I’ve seen your comment and just letting you know that you just made my day. Glad to know people out there are excited about this type of content and thank you for watching and your interest in science and tech.
The video is very nice, but I just wanted to leave a note. The X nm we read about the processors is not the transistor size. Traditionally it was the gate size of the transistor, which is much smaller than the transistor itself. However, for a decade or so, it’s just a marketing term about the manufacturing process, with no relation to any physical property of the transistors. 5nm processors have 18nm gate length, and that’s still not size of the whole transistor, that can be as much as 10x that in one of its dimensions. The size of a transistor should be measured in cubed nm, as it is a 3D object like any other.
You have a good point. Totally get the misnomer around the actual 'nm' size of the transistor. My commentary was simply alluding to the fact that overall transistor size is shrinking over time suggesting that Moore's law will no longer be valid as we will reach a threshold at which we can't squeeze transistors into a processor up to the point where quantum effects exhibit themselves. But in any case, thanks for your astute observation and hope you liked the video.
Very very good video. I will recommend a subscribe in my circles and please keep it up! Very great cadence, graphics and way about you kind sir.. I’m bought into everything you have to say to digest.. great info. May I suggest the cutting edge of sensors/survellience. What can authorities glean in this day and age from the private citizen through the lens of the tech. This included satellite imagery/tracking with AI. Hey... you asked lol.
There is absolutely no point comparing a quantum computer and an ordinary computer with a test that it was made specifically to test quantum computers efficiency. Also the assumption that the calculation is being done in multiple universes although exciting, it has no base. Quantum mechanics works in such a way that can give multiple results at once and this is done on microscopic level all the time in nature. The essence of this isnt having multiple results which this test measures but picking the right one as the output of the calculation.
Thanks for the comment. You're right on both fronts; it was never a direct comparison between regular computers and quantum computers - they operate on completely different architectures and hardware (including temperatures). However, I did want to make a comparison between a traditional binary bit and a qubit because you can at least showcase the fundamental differences in signaling and communication which is very apparent. RE the multiverse: this is all speculation. However, the fact that Google themselves even mentioned conjecture around the multiverse should make us stop and listen. It's going to be a while before we prove/disprove the multiverse theory, but simply put: it's exciting (like you said) to even think that this might be slightly possible. Theories like this always get eye-rolls at the beginning because it's so far-fetched, but it will only take time to figure out truly how QC actually works. I agree with you on 'picking the right answer' - you might have trillions of results, but if they're mostly wrong then it's all moot. I think that's where the error-checking stuff comes in...making that more reliable and scalable. In any case, I hope you liked the video and thanks for watching and your interest in science and tech.
Let me know what other topics you want me to explore and explain. Thanks for stopping by and your interest in science and tech :)
nice video - well done!
thank you! glad to know it helped
I appreciate how you communicate the information. I subscribed and am leaving a comment for the algorithm. Thanks for the quality content!
I’ve seen your comment and just letting you know that you just made my day. Glad to know people out there are excited about this type of content and thank you for watching and your interest in science and tech.
Sehr gut erklärt !
Gerne mehr davon
thank you. appreciate the support!
The video is very nice, but I just wanted to leave a note.
The X nm we read about the processors is not the transistor size.
Traditionally it was the gate size of the transistor, which is much smaller than the transistor itself.
However, for a decade or so, it’s just a marketing term about the manufacturing process, with no relation to any physical property of the transistors.
5nm processors have 18nm gate length, and that’s still not size of the whole transistor, that can be as much as 10x that in one of its dimensions.
The size of a transistor should be measured in cubed nm, as it is a 3D object like any other.
You have a good point. Totally get the misnomer around the actual 'nm' size of the transistor. My commentary was simply alluding to the fact that overall transistor size is shrinking over time suggesting that Moore's law will no longer be valid as we will reach a threshold at which we can't squeeze transistors into a processor up to the point where quantum effects exhibit themselves.
But in any case, thanks for your astute observation and hope you liked the video.
Very very good video. I will recommend a subscribe in my circles and please keep it up! Very great cadence, graphics and way about you kind sir..
I’m bought into everything you have to say to digest.. great info.
May I suggest the cutting edge of sensors/survellience. What can authorities glean in this day and age from the private citizen through the lens of the tech.
This included satellite imagery/tracking with AI. Hey... you asked lol.
Thanks
There is absolutely no point comparing a quantum computer and an ordinary computer with a test that it was made specifically to test quantum computers efficiency. Also the assumption that the calculation is being done in multiple universes although exciting, it has no base. Quantum mechanics works in such a way that can give multiple results at once and this is done on microscopic level all the time in nature. The essence of this isnt having multiple results which this test measures but picking the right one as the output of the calculation.
Thanks for the comment. You're right on both fronts; it was never a direct comparison between regular computers and quantum computers - they operate on completely different architectures and hardware (including temperatures). However, I did want to make a comparison between a traditional binary bit and a qubit because you can at least showcase the fundamental differences in signaling and communication which is very apparent.
RE the multiverse: this is all speculation. However, the fact that Google themselves even mentioned conjecture around the multiverse should make us stop and listen. It's going to be a while before we prove/disprove the multiverse theory, but simply put: it's exciting (like you said) to even think that this might be slightly possible. Theories like this always get eye-rolls at the beginning because it's so far-fetched, but it will only take time to figure out truly how QC actually works. I agree with you on 'picking the right answer' - you might have trillions of results, but if they're mostly wrong then it's all moot. I think that's where the error-checking stuff comes in...making that more reliable and scalable.
In any case, I hope you liked the video and thanks for watching and your interest in science and tech.