https://gizmodo.com/google-says-its-achieved-quantum-supremacy-a-world-fir-1838299829
The Financial Times reports that they saw a Google publication claiming that the company's quantum processor can perform a calculation "in three minutes and 20 seconds that would take today's most advanced classical computer, known as Summit, approximately 10,000 years"—a demonstration of quantum supremacy. Google has not yet responded to a Gizmodo request for comment, and it has long been cagey about when and how it'd make the announcement.
We don't have many details as to what calculation the computer performed. But previous proposals essentially involve the quantum computer racing classical computer simulating a random quantum circuit. The achievement would not be a surprise—we've long known that Google has been testing a 72-qubit device called Bristlecone with which it hoped to achieve quantum supremacy. Financial Times reports that the supremacy experiment was instead performed with a 53-qubit processor codenamed Sycamore.
This would be a major early milestone when it comes to comparing these quantum devices against classical computers. But we're a long way off before quantum computers actually demonstrate quantum usefulness. That would require increasing the coherence time and introducing error correction schemes‚ those where multiple qubits are combined into one in order to ensure that the quantum computer outputs the answers it's supposed to output.
Related Stories
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
The esoteric world of quantum computing is all aquiver following a robust blog post from IBM essentially rubbishing claims from Google that it has achieved "quantum supremacy".
The post notes that quantum computing is approaching the limits of classical simulation and there are big questions as to how to evaluate and benchmark system performance. Quantum supremacy is the moment quantum machines begin to do things classical computers cannot.
But Big Blue dismissed Google's most recent claims for its 53-qubit processor revealed in a leaked document last month.
IBM notes: "In the preprint, it is argued that their device reached 'quantum supremacy' and that 'a state-of-the-art supercomputer would require approximately 10,000 years to perform the equivalent task'. "We argue that an ideal simulation of the same task can be performed on a classical system in 2.5 days and with far greater fidelity. This is in fact a conservative, worst-case estimate, and we expect that with additional refinements, the classical cost of the simulation can be further reduced."
Previously:
IBM and Google’s Race for Quantum Computing Takes a Mysterious Turn
Google Quantum Processor Reportedly Achieves Quantum Supremacy
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Saturday September 21 2019, @02:38PM (4 children)
A quantum computer faster than a classical computer *simulating a quantum computer? Whoopie do. Let each type of computer do what is does best, then get back to me.
Quantum computing is fascinating, but AFAIK it has a long, long ways to go.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 1) by RandomFactor on Saturday September 21 2019, @02:59PM
There are previous articles on the approach of quantum supremacy like this one [soylentnews.org]
Even as they inevitably start to benchmark better at very specific types of calculations it doesn't feel like these are going to be used as 'general purpose computers' anytime soon.
Wonder if we'll get quantum coprocessors on our Quantium chips that kick in when you have a calculation they are suited for.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Saturday September 21 2019, @04:01PM
Quantum circuitry simulation means fermionic systems simulation which covers Baryonic matter. i.e. chemistry.
compiling...
(Score: 2) by driverless on Saturday September 21 2019, @06:46PM (1 child)
Beat me to it. "Quantum supremacy" = a quantum computer can solve a (literally) useless problem designed to show off quantum computers faster than a classical computer simulating a quantum computer running the same useless problem solution.
For Google's next trick they'll be demonstrating boxing supremacy, where one of the geeks working on Bristlecone will beat Mike Tyson after he's been wrapped in iron chains, had concrete set around his fists, and been knocked out with ketamine.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by pipedwho on Saturday September 21 2019, @11:16PM
More like and for their next trick “one of Google’s chess champions beats Mike Tyson at a game of chess!”
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday September 21 2019, @03:03PM (2 children)
They are pretty precise with that three minutes and twenty seconds. That "approximately 10,000 years" implies no precision at all. They couldn't use that new quantum computer to calculate with precision better than "approximately 10,000 years"???? That's a pretty good sign of bluff and bluster.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Saturday September 21 2019, @03:46PM (1 child)
Keep in mind that this imformation is being filtered through two news agencies, we don't have Google's unadulterated numbers. Also, does an extra 43 days, 2 hours, 6 minutes, and 12 seconds really matter after the first 10,000 years? I get that you would expect a more specific number than 10,000 years to be calculated, but I could still see throwing out "over 10,000 years" in a summary somewhere.
(Score: 4, Funny) by maxwell demon on Saturday September 21 2019, @04:23PM
Of course. If it were just 11 seconds instead of 12, it clearly wouldn't be quantum supremacy! ;-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 21 2019, @03:42PM
First we have white supremacists, now we have to deal with quantum supremacists too.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 21 2019, @03:52PM
The subhuman superposition of a nigger boy and a White boy is what happens when we let the niggers rape our White women.
(Score: 2) by looorg on Saturday September 21 2019, @04:02PM (2 children)
Has it been verified by anyone or anything beyond itself? But even if NASA removed it (which somehow casts shade or doubt about the whole thing or the medias interpretation of it) lets just assume that it's true until told otherwise. What are the implications if this is now a real thing? Isn't more or less all classical computations now then dead? Encryption is borderline pointless since it would be a mere fraction of a second to break it -- if Google can build one then pretty much any nation can build one, any reasonably large organization can build one etc ...
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Saturday September 21 2019, @05:50PM (1 child)
Well, perhaps not a fraction of a second, but a lot less time. And it would still be a very expensive process.
So, no, encryption isn't *dead*, merely moribund. For just about everybody it's probably still pretty good for a couple of decades. But do you use on-line banking? That's got a lot more issues than just quantum breaking of encryption.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 22 2019, @02:22AM
Quantum computers don't break all kinds of encryption, although it does break the current widely-used ones. But there are many alternative approaches that are quantum-resistant. I wouldn't expect encryption to just stop working.
Mostly, I'd expect it to become possible to break present-day encryption in the future. So if some secrets are encrypted now, in five or ten years someone that has obtained a copy of the encrypted data might be able to decrypt it. But there will be new algorithms available by then to protect routine transactions.
(Score: 2) by Rupert Pupnick on Saturday September 21 2019, @06:14PM (1 child)
So much bluster, so little supporting information.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 21 2019, @06:36PM
The time between having 100 qubit chips and 1 billion qubit chips will be very short.
If they are good for anything, they will become excellent at it very quickly.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 22 2019, @05:07AM
no worries, the next os update will break it.
acctually one wonders sometimes if them qubit computers dont exist already and are being used with great success to frustrate users applying "upgrades" maximally...
(Score: 2) by EvilJim on Tuesday September 24 2019, @03:39AM
I had a few quantum hard disk drives in the early 90's, even a bigfoot for extra elusiveness.