Arrays of Atoms Emerge As Dark Horse Candidate To Power Quantum Computers (sciencemag.org) 34
Sophia Chen reporting for Science Magazine: In a small basement laboratory, Harry Levine, a Harvard University graduate student in physics, can assemble a rudimentary computer in a fraction of a second. There isn't a processor chip in sight; his computer is powered by 51 rubidium atoms that reside in a glass cell the size of a matchbox. To create his computer, he lines up the atoms in single file, using a laser split into 51 beams. More lasers -- six beams per atom -- slow the atoms until they are nearly motionless. Then, with yet another set of lasers, he coaxes the atoms to interact with each other, and, in principle, perform calculations.
It's a quantum computer, which manipulates "qubits" that can encode zeroes and ones simultaneously in what's called a superposition state. If scaled up, it might vastly outperform conventional computers at certain tasks. But in the world of quantum computing, Levine's device is somewhat unusual. In the race to build a practical quantum device, investment has largely gone to qubits that can be built on silicon, such as tiny circuits of superconducting wire and small semiconductors structures known as quantum dots. Now, two recent studies have demonstrated the promise of the qubits Levine works with: neutral atoms. In one study, a group including Levine showed a quantum logic gate made of two neutral atoms could work with far fewer errors than ever before. And in another, researchers built 3D structures of carefully arranged atoms, showing that more qubits can be packed into a small space by taking advantage of the third dimension. Chen goes on report on the startups -- ColdQuanta and Atom Computing -- that are working to build fully programmable quantum computers. ColdQuanta has received $6.75 million in venture funding while Atom Computer has raised $5 million.
It's a quantum computer, which manipulates "qubits" that can encode zeroes and ones simultaneously in what's called a superposition state. If scaled up, it might vastly outperform conventional computers at certain tasks. But in the world of quantum computing, Levine's device is somewhat unusual. In the race to build a practical quantum device, investment has largely gone to qubits that can be built on silicon, such as tiny circuits of superconducting wire and small semiconductors structures known as quantum dots. Now, two recent studies have demonstrated the promise of the qubits Levine works with: neutral atoms. In one study, a group including Levine showed a quantum logic gate made of two neutral atoms could work with far fewer errors than ever before. And in another, researchers built 3D structures of carefully arranged atoms, showing that more qubits can be packed into a small space by taking advantage of the third dimension. Chen goes on report on the startups -- ColdQuanta and Atom Computing -- that are working to build fully programmable quantum computers. ColdQuanta has received $6.75 million in venture funding while Atom Computer has raised $5 million.
This is not a "rudimentary computer" (Score:3)
This is more on the level of a few single transistors, although actual transistors can be combined for the whole to scale. This cannot.
The more of these "breakthroughs" I see, the more I am convinced this stuff will never be of any use. They are making slower and slower process and still cannot solve even computing tasks a pocket calculator could solve 50 years ago. And they have been at it for like 30 years now.
Re:This is not a "rudimentary computer" (Score:4, Funny)
Re: This is not a "rudimentary computer" (Score:2)
I'm sure she felt the same about you when she took her love to town :)
Re: (Score:2)
I do. Different words, same old stupid people.
Re: (Score:2)
a) They are full of shit
b) 128bit is pretty worthless to do anything real with should they actually be able to deliver
In fact, they could probably fake b), because at that point classical computers or FPGA-based algorithms may still be faster. Just a guess, I have stopped following the details of this quantum-computing nonsense about 20 years ago, when it failed to deliver anything after about 20 years of research. This is just morons believing in magic. Noting usual, but also nothing to be taken seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Evidence? (Score:2)
Simpsons and Radioactive man (Score:1)
"No no, up and atom!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It IS government funding. (Score:2)
https://www.lawyers.com/legal-... [lawyers.com]
As an incentive for businesses to keep investing in R&D, the tax law provides favorable tax treatment for research and experimental costs. In most cases, you can currently deduct these costs or deduct them over five or ten years.
Government is funding research and development through tax incentives.
It's basically giving companies money to spend on playing around with LEGOs, trying to make a better mousetrap.
Why? Cause some of them work AND you get to keep and train a lot of experienced LEGO builders and other eggheads.
The kind of people who come up with better medicines and bigger bombs.
It's not the most efficient way of going about it, but the successful results get pumped straight into the economy
Re: (Score:2)
Tax incentives don't work that way.
Guess:
a) you make 1,000,000 and pay the tax
b) you make 1,000,000 and then spent 500,000 on some "tax incentive project" and pay the tax on the rest
What leaves you with more money in the bank a year later?
Unlike monkeys on typewriters, scientists and engineers DO come up with useful things by just playing around with stuff all day.
That is actually true. Nevertheless most of the time they have a goal and don't just play/fool around.