What is Digg?44 Comments
- PigThief, on 10/10/2007, -0/+22Where can I get a degree in rocket surgery?
- MasterThief117, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17Here is an article meant for people who are not rocket surgeons.
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/quantum-computer.htm - Andronicus1717, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8http://diggcomments.headzoo.com/ and enter MortimerTempest.... you will see that he is a serial "digg me down" spammer. I am outing you Mortimer Tempest!
- bromac, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I'll digg this both up and down at the same time. Until I make an observation of the article, of course.
- Bdog2g2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I had a friend of mine who did an quantum computing internship sponsored by NASA about 6 years ago. He gave an account of his internship and explained how they modeled a quantum computing and quantum "programming" with a virtual quantum computer. Like myself he majored in both mathematics and physics, and basically said that the program they wrote to do 2+2 for a quantum computer took all the mathematics and quantum mechanics knowledge he had and then some.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6will do, right after we kill you
- JefffN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Computer Scientists, thank you very much. :P
- maz2331, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Yes - but you won't know if the cat is alive or dead.
- Kektain, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4***** off and get something better to do.
- lfernandez91, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Thats because nobody understands it.
- TooManyHobbies, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Notice how less than 50% of these posts actually relate to the article...
- vertigoblue, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3imagine how much that job would pay...
- tito13kfm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3The mathematics of wonton burrito meals.
- santaliqueur, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2busted!
- HairyFotr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2They relate to the article and don't at the same time.
- travisccook, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Follow the link to the research paper, memorize a few lines, and start lecturing your friends on how the toaster toasts.
Great fun. - lukasmach, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Check out last chapter "Quantum algorithms" in this (great and publicly available) introductory book:
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~vazirani/algorithms.html - yahoofrom, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2i'm in ur quantum computer being alive and dead at the same time.
- exec0extreme, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I've just computed that a system that is fully entangled and uniform reaches maximum entropy faster than that of a non-uniform system.
- doodbun, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Let me remind you that what you learned in college about mathematics and physics is but a tadpole in the vast swamp of current knowledge. It is to be able to do anything usable out of it in the context of an emergent research branch that is the remarkable feat; quantum mechanics is, to an extend, accessible, and just scares people off because of its funny name and its bigoted/rookie/college advocates.
- bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1maybe he just suffers chronic stupidity. i hear it can be devastating.
- arjie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Gah! Article has too many links. Must...read...all.
- slapthemonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1hmmmm.....interesting,.....
- jacksofscience, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Good article! I mean, the one on the AMS website. Although, If you're looking for an even SIMPLER explanation of Shor's Algorithm check out Scott's explanation which was given the OK by Peter Shor himself in the comments/
http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=208 - PigThief, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1
- JohnnyXmas, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What about this:
http://www.itworld.com/Tech/3494/070309nasaquantum/index.html
I know its not "commercially available," but its technically available, and it works. Kindof contradicts this article. - PigThief, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1⁛ Test.
- keeganspeck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Alas, I looked at them. They do not. I should have used a different method of observation. Entanglement, perhaps?
- doodbun, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What they claim and what they did is two different things. Every company has a marketing department and most of the time they are the one spewing nonsense; D-Wave is no exception.
- PigThief, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1 Test.
- thechao, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0DWave is full of *****. They're claiming to have produced a `quantum adiabatic computer' (QAC); they claim QAC can solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time: a claim fantastically more difficult than BQP (Shor's complexity). There is *no*way* they have done this. None of their papers have survived peer review, and they're "public" demonstration was a sham. Please stop spreading disinformation.
- BigJ27, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I beg to differ, there is a functioning commercial quantum computer today, it doesn't need months, it's already released.
http://www.dwavesys.com/ - thechao, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I'll refer you to my above post. In a word: no. As a computer scientist I would love to believe they have done this. Proof would be simple: we could pick any of a large number of "unsolveably difficult" NP-complete problems, or better yet, EXP-complete problems, and have them run them. If they could solve the problems, then we could talk. However, D-Wave refuses to do this. In addition, they're "timeline" for their QAC is such that the computation time can be easily replicated by a classical computer.
- ElwoodHerring, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I think I have it now. We all know that the existence of a quantum computer is highly improbable. So, all we have to do is work out exactly how improbable it is, then feed that number into a regular computer and give it a cup of really strong tea...
- my8bird, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Terrible post. The article does not explain anything. Link to the explanation not to a stupid article which has no math and explains nothing.
- geeka19, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0totally agree!
- yahoofrom, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1i'm in ur quantum computer being alive and dead at the same time.
- WallinSage, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Nobody got anywhere in the world by simply being content.
- Poland, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Dugg down for not being awesome.
- Dylson, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0Thats horrible, why would you say that?
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0I dugg you up
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is