1 00:00:04,160 --> 00:00:07,160 Speaker 1: Get in touch with technology with tech Stuff from how 2 00:00:07,240 --> 00:00:14,120 Speaker 1: stuff Works dot com. Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff. 3 00:00:14,240 --> 00:00:18,800 Speaker 1: I am Jonathan Strickland, the host, an executive producer with 4 00:00:18,840 --> 00:00:22,480 Speaker 1: How Stuff Works and a lover of all things tech. 5 00:00:23,040 --> 00:00:26,960 Speaker 1: And this is another episode in the little mini series. 6 00:00:27,000 --> 00:00:30,560 Speaker 1: I'm recording while I'm attending the Think two thousand eighteen 7 00:00:30,600 --> 00:00:34,800 Speaker 1: conference in Las Vegas, Nevada. It's sponsored by IBM, and 8 00:00:35,240 --> 00:00:39,640 Speaker 1: IBM does this big conference. It's sort of a an amalgamation, 9 00:00:39,800 --> 00:00:44,720 Speaker 1: a gloming on to several different smaller conferences that IBM 10 00:00:44,800 --> 00:00:48,360 Speaker 1: has been holding for several years. They kind of pushed 11 00:00:48,360 --> 00:00:51,280 Speaker 1: them all together and turned it into a giant, mega conference. 12 00:00:52,080 --> 00:00:54,320 Speaker 1: And I emphasized giant. I mean there are tens of 13 00:00:54,320 --> 00:00:57,600 Speaker 1: thousands of people attending this conference. It feels like more 14 00:00:57,680 --> 00:00:59,959 Speaker 1: than that when you're trying to get through the Mandalay 15 00:01:00,120 --> 00:01:05,440 Speaker 1: Bay Conference Center, because holy cats, lots of executives, a 16 00:01:05,520 --> 00:01:08,600 Speaker 1: lot of blazers, a lot of blazers out there, folks. 17 00:01:09,000 --> 00:01:11,600 Speaker 1: I gotta watch my what I say because pretty much 18 00:01:11,640 --> 00:01:16,280 Speaker 1: everybody in there is a giant stakeholder in some big 19 00:01:16,319 --> 00:01:19,319 Speaker 1: business or another. And chances are if I if I 20 00:01:19,360 --> 00:01:22,479 Speaker 1: say something rude, I've just insulted a millionaire, and I'm 21 00:01:22,520 --> 00:01:25,360 Speaker 1: not in that tax bracket. But let's talk a little 22 00:01:25,360 --> 00:01:28,440 Speaker 1: bit about one of the topics that got a lot 23 00:01:29,319 --> 00:01:33,360 Speaker 1: of coverage here at IBM think two thousand and eighteen, 24 00:01:33,400 --> 00:01:37,840 Speaker 1: and that is quantum computing. It's a big deal, and 25 00:01:37,880 --> 00:01:41,040 Speaker 1: that's because quantum computers are beginning to emerge from the 26 00:01:41,080 --> 00:01:45,800 Speaker 1: realm of experimental science into practical applications. In fact, you 27 00:01:45,800 --> 00:01:48,200 Speaker 1: could argue it's already there and has been for a 28 00:01:48,240 --> 00:01:51,240 Speaker 1: couple of years, but it's still relatively new and I 29 00:01:51,240 --> 00:01:53,680 Speaker 1: think very mysterious for a lot of people. And I've 30 00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:56,280 Speaker 1: talked about a little bit in previous episodes, but I 31 00:01:56,320 --> 00:01:59,480 Speaker 1: really wanted to dedicate a an entire episode kind of 32 00:01:59,560 --> 00:02:04,960 Speaker 1: quantum computing one oh one and really talk about the 33 00:02:05,000 --> 00:02:09,119 Speaker 1: principles behind it, the history behind it, what it might 34 00:02:09,160 --> 00:02:12,280 Speaker 1: be used for, why it's such a big deal in 35 00:02:12,280 --> 00:02:15,080 Speaker 1: the first place. So this is our full episode on 36 00:02:15,080 --> 00:02:17,400 Speaker 1: the topic, and I'm going to reference some of the 37 00:02:17,440 --> 00:02:21,080 Speaker 1: things I've learned while I've been at this conference. Let's 38 00:02:21,160 --> 00:02:23,800 Speaker 1: do what I love to do. This is like a 39 00:02:23,840 --> 00:02:26,240 Speaker 1: good old traditional episode of tech stuff. We're gonna dive 40 00:02:26,280 --> 00:02:30,320 Speaker 1: into the history of quantum computing and quantum mechanics and 41 00:02:30,400 --> 00:02:33,520 Speaker 1: quantum theory. So this all begins before the computer age. 42 00:02:34,400 --> 00:02:37,840 Speaker 1: We have to discuss the history of quantum mechanics itself. Now, 43 00:02:38,600 --> 00:02:42,120 Speaker 1: I'm not going to go into exhaustive detail, because to 44 00:02:42,200 --> 00:02:46,760 Speaker 1: do that would require an entire podcast series, not just 45 00:02:46,800 --> 00:02:49,960 Speaker 1: an episode, but a series of episodes to kind of 46 00:02:49,960 --> 00:02:53,720 Speaker 1: talk about all of the developments in quantum mechanics. And 47 00:02:53,720 --> 00:02:56,919 Speaker 1: not only that, but it's a messy history filled with 48 00:02:57,360 --> 00:03:01,760 Speaker 1: a lot of scientific debate and our humans and uh 49 00:03:02,120 --> 00:03:07,440 Speaker 1: experiments and counter experiments, thought experiments, aim calling. There was 50 00:03:07,480 --> 00:03:10,919 Speaker 1: some adultery in there too. I mean, it's it reads 51 00:03:10,919 --> 00:03:13,839 Speaker 1: like a soap opera at times, and and like I said, 52 00:03:13,840 --> 00:03:18,000 Speaker 1: it's just it's so deep and dense that to really 53 00:03:18,120 --> 00:03:21,600 Speaker 1: cover it would require multiple episodes. So this is kind 54 00:03:21,600 --> 00:03:25,120 Speaker 1: of like a an introductory a bird's eye view of 55 00:03:25,160 --> 00:03:28,600 Speaker 1: the history of quantum mechanics. So let's talk about the 56 00:03:28,639 --> 00:03:33,000 Speaker 1: developments around the turn of the last century, the twentieth century. 57 00:03:33,040 --> 00:03:36,080 Speaker 1: In nineteen hundred, it only been a couple of years 58 00:03:36,080 --> 00:03:38,920 Speaker 1: and scientists had even discovered the existence of electrons at 59 00:03:38,920 --> 00:03:42,160 Speaker 1: that point. No one was even sure in nineteen hundred 60 00:03:42,480 --> 00:03:46,480 Speaker 1: if electrons were even part of the atom. They didn't 61 00:03:46,480 --> 00:03:50,320 Speaker 1: know our electrons actually a component of atoms or are 62 00:03:50,360 --> 00:03:52,880 Speaker 1: they something else? So do they coexist with atoms but 63 00:03:52,920 --> 00:03:56,280 Speaker 1: they're not bound to atoms? They weren't sure. In nine hundred, 64 00:03:56,760 --> 00:04:00,200 Speaker 1: there was general agreement that atoms were in fact a 65 00:04:00,320 --> 00:04:04,280 Speaker 1: kind of a fundamental particle, but beyond that, there wasn't 66 00:04:04,320 --> 00:04:07,960 Speaker 1: a whole lot of agreement on them. No one was 67 00:04:08,000 --> 00:04:11,680 Speaker 1: really sure what made the atoms of one element different 68 00:04:11,760 --> 00:04:15,040 Speaker 1: from another, and therefore they weren't sure why elements were 69 00:04:15,080 --> 00:04:17,920 Speaker 1: different in the first place. They could identify elements, they 70 00:04:17,920 --> 00:04:22,800 Speaker 1: could identify the qualities of elements, but they couldn't explain 71 00:04:22,920 --> 00:04:27,000 Speaker 1: why they were different from each other. Well, in there 72 00:04:27,080 --> 00:04:30,640 Speaker 1: was a smarty pants physicist, Max Planck, who was trying 73 00:04:30,640 --> 00:04:34,800 Speaker 1: to work out some reasons behind a curious observation that 74 00:04:34,839 --> 00:04:38,599 Speaker 1: people had noticed for centuries but didn't They couldn't explain it. 75 00:04:38,920 --> 00:04:41,960 Speaker 1: And that was the nature of heat radiation and the 76 00:04:42,080 --> 00:04:45,560 Speaker 1: light that it can produce. So let's say that you're 77 00:04:45,560 --> 00:04:48,960 Speaker 1: a blacksmith and you've got some iron, and you put 78 00:04:49,080 --> 00:04:51,719 Speaker 1: in the forge and you heat the forge up. Eventually 79 00:04:51,760 --> 00:04:54,560 Speaker 1: that iron, as it grows hot, will begin to glow, 80 00:04:55,000 --> 00:04:57,479 Speaker 1: and it first will kind of glow red, and then 81 00:04:57,480 --> 00:04:59,599 Speaker 1: that red will get brighter and brighter, kind of turned 82 00:04:59,600 --> 00:05:02,159 Speaker 1: into an orange. And if it gets hot enough, it'll 83 00:05:02,320 --> 00:05:05,600 Speaker 1: glow white. If you could get it hot enough before 84 00:05:05,600 --> 00:05:08,720 Speaker 1: it melted, you could make it even glow blue. These 85 00:05:08,760 --> 00:05:12,680 Speaker 1: different colors would represent different energy states, but no one 86 00:05:12,720 --> 00:05:14,640 Speaker 1: knew that at the time. No one was able to 87 00:05:14,680 --> 00:05:19,960 Speaker 1: explain why iron would change color as it got hotter. 88 00:05:20,880 --> 00:05:23,000 Speaker 1: So Plank was working on this problem. He was trying 89 00:05:23,040 --> 00:05:25,359 Speaker 1: to figure out, well, what is what explains us, or 90 00:05:25,400 --> 00:05:28,719 Speaker 1: what at least describes this, and eventually came up with 91 00:05:28,760 --> 00:05:33,159 Speaker 1: a formula that fit the observations he made in experiments. 92 00:05:33,720 --> 00:05:37,720 Speaker 1: He had figured out a formula that that seemed to fit, 93 00:05:37,880 --> 00:05:41,760 Speaker 1: But why did it fit? Why did that formula describe 94 00:05:41,800 --> 00:05:44,800 Speaker 1: what was happening? He couldn't tell. He wasn't sure, No 95 00:05:44,839 --> 00:05:47,320 Speaker 1: one was sure at first. He kept working on it, 96 00:05:47,560 --> 00:05:51,840 Speaker 1: so eventually Plank figured out that the atoms could apparently 97 00:05:52,040 --> 00:05:56,640 Speaker 1: only take on certain quantities of energy, So it could 98 00:05:56,680 --> 00:06:00,480 Speaker 1: take a certain amount of energy, and then any above 99 00:06:00,520 --> 00:06:03,240 Speaker 1: that it could not accept until it got to the 100 00:06:03,279 --> 00:06:07,279 Speaker 1: next specific allowable energy level. So you could think of 101 00:06:07,279 --> 00:06:11,679 Speaker 1: it as steps of energy. You could accept a certain amount, 102 00:06:12,560 --> 00:06:16,520 Speaker 1: and then you could step up and accept a new 103 00:06:16,760 --> 00:06:20,760 Speaker 1: larger amount, but anything in between those two steps didn't 104 00:06:21,040 --> 00:06:24,520 Speaker 1: fit the formula. And this was very curious. It wasn't 105 00:06:24,560 --> 00:06:28,240 Speaker 1: something that was continuous, right, This idea of steps of 106 00:06:28,360 --> 00:06:34,040 Speaker 1: energy levels was really perplexing at the time. You might 107 00:06:34,120 --> 00:06:38,200 Speaker 1: think of it more like a continuous string, but it wasn't. 108 00:06:38,440 --> 00:06:42,279 Speaker 1: It was this broken series of steps. So this really 109 00:06:42,320 --> 00:06:45,120 Speaker 1: got people wondering what the heck was going on. Um, 110 00:06:45,440 --> 00:06:49,280 Speaker 1: how could materials take on specific increments of energy rather 111 00:06:49,360 --> 00:06:52,880 Speaker 1: than any arbitrary amount. Planck didn't know. He didn't know 112 00:06:53,000 --> 00:06:55,600 Speaker 1: why it was happening. He only knew that it was 113 00:06:55,839 --> 00:07:00,159 Speaker 1: happening based upon his observations, and that the explanation he 114 00:07:00,240 --> 00:07:04,279 Speaker 1: had fit what he observed. He just couldn't explain why 115 00:07:04,360 --> 00:07:09,200 Speaker 1: it worked. He announced his findings on December four, nineteen hundred. 