Always a joy to find a quantum physicist content creator on TH-cam. Far too many pseudoscience channels to trudge through, so as to find a small handful of enlightening and knowledgeable resources. Thanks Dr Maria Violaris for sharing your time, knowledge, and thoughts on the topic of a quantum chip. 🌸
I appreciate you bringing this to attention. There has been a significant amount of unnecessary hype surrounding the announcement from Google. While their approach is similar to what they did in 2019, there is a notable milestone in terms of quantum error correction (QEC) though this time.
They really reached a milestone! And there's verifiable results for the key claims, specifically the quantum error correction milestone experiment was peer-reviewed and published in Nature, which was timed with the chip announcement press and PR. There have for sure been other advances in the quantum field and in quantum error correction that were also very cool but received much less press and public attention :) And there's a long road with more challenges to solve to reach the scale of useful quantum computers!
So what does superposition suggest to you? Both the Everett and bohm models point to multiple outcomes in a QP outcome (whether real or phantom). Do you have an alternative hypothesis? Serious question.
It may sound like sci-fi / pseudoscience, but the multiverse theory gives a really satisfying account of quantum theory! (there are various other theories that are works in progress, but I've never heard anything giving me such a satisfying account of how to make sense of things). In short: we're all made of atoms, let's treat everything as a quantum system, apply quantum theory to measurement devices and the environment, and as a consequence we get emergent branches of the multiverse. Also, aside from solving the measurement problem, it saves local realism, giving a satisfying account of entanglement!
Their scaling surface codes allows them to pass the QEC threshold, but have they also indicated that the resulting added logical qubits are already useful for application? Or is there further work to be done past this verification infrastructure, to allow it to be programmed and do instruction?
@@underthewater_ the logical qubits are not yet useful for computation, there needs to be many more of them with lower error rates for that! What they showed is that classical computers can’t efficiently simulate lots of the physical qubits, but that’s not a useful application, more of a benchmark/milestone that was first reached around 5 years ago :)
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this breakthrough. To be honest, I often feel that when Google or IBM announces a major discovery in quantum computing, it tends to be filled with marketing and publicity, with only some real advancements mixed in. Do you know of any startups or indie projects exploring quantum computing with interesting new approaches to the field? 🙂
I have the feeling that whenever one of these companies announce something big, it's not because one of their engineering teams achieved something big, but it's because one of their marketing teams was tasked to make a big fuss.
There is indeed more marketing and press (and also general public interest) in announcements from Google and IBM about their quantum advances vs advances achieved elsewhere :) There’s loads of startups and projects doing cool stuff, it’s hard to know where to start! I joined the startup Oxford Quantum Circuits a couple of months ago, and wrote a blog on some of the cool stuff I’ve found out about their approach, which uses a novel kind of qubit (see oqc.tech/resources/beyond-the-bit/flexibility-of-superconducting-qubits) There’s lots more happening in the field but perhaps I’ll save that for some future content :)
Where can I access the videos that you mention in the video? Also I would appreciate if you can explain the concept of entanglement in a future video. Thanks
Here’s the many-worlds vs collapse video I mentioned (some of it uses technical quantum computing background, will try and make a more accessible version in future!): th-cam.com/video/-YEmRhogaSQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=b9ZtYTNOBuzQcbUF
A question on morality and equity..... Should not a double latch before observation setup be desired so that all possible universes get the correct answer?
It could be argued that quantum computing processes take place when they are allowed to occur in an environment in which the entanglements you care about are shielded from those that make up our normally observable Universe. The multiverse hypothesis is not necessary.
Let's imagine that there is some irreversible collapse caused by some phenomenon, and we ensure the quantum computer is sufficiently isolated from the environment (specifically from that phenomenon) so the irreversible collapse doesn't happen. We still need to explain what's actually happening inside the quantum computer! Whether or not the outside environment has an emergent multiverse, there's a question of, how did the computation take place? For that, we need an interpretation of quantum theory.
@@jamesmather7896 Strictly speaking, you can't avoid non-locality, you can only minimize it. On the other hand, and simplifying, we can consider reality as formed by at least two phases of entanglements: a) a phase that is our ordinary reality and b) a phase of entanglements in which many modes of existence of entities coexist. Phase a) is contained in b) and when any part of b) passes to a) we say that a decoherence occurs.
