Quantum computers as experiments that are hard to predict outcomes by
Ciro Santilli 40 Updated 2025-07-16
One possibly interesting and possibly obvious point of view, is that a quantum computer is an experimental device that executes a quantum probabilistic experiment for which the probabilities cannot be calculated theoretically efficiently by a nuclear weapon.
This is how quantum computing was originally theorized by the likes of Richard Feynman: they noticed that "Hey, here's a well formulated quantum mechanics problem, which I know the algorithm to solve (calculate the probability of outcomes), but it would take exponential time on the problem size".
The converse is then of course that if you were able to encode useful problems in such an experiment, then you have a computer that allows for exponential speedups.
This can be seen very directly by studying one specific quantum computer implementation. E.g. if you take the simplest to understand one, photonic quantum computer, you can make systems for which you need exponential time to calculate the probabilities that photons will exit through certain holes and not others.
The obvious aspect of this idea is by coming from quantum logic gates are needed because you can't compute the matrix explicitly as it grows exponentially: knowing the full explicit matrix is impossible in practice, and knowing the matrix is equivalent to knowing the probabilities of every outcome.
Quantum computing is hard because we want long coherence but fast control by
Ciro Santilli 40 Updated 2025-07-16
Mentioned e.g. at:
These are two conflicting constraints:
- long coherence times: require isolation from external world, otherwise observation destroys quantum state
- fast control and readout: require coupling with external world
It takes time for the quantum state to evolve. So in order to have a deep quantum circuit, we need longer coherence times.
Technique that uses multiple non-ideal qubits (physical qubits) to simulate/produce one perfect qubit (logical).
One is philosophically reminded of classical error correction codes, where we also have multiple input bits per actual information bit.
TODO understand in detail. This appears to be a fundamental technique since all physical systems we can manufacture are imperfect.
Part of the fundamental interest of this technique is due to the quantum threshold theorem.
For example, when PsiQuantum raised 215M in 2020, they announced that they intended to reach 1 million physical qubits, which would achieve between 100 and 300 logical qubits.
Video "Jeremy O'Brien: "Quantum Technologies" by GoogleTechTalks (2014)" youtu.be/7wCBkAQYBZA?t=2778 describes an error correction approach for a photonic quantum computer.
Bibliography:
Quantum computers are not expected to solve NP-complete problems by
Ciro Santilli 40 Updated 2025-07-16
Only NP-intermediate, which includes notably integer factorization:
- quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/16506/can-quantum-computer-solve-np-complete-problems
- www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/The_Limits_of_Quantum_Computers.pdf by Scott Aaronson
- cs.stackexchange.com/questions/130470/can-quantum-computing-help-solve-np-complete-problems
- www.quora.com/How-can-quantum-computing-help-to-solve-NP-hard-problems
The most comprehensive list is the amazing curated and commented list of quantum algorithms as of 2020.
English translation of papers that include the original Quantization as an Eigenvalue Problem by Schrödinger (1926).
There are unlisted articles, also show them or only show them.