them being capable of working on states in parallel is like half of the speedup. Just working on things in parallel is something that a GPU can do already, but not exponentially so.

So like quantum multithreading?

​@@LookingGlassUniverseAm I correct that the class of Constraint System Problems like a sudoku puzzle, map coloring, and wave propagation tiling could be solved in a single step given a big enough set of qubits to represent the state?

@@thememermonkeyIn a complex plane, or multidimensional if you like.

the universe loves shoving things about itself in our faces until the topic shifts to one of its insecurities

The universe is a sim imo. Does the physics of a video game matter to you? It's been programmed into the sim, things are likely exaggerated like they are in games.

precision repeatability that adequately isolates environmental variables (including installation and a maintenance plan, sturdy enough to survive years of undergrads) costs thousands of dollars. Demonstrating an effect, especially an allegory of an effect or at least the concept of the effect, can be incredibly inexpensive. Its the actual analytical hardware that gets pricey. Partly because of the small market, partly because of the captive market (gives Thor Labs the stink eye), but yeah, a lot of cool stuff can be done with effectively trash. Hell, there is even a trash laser (the nitrogen TEA laser I believe)!

life of a scientist. Everytime you get the smallest insecurity you have to investigate :D But this is ultimately what makes us better.

Well, imagine the swindler has put another black box in the first, unbeknownst to you, 90° out of phase, from it's prior use. Best that you find an alternate field of study before it's too late!

hey, how did you get into it, ive only just finished my bach in physics and a double degree with CS as well, but i have no idea how to move towards my long term dream

as an overly educated evolutionary biologist still traumatized by the academic experience of emails and their responses 😂, let’s try to please find less generic phrases such as “keep up the good work” in response to truly unique and ingenious efforts. Love you all 🎉.

@@NinjamagicsFind an advisor/mentor that is a good person that offers you freedom to explore and learn while also offering true mentorship and feedback. You have to decide the field and choose with discernment and after many days of nerding out on the subject field and literatures. After immersing in the literature , contact your chosen prospective interest advisors. Their response or lack there of will be extremely informative as to where you are at in your educational journey , where you fit, and whether or not they are a fit for you. Dive deep and have fun friend.

At @11:20 you say one lambda and full wave plate. But that should be half lambda as here in the description, right? One lambda wouldn’t change the light, right?

Ms. Mithuna, if you do not use superposition as you explained, then it is a quantum computer without its advantage over traditional computers, but yes, it is a quantum computer. And the computation you showed is indeed computation, but it is seeing in the opposite direction of what most people are used to, even with the use of "calculators". Thanks for showing, for some in an apparently inadvertent way, that any action is computation, and that any computer is an "informatic searcher".

Very clear calcite may be sold under the varietal name "iceland spar"

Really, really enjoyed this video. I've seen this problem explained before, but usually it's done so fast that after a while I retain nothing. But with your slow pace + real life demo (and not just animation) I have the feeling it got engraved in my mind this time (and the HW answer is balanced). However, what I really want to know is why light slows down ?? 😉😅

It's crazy... This was rather scattered and yet gave me much better insight than most other explanations 🤣🤷‍♂️

Yeah! Welcome to information theory :) With a classical computer, you would never be able to get beyond that. There would be different ways to measure, potentially, but it's fundamentally impossible to get more information out of it than you put in, and with a classical computer, the information you put in can only have one bit. With quantum computing, it has to turn classical at the far end (the final measurement step), so there's still a fundamental limit (with one superposition input and one measurement, you still can't tell exactly which function it is), but there are now measurement forms that involve TWO inputs.

But this quantum computer lacks its advantage over "traditional computers"...

analog is not comparable to quantum at all. Analog is very much classical in its workings. There are no superposition calculations going on in analog systems. The potential of analog systems is speed. Using the physical properties of electricity to do the actual calculations - is very fast. The downside is flexibility. An analog circuit is only able to do a very specific calculation. It is not programmable in the same sense as a digital curcuit. ------------------------- This means that analog systems have great potential to speed up our digital computers, as a computation accelerator deployable in certain situations. Very much like a graphics card in its specific usecases. If the whole system is suppose to be analog, you will have very low flexibility after deployment. Kind of contrary to what makes computers extremely widely useful. Its not like I know a mathematical proof, but something tells me intuitively that building a turing complete system in complete analog is basically impossible. You will always depend on some digital circuits for programmability.

@@jonaswox wow you just wrote a whole book to prove my point. You said “the potential of analog systems is speed” that’s the exact same potential of quantum computers. You said “analog circuits is only able to do a very specific calculation” that is the exact same as saying quantum computer can perform one single algorithm. You said analog is not programmable in the same sense as a digital circuit. So are quantum computers based of what the videos show. So clearly both quantum and analog are comparable. And just so that there’s no confusion, in my statement I said they are similar, I’m very much aware of the fact that quantum checks the particle position to perform its task, and analog uses frequencies to perform its tasks. FYI, we already have analog processors to perform matrix multiplication for AI purposes. They are much faster than digital processors and use less power. We also have light processors for the same purposes as the analog processors. Both analog and light are much better suited for AI, but right now they’re just too expensive. This is what we’re going to need to solve the complex problems artificial intelligence is trying to solve. Quantum computing is probably going to smoke light and analog, but it’ll use more power to do so.