116 00:07:09,240 --> 00:07:11,560 Speaker 1: Now some people trace that as the origin of the 117 00:07:11,600 --> 00:07:15,320 Speaker 1: study of quantum mechanics, though of course at that time 118 00:07:15,360 --> 00:07:19,960 Speaker 1: it wasn't yet called quantum mechanics. It did, however, formulate 119 00:07:20,000 --> 00:07:23,560 Speaker 1: the foundation of what some would refer to as old 120 00:07:23,800 --> 00:07:28,840 Speaker 1: quantum theory. Now that theory stated that these acceptable energy 121 00:07:28,920 --> 00:07:34,560 Speaker 1: increments were specific quantities, right quantities of energy, and that 122 00:07:34,640 --> 00:07:38,480 Speaker 1: any phenomena that would only accept certain values of a 123 00:07:38,520 --> 00:07:43,440 Speaker 1: physical quantity fell into this category, and it typically was 124 00:07:43,520 --> 00:07:48,400 Speaker 1: stuff on the atomic scale, tiny tiny scale, not classical scale, 125 00:07:48,800 --> 00:07:52,120 Speaker 1: which seemed to follow the rules of classical physics. These 126 00:07:52,160 --> 00:07:54,840 Speaker 1: things didn't seem to follow the rules of classical physics. 127 00:07:54,880 --> 00:07:58,280 Speaker 1: The rules were different for some reason. So scientists said 128 00:07:58,280 --> 00:08:03,800 Speaker 1: that the values of this physical quantity of energy, uh, 129 00:08:04,240 --> 00:08:08,000 Speaker 1: we're said to be quantized. That's the values of this 130 00:08:08,120 --> 00:08:11,200 Speaker 1: energy is quantized. It was generally believed that you'd have 131 00:08:11,240 --> 00:08:14,480 Speaker 1: to do lots of experiments and make lots of observations 132 00:08:14,520 --> 00:08:17,880 Speaker 1: to kind of suss out the rules for that quantization 133 00:08:18,600 --> 00:08:21,280 Speaker 1: or perhaps even uncover a set of universal rules that 134 00:08:21,320 --> 00:08:25,480 Speaker 1: would work in all situations. So there were scientists like 135 00:08:25,720 --> 00:08:29,080 Speaker 1: Albert Einstein who seized on this notion, and they began 136 00:08:29,120 --> 00:08:32,640 Speaker 1: to apply this idea to other areas of study. He, 137 00:08:33,160 --> 00:08:36,480 Speaker 1: for example, Einstein, that is, proposed that the total energy 138 00:08:36,559 --> 00:08:40,360 Speaker 1: of a beam of light was quantized. Several other big 139 00:08:40,400 --> 00:08:43,480 Speaker 1: thinkers were looking into similar fields. But then the First 140 00:08:43,520 --> 00:08:48,760 Speaker 1: World War broke out and that really slowed down progress 141 00:08:48,960 --> 00:08:52,240 Speaker 1: in the sciences because a lot of the leading scientists 142 00:08:52,280 --> 00:08:55,400 Speaker 1: at the time we're all in Europe, so obviously Europe 143 00:08:55,400 --> 00:08:59,320 Speaker 1: being heavily affected by World War One meant that a 144 00:08:59,400 --> 00:09:02,160 Speaker 1: lot of that work was put on hold. However, at 145 00:09:02,160 --> 00:09:05,920 Speaker 1: the war's conclusion, things picked up again at that stage 146 00:09:06,000 --> 00:09:09,200 Speaker 1: after World War One, but before World War Two, you 147 00:09:09,280 --> 00:09:13,680 Speaker 1: had scientists like Max Bourne and Werner Heisenberg who were 148 00:09:14,160 --> 00:09:19,959 Speaker 1: extending our understanding of the quantized world. Now Born and Heisenberg, 149 00:09:20,160 --> 00:09:26,880 Speaker 1: along with Pascal Jordan's, wrote an extremely complicated but consistent 150 00:09:27,320 --> 00:09:33,800 Speaker 1: theory of quantum mechanics. Meanwhile, you had another smarty pants 151 00:09:33,880 --> 00:09:38,160 Speaker 1: Irwin Schrodinger or Irvin if you prefer, that would be 152 00:09:38,200 --> 00:09:41,760 Speaker 1: of Schrodinger's cat fame. He was working on his own 153 00:09:41,880 --> 00:09:46,440 Speaker 1: theory to describe quantum mechanics, and for a while, those 154 00:09:46,480 --> 00:09:49,240 Speaker 1: two theories were the focus of a pretty nasty war 155 00:09:49,760 --> 00:09:53,600 Speaker 1: within physics in which both sides were kind of disparaging 156 00:09:53,640 --> 00:09:58,000 Speaker 1: the ideas of the other side. And essentially one group 157 00:09:58,040 --> 00:10:01,120 Speaker 1: is saying, you guys are full of it. My theory 158 00:10:01,360 --> 00:10:04,440 Speaker 1: describes what's actually happening Here's is a mess, and the 159 00:10:04,440 --> 00:10:09,120 Speaker 1: other side saying, nah, our theory is far more descriptive 160 00:10:09,200 --> 00:10:12,199 Speaker 1: of what is actually going on your theory is nonsensical. 161 00:10:12,720 --> 00:10:18,160 Speaker 1: But then in Schrodinger and Carl Eckert, who was working 162 00:10:18,200 --> 00:10:24,480 Speaker 1: completely independently of Schrodinger, both proved that these two seemingly 163 00:10:24,720 --> 00:10:28,320 Speaker 1: different approaches were actually describing the same thing. They were 164 00:10:28,360 --> 00:10:32,000 Speaker 1: just doing it from completely different points of reference. So 165 00:10:32,880 --> 00:10:35,679 Speaker 1: on the surface they superficially seemed like they were at 166 00:10:35,679 --> 00:10:39,040 Speaker 1: odds with one another, but underneath that it turned out 167 00:10:39,080 --> 00:10:42,400 Speaker 1: they were. They were in alignment. As one book I 168 00:10:42,520 --> 00:10:46,120 Speaker 1: read on the subject said, it's like comparing how you 169 00:10:46,160 --> 00:10:50,160 Speaker 1: add Arabic numerals to how you add Roman numerals. The 170 00:10:50,200 --> 00:10:53,360 Speaker 1: two processes look very different from each other, but if 171 00:10:53,360 --> 00:10:56,640 Speaker 1: you do them each correctly for the same two values, 172 00:10:56,840 --> 00:10:59,800 Speaker 1: you'll always arrive at the same answer, no matter what 173 00:11:00,200 --> 00:11:03,040 Speaker 1: method you use. Now that's not to say that everything 174 00:11:03,080 --> 00:11:06,720 Speaker 1: was smooth sailing from that point forward. Many scientists had 175 00:11:06,800 --> 00:11:11,400 Speaker 1: problems with aspects of quantum mechanics, such as it's probabilistic nature. 176 00:11:11,559 --> 00:11:15,640 Speaker 1: That is, much of quantum mechanics concerns itself with probabilities 177 00:11:15,920 --> 00:11:19,200 Speaker 1: rather than certainties. In fact, lots of things and quantum 178 00:11:19,200 --> 00:11:23,839 Speaker 1: mechanics become inherently uncertain the more you try and nail 179 00:11:23,880 --> 00:11:28,160 Speaker 1: it down, the more uncertain other elements will become. That's 180 00:11:28,200 --> 00:11:33,160 Speaker 1: partly what Heisenberg's uncertainty principle states. Heisenberg was specifically talking 181 00:11:33,200 --> 00:11:38,520 Speaker 1: about a quantum particles position versus its momentum. Heisenberg stated 182 00:11:38,559 --> 00:11:41,920 Speaker 1: that the more precisely you measure one of those two values, 183 00:11:42,120 --> 00:11:45,240 Speaker 1: the less you can know about the other one. So 184 00:11:45,400 --> 00:11:50,679 Speaker 1: if you measure a quantum particles position with great precision, 185 00:11:51,040 --> 00:11:54,679 Speaker 1: you won't know very much about its momentum, and vice versa. 186 00:11:54,760 --> 00:11:57,760 Speaker 1: And that this is just a fundamental feature of our universe, 187 00:11:58,000 --> 00:12:01,920 Speaker 1: so it's tough if you don't like it. The probabilistic 188 00:12:01,960 --> 00:12:05,679 Speaker 1: side of a quantum mechanics is tied also to measurement. 189 00:12:06,160 --> 00:12:09,000 Speaker 1: This was a central focus of a debate between two 190 00:12:09,000 --> 00:12:13,480 Speaker 1: great physicists, Neil's Bore and of course Albert Einstein. Einstein 191 00:12:13,600 --> 00:12:17,040 Speaker 1: was not keen on the probabilistic nature of quantum theory. 192 00:12:17,600 --> 00:12:22,200 Speaker 1: Uh He has often been attributed the phrase God does 193 00:12:22,240 --> 00:12:25,000 Speaker 1: not play dice with the universe, although that is a 194 00:12:25,040 --> 00:12:28,120 Speaker 1: paraphrasing of what he said. And then Niel's Bore was 195 00:12:28,160 --> 00:12:32,640 Speaker 1: paraphrases saying God doesn't care what you think he's doing. 196 00:12:33,400 --> 00:12:35,680 Speaker 1: Um so that was kind of the back and forth. 197 00:12:35,720 --> 00:12:38,800 Speaker 1: Although both of those statements were paraphrase, neither of those 198 00:12:38,840 --> 00:12:41,840 Speaker 1: were actually what the scientists were saying, just kind of 199 00:12:41,920 --> 00:12:46,080 Speaker 1: was a an interpretation of what they said. Quantum mechanics 200 00:12:46,120 --> 00:12:51,000 Speaker 1: experiments wouldn't really produce a definite solution. So we're used 201 00:12:51,040 --> 00:12:54,360 Speaker 1: to things like calculations coming up with a specific answer. 202 00:12:54,440 --> 00:12:58,200 Speaker 1: Right even let's just take simple arithmetic. If you say 203 00:12:58,200 --> 00:13:02,079 Speaker 1: two plus two equals for then you know you realize that, 204 00:13:02,160 --> 00:13:03,880 Speaker 1: all right, well, that that makes sense to pless two 205 00:13:03,880 --> 00:13:06,320 Speaker 1: equals for that's a that's a certain value. It's a 206 00:13:06,360 --> 00:13:11,120 Speaker 1: definite answer. Whereas with quantum mechanics you would get results 207 00:13:11,160 --> 00:13:14,400 Speaker 1: that would be listed in terms of probabilities, not in 208 00:13:14,600 --> 00:13:18,240 Speaker 1: terms of here is the answer. You would get a 209 00:13:18,280 --> 00:13:23,679 Speaker 1: probabilistic distribution of possible values. So that means every single 210 00:13:23,760 --> 00:13:27,120 Speaker 1: value you would get would get assigned a probability, and 211 00:13:27,200 --> 00:13:29,720 Speaker 1: if you were to measure a quantum state, that would 212 00:13:29,720 --> 00:13:32,520 Speaker 1: actually cause it to collapse into one of those probable 213 00:13:32,640 --> 00:13:38,040 Speaker 1: values that it possibly could have been. This is also 214 00:13:38,200 --> 00:13:42,760 Speaker 1: related to that concept of quantum tunneling I mentioned earlier 215 00:13:42,800 --> 00:13:47,079 Speaker 1: this week. The idea of an electron could potentially inhabit 216 00:13:47,200 --> 00:13:51,319 Speaker 1: one of any positions that are within a certain field, 217 00:13:51,840 --> 00:13:54,840 Speaker 1: and because there's that probability, it means that sometimes the 218 00:13:54,840 --> 00:13:58,319 Speaker 1: electron will inhabit that position. And if that position happens 219 00:13:58,360 --> 00:14:00,360 Speaker 1: to be on the other side of a barrier, just 220 00:14:00,400 --> 00:14:04,120 Speaker 1: because the zone the electron could exist in happens to 221 00:14:04,160 --> 00:14:07,280 Speaker 1: overlap that barrier, then that means sometimes the electron is 222 00:14:07,360 --> 00:14:08,920 Speaker 1: on the other side of the barrier, even though it 223 00:14:08,920 --> 00:14:13,280 Speaker 1: did not physically pass through the barrier. It's it's part 224 00:14:13,280 --> 00:14:18,920 Speaker 1: of the weird nature of quantum mechanics and probabilistic distribution. Again, 225 00:14:18,960 --> 00:14:23,000 Speaker 1: it's not a certainty, it's a probability. Another concept of 226 00:14:23,080 --> 00:14:26,080 Speaker 1: quantum theory that ends up being very important with quantum 227 00:14:26,120 --> 00:14:31,400 Speaker 1: computers is that of superposition. This is a pretty tricky concept, 228 00:14:31,440 --> 00:14:35,880 Speaker 1: as it is so counterintuitive that it prompted Schrodinger to 229 00:14:35,880 --> 00:14:39,560 Speaker 1: create what he thought was an absolutely bonkers example so 230 00:14:39,600 --> 00:14:42,120 Speaker 1: that he could illustrate how whacka doodle this idea was 231 00:14:42,240 --> 00:14:45,720 Speaker 1: on the macro scale. But today that example is widely known, 232 00:14:46,120 --> 00:14:48,360 Speaker 1: or at least it's known by name. That would be 233 00:14:48,400 --> 00:14:52,520 Speaker 1: Schrodinger's cat. So what is superposition and what the heck 234 00:14:52,600 --> 00:14:58,000 Speaker 1: was that famous thought experiment. Well, superposition refers to quantum 235 00:14:58,000 --> 00:15:04,000 Speaker 1: particles as inhabiting all sable states simultaneously. So a state 236 00:15:04,080 --> 00:15:08,240 Speaker 1: is really just a feature, something that the quantum particle possesses. 