Thank you so much for this, it has helped clarify so much which I struggled to understand from my courses, especially the math/proof. The step by step animations are truly invaluable! 🙏🙇♂
This goes down well with my coffee this morning, you made this lesson very consumable and am having a feeling this will stick to my ribs ☺Thank you for this video!
Hello there, I'm coming back after 5 months to watch again. I read a book about quantum computing, read many explanations of Deutsch's algorithm, and I found your the best :) I'm curious what software did you use to make this nice presentation that compresses a formula, it's very useful for algebra!! Tnx again!
What's a - state such as in 4:19? I'll following the wikipedia page "quantum logic gate" as base for definitions and notations, I can't find there what should be the equivalent definition....
Thanks for the comment! The minus state is used as a shorthand for the state 1/sqrt(2) (|0\ - |1\). If you go to the 'Hadamard Transform' wikipedia page and look at the 'Hadamard gate operations' section you can see an explanation and example there.
You are excellent, I never seen better than that! It cannot be explained better than that, thank you so much for your effort, I appreciate it. Do you have any document online or any book to buy it?
bro one help for your side will u post the video on Grovers Search Algorithm, as well as Shors factoring Algorithm because it was very useful your video so please bro help me in this
Thanks for your comment. That's the plan I want to make a video about each one of the major algorithms. Uni has been keeping me busy but once the holidays start I will start to create more videos. Thanks!
QIQC: "A little thought shows that if we apply Uf to the state |x>(|0>−|1>)/√2 then we obtain the state (−1)f(x)|x>(|0>−|1>)/√2" Me: "what the fuck is the little thought"
We are omitting the minus state since it is no longer needed in our computation. By omitting it, we are removing it from the equation; it is still technically there, but it's easy to omit it and not have to worry about it since it doesn't affect the other qubits.
@@quantum-soar Hi!Still unsure about why it does not affect other qubits, the minus state itself is in superposition right? So why do we neglect that ?
@@dhairyapatel5162hello. I guess I understand it. in omega3 step first qubit will be in |+> or |-> state. And when we step on omega4 step, just the hadamard gate will be applied on first qubit, without any effect from second qubit. That's why it was just not wanted to write second qubit in the equations starting from that calculation point.
This symbol | ... > represents a qubit and most of the boxes are quantum logic gates. Qubits are the inputs of these boxes. The output of the boxes is always a 0 or a 1.
What you are SAYING here (1:09) is correct, but what you have WRITTEN is wrong. In general, balanced does not mean the functions can't be equal. @ 3:47 Here he only shows the result for the input y = 0. He forgot to tell you that the outcome is the same for the other case, when we have y = 1. @ 4:10 There is no target-qubit in this picture, because both inputs are completely independent of each other. | x > does not control | - > in any way. @ 6:05 On the RHS we have a straight line. This is mathematically not correct. It should have the MINUS-state that will be ignored from here: 7:10.
Hi @jacobvandijk6525, Thanks for the suggestions and I will try and make things clearer in my next videos. In terms of your first point, for a balanced function that takes in and outputs one bit (like the function in this algorithm), another way we can define this function is by stating that the function outputs are not equal. For other constant functions that accept more than one bit as input this statement wouldn't be true but because the function we are looking at in this algorithm takes one, we can use this property to define it. For the second point, I didn't show y=1 as it is not the standard way in quantum computing to query an oracle to get the output. We usually set y=0 so we get f(x). For the third point, it is conventional to call the qubits we write the answer to the target qubits when querying a oracle. (see Nielson-Chaung p31) The last point, |+ - ⟩ is the same as | + ⟩ | - ⟩ (this notation is used in Nielson-Chuang p56)
what a great and clear explanation. The animations are so useful.
Thanks a lot for this! Was lost in my course lectures, but this actually manages to explain it concisely & understandably.
This is so much better than what I studied in the class, thanks for the maths that even Nielsen and Chuang skipped. Much appreciate your help
Great Video Man! Continue the Series!
Undoubtedly!
Thanks! That's the plan!
Thank you so much for this, it has helped clarify so much which I struggled to understand from my courses, especially the math/proof. The step by step animations are truly invaluable! 🙏🙇♂
This goes down well with my coffee this morning, you made this lesson very consumable and am having a feeling this will stick to my ribs ☺Thank you for this video!
Good and clear explained videos. Very useful for beginners. waiting for more .
Best regards
I finished this algorithm from the qiskit textbook, I still learned a lot more from this video, you have a new subscriber :)
Great explanation. Finally I understood the algorithm!!! (or at least I believe so) Thanks a lot!
