Quantum Mechanics: Two Rules and No Math

Dr. Christopher Monroe, during an interview at the Institute for Quantum Computing, says that quantum mechanics is essentially a simple theory with just "two rules and no math." A member of IQC's Scientific Advisory Committee, Monroe's research interests are primarily in quantum computing using trapped ions. While he concedes that we don't fully understand quantum mechanics, we can easily understand the fundamental rules that separate it from classical physics.

Find out more about IQC!

[Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

This can be explained with just two simple postulates,
1) The first is that the quantum wave particle function explained by Schrödinger’s wave equation represents the forward passage of time or Arrow of Time itself photon by photon, quanta by quanta or moment by moment.

2) The second is that Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle that is formed by the wave function is the same uncertainty we have with any future event.

[alwaysmaggot]

I have an additonal thought for rule two.
I think there are other factors that can cause the object in question to "decide" which postion. Anything that would alert you where it is such as touching it without looking.

[farleyboy]

I think you are right when you say we need a clearer defination of what an observer really is. I can't tell where my conscience really is, if it is inside or outside of my mind or brain and what constitutes the observer and it's position in reality.

[josvazg]

2- The memory will be "classical"
When you read it you want it to be predictably the the same exact state it was when written, otherwise your memory forgot what it was written and is no good at all

3- The peripheral will be "classical"
Or at least their I/O control channel will be.

4- Most of the Processor will be "classical" as well, except for some ALU parts probably very specific and single-problem-oriented

Isn't this correct?

[chiefbarkontree]

What if the cups had water in them and you where thirsty. Could you grab the cup on the left side and drink, and then reach over towards the one on the right and drink that as well. Essentially doubling the water?
Or can you not touch either cup?

[chiefbarkontree]

Say the cups are supposed to be at seperate ends of a table and you are standing at the center of the table near the edge. Could you look at you left and see a cup, and then look towards you right and see the very same cup. Or will the cup only appear on one side of the table?

[hafizhhasyhari]

Nyari sumber materi indo dimana yah bang

[josvazg]

I mean, by the "no cloning theorem" it seems to me that talking about quantum computers is misleading. What you would get is classical computers with quantum ALUs, but
1- The BUS will be "classical"
what use will a bus that moves dancing qbits have? None, you want to move old boring bits and have them NOT to change, or your bus is useless.

[YuvalRishuSanders]

The whole point is to try an implement all these things for which you clearly have a decent classical intuition in a 'quantum' (i.e. coherent, or superposition-y) fashion. That requires a level of control over quantum systems that we have not yet achieved, but are working very hard to achieve. If we could do this, we could solve certain kinds of problems more efficiently than is believed possible with a classical computer. Full disclosure: I'm a PhD candidate at IQC :-)

[josvazg]

Imagine we already had a quantum circuit within the ALU to solve integer factorization much faster with Shor's Algorithm for 64 or 128bits (which we haven't got right now, am I wrong?)

Even in that case, the inputs and the outputs of that circuit will be single FIXED bits, then the circuit will do 'its magic' and when the proper solution is found, it is written in FIXED traditional bits so that we don't loose it.

[YuvalRishuSanders]

We don't have such a device right now, no. Creating such devices is really hard, because you need to maintain coherence on complicated enough devices for long enough times to perform complicated calculations like integer factorization via Shor's algorithm. Having classical input and output is beside the point.

Also, if you restrict attention to purely classical input and output, you might not be able to access the full power of the quantum computer. Look up the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd algorithm.

[amjan]

@alwaysmaggot11 Of course. After all, the issue with looking is that the object is touched by photons.

[coffeelaffdip]

I watched this guy talk about ion trapping, this guy is amazing!

[BKMarcelus]

What if all of the particles that pass through us, the earth and everything else everyday is the universe itself observing? And what about entanglement I'm not a quantum physicist but I thought that was part of quantum mechanics?

[moosemoss]

josvagz the power of a quantum computer is that it can be in every state that a classical computer can be in at the same time. Classical computers can only be in one state at a time. A quantum computer with 300 qubits in a superposition is in more states simultaneously than there are atoms in the observable universe. Imagine how long it would take for a classical computer to cycle through all them states. If it could switch a million million times a second, it would take around 50 times the age of the universe to be 'in' them all.

[bobdolelost]

You need to realize that physics students aren't his target audience here... This guy is a fairly exceptional physicist I think it's safe to say he understands the Copenhagen interpretation of measurement. Any physics student with half a brain should be able to understand what he means by looking. Measurement allows us to "look" at the state of a quantum system.

[josvazg]

This explanation is very good, but I still don't see how quantum computing would be useful. At the end of the day you need a SINGLE result, you will "look" at qubits and get just a bunch of bits. Right?
How is THAT useful at all?
I have a bunch of qubits dancing and that the result I get to read them back as final data (bits) is mostly random.

I would appreciate any math-less explanation to this.

[IronPenguin]

I love this guy I finally understand this now.

[Batmanmg]

sure, make my weeks of research and failed attempts to simplify quantum theory into a 5-7 speech seem like a walk in the park. why didn't i watch this sooner!

[lochinvar]

As so above, as so below. What is so hard to understand?