Aren't Google and D-Wave teaming up to solve machine learning problems with Quantum computing? It's not on individual atoms, but it's still a big advance.
So if we compute using single atoms and in theory find a copy and paste..then we are able to start enhancing our genetic makeup? Or am I way off? Just wondering
@450teamsuzuki i dont think so. because atoms are different than DNA\ Genetics. And what do me mean a way to copy and paste atoms? Do you mean like computers built into the atoms in people? If thats what you mean that wouldnt work. He says vibrations interfere with the atoms so I dont think that is possible. Or if it is I think the technology to build something like that is way beyond what we can do today.
@ironmaiden66695 We are also starting to get off of the ground with nanotechnology, and this sounds very similar to what you're describing.There is another video on YT that explains more about quantum computing, and ibmlab also has something posted about how they can get rid of the vibrations of the atoms so there will be zero interference. You are probably right about the quantum computer code though.we can only use it in something not someone.Nanotechnology is where we will make a breakthrough
The problem with Moore's Law is that eventually, no matter how long it may take, we will reach a limit. We just discovered the smallest possible transistor, and it is a single atom large. From there there is no smaller possible one without applying something like quantum computing.
@noahgolman The finality of Moore's Law will be the technological singularity. AI will get so advanced that it will be able to create an even more advanced AI (and on and on and on). We probably won't be alive to see this go down but I can guarantee it will be a beautiful moment for mankind.
Moores' law states that the amount of transistors on a chip will double roughly every two years, it never said computing power would double...I've seen people say the same thing on even tech sites and it bothers me.
@commofan88 the heat comes from resistance, have the size, half the heat. If shrinking in size meant increase in heat then all our smartphones would burn holes in our pockets.
@FrozenNyte thats what im talking about.. our computers are programmed on a digital signal or 0v and 5v or something similar... Off 0v or On 5v (which is how the get 0s and 1s)0v=0s and 5v=1s. Analog signals are 0v or 5v or anything in between. Is a quantum computer based of an analog DC signal?
Moore's law will not expire and has completed its course early. The law states that transistors wil be the size of an atom by the year 2020. However, scientists at the University of New Whales have already done so. They have made a transistor the size of an atom, 12 years before the predicted date.
The photon comes at the atom with a certain frequency, to manipulate the electron into the desired spin. Then the photon bounces off with probably a new frequency.
The original and new frequency are then compared to check if the electron actually rotates in the desired spin.
So the echo is used as a check-up. Just like the reason we use the TCP/IP-protocol.
@Ramiromasters .... Absolutely and utterly wrong in every way.... GHz does NOT equal speed in Moore's Law, it's computational power, and in that aspect, we've blown his original predictions away several times. What happend when we reached the GHz barrier? We shunk the cores, we increased front side bus, we expanded the L2 Cache, that alone could double a processors computational power at the exact same GHz clock. There is muuuch more than just what I've listed too...
@jsullivan05 By those standards Nostradamus predictions would be in physics books, it would be silly.
Moore didn't made out a broad prophecy, he made a law based on one simple thing "Silicone". All that Moore's law says is that: you need small tools to make a smaller transistor, and that new smaller more powerful technology will enable you to make the next generation smaller.
Moore's law its not: oh just put a bunch of those chips together and I predict you can process more information...
@Ramiromasters Okay, you have completely changed your arguement, your original arguement is about speed (which I proved wrong), now you've changed it to size... which you are STILL wrong about lmao. We have been progressively shrinking the cores for the past 11 years, something to the tune of 32nm now, down from the originals size which was well over 100nm... now PLEASE, change your argument again, so I can shoot it down AGAIN...
@Ramiromasters By the way, I love how you used a completely proposterous opening sentence to try to paint me in negative light, when it had absolutely nothing to do with my original arguement, which was very correct and falsafiable, with a little help from google you can probably stop drowning in this puddle of stupid you've seemed to trip and fall in...
@jsullivan05 The context of the video was about building blocks of transistors, and Moore's law, therefor my comment along with this context is self explanatory. How come other people here don't start talking about all sort of arbitrary crap that can be done around the existing processors?
You need to check your ego, because most people can see you are aggressive, irrational, and in the wrong, but yet think you are right...
@Ramiromasters You need to read other peoples posts directed at you, they tend to agree with me, and AGAIN, you've changed your original argument from, "Processors aren't getting faster, we are just adding them together" to something completely different. This is getting extremely funny for me. Dude just admit you were wrong about your first post, IT IS IN PLAIN VIEW FOR THE WORLD TO SEE. Or, you can AGAIN try to change your arguement... :-\ Just give up man, you were wrong
@jsullivan05 There is only one guy besides you that replied and he was pretty smart, he understood perfectly as expected from a normal person, unlike some trolls I can mention...