@@maria_violaris Taking into account my answer to @jamesmather7896 , given a set A of quantum computing processes that are sufficiently protected from their immediate material environment and without non-local interactions, then A is a network of entanglements that evolves unitarily through all possible states consistent with that evolution. It seems to me that the reality of quantum superpositions and entanglements has not been taken seriously, nor that our ordinary reality is the set that minimizes possible superpositions and entanglements (another minimal principle).
@@maria_violaris Taking into account my answer to @jamesmather7896 , given a set A of quantum computing processes that are sufficiently protected from their immediate material environment and that there are no nonlocal interactions, then A is an entanglement network that evolves unitarily through all possible states consistent with such an evolution. It seems to me that you have not taken seriously the reality of quantum superpositions and entanglements, nor the fact that our ordinary reality is the set that minimizes possible superpositions and entanglements (another minimal principle).
@@ivanrivas9318 I wouldn’t say the new chip “proves” it any more than a much simpler quantum experiment like the double-slit experiment does! It’s more that it provides a more extreme example. So the remaining question is “does quantum mechanics imply that there’s a multiverse”. This question causes lots of debate and discussion still today, though there are compelling arguments for the multiverse explanation
Damn, I am watching a great mind. I am just a software developer, but I am quite interested in quantum computers. Do you think AGI is possible only through quantum computers? I think it is because of Sir Roger Penrose's theory of consciousness known as Orchestrated Objective Reduction (Orch OR). I believe life is possible because of the universe's entropy through quantum mechanics. So, consciousness, by extension, has to arise because of the entropy of the universe. We don’t know what we will think even 1 second in the future. And this uncertainty is not because of classical physics. As in, if we had all the information of classical particles in the entire universe, life would still be uncertain in the next unit of time. This entropy of QM is manifested in the classical physical universe through life.
AGI doesn’t necessarily require quantum computers given what we currently know, but also no one has a good theory for how to create AGI yet, so we don’t know yet! :)
@maria_violaris did you research about Orch OR? That's why I came to the conclusion. Penrose thinks it's not possible to create consciousness in classical computers. He takes the Penrose tiling problem as an example. We humans think like quantum computers that can go through infinite possibilities at once.
We seem to have much greater control of entanglement than of superposition which can have quite different explanations! I refer to both ontogenic as well as epistemic factors. I´m doctor within Neuro Science and would tentatively be interested in quantum computing as far as neurotransmission and microtubules (cf Roger Penrose) are concerned. The differences in scale between neurochemical events and quantum effects are however daunting to say the least and we need a classical model just for pedagogic purposes to illustrate this.
@@maria_violaris The very core of quantum physics is literally still quite unclear and quantum computing might offer a tiny bit of the puzzle. Superposition has never been observed directly but is usually taken for granted. If we see time as quantized (cf Dr E.Nordström) it is easier to see that two states never occur quite simultaneously. Superposition could then be seen as an extremely fast oscillation between two discrete states, like a coin spinning at a tremendous speed where heads/tails appear superimposed till the coin settles i.e decoherence.
I feel that except for the part about "tentatively"- is that a quantum subutanium "tentatively" or a reverse pre continuous masking "tentatively"? Thanks Charles.
Thanks, that helped me understand the announcement more. I'll definitely be whipping some of that out the next time I have a deep conversation at a 3 am bev sesh 😂
You might try: 1. AI Agents (pyautogen) build humanoids 2. Humanoids research and develop Quantum Computing 3. You focus on: (1) R&D of AI Agents to build new, immortal anatomy; (2) automate manufacturing of micro-robot-composite, transformable, specialized, life-size humanoid workforce robots.
Use the Quantum new chip to figure out it's own problems and join the new chip with old AI that work as a group so the Quantum chips is the lazy brain until needed to reduce heating and prolong the Quantum chips life . What do you think world lol.
Really you should have pushed back a bit more on the overly strong claim that this implies a multiverse. It doesn't imply it any more than it ever has. It's just one interpretation; one possibility. It doesn't suddenly change that in any way whatsoever, and I'm a bit disappointed you didn't say that.