237 00:15:08,840 --> 00:15:12,400 Speaker 1: So let's take electron spin as an example. All right, 238 00:15:12,480 --> 00:15:15,720 Speaker 1: So electrons can spin in different directions, and for this 239 00:15:15,760 --> 00:15:19,320 Speaker 1: particular example, let's just talk about spinning up or spinning down. 240 00:15:19,680 --> 00:15:22,120 Speaker 1: So electron can spin up or it can spin down. 241 00:15:22,160 --> 00:15:25,760 Speaker 1: According to some versions of quantum theory and its quantum state, 242 00:15:26,240 --> 00:15:29,000 Speaker 1: that electron can be said to be both spinning up 243 00:15:29,040 --> 00:15:33,120 Speaker 1: and down simultaneously. It's both states at the same time. 244 00:15:33,360 --> 00:15:36,960 Speaker 1: It inhabits them while it's in this quantum state. But 245 00:15:37,600 --> 00:15:41,200 Speaker 1: when you measure the electrons spin, when you observe it, 246 00:15:41,600 --> 00:15:45,880 Speaker 1: the quantum state collapses down into one of the two 247 00:15:45,920 --> 00:15:49,360 Speaker 1: possible states. So you're never going to observe an electron 248 00:15:49,520 --> 00:15:53,680 Speaker 1: spinning up and down simultaneously because the act of observing 249 00:15:54,040 --> 00:15:58,040 Speaker 1: changes that which is observed at the quantum level. This 250 00:15:58,120 --> 00:16:01,520 Speaker 1: is the argument some people make that you know, measuring 251 00:16:01,560 --> 00:16:04,680 Speaker 1: doesn't matter because if you measure, you have changed the 252 00:16:04,720 --> 00:16:06,840 Speaker 1: thing that you were measuring. Now, that is true on 253 00:16:06,880 --> 00:16:09,200 Speaker 1: the quantum scale, but as you move up to the 254 00:16:09,200 --> 00:16:13,000 Speaker 1: classical scale, it's not really something you need to concern 255 00:16:13,040 --> 00:16:18,440 Speaker 1: yourself with. So, uh, you can't confuse quantum mechanics with 256 00:16:18,520 --> 00:16:24,920 Speaker 1: classical mechanics. It they are rules that define two different universes, 257 00:16:25,000 --> 00:16:28,880 Speaker 1: really the quantum level and then the classical level. So 258 00:16:29,800 --> 00:16:32,000 Speaker 1: it's not like classical physics need to be thrown out 259 00:16:32,040 --> 00:16:34,920 Speaker 1: the door. They still apply just two things that are 260 00:16:34,960 --> 00:16:37,600 Speaker 1: on the classical scale. When you get to the quantum scale, 261 00:16:37,640 --> 00:16:39,400 Speaker 1: that's when you have to look at quantum mechanics, and 262 00:16:39,400 --> 00:16:44,120 Speaker 1: that's when you start seeing these seemingly weird and counterintuitive rules. 263 00:16:44,880 --> 00:16:47,840 Speaker 1: And I say seemingly because the only reason they seem 264 00:16:47,880 --> 00:16:50,560 Speaker 1: weird to us is because we cannot observe them directly. 265 00:16:51,120 --> 00:16:54,240 Speaker 1: We don't exist on the quantum level um and in 266 00:16:54,600 --> 00:16:56,760 Speaker 1: the way that we can perceive it. We can just 267 00:16:57,040 --> 00:16:58,880 Speaker 1: work out the math and figure it out, and then 268 00:16:58,880 --> 00:17:02,400 Speaker 1: we can design experiments, and through those experiments we can 269 00:17:03,600 --> 00:17:07,160 Speaker 1: we can actually look for evidence that supports these theories. 270 00:17:07,200 --> 00:17:10,080 Speaker 1: And in fact, that has happened over time. People have 271 00:17:10,720 --> 00:17:14,280 Speaker 1: designed experiments to test these ideas and found through the 272 00:17:14,320 --> 00:17:18,199 Speaker 1: results of the experiments that those ideas seemed worthy, they 273 00:17:18,240 --> 00:17:23,199 Speaker 1: seemed valuable, and and real. Now, Schrodinger's cat is a 274 00:17:23,240 --> 00:17:26,879 Speaker 1: way of exaggerating this superposition effect, kind of in an 275 00:17:26,920 --> 00:17:29,399 Speaker 1: effort to show how crazy it sounds. So here's the 276 00:17:29,400 --> 00:17:32,919 Speaker 1: thought experiment. Let's say you've got a cat, and you 277 00:17:32,960 --> 00:17:35,919 Speaker 1: put the cat in a metal case. Inside that case 278 00:17:36,000 --> 00:17:39,680 Speaker 1: with the cat is a device that contains a radioactive particle. Now, 279 00:17:39,680 --> 00:17:46,040 Speaker 1: that radioactive particle could undergo radioactive decay within the next hour, 280 00:17:46,960 --> 00:17:51,320 Speaker 1: or equally, it could not decay within an hour. So 281 00:17:51,359 --> 00:17:54,240 Speaker 1: there's an equal chance that it could decay or that 282 00:17:54,320 --> 00:17:58,640 Speaker 1: it could remain whole within the span of an hour. 283 00:18:00,000 --> 00:18:03,360 Speaker 1: If the particle does decay, the energy it gives off 284 00:18:03,440 --> 00:18:07,240 Speaker 1: will cause a glass vial containing a poison to break, 285 00:18:07,600 --> 00:18:09,879 Speaker 1: and that will release the poison in the cage and 286 00:18:10,040 --> 00:18:13,400 Speaker 1: kill the poor kitty cat. The whole experiment is completely 287 00:18:13,440 --> 00:18:16,719 Speaker 1: sealed away. The cat is unable to interfere with the device, 288 00:18:16,800 --> 00:18:20,080 Speaker 1: because if you interfere with a quantum state and then 289 00:18:20,200 --> 00:18:23,480 Speaker 1: it decoheres, the whole experiment falls apart. So you have 290 00:18:23,560 --> 00:18:26,240 Speaker 1: to have this is a thought experiment anyway, but you 291 00:18:26,280 --> 00:18:27,760 Speaker 1: have to have it set up in a way so 292 00:18:27,800 --> 00:18:30,600 Speaker 1: that the cat's not going to interfere with the quantum state. 293 00:18:30,760 --> 00:18:33,480 Speaker 1: So an hour goes by with the cat inside this 294 00:18:33,520 --> 00:18:37,199 Speaker 1: cage and the radioactive element in there as well. And 295 00:18:37,240 --> 00:18:39,760 Speaker 1: the question you have to ask yourself before you open 296 00:18:39,960 --> 00:18:43,199 Speaker 1: up the cage is is the cat dead or is 297 00:18:43,240 --> 00:18:47,960 Speaker 1: it alive? Now? According to the super position theory and 298 00:18:48,000 --> 00:18:51,200 Speaker 1: Schroedinger's interpretation of that theory, you would have to say 299 00:18:51,240 --> 00:18:54,240 Speaker 1: that the cat is both alive and dead at the 300 00:18:54,320 --> 00:18:57,439 Speaker 1: same time. That exists in this quantum state where it 301 00:18:57,520 --> 00:19:00,439 Speaker 1: is alive and dead. It is only when you open 302 00:19:00,480 --> 00:19:03,880 Speaker 1: the cage and you look in and you are essentially 303 00:19:03,920 --> 00:19:07,160 Speaker 1: measuring the system this way, because you're making an observation 304 00:19:07,760 --> 00:19:10,479 Speaker 1: that the entire system will collapse into one of the 305 00:19:10,520 --> 00:19:14,400 Speaker 1: two possible outcomes, And at that point the cat makes 306 00:19:14,440 --> 00:19:18,040 Speaker 1: the transition into either being perfectly fine or very much 307 00:19:18,080 --> 00:19:22,560 Speaker 1: an ex kitty cat joining the choir invisible, running up 308 00:19:22,560 --> 00:19:25,840 Speaker 1: the curtain, kicking the bucket, shuffling off the mortal coil. 309 00:19:25,880 --> 00:19:28,239 Speaker 1: You get the idea. This is where you get all 310 00:19:28,240 --> 00:19:31,560 Speaker 1: those jokes about the cat being half dead. But here's 311 00:19:31,560 --> 00:19:36,080 Speaker 1: the crazy thing. While Schroedinger's thought experiment did make superposition 312 00:19:36,160 --> 00:19:41,320 Speaker 1: sound really bonkers, experiments supported the notion of superposition. Now Granted, 313 00:19:41,640 --> 00:19:44,920 Speaker 1: we're talking about effect on the quantum level, not something 314 00:19:44,960 --> 00:19:48,880 Speaker 1: that's observable in our macro world. Schrodinger would argue that 315 00:19:48,960 --> 00:19:53,560 Speaker 1: because the the whole premise of the experiment relied upon 316 00:19:53,560 --> 00:19:57,040 Speaker 1: a quantum particle, whether it decayed or not, it doesn't 317 00:19:57,119 --> 00:20:01,920 Speaker 1: violate this. The consequences of the at quantum event would 318 00:20:01,960 --> 00:20:05,280 Speaker 1: be on the macro level, but that the actual event 319 00:20:05,359 --> 00:20:08,800 Speaker 1: itself would still be in the quantum level. Uh. There's 320 00:20:08,800 --> 00:20:11,280 Speaker 1: some people who dispute that, so it kind of becomes 321 00:20:11,280 --> 00:20:14,560 Speaker 1: a philosophical argument. But the point is that the experiment 322 00:20:14,640 --> 00:20:18,520 Speaker 1: started to support this idea of superposition, and it's one 323 00:20:18,560 --> 00:20:20,720 Speaker 1: of the few, one of a couple of principles of 324 00:20:20,760 --> 00:20:24,080 Speaker 1: quantum mechanics that makes quantum computing such a potentially powerful 325 00:20:24,119 --> 00:20:27,879 Speaker 1: tool and a possible revolution in computing in general. The 326 00:20:27,960 --> 00:20:31,159 Speaker 1: other big concept in quantum theory that is of particular 327 00:20:31,200 --> 00:20:35,480 Speaker 1: importance with quantum computers is called entanglement. Now, this is 328 00:20:35,520 --> 00:20:40,400 Speaker 1: the strong correlation between two quantum particles that link those 329 00:20:40,440 --> 00:20:43,600 Speaker 1: two particles together, no matter how much physical distance might 330 00:20:43,680 --> 00:20:48,760 Speaker 1: separate the particles. So you could take two entangled particles, 331 00:20:48,920 --> 00:20:50,440 Speaker 1: and if you could do it in a way where 332 00:20:50,440 --> 00:20:53,640 Speaker 1: you're not disturbing the entanglement. You could move one particle 333 00:20:53,720 --> 00:20:56,000 Speaker 1: to the other side of the universe from the first 334 00:20:56,000 --> 00:20:59,840 Speaker 1: particle and they would still remain entangled. Einstein would call 335 00:21:00,040 --> 00:21:04,240 Speaker 1: this spooky action at a distance, and entangling particles means 336 00:21:04,280 --> 00:21:07,359 Speaker 1: that these two particles are always going to complement one 337 00:21:07,400 --> 00:21:11,600 Speaker 1: another in some way. So let's take electrons again. Let's 338 00:21:11,600 --> 00:21:15,160 Speaker 1: say you entangle to electrons so that their spin is correlated, 339 00:21:15,640 --> 00:21:19,240 Speaker 1: and if one electron is spinning up, the entangled partner 340 00:21:19,320 --> 00:21:21,919 Speaker 1: is always spinning down. This is just one example of 341 00:21:21,920 --> 00:21:25,160 Speaker 1: a way you could entangle particles so that means no 342 00:21:25,200 --> 00:21:29,399 Speaker 1: matter how much distance separates these electrons, if electron A 343 00:21:29,520 --> 00:21:31,800 Speaker 1: is spinning up, then electron B is spinning down. If 344 00:21:31,840 --> 00:21:34,680 Speaker 1: electron A starts to spin down, then electron B will 345 00:21:34,680 --> 00:21:37,760 Speaker 1: start to spin up, and he'll do it exactly at 346 00:21:37,800 --> 00:21:41,800 Speaker 1: the same time. There's like no delay, and this will 347 00:21:41,840 --> 00:21:44,720 Speaker 1: happen no matter how far apart those electrons are. It 348 00:21:44,840 --> 00:21:48,160 Speaker 1: seems impossible, and yet that is in fact what seems 349 00:21:48,200 --> 00:21:52,400 Speaker 1: to be happening with entanglement. However, once you observe one 350 00:21:52,440 --> 00:21:55,399 Speaker 1: of those two electrons, then the entanglement is broken and 351 00:21:55,480 --> 00:21:58,919 Speaker 1: you will know at the moment of observation, the moment 352 00:21:59,000 --> 00:22:02,280 Speaker 1: of measurement, what that other electron was doing, But you 353 00:22:02,320 --> 00:22:05,720 Speaker 1: don't know what it's doing anytime after the moment of observation. 