@Ramiromasters But he didn't agree with you... like you said... I love how you can't let being completely wrong go, you just gotta keep going when you've been proved wrong on every single comment you made. Come on, say something else, tell me that me that your arguement is that kittens are better than puppies next or something, change your arguement YET AGAIN lol
@Ramiromasters also there have been small increase in clock speed but as the guy said above efficiency has been improved of the cloak speed, also the size and power requerments for the same amount of calculations per second has went up.
and ah f*** intel has said that moores law will break down by 2013 F*** WORLDS GOING TO END. tbh though I think they will find something before then but people really you thought that the 2008 recession was bad if this shit goes down its going to be way worse.
@Etheoma You know, I think is weird is that Moore's law failed at this level. Moore and the people who said we will see the limit of silicon at 20 GHz are physics. I doubt anyone would have made any calculation about a computer processors not taking heat in consideration. Looking at how the US gov don't allow the sell of a mere PS2 in some countries, due its technology, and the SOPA laws... probably technology is being held back, or classified.
The good thing about molecular computers is that they may still be programmable using the programming concepts today and could still look like the technology we use today. A finished molecular processor may still be in a conventional IC because they are still stable. Quantum computers however could mean a lot of support technology for the system to work and therefore it may very rarely be in consumer devices.
"everything that can be computed is computable by a Turing Machine" -- Church-Turing Thesis. So, shouldn't they be equivalent despite one is more powerful than the other.
At 3:40, he says that building larger quantum computers would enable us to build human-level AI. That's a bit of an overstatement.
Granted, time-efficiency counts for something in a measure of intelligence, but it plays "4th fiddle" to *organization* and the ability to generalize.
Look, a human brain "running more slowly" (with the electrical signals somehow slowed down) would still be capable of solving the same problems, just in more time.
@extropian314 But when we take computational complexity into account, we are not only referring to "faster processing", we are referring to literally solving problems in infinitely more efficient ways.
"solving problems in infinitely more efficient ways."
And by "efficient", you mean time-efficient. Yes, with thousands of qubits, we really could solve problems that would never be attainable with classical computers. My point is that while that *could* make general-AI a little easier, I just don't see it making that big of a difference. Even if it eventually does, there is no way Kaku has grounds to say that today (If he does, he needs to present that evidence).
@extropian314 Plus, you have to take computational complexity into account when making this affirmation. It might be that pure speed alone won't mean more intelligence, but when you can solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time, that's quite an accomplishment, and it does imply more "intelligence", so to say.
Yea, if we move away from bi-stable system, programming would be near impossible. Not to mention, through a few months of wear and tare, voltages change, which would render a quantum computer a peice of expensive garbage.
what I mean is, although his discription for computer is quite basic. but the way he explains it is just so much simpler that the discussion of our instructors in Programming101
I know you probably wont get to read this, but this is what will probably happen: As you said previously, we are heading towards a type 1 civ. This will probably affect the computing world in its very roots; instead of buying each a computer strong enough to perform said operation(3x5=15), i think there will be ONE, or few computers, accepting requests from over the world, and sending out the answer almost in real time.
imagine the components of your gaming pc change in color , size and style .. wont you change it ? i personally would change my pc every year -random PC gamer
@Stabiiliize you need to multiply 3 bits and output 4 bits (In binary, 3 is 011, 5 is 101, and 15 is 1111). Multiplication is done by adding and shifting. to multiply numbers A and B you do the following:
start off with C = 0
1. if A ends in a 1, add B to C
2. get rid of the rightmost digit of A, add a zero to the right of B
@Stabiiliize it would take a 4 bit binary computer to calculate 15 because 1111 would be 1+2+4+8. and I'm assuming your actually joking I think that comment made you look stupid and another 81 at current count even more stupid. So I don't find it funny so I'm going to take you totally seriously.
well today the manufacturing process is down to 45nm and silicon atoms are 0.3nm so 0.3nmx45 to the power of 3 so 2461 roughly
i dunno if its so scary, i mean it seems simple to program an enviroment where you could do that type of calculation. Kind of in the same why you can describe a 3d word on a flat screen, or a four dimentional universe in math.
while i know a computer is not truely random, it seems quite easy to set up an enviroment in which you could practice virtually makeing quantum computational programs.