@@ElvisRandomVideos You are obviously not educated in the subject. No offense :) Im not proving your point at all :D Yes it seems like you have discovered the potential of embedded systems ;) I once was in a course on embedded systems, ... 20 years ago Dedicated circuits for specific calculations is not a new idea at all. And you always pay with flexibility when gaining speed.

Thank you!!

So true! They feel like magic when everything perfectly cancels in just the right way at the end!

Eh, it accelerates rather than "going", so its displacement will be 180° out of phase with the negative of the EM wave.

Sorry, but what perfectly canceled in the just the right way??@@LookingGlassUniverse

The wavelenght sticks :D

Sorry about that!!

Hi. I'm not AT ALL 'Super Math Guy' so excuse the 'input', PLEASE; but, "PS: Nobody said there would be homework! 😮" cracked me UP!! (I'll have to take /n times to rewatch this - and others.) Appreciate you folks! 👍 [Barry Setterfield and Halton Arp and WG Tiff and - by reference - JW Selentic, Bernand Haisch, Hal Puthoff, Timothy Boyer, Luis de la Pena (with out 'the math') are my 'stimulus'.

If a system gives a constant output for any input, then you cannot guess what the input was given the output. Guessing the input means that you want to reverse the process(in your head)to know the initial state. Any process described by the Schrödinger equation is a reversible process so any quantum system has to be reversible.

Feynman's Lectures on Computation describes the connections between reversible computing and quantum computing nicely.

This gives context for the thermodynamics in computing, and a brief mention of quantum computing too: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jr9doMWjkselink.html

I don't think it is necessarily good for the scientific field. People take a lot of time thinking about something rather than just trying something. If you have more action you can actually test whether your idea/ way of thinking was correct or incorrect. Then you can change what you have learned during the process if it was incorrect. You may even stumble across something interesting during the process. There's a balance to be had even in the scientific field, what's the point in thinking about stuff and wasting time when you can just test it? Ofc if depends on resources, but from a data scientist perspective I find some academic pondering debilitating for some projects.

@@liambailey5630 Unfortunately, at the Ph.D. level or at the level where you extend the boundaries of science, the goal is to prove or disprove something, and fully document your process and thoughts, so that your peers can understand, reproduce, extend, or prove it wrong. Outside of that level, at the engineering or application level, the goal to "fail quickly" is indeed much more productive. In some fields, that's good, while in others... for example medicine, I'd prefer that drug companies, etc. use the complete and transparent scientific method with peer review... rather than the "fail quickly" method that doesn't always explore completely and deeply.

@@hanksimon1023 Just because you provide quick action does not mean that the methodology is not documented or that its unethical. You can test ideas quickly without pondering for months. Some drugs were discovered by accident not by thinking. Obviously, testing on subjects rather than testing ideas in a lab is different. I agree that there needs to be a balance though.

@@hanksimon1023 Science is experimental, and failing (i.e. proving something is incorrect) should be considered a good thing.

@@liambailey5630 Thalidomide was tested inadequately. And, the Pfizer CEO refused to release early data on the COVID vaccine, saying that the data were company proprietary... This is a not so subtle way of saying that his profits [and confirmation bias] were more important than peer review.

|+> is just the superposition of the usual 0,1 basis with a plus: |0> *+* |1> (and a global factor of 1/sqrt(2) that's not necessary to get the idea across) |-> is the same but combined with a minus (on the 1s side): |0> *-* |1> (and same factor of 1/sqrt(2) ) So the names for |+> and |-> are self explanatory

​@@Tomyb15 huh? zero plus minus doesnt equal plus.

@@authenticallysuperficial9874 my mistake. I meant to write |1> there.

@@Tomyb15 I know, but for the purposes of this explanation video they are not ideal.

I’m not sure how soon any of this will be practical! It may well be 30 years or more

She messed up spin 1/2 qubit with photon qubit, she thought light polarization flipped means 0 -> 1, which is not true.

Flipping the EM wave only introduces a Pi phase shift into original quantum state, you need a photonic Pauli-X gate to rotate the polarization by 90 degree, which can be easily achieved by two properly aligned mirrors, or a properly aligned 1/2 lambda waveplate. She claims herself a PhD student without realizing her wrong explanation cannot even convince herself.

As far as I understand, the output of 1 is represented by negating the state (08:57). So the do nothing function is |0⟩ -> |0⟩ and |1⟩ -> -|1⟩.

Merry Christmas :)!!

Lol it looked weird but I think it was just the shadow of the polymer being cast on itself from the left. It looked as if it was bent up more than it actually was