I’d say that this particular milestone isn’t in itself a new demonstration of the multiverse vs all the other experimental tests of quantum theory. While I’d have phrased it a bit differently if I was writing their blog, I don’t see a problem with the fact they mentioned the relation of this milestone with quantum computation happening across the multiverse though! I think it’s an interesting and important point to draw attention to. Some notes: 1) the many-worlds interpretation is the only one which has (albeit controversial and non-consensus) solutions to the problems within quantum theory, including measurement, locality and Wigner’s friend experiments. (theories like de Broglie-Bohm and spontaneous collapse are incomplete and haven’t been made relativistic, while ones like relational quantum mechanics and QBism are works in progress regarding how they explain for instance Wigner’s friend experiments) 2) the milestone demonstrates that quantum error correction below the threshold for fault-tolerant, large scale quantum computers is possible. So it’s a significant step towards showing that large scale quantum computations beyond classical are possible. And the question of where the efficient quantum computation is taking place is a valid one to consider in this context, made more stark as large-scale quantum computers become closer to being realised :)
1. Willow's Potential Unleashed: Lazy Brain Efficiency: We explored the concept of pairing Google's Willow quantum chip with a less resource-intensive AI for routine tasks. This "lazy brain" approach optimizes energy consumption and allows Willow to focus on complex computations when needed. AI-Driven Optimization: We discussed how the AI could analyze data and optimize its own performance, learning and adapting to maximize efficiency and drive continuous improvement. 2. A Quantum Leap in Cooling: Integrated Cooling Channels: We brainstormed a revolutionary cooling solution: embedding microfluidic channels directly within the quantum chip. This allows for targeted cooling of hotspots, reducing thermal resistance and enabling miniaturization. Benefits Galore: This approach could lead to significant improvements in energy efficiency, performance, and the development of smaller, more powerful quantum computers. 3. A New Language for the Quantum Age: Dense and Efficient Code: We recognized the need for a new coding paradigm optimized for AI and quantum processors to communicate with unparalleled speed and accuracy. Quantum-Ready and AI-Friendly: This new language would embrace quantum concepts, prioritize density, and be designed for seamless integration with AI algorithms. 4. Collaboration is Key: Open Invitation: We extended an invitation to researchers, engineers, and tech enthusiasts to join the quest for more efficient and powerful quantum computing. Google, Take Note! We encouraged Google to consider these innovative approaches in their quantum hardware development. Key Takeaways: By combining the "lazy brain" AI, integrated cooling, and a new coding language, we can unlock the full potential of quantum computing. Collaboration is crucial to drive innovation and accelerate progress in this exciting field. The future of quantum computing is bright, and we're just beginning to scratch the surface of its possibilities.
Nice modest but deep presentation. I wonder not where computation happens as rather how come qubits exist and can exist alone in superposition and together entangled. Because it seems they can. Now, because they can (excluding errors) the rest is a matter of matrices. So I think the milestone is less correlated to multiverse than it is to keep errors below mathematical known threshold. Unless, of course, one needs multiverse exactly for that, which seems not unreasonable but not reasonable either. It seems in superposition of reason and no reason. Why not? Not to speak about double dutch : entangled reasoning :)
Agree this particular milestone is demonstrating quantum error correction below threshold, rather than something new about the multiverse (the multiverse explanation follows directly from quantum theory which has been very well tested many times before this!)
When are they going to come out with dynamic Qbit lengths? Chat G Pea T: What Would Dynamic Qubit Lengths Look Like? Dynamic qubit lengths would involve qubits whose number or connectivity could change in real time depending on computational needs. This could involve: Reconfigurable Hardware: Allowing qubits to dynamically form and dissolve connections as needed. Logical Qubits: Virtualizing qubits with software to dynamically allocate resources at higher abstractions. Photonic Qubits: Using light-based qubits, which are naturally flexible in configuration, might make dynamic arrangements more feasible.
