Simulations Show Quantum Error Not As Bad As Believed 44
aarondubrow writes "Because quantum systems become unstable quickly, their error threshold is an important factor. How many bits can 'break' before the system stops working? An international team of researchers used the supercomputers at the Texas Advanced Computing Center to simulate the error threshold of a topological quantum system and found a much higher threshold than had previously been reported."
Re:Meh (Score:1, Funny)
Quantum Errors (Score:4, Funny)
I had a Quantum hard drive fail about 2 months after the warranty expired. Fortunately you could still READ the data on it, you just couldn't write to it.
This was in the days of SCSI hard drives and Amiga computers.
The error rate exists as a superposition of itself (Score:4, Funny)
Both good and bad was the the error rate
of the simulated Quantum state:
A superposition the states did make
having properties hard not to misstate.
Thus, when the research groups did separate
to further test the quantum error rate
they each observed a quantum error state
that they could not, in fact, equate!
Indeed, the collapsed quantum state
resulted in results so disparate,
their virtual machines could not re-simulate
these quantum effects they could not contemplate.
As the scientists began to debate
over a single quantum error rate
Their tense and stressed emotional state
caused some of them to scorn and berate,
and sparked others to recriminate.
(I would dare to speculate
that they were even too irate
to relate or even cogitate
the average quantum error rate.)
I hope they can remunerate
the costs that we associate
with researching the quantum error state,
so their teams do not have to inflate
the local unemployment rate!
Alas, science has yet to negate,
(or even circumnavigate)
the risks that one begins to take
by observing a Quantum error rate.