Hello there, I'm coming back after 5 months to watch again. I read a book about quantum computing, read many explanations of Deutsch's algorithm, and I found your the best :) I'm curious what software did you use to make this nice presentation that compresses a formula, it's very useful for algebra!! Tnx again!
Thanks for the comment! In this video I used the python library Manim to create the animations.
Excellent video. Cheers for your explanation!
very beautiful explanation, thanks
This video is such an important pedagogical contribution. Thank you very much!
Very impressive explanation. Good job! Thanks.
Are you constant or balanced ?
❤❤❤❤❤❤ have fun. thanks for your help 🎉🎉🎉🎉
Great job, guys
Yo, what are you studying? I’m an AUS Physics/Comp Sci student and I have a feeling your AUS too
I'm studying comp sci. And yeah I'm Australian. Thanks for the comment!
UQ?
@@willastralian7141 haha nah I'm from Sydney. Is that where you study?
Also great video, thanks for sharing this!
Amazing video!
What's a - state such as in 4:19? I'll following the wikipedia page "quantum logic gate" as base for definitions and notations, I can't find there what should be the equivalent definition....
Thanks for the comment! The minus state is used as a shorthand for the state 1/sqrt(2) (|0\ - |1\). If you go to the 'Hadamard Transform' wikipedia page and look at the 'Hadamard gate operations' section you can see an explanation and example there.
@@quantum-soar thnx! that's exactly what I was trying to get!!
explained so much better than my professor
You are excellent, I never seen better than that! It cannot be explained better than that, thank you so much for your effort, I appreciate it. Do you have any document online or any book to buy it?
What does the X gate represent in your algorithm circuit?
A little bit late, but that's a NOT gate
bro one help for your side will u post the video on Grovers Search Algorithm, as well as Shors factoring Algorithm because it was very useful your video so please bro help me in this
Thanks for your comment. That's the plan I want to make a video about each one of the major algorithms. Uni has been keeping me busy but once the holidays start I will start to create more videos. Thanks!
Thanks a lot
Love your content. Keep going ❤
Cool!
can you do the chsh game circuit please 😊
Love from Pakistan
QIQC: "A little thought shows that if we apply Uf to the state |x>(|0>−|1>)/√2 then we obtain the state (−1)f(x)|x>(|0>−|1>)/√2"
Me: "what the fuck is the little thought"
I had the EXACT SAME experience. They really didn't bother to explain at all.
Need some clarity on why the minus state is omitted 7:25
We are omitting the minus state since it is no longer needed in our computation. By omitting it, we are removing it from the equation; it is still technically there, but it's easy to omit it and not have to worry about it since it doesn't affect the other qubits.
@@quantum-soar Hi!Still unsure about why it does not affect other qubits, the minus state itself is in superposition right? So why do we neglect that ?
@@dhairyapatel5162hello. I guess I understand it. in omega3 step first qubit will be in |+> or |-> state. And when we step on omega4 step, just the hadamard gate will be applied on first qubit, without any effect from second qubit. That's why it was just not wanted to write second qubit in the equations starting from that calculation point.
what are those symbols 😵💫
This symbol | ... > represents a qubit and most of the boxes are quantum logic gates.
Qubits are the inputs of these boxes. The output of the boxes is always a 0 or a 1.
@@jacobvandijk6525 ty
@@jacobvandijk6525 it's bra ket notation after all huh
@@Arthur-so2cd Wow, you are making progess, mate!
@@jacobvandijk6525 bruh
What you are SAYING here (1:09) is correct, but what you have WRITTEN is wrong. In general, balanced does not mean the functions can't be equal.
@ 3:47 Here he only shows the result for the input y = 0. He forgot to tell you that the outcome is the same for the other case, when we have y = 1.
@ 4:10 There is no target-qubit in this picture, because both inputs are completely independent of each other. | x > does not control | - > in any way.
@ 6:05 On the RHS we have a straight line. This is mathematically not correct. It should have the MINUS-state that will be ignored from here: 7:10.
Hi @jacobvandijk6525,
Thanks for the suggestions and I will try and make things clearer in my next videos.
In terms of your first point, for a balanced function that takes in and outputs one bit (like the function in this algorithm), another way we can define this function is by stating that the function outputs are not equal. For other constant functions that accept more than one bit as input this statement wouldn't be true but because the function we are looking at in this algorithm takes one, we can use this property to define it.
For the second point, I didn't show y=1 as it is not the standard way in quantum computing to query an oracle to get the output. We usually set y=0 so we get f(x).
For the third point, it is conventional to call the qubits we write the answer to the target qubits when querying a oracle. (see Nielson-Chaung p31)
The last point, |+ - ⟩ is the same as | + ⟩ | - ⟩ (this notation is used in Nielson-Chuang p56)
You cannot just drop the - state
Why not?