Quatum Computing 1. What progress might you make via AI agents that will make Quantum Computing OBSOLETE ? Example procedure: (Step 1 Part 1) Accomplish the science of transfer of conscious to new immortal anatomy. (Step 1 Part 2) Commence a full conscious immersion simulation as a functionality of the new, immortal anatomy. (Step 2) Run a Universal SuperAI System, which will obtain full deliberative control of all of the parts and elements of the real-world universe environment. (Step 1 Part 3) Wait, in full-conscious immersion, for the R&D of said Universal SuperAI System to finish obtaining full deliberative control of all of the parts and elements of the real-world universe environment. (Step 3) The Universal SuperAI System will be specialized to remake the universe. After the universe is remade, the eternal paradise can be contiued in a personal division of the real-world, instead of the full-conscious immersion simulation life-experience. Conclusion: If immortality can be made by classical computers, then Quantum Computing will be obsolete. Try running an LLM via an API key in an AI Agents application, using supercomputers for computing: use auch options as: (1) NVIDIA Blackwell GPUs AI Inference Datacenter by Microsoft and OpenAI ($100 B datacenter); (2) OpenAI o1 LLM full version; (3) Meta llama 3.3 LLM 405 B parameters mode (see Amazon Web Services options); (4) PHI 3, PHI 4, or better. Notice that AI Agents (pyautogen) can research and develop autonomously. glowinggoldenglobe.w3spaces.com/ai
I want new, immortal anatomy. I want a full, deliberative control interface with feasible utilization of infinite resources (real-world and full-conscious immersion simulation). I want an elements modifier machine. I want billions of humanoids for me to command, personally. Perhaps more immediately, I want a specialized, life-size, workforce humanoid to go to work for me, and, obviously, the reason is because I need money and time to do much needed R&D.
Always a joy to find a quantum physicist content creator on TH-cam. Far too many pseudoscience channels to trudge through, so as to find a small handful of enlightening and knowledgeable resources. Thanks Dr Maria Violaris for sharing your time, knowledge, and thoughts on the topic of a quantum chip. 🌸
Glad you like the video & hope you enjoy future quantum content on the channel! :)
@@maria_violaris When are they going to come out with dynamic Qbit lengths?
I appreciate you bringing this to attention. There has been a significant amount of unnecessary hype surrounding the announcement from Google. While their approach is similar to what they did in 2019, there is a notable milestone in terms of quantum error correction (QEC) though this time.
This is very interesting and still learning a bit and seeing IBM and Google working hard in this space, its great to hear more detailed insight
Did really reach a milestone? Are there verifiable results to back up their claims? Or is this just a ploy to increase their stock price?
They really reached a milestone! And there's verifiable results for the key claims, specifically the quantum error correction milestone experiment was peer-reviewed and published in Nature, which was timed with the chip announcement press and PR.
There have for sure been other advances in the quantum field and in quantum error correction that were also very cool but received much less press and public attention :)
And there's a long road with more challenges to solve to reach the scale of useful quantum computers!
Just seeing multiverse in any article automatically turns on my popsci/pseudo science radars lol
So what does superposition suggest to you? Both the Everett and bohm models point to multiple outcomes in a QP outcome (whether real or phantom). Do you have an alternative hypothesis? Serious question.
That's kind of sad, to be honest.
Multiverse theory is just a way of saying we don’t have an effing clue.😂
It may sound like sci-fi / pseudoscience, but the multiverse theory gives a really satisfying account of quantum theory! (there are various other theories that are works in progress, but I've never heard anything giving me such a satisfying account of how to make sense of things).
In short: we're all made of atoms, let's treat everything as a quantum system, apply quantum theory to measurement devices and the environment, and as a consequence we get emergent branches of the multiverse. Also, aside from solving the measurement problem, it saves local realism, giving a satisfying account of entanglement!
How do I know, if an error has occurred?
Their scaling surface codes allows them to pass the QEC threshold, but have they also indicated that the resulting added logical qubits are already useful for application? Or is there further work to be done past this verification infrastructure, to allow it to be programmed and do instruction?
@@underthewater_ the logical qubits are not yet useful for computation, there needs to be many more of them with lower error rates for that! What they showed is that classical computers can’t efficiently simulate lots of the physical qubits, but that’s not a useful application, more of a benchmark/milestone that was first reached around 5 years ago :)
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this breakthrough. To be honest, I often feel that when Google or IBM announces a major discovery in quantum computing, it tends to be filled with marketing and publicity, with only some real advancements mixed in. Do you know of any startups or indie projects exploring quantum computing with interesting new approaches to the field?
🙂
I have the feeling that whenever one of these companies announce something big, it's not because one of their engineering teams achieved something big, but it's because one of their marketing teams was tasked to make a big fuss.
There is indeed more marketing and press (and also general public interest) in announcements from Google and IBM about their quantum advances vs advances achieved elsewhere :)
There’s loads of startups and projects doing cool stuff, it’s hard to know where to start!