Quantum computers will never replace digital computers. Think of them as a special purpose peripheral which can be used to solve certain problems much faster than a digital computer.
@SherwinGooch hes sying eventually you will reach the limit of silicon computing and will need a replacement a atom is so small if you made a quantum chip the size of a regular chip it would probably be millions of times faster
@Byzanking i do not understand what u are saying. dna is made of molecules. when we write the down we write thme down as codes for convenience. even so, the whole of human genome can be stored in a DVD or a peb drive.
Spintironics. Is going to wipe atomic computers. Why did you not cover spintronics. The spin of an atom controlled gives 360 * 360 integer possibilities. Let alone the floating point possibilities. Just programing an atom before and during movement through a chip will condense the size of CPU's vastly!
Diamond will replace silicon when it's ready. If you add Boron to the mixture of gasses used to grow cultured diamonds, and you get conductivity. A cm thick plate of diamond can withstand 10 million volts. It can also switch MUCH higher frequencies. Source: watch?v=021v4BsNyZ4
No 3 x 5 = 15 isn't the world record for a quantum computer calculation, 15 = 3 x 5 is the world record for the polynomial-time composite number factorization algorithm designed for quantum computers (there is no known algorithm for normal computers). There is a world of difference. In one, you start with 2 numbers and you multiply them together. In the other, you start with a presumably composite number, and you find its prime factorization - and there is a WORLD of difference. A world of hurt.
Is it just me or does this not really explain anything? Asking, "try to calculate 3 x 5 using 5 atoms" is a completely ridiculous thing to say. What are you going to do with them? Why do they need EM radiation beamed over them? How does it affect spin? You'll need a 10^35 atom sized MRI machine to do it.
Graphane will be the next step in computer component and electronics fabrication, quantum computing will become the ultimate revolution in technology but that is much further into the future, I would predict a 100 years from now. IBM has already developed transistors at 50nm which are capable of processing larger blocks of data at a much higher rate then silicon is capable of and it also solves the power and heat wall problem. The Graphene transistors is said to be able to compute @ 155GHZ!
@romefox They've run into problems with graphene though. For some reason why have problems making transistors out of them because they don't have a band gap like silicon does
@VinylRhapsody Indeed, however, IBM has developed a dual-gate bi-layer graphene architecture which is capable of functioning with an open bandgap 0f 0.13 electron volts and now the Polytechnic Institute institute has reported that they are able to achieve 0.2 eV using water vapors, this challenge may very soon be resolved.
@romefox If the graphene is patterned at lateral dimensions below 100 nm, quantum confinement effects increase the bandgap and the material becomes more semiconducting (0.24 eV has been reported). A paper in Advanced Materials, however, showed evidence that the carrier mobilities in graphene drop off dramatically as the characteristic size gets down to 5-40 nm, which defeats the purpose of switching to graphene since the high carrier mobilities are what allows faster computations.
If any vibration will change the values of the code, there is no way that quantum computing will ever work, at least not the way they are trying to make it work.
We don't have quantum life forms, we have molecular life forms for the most part aside from the fact that the very foundation of molecular structure is quantum structure. It is like floating on water as the foundation. It makes all functions, working parts and mechanisms possible.
They need to be working hard on molecular computing.
"Researchers at I.B.M. have stored and retrieved digital 1s and 0s from an array of just 12 atoms, pushing the boundaries of the magnetic storage of information to the edge of what is possible." Looks like we're getting close o.o
So essentially if i was browsing youtube on my Q-comp and my mom ran by and happened to nudge the table a bit, i would suddenly be watching Fetish porn, then i nudge it again in panic and it turns into a picture of a lama, chasing a fat guy into a swimming pool :P
I require a computer made of carbon nanotubes by the next 5 years.
skullsguitarist1122 2 hours ago
I just got a huge boner
LakiWatko 15 hours ago
Dr Kaku is my hero...
me52 1 day ago
Atom on... Atom off
K9JT 1 day ago
i thought mr miyagi died 0.0
JMANDADIZZLE 4 days ago
Aren't Google and D-Wave teaming up to solve machine learning problems with Quantum computing? It's not on individual atoms, but it's still a big advance.
garfieldnate 4 days ago
So if we compute using single atoms and in theory find a copy and paste..then we are able to start enhancing our genetic makeup? Or am I way off? Just wondering
450teamsuzuki 4 days ago
@450teamsuzuki i dont think so. because atoms are different than DNA\ Genetics. And what do me mean a way to copy and paste atoms? Do you mean like computers built into the atoms in people? If thats what you mean that wouldnt work. He says vibrations interfere with the atoms so I dont think that is possible. Or if it is I think the technology to build something like that is way beyond what we can do today.
