I didn't dig deeper on that meaningless "result". So they failed even with a proof-of-concept. :)
As for large systems, AFAIK, there comes up another problem with decoherence along with the scale up. More qubits, more decoherence and nobody knows how to avoid it.
Really, it is fascinating to observe how all that total crap with quantum computing, artificial intelligence, etc. not only used for enormous money laundering, but also successfully used in fearmongering. Seems that even here only few really do their own research to find out the real state of affairs with that marketing bullshit.
Day to day it's harder and harder to keep the faith in humanity.
As you said, it's so important to research things than to take "common knowledge" about recent developments as accurate.
If you really want to lose faith, study all the crazy experiments that have been conducted in quantum mechanics, and you'll see no one can answer some basic questions about the entire concept. No one understands what's going on, and the so called "conclusions" of various experiments are just wild far-fetched guesses that sound nice on paper. Everyone is also afraid to ask the big questions behind the meaning of all the tests that have been conducted.
How is entanglement even possible? What does it mean about our reality if particles appear to share properties?
Why does every test conducted with "gates" result in confirmation? Is it possible to even achieve a negative result?
When multiple outcomes are possible, why are the ratios so perfect? How does this relate to the above question?
Are our experiments somehow flawed?
Are the particles aware they're being tested and necessarily react differently then they would if no one was looking?
Quantum theory is not complete, it could explain some effects, like changing energy levels of atom electrons and perfectly allow to calculate and create a lot of things from lasers and semiconductors to fluorescent paints but it does not explain a lot of things. Possible theory enhancements cross the road of relativity which is an absolute dogma for Einstein praisers.
So, most answers for interesting questions could not be given until relativity will be thrown away.
Really, the coolest thing connected with quantum physics I found is Gunter Nimtz FTL experiments, that was reproduced by other researchers and completely silenced for a long time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCnter_Nimtz He made a very simple experiment, that undeniably show that radiowaves carrying information could travel 4.7 times faster than light. Further experiments by other researchers shown that quantum tunnelling of radiowave photons seem to occur in zero time. That completely throw out special relativity theory with all its garbage about impossibility of FTL.
Obvilously no any predicted by special relativity time paradoxes, like casuality violation occur, and some most active Einstein shills even used that fact as a "proof" that there was no FTL.
And you will hear absolutely nothing about that bombshell.
I think you hear nothing about it because people have offered other explanations. I have seen a paper on causality violation, that it can happen according to some test conducted where photons are reacting to something that hasn't happened yet. There's other explanations also.
Indeed, all this stuff about quantum everything is interesting, but nobody is really asking the big questions and trying to answer them. Our knowledge in the field is incredibly primitive, yet some people think we'll have machines that can do quantum computing any day now, when no one even knows how to engineer anything in that regard.
I think you hear nothing about it because people have offered other explanations.
There are no any other explanations, only FTL one and weak attempts of opponents to misinform others about experiment details. The latter ones is futile, because experiment was reproduced by independent researchers with results even worse for relativists.
I have seen a paper on causality violation, that it can happen according to some test conducted where photons are reacting to something that hasn't happened yet.
Please share a link or doi if you have it, I like that fringe things a lot.
Our knowledge in the field is incredibly primitive
Our knowledge on quantum physics could be completely worng, like in a case with a theory of flogiston, that was completely wrong, but allowed to do a complex thermodynamic calculations that was perfectly accurate.
As for quantum computers, I could imagine some usage in cases where you have to deal with probabilities, since all quantum physics is about probabilities, but that niche in no case interfere with anything that advertised about quantum computing in MSM.
I didn't dig deeper on that meaningless "result". So they failed even with a proof-of-concept. :)
As for large systems, AFAIK, there comes up another problem with decoherence along with the scale up. More qubits, more decoherence and nobody knows how to avoid it.
Really, it is fascinating to observe how all that total crap with quantum computing, artificial intelligence, etc. not only used for enormous money laundering, but also successfully used in fearmongering. Seems that even here only few really do their own research to find out the real state of affairs with that marketing bullshit.
Day to day it's harder and harder to keep the faith in humanity.
You'll probably enjoy these articles:
https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2019/01/15/quantum-computing-as-a-field-is-obvious-bullshit/
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-case-against-quantum-computing
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-us-national-academies-reports-on-the-prospects-for-quantum-computing
https://www.quantamagazine.org/gil-kalais-argument-against-quantum-computers-20180207/
As you said, it's so important to research things than to take "common knowledge" about recent developments as accurate.
If you really want to lose faith, study all the crazy experiments that have been conducted in quantum mechanics, and you'll see no one can answer some basic questions about the entire concept. No one understands what's going on, and the so called "conclusions" of various experiments are just wild far-fetched guesses that sound nice on paper. Everyone is also afraid to ask the big questions behind the meaning of all the tests that have been conducted.
How is entanglement even possible? What does it mean about our reality if particles appear to share properties?
Why does every test conducted with "gates" result in confirmation? Is it possible to even achieve a negative result?
When multiple outcomes are possible, why are the ratios so perfect? How does this relate to the above question?
Are our experiments somehow flawed?
Are the particles aware they're being tested and necessarily react differently then they would if no one was looking?
Nice articles, thank you, bookmarked.
Quantum theory is not complete, it could explain some effects, like changing energy levels of atom electrons and perfectly allow to calculate and create a lot of things from lasers and semiconductors to fluorescent paints but it does not explain a lot of things. Possible theory enhancements cross the road of relativity which is an absolute dogma for Einstein praisers. So, most answers for interesting questions could not be given until relativity will be thrown away.
Really, the coolest thing connected with quantum physics I found is Gunter Nimtz FTL experiments, that was reproduced by other researchers and completely silenced for a long time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCnter_Nimtz He made a very simple experiment, that undeniably show that radiowaves carrying information could travel 4.7 times faster than light. Further experiments by other researchers shown that quantum tunnelling of radiowave photons seem to occur in zero time. That completely throw out special relativity theory with all its garbage about impossibility of FTL. Obvilously no any predicted by special relativity time paradoxes, like casuality violation occur, and some most active Einstein shills even used that fact as a "proof" that there was no FTL.
And you will hear absolutely nothing about that bombshell.
I think you hear nothing about it because people have offered other explanations. I have seen a paper on causality violation, that it can happen according to some test conducted where photons are reacting to something that hasn't happened yet. There's other explanations also.
Indeed, all this stuff about quantum everything is interesting, but nobody is really asking the big questions and trying to answer them. Our knowledge in the field is incredibly primitive, yet some people think we'll have machines that can do quantum computing any day now, when no one even knows how to engineer anything in that regard.
There are no any other explanations, only FTL one and weak attempts of opponents to misinform others about experiment details. The latter ones is futile, because experiment was reproduced by independent researchers with results even worse for relativists.
Please share a link or doi if you have it, I like that fringe things a lot.
Our knowledge on quantum physics could be completely worng, like in a case with a theory of flogiston, that was completely wrong, but allowed to do a complex thermodynamic calculations that was perfectly accurate.
As for quantum computers, I could imagine some usage in cases where you have to deal with probabilities, since all quantum physics is about probabilities, but that niche in no case interfere with anything that advertised about quantum computing in MSM.