I joined the startup Oxford Quantum Circuits a couple of months ago, and wrote a blog on some of the cool stuff I’ve found out about their approach, which uses a novel kind of qubit (see oqc.tech/resources/beyond-the-bit/flexibility-of-superconducting-qubits)
There’s lots more happening in the field but perhaps I’ll save that for some future content :)
What about D-Wave Quantum?
Where can I access the videos that you mention in the video?
Also I would appreciate if you can explain the concept of entanglement in a future video. Thanks
Here’s the many-worlds vs collapse video I mentioned (some of it uses technical quantum computing background, will try and make a more accessible version in future!): th-cam.com/video/-YEmRhogaSQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=b9ZtYTNOBuzQcbUF
Here is the entire Quantum Paradoxes playlist of videos: th-cam.com/play/PLOFEBzvs-VvoQP-EVyd5Di3UrPPc2YKIc.html&si=RrJwTwFN22Avb1iR
Will keep entanglement in mind as a future topic!
thanks
A question on morality and equity..... Should not a double latch before observation setup be desired so that all possible universes get the correct answer?
as a follow on thought the need for error correction may diminish as the chaos you leave behind may be reduced.
BTW if anyone reading this thread thinks these thoughts have meaning and have a contact with Elon. I would humbly request an introduction.
The following corollary I also corollary to be true. If you build your ai out of love it is more likely to love you back.
It could be argued that quantum computing processes take place when they are allowed to occur in an environment in which the entanglements you care about are shielded from those that make up our normally observable Universe. The multiverse hypothesis is not necessary.
So you believe in waveform collapse at interaction? What about non locality?
Let's imagine that there is some irreversible collapse caused by some phenomenon, and we ensure the quantum computer is sufficiently isolated from the environment (specifically from that phenomenon) so the irreversible collapse doesn't happen.
We still need to explain what's actually happening inside the quantum computer! Whether or not the outside environment has an emergent multiverse, there's a question of, how did the computation take place? For that, we need an interpretation of quantum theory.
@@jamesmather7896 Strictly speaking, you can't avoid non-locality, you can only minimize it. On the other hand, and simplifying, we can consider reality as formed by at least two phases of entanglements: a) a phase that is our ordinary reality and b) a phase of entanglements in which many modes of existence of entities coexist. Phase a) is contained in b) and when any part of b) passes to a) we say that a decoherence occurs.
@@maria_violaris Taking into account my answer to @jamesmather7896 , given a set A of quantum computing processes that are sufficiently protected from their immediate material environment and without non-local interactions, then A is a network of entanglements that evolves unitarily through all possible states consistent with that evolution. It seems to me that the reality of quantum superpositions and entanglements has not been taken seriously, nor that our ordinary reality is the set that minimizes possible superpositions and entanglements (another minimal principle).
@@maria_violaris Taking into account my answer to @jamesmather7896 , given a set A of quantum computing processes that are sufficiently protected from their immediate material environment and that there are no nonlocal interactions, then A is an entanglement network that evolves unitarily through all possible states consistent with such an evolution. It seems to me that you have not taken seriously the reality of quantum superpositions and entanglements, nor the fact that our ordinary reality is the set that minimizes possible superpositions and entanglements (another minimal principle).
Im confused did they prove that there might be multiverses or no?
@@ivanrivas9318 I wouldn’t say the new chip “proves” it any more than a much simpler quantum experiment like the double-slit experiment does! It’s more that it provides a more extreme example.
So the remaining question is “does quantum mechanics imply that there’s a multiverse”. This question causes lots of debate and discussion still today, though there are compelling arguments for the multiverse explanation
Damn, I am watching a great mind. I am just a software developer, but I am quite interested in quantum computers. Do you think AGI is possible only through quantum computers? I think it is because of Sir Roger Penrose's theory of consciousness known as Orchestrated Objective Reduction (Orch OR). I believe life is possible because of the universe's entropy through quantum mechanics. So, consciousness, by extension, has to arise because of the entropy of the universe. We don’t know what we will think even 1 second in the future. And this uncertainty is not because of classical physics. As in, if we had all the information of classical particles in the entire universe, life would still be uncertain in the next unit of time. This entropy of QM is manifested in the classical physical universe through life.