354 00:22:05,840 --> 00:22:10,480 Speaker 1: You can only say, at this precise moment, the other electron, 355 00:22:10,520 --> 00:22:15,360 Speaker 1: wherever it may be, was doing this particular activity. At 356 00:22:15,400 --> 00:22:19,320 Speaker 1: that point, the system decoheres, and so it gives you 357 00:22:19,359 --> 00:22:23,720 Speaker 1: information but nothing. Some people have argued that this is 358 00:22:23,720 --> 00:22:26,960 Speaker 1: a way that you could potentially have faster than like communication. 359 00:22:27,000 --> 00:22:29,919 Speaker 1: Others argue no, because all it does is tell you 360 00:22:30,000 --> 00:22:35,480 Speaker 1: information that previously existed. The information didn't travel, just your 361 00:22:35,760 --> 00:22:39,600 Speaker 1: realization of what that information was occurs to you. It's 362 00:22:39,880 --> 00:22:43,359 Speaker 1: another fine distinction that gets into philosophical arguments, and its 363 00:22:43,400 --> 00:22:46,199 Speaker 1: outside the scope of this particular podcast, but it is 364 00:22:46,240 --> 00:22:50,639 Speaker 1: a fascinating discussion. So together, super position and entanglement are 365 00:22:50,720 --> 00:22:53,359 Speaker 1: two of the factors that really make quantum computers so 366 00:22:53,440 --> 00:22:57,240 Speaker 1: potentially revolutionary. And it's weird to say potentially, because today 367 00:22:57,240 --> 00:23:00,840 Speaker 1: they are actual working Quantum computers just have a somewhat 368 00:23:00,880 --> 00:23:03,760 Speaker 1: limited scope right now, but they're getting better all the time, 369 00:23:03,800 --> 00:23:07,240 Speaker 1: and in fact, some of the prototypes are really impressive 370 00:23:07,320 --> 00:23:11,639 Speaker 1: already before we get to actual quantum computers. There's a 371 00:23:11,760 --> 00:23:15,320 Speaker 1: little more history I need to cover. In nineteen seventy three, 372 00:23:15,640 --> 00:23:19,920 Speaker 1: Alexander Hollevo argued that for any given number of cubits, 373 00:23:19,960 --> 00:23:23,560 Speaker 1: which are quantum bits, you could not possibly carry more 374 00:23:23,640 --> 00:23:28,080 Speaker 1: information than that same number of classical bits. So, in 375 00:23:28,119 --> 00:23:31,840 Speaker 1: other words, if you have eight quantum bits, those eight 376 00:23:31,920 --> 00:23:35,000 Speaker 1: quantum bits could carry only as much information as a 377 00:23:35,040 --> 00:23:38,439 Speaker 1: classical bite, bite being eight bits, and of course a 378 00:23:38,480 --> 00:23:40,960 Speaker 1: bit being a basic unit of information, either a zero 379 00:23:41,080 --> 00:23:46,119 Speaker 1: or a one. However, the eight cubits through superposition could 380 00:23:46,160 --> 00:23:51,199 Speaker 1: represent all possible states of that bite. So it's not 381 00:23:51,280 --> 00:23:56,159 Speaker 1: carrying more information, it's just carrying Uh. It's hard to 382 00:23:56,320 --> 00:23:58,320 Speaker 1: hard to put this in a way that makes sense. 383 00:23:58,640 --> 00:24:00,639 Speaker 1: It's not carrying more information than a bite, it's just 384 00:24:00,680 --> 00:24:05,000 Speaker 1: carrying every single variation of information that bite could represent. Again, 385 00:24:05,040 --> 00:24:08,359 Speaker 1: anotherir fine distinction. This gets really fuzzy and wibbly wobbly 386 00:24:08,400 --> 00:24:11,119 Speaker 1: timey y me to me. In the early eighties, people 387 00:24:11,160 --> 00:24:14,920 Speaker 1: begin to theorize about the possibility of quantum computing and 388 00:24:15,480 --> 00:24:19,080 Speaker 1: talking about how you might use quantum particles to represent bits. 389 00:24:19,160 --> 00:24:21,640 Speaker 1: So again, like electrons, you could use electrons in their 390 00:24:21,680 --> 00:24:25,600 Speaker 1: spin And this is a quantum quality that electrons have, 391 00:24:26,200 --> 00:24:28,240 Speaker 1: and if you were able to put those into a 392 00:24:28,280 --> 00:24:31,200 Speaker 1: quantum state, you could use the electron spin to represent 393 00:24:31,520 --> 00:24:34,720 Speaker 1: what would normally be a bit in a classical computer. 394 00:24:35,280 --> 00:24:38,480 Speaker 1: That's just one possible example, mind you, because you could 395 00:24:38,640 --> 00:24:41,440 Speaker 1: use all sorts of different stuff to represent these bits. 396 00:24:41,520 --> 00:24:45,520 Speaker 1: You could use photons and their polarization if you wanted to, 397 00:24:46,160 --> 00:24:51,400 Speaker 1: or other quantum particles and other qualities. In Richard Fineman 398 00:24:51,480 --> 00:24:54,320 Speaker 1: presented a talk in which he lamented the fact that 399 00:24:54,400 --> 00:24:59,520 Speaker 1: classical computer systems would be incapable of simulating the evolution 400 00:24:59,520 --> 00:25:02,159 Speaker 1: of a quant um system, because quantum systems would just 401 00:25:02,160 --> 00:25:05,879 Speaker 1: be far too complicated for a classical computer to do 402 00:25:05,960 --> 00:25:09,720 Speaker 1: this in any reasonable time frame. He did, however, hypothesize 403 00:25:10,119 --> 00:25:13,080 Speaker 1: that if you were able to create a quantum computer, 404 00:25:13,720 --> 00:25:17,399 Speaker 1: you could potentially simulate the evolution of a quantum state. 405 00:25:18,640 --> 00:25:21,640 Speaker 1: Theorists began to flesh out what a quantum computer might 406 00:25:21,680 --> 00:25:24,800 Speaker 1: look like, and how it might operate, and even how 407 00:25:24,880 --> 00:25:29,040 Speaker 1: you might try to go about making one. This was, all, however, 408 00:25:29,080 --> 00:25:32,200 Speaker 1: still within the realm of the theoretical In the mid nineties, 409 00:25:32,280 --> 00:25:36,440 Speaker 1: and engineer named Peter Shore discovered an algorithm that would 410 00:25:36,560 --> 00:25:40,199 Speaker 1: really put a fire under the bottoms of quantum computer researchers. 411 00:25:40,240 --> 00:25:43,200 Speaker 1: His algorithm was a set of rules that a quantum 412 00:25:43,240 --> 00:25:47,240 Speaker 1: computer could theoretically be able to follow and allow it 413 00:25:47,320 --> 00:25:51,640 Speaker 1: to factor large integers much more quickly than a classical computer. Now, 414 00:25:51,680 --> 00:25:55,919 Speaker 1: the reason this posed both an exciting opportunity and a 415 00:25:56,119 --> 00:26:01,120 Speaker 1: terrifying realization was because factoring large numbers is what most 416 00:26:01,240 --> 00:26:05,160 Speaker 1: modern day cryptography is based off of. Uh, you take 417 00:26:05,480 --> 00:26:09,600 Speaker 1: numbers that are hundreds of digits long, prime numbers specifically, 418 00:26:09,680 --> 00:26:12,840 Speaker 1: so these are numbers that are only divisible by themselves. 419 00:26:13,440 --> 00:26:15,880 Speaker 1: And then you take two of those numbers that are 420 00:26:15,920 --> 00:26:18,880 Speaker 1: both hundreds of digits long, like five hundred digits long, 421 00:26:19,000 --> 00:26:21,879 Speaker 1: and they're both prime numbers, and you multiply those two 422 00:26:21,920 --> 00:26:26,080 Speaker 1: prime numbers together, you get an even larger number that 423 00:26:26,200 --> 00:26:29,400 Speaker 1: ends up being sort of your public key, your your 424 00:26:29,640 --> 00:26:32,000 Speaker 1: key that you used to encrypt stuff. But the only 425 00:26:32,080 --> 00:26:34,960 Speaker 1: way you can decrypt the information is if you know 426 00:26:35,440 --> 00:26:38,720 Speaker 1: what those two numbers were, those two huge numbers you 427 00:26:38,760 --> 00:26:42,680 Speaker 1: started off with were, which is hard to determine. It's 428 00:26:42,800 --> 00:26:45,200 Speaker 1: really hard. If you're using a classical computer. It would 429 00:26:45,200 --> 00:26:48,119 Speaker 1: take years or more, depending upon how long the number 430 00:26:48,280 --> 00:26:52,080 Speaker 1: was to brute force the answer if you're following classical 431 00:26:52,080 --> 00:26:57,240 Speaker 1: computer science. But Shore's algorithm was a short cut that 432 00:26:57,359 --> 00:27:01,000 Speaker 1: a quantum computer, not a classical computer. A quantum computer 433 00:27:01,119 --> 00:27:05,280 Speaker 1: could run and run that same calculation in a fraction 434 00:27:05,600 --> 00:27:08,680 Speaker 1: of the time. So, in other words, a quantum computer 435 00:27:08,960 --> 00:27:13,399 Speaker 1: following this algorithm that was discovered by Shore could reverse 436 00:27:13,840 --> 00:27:18,480 Speaker 1: the process we use to make all of our data secret. Well, 437 00:27:18,480 --> 00:27:21,720 Speaker 1: by the late nineties, the first rudimentary quantum computers were 438 00:27:21,720 --> 00:27:25,239 Speaker 1: being constructed in the laboratories. They were really primitive. They 439 00:27:25,240 --> 00:27:29,160 Speaker 1: could not run very many operations before they would decohere uh, 440 00:27:29,200 --> 00:27:31,720 Speaker 1: and then you'd have to start all over again. They 441 00:27:31,720 --> 00:27:34,400 Speaker 1: were delicate systems. They were consisting of just a couple 442 00:27:34,440 --> 00:27:37,520 Speaker 1: of quantum bits of processing power. But it was the 443 00:27:37,560 --> 00:27:42,320 Speaker 1: beginning of the revolution. So how can quantum computers be 444 00:27:42,480 --> 00:27:46,120 Speaker 1: so powerful compared to classical computers and exactly what sort 445 00:27:46,119 --> 00:27:49,280 Speaker 1: of problems would quantum computers be good at solving? Well, 446 00:27:49,320 --> 00:27:51,879 Speaker 1: i'll tell you about that in just a moment, but 447 00:27:52,080 --> 00:27:55,560 Speaker 1: first let's take a quick break to thank our sponsor. 448 00:28:02,720 --> 00:28:05,639 Speaker 1: All right, so let's talk about bits now. As I mentioned, 449 00:28:05,640 --> 00:28:08,639 Speaker 1: a bit is a basic unit of information and it 450 00:28:08,800 --> 00:28:13,000 Speaker 1: is binary, meaning it can have only two states. So 451 00:28:13,040 --> 00:28:16,199 Speaker 1: we express bits as a zero or a one, and 452 00:28:16,280 --> 00:28:18,840 Speaker 1: you can think of that as being off or on, 453 00:28:19,359 --> 00:28:22,560 Speaker 1: or down or up. Just as an electron spin has 454 00:28:22,600 --> 00:28:26,280 Speaker 1: different states or a photons polarization, so too does a 455 00:28:26,320 --> 00:28:30,719 Speaker 1: bit machine. Language is made up of strings of bits. 456 00:28:31,000 --> 00:28:33,639 Speaker 1: A collection of eight bits makes up a bite, and 457 00:28:33,680 --> 00:28:36,399 Speaker 1: a single bite can represent up to two hundred fifty 458 00:28:36,480 --> 00:28:40,800 Speaker 1: six different states. I talked about this recently in the 459 00:28:40,840 --> 00:28:43,360 Speaker 1: I p V six episode. I did the numbers in 460 00:28:43,400 --> 00:28:46,000 Speaker 1: an ip V four address or just a regular old 461 00:28:46,000 --> 00:28:50,680 Speaker 1: IP address. Those are based off octets or bites. Each 462 00:28:50,760 --> 00:28:54,520 Speaker 1: number in that IP address can have a hypothetical value 463 00:28:54,600 --> 00:28:58,680 Speaker 1: between zero and two hundred fifty five. I say hypothetical 464 00:28:58,800 --> 00:29:01,360 Speaker 1: because some numbers are off limits due to the rules 465 00:29:01,360 --> 00:29:04,440 Speaker 1: of Internet protocol. But if you didn't have those restrictions, 466 00:29:04,480 --> 00:29:07,480 Speaker 1: each of those four numerals in that address could have 467 00:29:07,560 --> 00:29:12,080 Speaker 1: a value between zero and two inclusive. Those would be 468 00:29:12,160 --> 00:29:15,959 Speaker 1: the two six potential values of that bite. A classical 469 00:29:16,000 --> 00:29:20,440 Speaker 1: computer relies on these bits. It's the form of information 470 00:29:20,480 --> 00:29:22,800 Speaker 1: the processor takes in and the form it spits back 471 00:29:22,800 --> 00:29:26,320 Speaker 1: out again. The information does get translated into formats where 472 00:29:26,400 --> 00:29:29,400 Speaker 1: humans can find useful or initiate some action that is 473 00:29:29,480 --> 00:29:32,000 Speaker 1: useful to us in some way. Humans have made a 474 00:29:32,040 --> 00:29:35,960 Speaker 1: series of computer programming languages, starting with assembly code or 475 00:29:35,960 --> 00:29:39,360 Speaker 1: a similar code really, which is just a step above binary, 476 00:29:39,920 --> 00:29:43,840 Speaker 1: up to high level programming languages that abstract those zeros 477 00:29:43,840 --> 00:29:46,720 Speaker 1: and ones so that we can structure programs in a 478 00:29:46,720 --> 00:29:50,200 Speaker 1: way that's more natural for us to understand. It's still 479 00:29:50,320 --> 00:29:52,920 Speaker 1: it can look like complete gibberish to you if you 480 00:29:53,080 --> 00:29:57,120 Speaker 1: don't know computer languages, but in fact it is far 481 00:29:57,200 --> 00:30:00,480 Speaker 1: easier to read than just zeros and ones. So it's 482 00:30:00,480 --> 00:30:04,120 Speaker 1: hard to think of any kind of information just in binary. 