You have commented 375 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Science & Technology
Quantum computer works best switched off
2006-02-24
Posted for its weirdness and potential interest for computer geeks.
Even for the crazy world of quantum mechanics, this one is twisted. A quantum computer program has produced an answer without actually running.

The idea behind the feat, first proposed in 1998, is to put a quantum computer into a “superposition”, a state in which it is both running and not running. It is as if you asked Schrödinger's cat to hit "Run".

With the right set-up, the theory suggested, the computer would sometimes get an answer out of the computer even though the program did not run. And now researchers from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign have improved on the original design and built a non-running quantum computer that really works.

They send a photon into a system of mirrors and other optical devices, which included a set of components that run a simple database search by changing the properties of the photon.

The new design includes a quantum trick called the Zeno effect. Repeated measurements stop the photon from entering the actual program, but allow its quantum nature to flirt with the program's components - so it can become gradually altered even though it never actually passes through.

"It is very bizarre that you know your computer has not run but you also know what the answer is," says team member Onur Hosten.

This scheme could have an advantage over straightforward quantum computing. "A non-running computer produces fewer errors," says Hosten. That sentiment should have technophobes nodding enthusiastically.
Posted by:phil_b

#8  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: BigEd   2006-02-24 15:08  

#7  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Scooter McGruder   2006-02-24 12:36  

#6  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: SR-71   2006-02-24 11:26  

#5  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: .com   2006-02-24 11:16  

#4  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Poitiers-Lepanto   2006-02-24 10:20  

#3  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Glenmore   2006-02-24 09:50  

#2  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Whating Flager4285   2006-02-24 09:22  

#1  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2006-02-24 08:41  

00:00