Date of publication: 2017-09-01 21:56
Scott asks (with rhetoric removed) 8775 Why should [Group B] get to define [quantum computing], overriding the quantum computing research community’s [Group A] previous understanding? 8776
Now, as for the difference between the 678-qubit machine and the 567-qubit one: based on the results Troyer explained to me (some of which, unfortunately, are not yet public), I see Geordie 8767 s bet and raise it. Give Troyer and his postdocs full access to the Vesuvius-based system. If they can 8767 t outperform it classically within a year or so, I will eat my words.
My reading of Scott and other writers is that, a honest assessment of QC is along the lines of 8775 fundamentally exhilarating, perhaps revealing some deep insights into the workings of our world etc. 8776 An argument for QC research seems more genuine when analogous to proving Fermat 8767 s Last Theorem or some such significant conceptual problem. No doubt we might discover exciting things along the way, but expectation of an useful applied quantum computer doesn 8767 t seem realistic.
There are no technology are not in question
MY COMMENT: Am not sure about this. Have seen teachers who are properly trained in ICT perform miracles in underfunded schools with limited infrastructure.
This is why you use a gun to shoot the pile. You need a lot of force, otherwise it misses its target and remains stabbing halfway. In a relatively dense surface, a lot of chain mail per centimeter in combination with a relatively thick wire you can probably imagine that this is tough work. Many piles close together will form a phalanx that protects each other and is able to win.
Robin B-K #89: I think I 8767 ve been pretty consistent that entanglement is necessary but not sufficient for a quantum speedup. I see entanglement as nothing more than a sanity check and as such, as an obvious hurdle than one should clear before one even starts talking about quantum speedups. And as soon as it looked like D-Wave had cleared that hurdle, I immediately acknowledged it and congratulated them, without even putting up a fight!
A regrettable circumstance Scott 8767 s assertion (circa #896) that 8775 Countless string theorists and other HEP theorists consider the feasibility of QC so obvious that the question doesn 8767 t particularly interest them (it 8767 s 8766 mere engineering 8767 ) 8776 if we assume that this claim is accurate surely is a regrettable circumstance. Because these QM/QIT/field-theoretic issues manifestly are sufficiently tough that it is neither necessary nor feasible nor desirable that everyone think alike in regard to them! 🙂
With their products, designers want to tell stories about our existence and the future of our world. Ideas about house and garden are embroidered, woven and collected into tender and detailed form.
My main recommendation here is that most schools in the world would cost-effectively benefit by focusing on the human factor in pedagogy, rather than on technology. I don t see teaching as a technology in many ways, good teaching is the opposite of technology in that it is caring, creative, non-repetitive, ultra-customized, and ultimately about nurturing people, not simply making things easier for them.