483 00:30:04,480 --> 00:30:07,479 Speaker 1: But in the classical computer, a bit has to be 484 00:30:07,600 --> 00:30:10,320 Speaker 1: either a zero or a one, it cannot be both, 485 00:30:10,680 --> 00:30:14,680 Speaker 1: and classical computers will run processes in sequence. So you 486 00:30:14,720 --> 00:30:17,880 Speaker 1: can speed that up a little bit by using a 487 00:30:17,920 --> 00:30:20,560 Speaker 1: couple of different strategies. One is just to make more 488 00:30:20,560 --> 00:30:24,440 Speaker 1: powerful processors that can handle more information and smaller amounts 489 00:30:24,480 --> 00:30:29,280 Speaker 1: of time. That will help. You can improve bus speeds, 490 00:30:29,280 --> 00:30:32,160 Speaker 1: You can improve the speed that a CPU can draw 491 00:30:32,320 --> 00:30:35,600 Speaker 1: information from memory or put information back in memory. That 492 00:30:35,640 --> 00:30:37,920 Speaker 1: will help too, but eventually you run up against the 493 00:30:37,960 --> 00:30:42,040 Speaker 1: upper limits of what we can accomplish with today's technology, 494 00:30:42,200 --> 00:30:45,360 Speaker 1: and of course that keeps on improving, but you still 495 00:30:45,400 --> 00:30:47,520 Speaker 1: will run up against those limits. You can use a 496 00:30:47,760 --> 00:30:51,479 Speaker 1: multiple core processor. Multi core processors are great. You can 497 00:30:51,520 --> 00:30:54,720 Speaker 1: even use an array of processors. That's useful if the 498 00:30:54,760 --> 00:30:57,960 Speaker 1: computer problems you're working on can be split into smaller 499 00:30:58,040 --> 00:31:01,160 Speaker 1: problems that can be solved in parallel. Not all problems 500 00:31:01,200 --> 00:31:04,960 Speaker 1: fall into that category, however, and even if your processor 501 00:31:05,080 --> 00:31:08,800 Speaker 1: isn't the fastest, if you're talking about a parallel problem, 502 00:31:08,920 --> 00:31:12,040 Speaker 1: multiple core processors might be a better choice than a 503 00:31:12,120 --> 00:31:18,360 Speaker 1: single powerful core processor. I usually use this particular analogy. 504 00:31:18,400 --> 00:31:21,000 Speaker 1: Imagine you've got a math test, and the math test 505 00:31:21,040 --> 00:31:23,720 Speaker 1: has ten problems on it. You also have a math 506 00:31:23,840 --> 00:31:27,320 Speaker 1: class and it has eleven students in it. One of 507 00:31:27,360 --> 00:31:30,560 Speaker 1: the eleven students is a super math genius, and she 508 00:31:30,680 --> 00:31:34,400 Speaker 1: has an innate sense of math. It's almost spooky. It's 509 00:31:34,440 --> 00:31:38,200 Speaker 1: like she can visualize mathematics all around her, and she 510 00:31:38,200 --> 00:31:41,920 Speaker 1: can solve any one problem faster than anyone else in 511 00:31:41,960 --> 00:31:46,200 Speaker 1: the class. Just doesn't matter. But the teacher gives the 512 00:31:46,240 --> 00:31:49,560 Speaker 1: super smarty genius all ten of the math problems on 513 00:31:49,600 --> 00:31:52,240 Speaker 1: the test, whereas each of the other students in the 514 00:31:52,280 --> 00:31:55,320 Speaker 1: class each of them, being good at math but not 515 00:31:55,440 --> 00:31:59,400 Speaker 1: at genius level, gets only one of the ten problems. 516 00:31:59,400 --> 00:32:02,880 Speaker 1: So student one gets problem one, Student two gets problem too, 517 00:32:02,960 --> 00:32:06,200 Speaker 1: and so forth. You have ten students working to solve 518 00:32:06,240 --> 00:32:09,960 Speaker 1: one problem each, and a supermath genius working on all 519 00:32:10,080 --> 00:32:13,720 Speaker 1: ten problems. Who's going to finish first? Well, the super 520 00:32:13,720 --> 00:32:17,080 Speaker 1: genius is going to solve each of her ten problems 521 00:32:17,560 --> 00:32:21,000 Speaker 1: faster than any of the individual students will finish their 522 00:32:21,040 --> 00:32:24,720 Speaker 1: respective problems. But chances are the group of ten will 523 00:32:24,800 --> 00:32:27,880 Speaker 1: finish first because they each only have one problem to 524 00:32:27,920 --> 00:32:31,600 Speaker 1: work on. They're able to divide and conquer, as it were. 525 00:32:32,120 --> 00:32:35,840 Speaker 1: And some computational problems are like that. But there are 526 00:32:35,920 --> 00:32:38,840 Speaker 1: classes of mathematical problems that are too tough even for 527 00:32:38,920 --> 00:32:45,040 Speaker 1: the fastest classical computers running scores of processors. There so 528 00:32:45,080 --> 00:32:49,640 Speaker 1: difficult as to be practically unsolvable. Now I say practically 529 00:32:49,720 --> 00:32:53,640 Speaker 1: on purpose. It's not that a classical machine can't solve 530 00:32:53,720 --> 00:32:56,520 Speaker 1: these sorts of problems. They just can't do it in 531 00:32:56,560 --> 00:32:59,320 Speaker 1: any sort of reasonable amount of time. It could take 532 00:32:59,480 --> 00:33:03,240 Speaker 1: years or decades or centuries, depending upon the complexity of 533 00:33:03,240 --> 00:33:06,600 Speaker 1: the problem. So what kind of problems am I talking about? Well, 534 00:33:06,600 --> 00:33:10,400 Speaker 1: there's a class of problems around the concept of optimization, 535 00:33:11,000 --> 00:33:14,280 Speaker 1: and that's a big part of what quantum computers could tackle. 536 00:33:14,720 --> 00:33:17,760 Speaker 1: These are problems they get very hard to solve, particularly 537 00:33:17,800 --> 00:33:20,840 Speaker 1: as you add more components to it. Now, I'll give 538 00:33:20,880 --> 00:33:23,320 Speaker 1: you a very simple example. Let's say you're throwing a 539 00:33:23,360 --> 00:33:27,560 Speaker 1: big dinner party. You've rented out a swanky joint. You've 540 00:33:27,600 --> 00:33:32,440 Speaker 1: got five tables. Each table has seating for ten people, 541 00:33:32,800 --> 00:33:35,760 Speaker 1: So you've got fifty people on the way to your party, 542 00:33:36,200 --> 00:33:39,320 Speaker 1: and it's your job to assign seats for each of 543 00:33:39,320 --> 00:33:43,000 Speaker 1: the people who are coming. However, there's a problem. Not 544 00:33:43,080 --> 00:33:46,360 Speaker 1: all of your friends are crazy about each other. So 545 00:33:46,440 --> 00:33:48,760 Speaker 1: let's say you've got a buddy named Sally, and she 546 00:33:48,800 --> 00:33:53,600 Speaker 1: would absolutely hate to sit next to Jim. Jennifer would 547 00:33:53,600 --> 00:33:56,600 Speaker 1: love to sit next to Sally, but she definitely doesn't 548 00:33:56,600 --> 00:34:00,160 Speaker 1: want to sit next to Sally's cousin, Darryl. But m 549 00:34:00,160 --> 00:34:03,280 Speaker 1: and Darryl are best friends, so they definitely want to 550 00:34:03,360 --> 00:34:05,920 Speaker 1: at least sit at the same table, if not next 551 00:34:05,960 --> 00:34:08,200 Speaker 1: to each other, and so on and so forth. You've 552 00:34:08,239 --> 00:34:11,319 Speaker 1: got all these different conditions that exist, and you want 553 00:34:11,360 --> 00:34:14,840 Speaker 1: to find the best possible seating solution to the problem 554 00:34:14,880 --> 00:34:17,480 Speaker 1: of who sits where in order for you to have 555 00:34:18,000 --> 00:34:20,680 Speaker 1: a nice, lovely dinner and not have a breakout into 556 00:34:20,719 --> 00:34:24,040 Speaker 1: a three stooges pie throwing routine. Well, here's the thing. 557 00:34:24,160 --> 00:34:28,000 Speaker 1: The problem of sitting just ten people around a table 558 00:34:28,360 --> 00:34:35,200 Speaker 1: is factorial. There are three point six million possible configurations 559 00:34:35,280 --> 00:34:38,640 Speaker 1: for ten people to sit at a table. That's just 560 00:34:38,800 --> 00:34:42,799 Speaker 1: ten at one table. And remember you have five of 561 00:34:42,840 --> 00:34:46,239 Speaker 1: those tables, and you have numerous rules you want to 562 00:34:46,600 --> 00:34:48,719 Speaker 1: do your best to follow to ensure that it's a 563 00:34:48,760 --> 00:34:51,520 Speaker 1: pleasant party and no one's gonna go home with punch 564 00:34:51,560 --> 00:34:54,560 Speaker 1: and pie spilled all over their outfits. So how do 565 00:34:54,600 --> 00:34:58,200 Speaker 1: you solve this problem? Well, a classical computer would choke 566 00:34:58,719 --> 00:35:00,880 Speaker 1: on this kind of problem because they would have to 567 00:35:01,000 --> 00:35:04,440 Speaker 1: run every single possible scenario, and then it would have 568 00:35:04,480 --> 00:35:08,279 Speaker 1: to check the results of all those scenarios against the 569 00:35:08,360 --> 00:35:10,520 Speaker 1: rules that you had given it, saying all right, well 570 00:35:10,560 --> 00:35:13,120 Speaker 1: don't put so and so next to so and so, 571 00:35:13,920 --> 00:35:15,600 Speaker 1: and then it would have to tally up all of 572 00:35:15,640 --> 00:35:19,720 Speaker 1: those different scenarios, analyze the whole thing, and determine which 573 00:35:19,800 --> 00:35:22,520 Speaker 1: one out of all the different scenarios that could come out. 574 00:35:22,560 --> 00:35:26,160 Speaker 1: And remember there's three point six million per table, that 575 00:35:26,520 --> 00:35:29,200 Speaker 1: which one is the best. By that time, half your 576 00:35:29,200 --> 00:35:33,000 Speaker 1: friends have moved away, or had kids, or have become 577 00:35:33,040 --> 00:35:36,799 Speaker 1: honored ancestors to generations that follow because it just took 578 00:35:37,280 --> 00:35:40,239 Speaker 1: way too long for this classical computer to work out 579 00:35:40,239 --> 00:35:42,520 Speaker 1: the problem, and your party was a bust because you 580 00:35:42,560 --> 00:35:45,440 Speaker 1: never got the invitations out in the first place. Now, 581 00:35:45,440 --> 00:35:49,600 Speaker 1: another problem in this class is called the traveling salesman problem. 