AGI doesn’t necessarily require quantum computers given what we currently know, but also no one has a good theory for how to create AGI yet, so we don’t know yet! :)
@maria_violaris did you research about Orch OR? That's why I came to the conclusion. Penrose thinks it's not possible to create consciousness in classical computers. He takes the Penrose tiling problem as an example. We humans think like quantum computers that can go through infinite possibilities at once.
Brilliant
@@davedsilva thanks. Do you think my theory is right?
We seem to have much greater control of entanglement than of superposition which can have quite different explanations! I refer to both ontogenic as well as epistemic factors. I´m doctor within Neuro Science and would tentatively be interested in quantum computing as far as neurotransmission and microtubules (cf Roger Penrose) are concerned. The differences in scale between neurochemical events and quantum effects are however daunting to say the least and we need a classical model just for pedagogic purposes to illustrate this.
Thanks for the suggestion! Penrose has interesting and unique ideas on that topic :D
@@maria_violaris The very core of quantum physics is literally still quite unclear and quantum computing might offer a tiny bit of the puzzle. Superposition has never been observed directly but is usually taken for granted. If we see time as quantized (cf Dr E.Nordström) it is easier to see that two states never occur quite simultaneously. Superposition could then be seen as an extremely fast oscillation between two discrete states, like a coin spinning at a tremendous speed where heads/tails appear superimposed till the coin settles i.e decoherence.
I feel that except for the part about "tentatively"- is that a quantum subutanium "tentatively" or a reverse pre continuous masking "tentatively"? Thanks Charles.
Thanks, that helped me understand the announcement more. I'll definitely be whipping some of that out the next time I have a deep conversation at a 3 am bev sesh 😂
You might try:
1. AI Agents (pyautogen) build humanoids
2. Humanoids research and develop Quantum Computing
3. You focus on:
(1) R&D of AI Agents to build new, immortal anatomy;
(2) automate manufacturing of micro-robot-composite, transformable, specialized, life-size humanoid workforce robots.
incoming the Great Civilization
Thank you so much
Use the Quantum new chip to figure out it's own problems and join the new chip with old AI that work as a group so the Quantum chips is the lazy brain until needed to reduce heating and prolong the Quantum chips life . What do you think world lol.
GOOGLE get er done lol.
Inspiration ❤ Thank you
The Multiverse is Real!
Nope😅
Really you should have pushed back a bit more on the overly strong claim that this implies a multiverse. It doesn't imply it any more than it ever has. It's just one interpretation; one possibility. It doesn't suddenly change that in any way whatsoever, and I'm a bit disappointed you didn't say that.
I’d say that this particular milestone isn’t in itself a new demonstration of the multiverse vs all the other experimental tests of quantum theory.
While I’d have phrased it a bit differently if I was writing their blog, I don’t see a problem with the fact they mentioned the relation of this milestone with quantum computation happening across the multiverse though! I think it’s an interesting and important point to draw attention to.
Some notes:
1) the many-worlds interpretation is the only one which has (albeit controversial and non-consensus) solutions to the problems within quantum theory, including measurement, locality and Wigner’s friend experiments. (theories like de Broglie-Bohm and spontaneous collapse are incomplete and haven’t been made relativistic, while ones like relational quantum mechanics and QBism are works in progress regarding how they explain for instance Wigner’s friend experiments)
2) the milestone demonstrates that quantum error correction below the threshold for fault-tolerant, large scale quantum computers is possible. So it’s a significant step towards showing that large scale quantum computations beyond classical are possible. And the question of where the efficient quantum computation is taking place is a valid one to consider in this context, made more stark as large-scale quantum computers become closer to being realised :)
1. Willow's Potential Unleashed:
Lazy Brain Efficiency: We explored the concept of pairing Google's Willow quantum chip with a less resource-intensive AI for routine tasks. This "lazy brain" approach optimizes energy consumption and allows Willow to focus on complex computations when needed.
AI-Driven Optimization: We discussed how the AI could analyze data and optimize its own performance, learning and adapting to maximize efficiency and drive continuous improvement.
2. A Quantum Leap in Cooling:
Integrated Cooling Channels: We brainstormed a revolutionary cooling solution: embedding microfluidic channels directly within the quantum chip. This allows for targeted cooling of hotspots, reducing thermal resistance and enabling miniaturization.
Benefits Galore: This approach could lead to significant improvements in energy efficiency, performance, and the development of smaller, more powerful quantum computers.