582 00:35:49,640 --> 00:35:52,520 Speaker 1: This is a classic problem and it goes like this. 583 00:35:52,960 --> 00:35:55,759 Speaker 1: Given a list of cities that a salesperson has to 584 00:35:55,840 --> 00:35:58,680 Speaker 1: visit to do his or her rounds, what is the 585 00:35:58,760 --> 00:36:03,920 Speaker 1: shortest possible route that the salesperson can follow that will 586 00:36:03,960 --> 00:36:07,120 Speaker 1: allow them to visit every single city and return home 587 00:36:07,280 --> 00:36:11,600 Speaker 1: to their point of origin the shortest possible route among 588 00:36:11,640 --> 00:36:14,400 Speaker 1: all those cities. This one's pretty easy to understand, but 589 00:36:14,440 --> 00:36:18,080 Speaker 1: it's actually fiendishly difficult to solve, especially as you add 590 00:36:18,120 --> 00:36:21,160 Speaker 1: more cities to the problem. So this type of problem 591 00:36:21,400 --> 00:36:24,920 Speaker 1: is called an MP hard problem, and the more cities 592 00:36:24,960 --> 00:36:27,640 Speaker 1: you add, the harder it gets. So how could quantum 593 00:36:27,680 --> 00:36:31,160 Speaker 1: computers do a better job than classical ones with these 594 00:36:31,200 --> 00:36:33,880 Speaker 1: sorts of problems? And it comes down to a basic 595 00:36:34,040 --> 00:36:36,600 Speaker 1: unit of information in the world of quantum computers, The 596 00:36:36,840 --> 00:36:39,360 Speaker 1: quantum bid or the cubit you know, I mentioned it 597 00:36:39,400 --> 00:36:42,240 Speaker 1: a couple of times, and a cubit can be placed 598 00:36:42,360 --> 00:36:47,200 Speaker 1: in superposition, meaning that in its quantum state, it is 599 00:36:48,440 --> 00:36:52,120 Speaker 1: behaving as if it's both a zero and a one simultaneously. 600 00:36:52,560 --> 00:36:56,080 Speaker 1: You can also entangle cubits with one another, so that 601 00:36:56,160 --> 00:37:00,120 Speaker 1: the state of one cubit and it's entangled cubit are 602 00:37:00,239 --> 00:37:04,080 Speaker 1: highly correlated. So you could encoded in such a way 603 00:37:04,080 --> 00:37:07,319 Speaker 1: where you say, if cubit A is a zero, do 604 00:37:07,520 --> 00:37:10,520 Speaker 1: nothing to cubit B. If cubit A is a one, 605 00:37:10,840 --> 00:37:13,800 Speaker 1: flip cubit B to one. That would be an example 606 00:37:13,840 --> 00:37:17,439 Speaker 1: of entanglement. With these properties, it's possible to solve these 607 00:37:17,440 --> 00:37:21,200 Speaker 1: traditional unsolvable problems in a very short amount of time 608 00:37:21,360 --> 00:37:24,320 Speaker 1: if you have a quantum computer with a sufficient number 609 00:37:24,360 --> 00:37:27,799 Speaker 1: of cubits. That's because the cubits in their quantum state 610 00:37:27,840 --> 00:37:32,320 Speaker 1: can essentially run all possible solutions to a problem simultaneously 611 00:37:32,960 --> 00:37:37,880 Speaker 1: rather than sequentially. I'm oversimplifying here, but that's the general principle. 612 00:37:38,080 --> 00:37:40,480 Speaker 1: And as you add more cubits, your ability to process 613 00:37:40,520 --> 00:37:44,480 Speaker 1: information grows exponentially. Now, how does that work? Well, if 614 00:37:44,480 --> 00:37:47,200 Speaker 1: you have a single cubit, but it can potentially be 615 00:37:47,360 --> 00:37:51,120 Speaker 1: two states at the same time. Because of superposition, that 616 00:37:51,280 --> 00:37:55,560 Speaker 1: cubit actually represents two states, not one. Remember a bit 617 00:37:55,600 --> 00:37:58,560 Speaker 1: can only represent one state at a time. If you 618 00:37:58,600 --> 00:38:03,440 Speaker 1: have two cubits in superposition, that can represent four states 619 00:38:03,480 --> 00:38:06,480 Speaker 1: at one time. So does that mean three cubits is 620 00:38:06,520 --> 00:38:11,759 Speaker 1: going to be six states? No, No, three cubits would 621 00:38:11,760 --> 00:38:15,360 Speaker 1: be eight states. So one cubit can be two states, 622 00:38:15,400 --> 00:38:17,840 Speaker 1: Two cubits can be four states. Three cubits can be 623 00:38:18,200 --> 00:38:21,279 Speaker 1: eight states. That means there's eight possible values of the 624 00:38:21,280 --> 00:38:23,480 Speaker 1: three cubits, and I'll give them to you right now 625 00:38:23,520 --> 00:38:27,880 Speaker 1: so you can see that I'm right. You've got zero zero, zero, zero, zero, 626 00:38:28,040 --> 00:38:34,480 Speaker 1: one zero, one zero zero, one one one zero zero, 627 00:38:34,800 --> 00:38:39,160 Speaker 1: one zero, one one, one zero, and one one one, 628 00:38:39,239 --> 00:38:42,520 Speaker 1: So eight potential values. Every time you had a cubit 629 00:38:43,000 --> 00:38:46,040 Speaker 1: you have to you have you end up going with 630 00:38:46,160 --> 00:38:48,600 Speaker 1: two to the power of number of cubits you have 631 00:38:49,120 --> 00:38:52,800 Speaker 1: for potential states. So in other words, with three cubits 632 00:38:52,840 --> 00:38:55,880 Speaker 1: you have two to the power of three. That's eight. 633 00:38:56,640 --> 00:38:59,560 Speaker 1: That's how many potential states you could represent. Right now. 634 00:38:59,680 --> 00:39:02,799 Speaker 1: I B. M has a prototype quantum computer that has 635 00:39:03,040 --> 00:39:06,200 Speaker 1: fifty cubits, and that's a prototype. It's not one that's 636 00:39:06,280 --> 00:39:08,799 Speaker 1: rolled out to for anyone to in general to use, 637 00:39:08,880 --> 00:39:11,719 Speaker 1: but they do have it. So that means you can 638 00:39:11,760 --> 00:39:15,919 Speaker 1: represent two to the fiftieth power in states. So that's 639 00:39:16,560 --> 00:39:18,960 Speaker 1: in case you wanted to know. If you knock that 640 00:39:19,000 --> 00:39:22,600 Speaker 1: out too, to the fiftieth power, that is one quadrillion, 641 00:39:22,960 --> 00:39:27,440 Speaker 1: one hundred twenty five trillion, eight hundred ninety nine billion, 642 00:39:27,920 --> 00:39:32,600 Speaker 1: nine hundred six million, eight hundred forty two thousand, six 643 00:39:32,719 --> 00:39:36,560 Speaker 1: hundred twenty four states. It's a lot of potential states. 644 00:39:36,719 --> 00:39:38,800 Speaker 1: And if that's not enough, if you build a sixty 645 00:39:38,920 --> 00:39:42,960 Speaker 1: cubit computer, you just add ten more cubits, you'd have 646 00:39:43,040 --> 00:39:49,919 Speaker 1: one capable of representing one thousand quadrillion states. It's insane. 647 00:39:50,480 --> 00:39:54,280 Speaker 1: In IBM announced it would make a five cubit computer 648 00:39:54,360 --> 00:39:58,080 Speaker 1: available for people to run calculations and experiments on using 649 00:39:58,120 --> 00:40:02,359 Speaker 1: a cloud based interface. Uh. This is necessary because in 650 00:40:02,440 --> 00:40:04,520 Speaker 1: order to create a quantum computer, you have to take 651 00:40:04,560 --> 00:40:09,960 Speaker 1: a really special, extreme precautions to not just create the 652 00:40:10,040 --> 00:40:12,839 Speaker 1: quantum state, but to preserve it. So how special am 653 00:40:12,840 --> 00:40:15,800 Speaker 1: I talking about? Well, the quantum computers that IBM uses 654 00:40:16,080 --> 00:40:20,360 Speaker 1: are cooled to ten millie kelvin in other words, or 655 00:40:20,400 --> 00:40:24,080 Speaker 1: fifteen millie kelvin, depending upon which source I was looking at. 656 00:40:24,160 --> 00:40:26,360 Speaker 1: Both of them came from IBM, but once at fifteen 657 00:40:26,360 --> 00:40:29,319 Speaker 1: and one said ten millie kelvin is incredibly tiny. You're 658 00:40:29,320 --> 00:40:34,480 Speaker 1: talking about a fraction above absolute zero. Absolute zero is 659 00:40:34,520 --> 00:40:37,879 Speaker 1: the point at which there is no molecular movement, which 660 00:40:37,920 --> 00:40:42,359 Speaker 1: is quote unquote colder than space itself. To achieve this, 661 00:40:42,719 --> 00:40:45,600 Speaker 1: IBM has to use liquid nitrogen to get the computer 662 00:40:45,680 --> 00:40:48,799 Speaker 1: down to a low temperature, and then liquid helium to 663 00:40:48,840 --> 00:40:52,839 Speaker 1: get it to an even more insanely low temperature. And 664 00:40:52,920 --> 00:40:55,480 Speaker 1: what did IBM used to create the cubits? Did they 665 00:40:55,560 --> 00:40:58,960 Speaker 1: use electrons or photons? Nope, they created what they called 666 00:40:59,160 --> 00:41:05,600 Speaker 1: artificial atoms. They used a superconducting Josephson junction. What. Well, 667 00:41:05,640 --> 00:41:10,200 Speaker 1: it's a superconductor that's coupled to a second superconductor over 668 00:41:10,239 --> 00:41:13,120 Speaker 1: a weak link. And I really wish I could go 669 00:41:13,160 --> 00:41:15,880 Speaker 1: into more detail and explain how this works, but frankly, 670 00:41:16,719 --> 00:41:19,560 Speaker 1: it goes well beyond my understanding, and I feel I 671 00:41:19,600 --> 00:41:21,960 Speaker 1: would need to take a college course to get a 672 00:41:22,040 --> 00:41:24,680 Speaker 1: handle on it in order to explain it properly. So 673 00:41:24,719 --> 00:41:27,120 Speaker 1: I'm not going to try because I'm afraid that if 674 00:41:27,120 --> 00:41:30,279 Speaker 1: I did, I would mis explain it to the point 675 00:41:30,280 --> 00:41:33,240 Speaker 1: where I would just be giving completely wrong information. Suffice 676 00:41:33,440 --> 00:41:38,120 Speaker 1: to say, it's a man made component on a microchip 677 00:41:38,480 --> 00:41:42,239 Speaker 1: that's paired with a microwave resonator. The microwave resonator is 678 00:41:42,280 --> 00:41:45,960 Speaker 1: what is used to communicate with the cubits, and it's 679 00:41:46,000 --> 00:41:49,160 Speaker 1: housed in this crazy looking metal contraption that reminds me 680 00:41:49,200 --> 00:41:52,239 Speaker 1: of a super fancy espresso machine, and that in turn 681 00:41:52,400 --> 00:41:56,040 Speaker 1: is encased in a cylinder that is a giant refrigerator 682 00:41:56,080 --> 00:42:00,160 Speaker 1: to cool it down to these insane low temperatures. Now, 683 00:42:00,200 --> 00:42:03,640 Speaker 1: to make it more complicated, if you were to interfere 684 00:42:03,680 --> 00:42:06,239 Speaker 1: with this computer in any way, and that could be 685 00:42:06,440 --> 00:42:09,480 Speaker 1: electromagnetic interference, it could be heat, it could be motion. 686 00:42:09,800 --> 00:42:12,800 Speaker 1: It's very sensitive, you would cause the quantum states to 687 00:42:12,880 --> 00:42:17,400 Speaker 1: collapse and decohere, which would turn your expensive quantum computer 688 00:42:17,480 --> 00:42:21,800 Speaker 1: into a pretty pathetic excuse for a classical computer until 689 00:42:21,800 --> 00:42:24,520 Speaker 1: you can repair the quantum states, and typically you have 690 00:42:24,600 --> 00:42:26,719 Speaker 1: a very short amount of time on the order of 691 00:42:26,760 --> 00:42:31,320 Speaker 1: milliseconds to complete your operations before either the error rates 692 00:42:31,360 --> 00:42:33,879 Speaker 1: get out of hand, which makes all the results look 693 00:42:34,040 --> 00:42:37,480 Speaker 1: like they were truly random as opposed to probabilistic, or 694 00:42:37,520 --> 00:42:41,560 Speaker 1: the system itself will collapse. The impracticalities of quantum computing 695 00:42:41,600 --> 00:42:44,520 Speaker 1: mean that only a few select organizations are ever likely 696 00:42:44,640 --> 00:42:48,000 Speaker 1: going to have an actual quantum computer. They're just too 697 00:42:48,040 --> 00:42:52,400 Speaker 1: complicated and too sensitive for the general person to have. However, 698 00:42:52,719 --> 00:42:56,799 Speaker 1: if they follow the the methodology of IBM and make 699 00:42:56,840 --> 00:43:00,400 Speaker 1: it available for other people to use through cloud based 700 00:43:00,440 --> 00:43:03,160 Speaker 1: systems where you know you're able to control the quantum computer, 701 00:43:03,200 --> 00:43:06,120 Speaker 1: you're just doing it remotely through an interface that they've designed, 702 00:43:06,800 --> 00:43:10,439 Speaker 1: then they can make quantum computing more accessible. You won't 703 00:43:10,440 --> 00:43:12,480 Speaker 1: own one, but you will be able to access one. 704 00:43:12,680 --> 00:43:18,040 Speaker 1: It's pretty crazy, really. Uh. The IBM methodology is called 705 00:43:18,040 --> 00:43:21,160 Speaker 1: IBM Q. You can actually go and join that program. 706 00:43:21,200 --> 00:43:23,799 Speaker 1: If you want to learn how to program quantum computers, 707 00:43:24,200 --> 00:43:26,080 Speaker 1: you can use IBM Q to do it. They have 708 00:43:26,280 --> 00:43:30,319 Speaker 1: guides on how to program. They have a very simple interface, UH, 709 00:43:30,480 --> 00:43:32,960 Speaker 1: so that you can learn how to program on the 710 00:43:33,120 --> 00:43:36,000 Speaker 1: five cubit machine. They also have access to a sixteen 711 00:43:36,040 --> 00:43:40,080 Speaker 1: cubit machine through this system, so you can start designing 712 00:43:40,560 --> 00:43:43,840 Speaker 1: uh programs to run on a quantum computer. If you 713 00:43:43,840 --> 00:43:46,560 Speaker 1: want to check that out. It's frankly, it's beyond my 714 00:43:46,640 --> 00:43:49,879 Speaker 1: capabilities to actually do this, at least with my current 715 00:43:49,960 --> 00:43:53,560 Speaker 1: level of understanding. But then I'm not really a programmer. 716 00:43:53,760 --> 00:43:56,040 Speaker 1: So the program is out there, should definitely take a 717 00:43:56,040 --> 00:43:58,080 Speaker 1: look into it and see if you're interested. Well, in 718 00:43:58,160 --> 00:44:01,240 Speaker 1: ten you could have access to a live cubit computer 719 00:44:01,600 --> 00:44:03,960 Speaker 1: that would give you the potential to have a superposition 720 00:44:04,000 --> 00:44:07,960 Speaker 1: of thirty two states simultaneously. So when you encode a 721 00:44:08,000 --> 00:44:12,600 Speaker 1: problem onto a quantum machine, what is actually happening. You're 722 00:44:12,640 --> 00:44:17,200 Speaker 1: applying a phase to each of those states. So you 723 00:44:17,200 --> 00:44:20,360 Speaker 1: can think of the phase like a wave. Some phases 724 00:44:20,360 --> 00:44:24,600 Speaker 1: will amplify others and some phases will cancel out others. 725 00:44:25,080 --> 00:44:28,480 Speaker 1: This is just like a wave and how waves work 726 00:44:28,560 --> 00:44:31,480 Speaker 1: when they encounter other waves. So, for example, if you 727 00:44:31,520 --> 00:44:36,240 Speaker 1: have noise canceling headphones, those work by producing sound waves 728 00:44:36,280 --> 00:44:39,720 Speaker 1: that are out of phase with the sounds you're surrounded by. 729 00:44:39,760 --> 00:44:42,719 Speaker 1: So if you have a perfect tone of a certain frequency, 730 00:44:43,239 --> 00:44:46,200 Speaker 1: the sound wave visualization will be one of those lovely 731 00:44:46,360 --> 00:44:51,319 Speaker 1: curves has a regular hills and valleys that rise and 732 00:44:51,360 --> 00:44:56,640 Speaker 1: fall at a perfect curve and in a particular frequency 733 00:44:56,719 --> 00:45:01,359 Speaker 1: that's depended upon whatever the tone is, and it'll look gorgeous. Now, 734 00:45:01,360 --> 00:45:05,120 Speaker 1: if you were to produce a second tone where the 735 00:45:05,200 --> 00:45:09,319 Speaker 1: sound wave has its peak at the same point on 736 00:45:09,320 --> 00:45:12,880 Speaker 1: that wave form that the first wave the first tone 737 00:45:13,440 --> 00:45:16,920 Speaker 1: has its valley. So the highest point on your second 738 00:45:16,920 --> 00:45:19,800 Speaker 1: tone matches with the lowest point on your first tone, 739 00:45:20,320 --> 00:45:23,279 Speaker 1: and vice versa, and they are exactly the same amplitude 740 00:45:23,280 --> 00:45:26,640 Speaker 1: and same frequency. They'll cancel each other out. It will 741 00:45:26,680 --> 00:45:28,719 Speaker 1: be as if you can't there's no noise at all, 742 00:45:28,840 --> 00:45:30,800 Speaker 1: because these two sound waves cancel each other out, and 743 00:45:30,880 --> 00:45:34,280 Speaker 1: it's it's as if there's nothing there. That's how noise 744 00:45:34,320 --> 00:45:37,279 Speaker 1: cancelation headphones work. They have a microphone that takes an 745 00:45:37,280 --> 00:45:40,799 Speaker 1: all incoming sound and then they generate a sound in 746 00:45:40,920 --> 00:45:45,280 Speaker 1: the headphones that is out of phase with the sounds 747 00:45:45,320 --> 00:45:48,000 Speaker 1: that are around you. They cancel it out. It's not 748 00:45:48,080 --> 00:45:52,960 Speaker 1: just muffling sound, it's canceling it by generating this out 749 00:45:53,000 --> 00:45:56,240 Speaker 1: of phase sound wave. It's kind of interesting, Well, quantum 750 00:45:56,239 --> 00:46:00,200 Speaker 1: computers are doing the same sort of thing with there 751 00:46:00,920 --> 00:46:05,600 Speaker 1: the various represented states of the quantum state, like all 752 00:46:05,680 --> 00:46:10,720 Speaker 1: those potential combinations of zeros and ones. So the problem 753 00:46:10,760 --> 00:46:14,120 Speaker 1: you encode onto the cubits applies those phases, and as 754 00:46:14,120 --> 00:46:16,360 Speaker 1: long as you have enough cubits to handle the problem 755 00:46:16,400 --> 00:46:19,319 Speaker 1: you're trying to solve. Everything should work out pretty well. 756 00:46:19,440 --> 00:46:23,640 Speaker 1: Some answers get amplified, some get canceled out, and you'll 757 00:46:23,719 --> 00:46:26,800 Speaker 1: arrive it's your solution, or it's a little more accurate 758 00:46:26,840 --> 00:46:31,000 Speaker 1: to say you'll arrive at a probabilistic distribution of solutions. 759 00:46:31,000 --> 00:46:34,440 Speaker 1: So better solutions will occupy a higher percentage of probability 760 00:46:34,520 --> 00:46:37,680 Speaker 1: than not so good answers. So you can think of 761 00:46:37,719 --> 00:46:40,200 Speaker 1: it as like each answers on a pillar, and the 762 00:46:40,239 --> 00:46:42,960 Speaker 1: most likely answer is on the highest pillar and the 763 00:46:43,040 --> 00:46:45,680 Speaker 1: least likely answer is on the lowest pillar. Does that 764 00:46:45,760 --> 00:46:49,040 Speaker 1: mean that the answer is always the right answer is 765 00:46:49,040 --> 00:46:51,040 Speaker 1: always going to be the one that's on the highest pillar. No, 766 00:46:51,400 --> 00:46:55,520 Speaker 1: that's not how probability works. It's likely, but it's not 767 00:46:55,760 --> 00:47:00,560 Speaker 1: always going to happen. That's where you can run into errors. So, 768 00:47:01,400 --> 00:47:02,799 Speaker 1: like I said, you're gonna have to look at those 769 00:47:02,880 --> 00:47:05,799 Speaker 1: error rates, quantum engineers are gonna have to keep a 770 00:47:05,840 --> 00:47:08,360 Speaker 1: close eye on error rates. If we are able to 771 00:47:08,360 --> 00:47:11,560 Speaker 1: build more powerful quantum computers, that's great, but if error 772 00:47:11,640 --> 00:47:14,839 Speaker 1: rates are high, we can't trust the results we get. 773 00:47:15,360 --> 00:47:17,960 Speaker 1: And the more operations you try to run in sequence, 774 00:47:18,560 --> 00:47:22,560 Speaker 1: the more opportunities you have for error rates to have 775 00:47:22,680 --> 00:47:26,720 Speaker 1: an effect on your results, until again, your probabilistic results 776 00:47:26,719 --> 00:47:29,640 Speaker 1: will start to look more like randomized data. Now I've 777 00:47:29,640 --> 00:47:32,640 Speaker 1: talked a bit about the sorts of problems quantum computers 778 00:47:32,640 --> 00:47:37,120 Speaker 1: can tackle the theoretical problems, but that's mostly in the 779 00:47:37,160 --> 00:47:40,480 Speaker 1: thought experiment world. What could quantum computers do in the 780 00:47:40,520 --> 00:47:44,160 Speaker 1: real world. Well, i'll tell you right after we come 781 00:47:44,160 --> 00:47:54,239 Speaker 1: back from this break for our sponsor. All Right, so 782 00:47:54,280 --> 00:47:57,160 Speaker 1: you got your quantum computer. What the heck are you 783 00:47:57,160 --> 00:47:59,439 Speaker 1: gonna do with it? Well, one thing you could do 784 00:47:59,840 --> 00:48:02,640 Speaker 1: is follow Richard Feynman's suggestion back in the early eighties 785 00:48:02,800 --> 00:48:05,440 Speaker 1: and use your quantum computer to simulate the evolution of 786 00:48:05,520 --> 00:48:09,200 Speaker 1: quantum states. Actually, simulations in general would be a really 787 00:48:09,280 --> 00:48:14,040 Speaker 1: useful application of quantum computers, because, unlike a classical computer, 788 00:48:14,160 --> 00:48:17,720 Speaker 1: a quantum computer with a sufficient number of cubits remains 789 00:48:17,840 --> 00:48:23,239 Speaker 1: undaunted by the exponential difficulties those simulations pose. So take 790 00:48:23,320 --> 00:48:26,640 Speaker 1: chemistry for example. If you want to simulate chemistry down 791 00:48:26,640 --> 00:48:29,040 Speaker 1: to the molecular level and you want to work with 792 00:48:29,160 --> 00:48:33,400 Speaker 1: long chain polymers, that gets really complicated very quickly because 793 00:48:33,400 --> 00:48:35,960 Speaker 1: you've got all these interactions going on at the sub 794 00:48:36,000 --> 00:48:40,520 Speaker 1: atomic level that you have to account for. So electrons, 795 00:48:40,600 --> 00:48:44,080 Speaker 1: for example, are negatively charged, and they repel one another 796 00:48:44,640 --> 00:48:48,920 Speaker 1: because like charge repels like, but they also will be 797 00:48:48,960 --> 00:48:52,400 Speaker 1: attracted to the nuclei of the atoms because the nuclei 798 00:48:52,480 --> 00:48:56,520 Speaker 1: contained protons those have a positive charge and opposite charges attract. 799 00:48:56,800 --> 00:48:59,839 Speaker 1: So you've got these really complex interactions that are going 800 00:49:00,040 --> 00:49:03,399 Speaker 1: on at the molecular level, and it gets even more 801 00:49:03,480 --> 00:49:06,919 Speaker 1: complicated every time you add another atom to the molecule chain. 802 00:49:07,600 --> 00:49:11,080 Speaker 1: And it's that complexity that makes simulating molecules such a 803 00:49:11,160 --> 00:49:15,640 Speaker 1: huge challenge for classical computers. In a presentation at think, 804 00:49:16,960 --> 00:49:20,560 Speaker 1: an IBM researcher named Talia Gershon, who was part of 805 00:49:20,560 --> 00:49:24,279 Speaker 1: the Science slam as well, talked about iron sulfide and 806 00:49:24,400 --> 00:49:27,080 Speaker 1: modeling an iron sulfide molecule, and she said that the 807 00:49:27,160 --> 00:49:31,640 Speaker 1: largest iron sulfide molecule that the most powerful classical computers 808 00:49:31,680 --> 00:49:36,000 Speaker 1: can simulate right now would be a molecule that had 809 00:49:36,040 --> 00:49:38,880 Speaker 1: four iron atoms and four sulfur atoms. That would be 810 00:49:38,920 --> 00:49:41,960 Speaker 1: a very small iron sulfide molecule. But you couldn't go 811 00:49:42,000 --> 00:49:46,400 Speaker 1: bigger than that because the classical computers just couldn't handle 812 00:49:46,560 --> 00:49:51,040 Speaker 1: all of those sub atomic interactions accurately. Uh, that's a 813 00:49:51,080 --> 00:49:55,160 Speaker 1: severe limitation. If we could shed that limitation, we could 814 00:49:55,239 --> 00:49:58,040 Speaker 1: run simulations and all sorts of chemical compounds, and we 815 00:49:58,080 --> 00:50:01,719 Speaker 1: could potentially learn the properties of those compounds and think 816 00:50:01,760 --> 00:50:08,000 Speaker 1: of potential uses for those compounds. This could revolutionize multiple industries, 817 00:50:08,360 --> 00:50:12,920 Speaker 1: a material science, a medicine, those two. In particular chemistry 818 00:50:12,960 --> 00:50:15,799 Speaker 1: in general, the chemists could simulate the properties of a 819 00:50:15,840 --> 00:50:20,400 Speaker 1: theoretical drug long before ever moving to clinical trials, perhaps 820 00:50:20,440 --> 00:50:23,400 Speaker 1: eliminating false leads and saving vast amounts of time and efforts. So, 821 00:50:23,440 --> 00:50:26,680 Speaker 1: in other words, you could, based upon your knowledge, create 822 00:50:26,760 --> 00:50:30,640 Speaker 1: simulations of various molecules to see how they would play 823 00:50:30,680 --> 00:50:34,400 Speaker 1: out in various scenarios, and anything that looked promising, you 824 00:50:34,400 --> 00:50:39,120 Speaker 1: could then go forth and try and synthesize and move 825 00:50:39,160 --> 00:50:41,319 Speaker 1: forward with clinical trials or at least you know the 826 00:50:41,320 --> 00:50:46,200 Speaker 1: earliest stages of testing. That way and narrow down the 827 00:50:46,719 --> 00:50:51,279 Speaker 1: limitless possibilities much faster and uh potentially make much more 828 00:50:51,320 --> 00:50:54,960 Speaker 1: effective medicine. Arvin Krishna, who's an s VP senior vice 829 00:50:54,960 --> 00:50:58,640 Speaker 1: president over at IBM, also mentioned that quantum computing could 830 00:50:58,680 --> 00:51:02,040 Speaker 1: be used for financial risk analysis. I imagine it would 831 00:51:02,040 --> 00:51:04,640 Speaker 1: also be good for running other types of simulations, ones 832 00:51:04,680 --> 00:51:07,840 Speaker 1: that classically are really difficult to manage. For example, it 833 00:51:07,880 --> 00:51:11,239 Speaker 1: could be really useful for weather forecasting. That's similar to 834 00:51:11,280 --> 00:51:14,759 Speaker 1: the traveling salesman problem I mentioned earlier. Quantum computers could 835 00:51:14,760 --> 00:51:18,200 Speaker 1: also be used to help plot out the most ideal 836 00:51:18,440 --> 00:51:21,000 Speaker 1: travel routes, not just for a single vehicle, but a 837 00:51:21,040 --> 00:51:23,320 Speaker 1: fleet of them. That would be useful in multiple industries, 838 00:51:23,360 --> 00:51:28,200 Speaker 1: from transportation to shipping. More efficient travel means fewer delays, 839 00:51:28,239 --> 00:51:32,000 Speaker 1: which in turn means cost savings, not to mention fuel conservation. 