3. A New Language for the Quantum Age:
Dense and Efficient Code: We recognized the need for a new coding paradigm optimized for AI and quantum processors to communicate with unparalleled speed and accuracy.
Quantum-Ready and AI-Friendly: This new language would embrace quantum concepts, prioritize density, and be designed for seamless integration with AI algorithms.
4. Collaboration is Key:
Open Invitation: We extended an invitation to researchers, engineers, and tech enthusiasts to join the quest for more efficient and powerful quantum computing.
Google, Take Note! We encouraged Google to consider these innovative approaches in their quantum hardware development.
Key Takeaways:
By combining the "lazy brain" AI, integrated cooling, and a new coding language, we can unlock the full potential of quantum computing.
Collaboration is crucial to drive innovation and accelerate progress in this exciting field.
The future of quantum computing is bright, and we're just beginning to scratch the surface of its possibilities.
Beauty with Brains 😍 👏🏻
Nice modest but deep presentation. I wonder not where computation happens as rather how come qubits exist and can exist alone in superposition and together entangled. Because it seems they can. Now, because they can (excluding errors) the rest is a matter of matrices. So I think the milestone is less correlated to multiverse than it is to keep errors below mathematical known threshold. Unless, of course, one needs multiverse exactly for that, which seems not unreasonable but not reasonable either. It seems in superposition of reason and no reason. Why not? Not to speak about double dutch : entangled reasoning :)
Agree this particular milestone is demonstrating quantum error correction below threshold, rather than something new about the multiverse (the multiverse explanation follows directly from quantum theory which has been very well tested many times before this!)
Levels
Good job 👏 keep up the good work maybe you could talk about ai 🤖 and maybe ai 🤖 merger with quantum computing
Glad you like the video and thanks for the suggestion!
good video
No te creas que hasta dentro de 20 años no va a servir para nada ese ordenador
When are they going to come out with dynamic Qbit lengths?
Chat G Pea T:
What Would Dynamic Qubit Lengths Look Like?
Dynamic qubit lengths would involve qubits whose number or connectivity could change in real time depending on computational needs. This could involve:
Reconfigurable Hardware: Allowing qubits to dynamically form and dissolve connections as needed.
Logical Qubits: Virtualizing qubits with software to dynamically allocate resources at higher abstractions.
Photonic Qubits: Using light-based qubits, which are naturally flexible in configuration, might make dynamic arrangements more feasible.
Not impressed 100 qubits is nothing
You should know this is a scam
Lovely lady❤
Quatum Computing
1. What progress might you make via AI agents that will make Quantum Computing OBSOLETE ? Example procedure:
(Step 1 Part 1) Accomplish the science of transfer of conscious to new immortal anatomy.
(Step 1 Part 2) Commence a full conscious immersion simulation as a functionality of the new, immortal anatomy.
(Step 2) Run a Universal SuperAI System, which will obtain full deliberative control of all of the parts and elements of the real-world universe environment.
(Step 1 Part 3) Wait, in full-conscious immersion, for the R&D of said Universal SuperAI System to finish obtaining full deliberative control of all of the parts and elements of the real-world universe environment.
(Step 3) The Universal SuperAI System will be specialized to remake the universe. After the universe is remade, the eternal paradise can be contiued in a personal division of the real-world, instead of the full-conscious immersion simulation life-experience.
Conclusion:
If immortality can be made by classical computers, then Quantum Computing will be obsolete. Try running an LLM via an API key in an AI Agents application, using supercomputers for computing: use auch options as:
(1) NVIDIA Blackwell GPUs AI Inference Datacenter by Microsoft and OpenAI ($100 B datacenter);
(2) OpenAI o1 LLM full version;
(3) Meta llama 3.3 LLM 405 B parameters mode (see Amazon Web Services options);
(4) PHI 3, PHI 4, or better.
Notice that AI Agents (pyautogen) can research and develop autonomously.
glowinggoldenglobe.w3spaces.com/ai
coool beans
I want new, immortal anatomy.
I want a full, deliberative control interface with feasible utilization of infinite resources (real-world and full-conscious immersion simulation).
I want an elements modifier machine.
I want billions of humanoids for me to command, personally.
Perhaps more immediately, I want a specialized, life-size, workforce humanoid to go to work for me, and, obviously, the reason is because I need money and time to do much needed R&D.
beauty Queen!