840 00:51:32,360 --> 00:51:35,080 Speaker 1: So you might first think that shaving some miles or 841 00:51:35,200 --> 00:51:38,120 Speaker 1: minutes off of travel is a trivial use of so 842 00:51:38,200 --> 00:51:40,839 Speaker 1: powerful a computing device, But when you start to think 843 00:51:40,840 --> 00:51:44,120 Speaker 1: of the ripple effects the things that that implies, you 844 00:51:44,120 --> 00:51:46,399 Speaker 1: start to see the bigger picture. Now I mentioned weather 845 00:51:46,440 --> 00:51:51,239 Speaker 1: forecasting that is a really challenging science. Actually, there are 846 00:51:51,239 --> 00:51:53,440 Speaker 1: a lot of factors that impact whether you may have 847 00:51:53,520 --> 00:51:57,720 Speaker 1: heard my podcast about weather forecasting and how insanely difficult 848 00:51:57,719 --> 00:52:00,920 Speaker 1: it is. You've got these big components of weather that 849 00:52:00,960 --> 00:52:04,600 Speaker 1: we're all familiar with, things like temperature, humidity, air pressure, 850 00:52:04,760 --> 00:52:06,960 Speaker 1: that kind of thing. But there are also other factors 851 00:52:07,000 --> 00:52:11,520 Speaker 1: that influence weather patterns, like geography. The topography of the 852 00:52:11,600 --> 00:52:14,480 Speaker 1: area you live in affects weather, how it plays out, 853 00:52:15,160 --> 00:52:18,920 Speaker 1: the presence of air pollution. Other variables can all affect weather, 854 00:52:19,400 --> 00:52:22,000 Speaker 1: and there's so many different variables that shape the weather, 855 00:52:22,080 --> 00:52:25,800 Speaker 1: and those variables can have an effect on other variables 856 00:52:25,840 --> 00:52:28,080 Speaker 1: that in turn can have an effect on other variables. 857 00:52:28,120 --> 00:52:30,960 Speaker 1: In other words, there becomes the sort of domino effect 858 00:52:31,040 --> 00:52:33,760 Speaker 1: that can happen in ways that are very difficult to predict. 859 00:52:34,360 --> 00:52:37,880 Speaker 1: Simulating the weather with enough data points to ensure precision 860 00:52:38,080 --> 00:52:42,040 Speaker 1: is really difficult. Classical computers struggle with this. We use 861 00:52:42,080 --> 00:52:45,160 Speaker 1: a lot of supercomputers to crunch the numbers now, and 862 00:52:45,239 --> 00:52:47,719 Speaker 1: even then we have to make tough choices. We have 863 00:52:47,760 --> 00:52:50,759 Speaker 1: to make allowances for this. So, for example, you could 864 00:52:50,760 --> 00:52:54,120 Speaker 1: create a weather model that has a really high resolution, 865 00:52:54,400 --> 00:52:57,759 Speaker 1: but it covers a relatively small region. Or you can 866 00:52:57,800 --> 00:53:00,320 Speaker 1: have a weather model that covers a much large arger 867 00:53:00,360 --> 00:53:04,680 Speaker 1: region but has much lower resolution, so you have lower 868 00:53:04,880 --> 00:53:09,360 Speaker 1: amounts of accuracy within that larger model. Uh you also 869 00:53:09,520 --> 00:53:13,359 Speaker 1: can have models that predict weather out further into the 870 00:53:13,360 --> 00:53:17,760 Speaker 1: future than others, but again with a compromise to either 871 00:53:17,840 --> 00:53:20,880 Speaker 1: the size or the resolution or both, So quantum computers 872 00:53:20,960 --> 00:53:25,880 Speaker 1: might allow for unprecedented scaling of these weather models, perhaps 873 00:53:26,000 --> 00:53:28,399 Speaker 1: one day even leading us to the gold mine, which 874 00:53:28,400 --> 00:53:31,480 Speaker 1: would be a global weather model that has high resolution 875 00:53:31,560 --> 00:53:34,320 Speaker 1: for any point along the Earth, or at least any 876 00:53:34,320 --> 00:53:37,120 Speaker 1: point in those regions where we have enough reliable weather 877 00:53:37,280 --> 00:53:40,239 Speaker 1: sensors to provide the data points necessary to create the 878 00:53:40,280 --> 00:53:43,080 Speaker 1: simulation in the first place. Now, one thing that I 879 00:53:43,160 --> 00:53:46,520 Speaker 1: mentioned earlier that quantum computers would definitely change is how 880 00:53:46,560 --> 00:53:50,520 Speaker 1: we protect information. Using Shore's algorithm and a quantum computer 881 00:53:50,600 --> 00:53:53,279 Speaker 1: with a sufficient number of cubits, you could determine the 882 00:53:53,320 --> 00:53:57,080 Speaker 1: prime number factors of any large number relatively quickly, which 883 00:53:57,080 --> 00:53:59,719 Speaker 1: puts all of our encryption at risk. Well not all 884 00:53:59,760 --> 00:54:02,719 Speaker 1: of it, but but but the vast majority of our 885 00:54:03,040 --> 00:54:05,439 Speaker 1: of the way we encrypt things would be at risk. 886 00:54:05,760 --> 00:54:08,800 Speaker 1: And I'm not just talking encryption for stuff like email 887 00:54:08,920 --> 00:54:11,680 Speaker 1: or online shopping. Credit Card transactions would be at risk. 888 00:54:11,880 --> 00:54:16,520 Speaker 1: They rely on large number factoring, so that would be 889 00:54:16,520 --> 00:54:20,759 Speaker 1: a problem, as would numerous otherwise secure data exchanges. They 890 00:54:20,800 --> 00:54:23,239 Speaker 1: would also be at risk. All the secrets would no 891 00:54:23,320 --> 00:54:25,560 Speaker 1: longer be secret, so this would be like someone creating 892 00:54:25,560 --> 00:54:27,920 Speaker 1: the perfect skeleton key that fits all the locks in 893 00:54:27,920 --> 00:54:30,480 Speaker 1: the world, and at that point, there's not really a 894 00:54:30,520 --> 00:54:32,840 Speaker 1: reason to use a lock because you already know someone's 895 00:54:32,840 --> 00:54:34,399 Speaker 1: out there with a key that's going to open it. 896 00:54:34,719 --> 00:54:37,279 Speaker 1: So you've got to figure out a different way to 897 00:54:37,360 --> 00:54:39,959 Speaker 1: lock stuff. So rather than give up, it just means 898 00:54:39,960 --> 00:54:43,480 Speaker 1: we have to come up with a post quantum encryption strategy. Now. 899 00:54:43,520 --> 00:54:46,040 Speaker 1: I mentioned that in the episodes are recorded about the 900 00:54:46,040 --> 00:54:50,840 Speaker 1: IBM Science Slam to Chilia, Boscuini mentioned a lattice based 901 00:54:50,840 --> 00:54:55,440 Speaker 1: cryptography strategy, which would use a plotted point within a 902 00:54:55,560 --> 00:54:59,040 Speaker 1: realm of dimensions multiple dimensions as many as like a 903 00:54:59,120 --> 00:55:03,239 Speaker 1: hundred dimensions as an alternative to factoring large numbers. I 904 00:55:03,280 --> 00:55:05,879 Speaker 1: can only sort of pretend like I understand what she's 905 00:55:05,880 --> 00:55:08,319 Speaker 1: talking about, because it goes way over my head. But 906 00:55:08,840 --> 00:55:12,760 Speaker 1: according to Buscini, this could pose a problem so difficult 907 00:55:12,800 --> 00:55:15,160 Speaker 1: that even a quantum computer might have trouble working it 908 00:55:15,200 --> 00:55:18,600 Speaker 1: out and thus end up securing our data. We would 909 00:55:18,600 --> 00:55:22,160 Speaker 1: just be switching our encryption strategies. So quantum computers do 910 00:55:22,239 --> 00:55:25,320 Speaker 1: have the potential to make a tremendous impact on our world. 911 00:55:25,800 --> 00:55:28,200 Speaker 1: Though it is important again to note that they aren't 912 00:55:28,360 --> 00:55:32,480 Speaker 1: going to replace classical computers for all tasks. Quantum computers 913 00:55:32,480 --> 00:55:37,000 Speaker 1: are ideally suited for a subset of computational problems, including 914 00:55:37,080 --> 00:55:40,160 Speaker 1: ones that are really hard for classical computers to tackle. 915 00:55:40,600 --> 00:55:43,359 Speaker 1: But there are other tasks that classical computers will be 916 00:55:43,480 --> 00:55:47,560 Speaker 1: just as good at, or even better at, than quantum computers. 917 00:55:47,560 --> 00:55:49,439 Speaker 1: So I don't mean to suggest that in twenty years 918 00:55:49,480 --> 00:55:51,640 Speaker 1: everyone's going to have a quantum computer sitting on their 919 00:55:51,680 --> 00:55:54,280 Speaker 1: work desk, unless you have to work in a quantum 920 00:55:54,320 --> 00:55:57,359 Speaker 1: computer laboratory, in which case you might because you might 921 00:55:57,400 --> 00:56:00,000 Speaker 1: have to do repairs or something. Anyway, that wraps up 922 00:56:00,120 --> 00:56:04,040 Speaker 1: this quantum computing one oh one episode. I hope you 923 00:56:04,040 --> 00:56:06,240 Speaker 1: guys enjoyed it. If you have any suggestions for future 924 00:56:06,280 --> 00:56:08,399 Speaker 1: episodes of tech Stuff, make sure you write me and 925 00:56:08,480 --> 00:56:11,160 Speaker 1: let me know what those are. It could be a technology, 926 00:56:11,160 --> 00:56:13,719 Speaker 1: it could be a person, could be a company, or 927 00:56:13,760 --> 00:56:16,400 Speaker 1: maybe it's a suggestion for an interview or a guest 928 00:56:16,440 --> 00:56:19,200 Speaker 1: co host. I am happy to hear all of those. 929 00:56:19,239 --> 00:56:22,000 Speaker 1: Just SIMI a message. The email address is tech Stuff 930 00:56:22,080 --> 00:56:24,600 Speaker 1: at how stuff works dot com, or drop me a 931 00:56:24,640 --> 00:56:26,560 Speaker 1: line on Facebook or Twitter. The handle for both of 932 00:56:26,600 --> 00:56:29,799 Speaker 1: those is text stuff h s W. Check out our 933 00:56:29,840 --> 00:56:32,680 Speaker 1: Instagram account to see some behind the scenes stuff that 934 00:56:32,719 --> 00:56:36,200 Speaker 1: we post occasionally. And remember you can watch me record 935 00:56:36,320 --> 00:56:39,520 Speaker 1: the regular episodes live on Wednesdays and Fridays over at 936 00:56:39,560 --> 00:56:42,960 Speaker 1: twitch dot tv slash tech stuff. We've got a chat 937 00:56:43,000 --> 00:56:44,879 Speaker 1: room in there. You can join in there and and 938 00:56:44,960 --> 00:56:46,560 Speaker 1: chat with me. I'll be happy to talk with you 939 00:56:46,640 --> 00:56:49,520 Speaker 1: during breaks, and I will talk to you guys again 940 00:56:50,440 --> 00:56:58,960 Speaker 1: really soon. For more on this and thousands of other topics, 941 00:56:59,200 --> 00:57:10,360 Speaker 1: visit House staff sat com.