ironmaiden66695 4 days ago
@ironmaiden66695 We are also starting to get off of the ground with nanotechnology, and this sounds very similar to what you're describing.There is another video on YT that explains more about quantum computing, and ibmlab also has something posted about how they can get rid of the vibrations of the atoms so there will be zero interference. You are probably right about the quantum computer code though.we can only use it in something not someone.Nanotechnology is where we will make a breakthrough
450teamsuzuki 4 days ago
@450teamsuzuki IMO :)
450teamsuzuki 4 days ago
IBM just made the Quantum Computer, next?
aar0n262 5 days ago
takes 5 Intel ATOM powered computers.. types 3*5 into calculator.. finds the answer to be 15 on each computer
commofan88 6 days ago
12 people can't program a normal computer.
behnamasid 6 days ago
The problem with Moore's Law is that eventually, no matter how long it may take, we will reach a limit. We just discovered the smallest possible transistor, and it is a single atom large. From there there is no smaller possible one without applying something like quantum computing.
noahgolman 1 week ago
@noahgolman The finality of Moore's Law will be the technological singularity. AI will get so advanced that it will be able to create an even more advanced AI (and on and on and on). We probably won't be alive to see this go down but I can guarantee it will be a beautiful moment for mankind.
nbmatt 5 days ago
Moores' law states that the amount of transistors on a chip will double roughly every two years, it never said computing power would double...I've seen people say the same thing on even tech sites and it bothers me.
NTGam1ng 1 week ago
@NTGam1ng twice the transistors, twice the processing power, twice the speed.
Polydynamix 1 week ago
@Polydynamix also, twice the heat due to twice the amount of transistors..
commofan88 6 days ago
@commofan88 the heat comes from resistance, have the size, half the heat. If shrinking in size meant increase in heat then all our smartphones would burn holes in our pockets.
Polydynamix 6 days ago
We need to get this guy as much money as he needs to do the things he talks about in these videos.
He's easily the next generation Einstein.
Fr3k3 1 week ago 3
Will I be able to play Solitaire on a quantum computer?
Xenctuary 1 week ago 4
1:43
LogoMproductions 1 week ago
Cubit? Bible predicted quantum computing!
KokotTheMonkey 1 week ago
@KokotTheMonkey its Q-bit, also cubits were the measurements of the ancent times (one length from the start of the forearm to the finger tip).
UltraDrago2000 1 week ago
@MAGNETICSANDWICHFILM What do you mean?
MrNotoriousNinja 1 week ago
When he refers to anything between 0 and 1 does he mean like an "analog signal computer" instead of todays on/off digital computers?
z28snakeeater 1 week ago
@z28snakeeater no its how they code computers lol
FrozenNyte 1 week ago
@FrozenNyte thats what im talking about.. our computers are programmed on a digital signal or 0v and 5v or something similar... Off 0v or On 5v (which is how the get 0s and 1s)0v=0s and 5v=1s. Analog signals are 0v or 5v or anything in between. Is a quantum computer based of an analog DC signal?
z28snakeeater 4 days ago
Moore's law will not expire and has completed its course early. The law states that transistors wil be the size of an atom by the year 2020. However, scientists at the University of New Whales have already done so. They have made a transistor the size of an atom, 12 years before the predicted date.
texasjac01 1 week ago
@texasjac01 - Source? I'd like to read it.
Tridecalogism 1 week ago
Is it just me or is this guy obsessed with graphene?
joshlopez908 1 week ago
I couldent hit the right key. I hit the 4 instead D:.
ThreeArrowVideos 1 week ago
genius
0011STEALTH 1 week ago
You could build that computer out of Aluminum and slap an Apple on the back of it.....
gaaraman082 1 week ago
i always knew the molecules in my body was useless. (._.)
RiazGT 2 weeks ago
bigthink you cheap bastards, they made 2 of this video on the same day!
SuperRustyTrumbone 2 weeks ago
1:42 he's jerking off :)
SuperRustyTrumbone 2 weeks ago
he's pretty good at not actually answering the question.
chadd990 2 weeks ago
I dont give a fuck about quantum comps, i can because of the thumbnail - thought he was giving someone the FINGER.....
DarronTheDamaga 2 weeks ago
Cheezz Prof. Aren't you the one working on The String Theory?
why not try to figure out a way to solve the Adams problem by examining the string principal?
kadmany 2 weeks ago
Lol @1:43... :( I'm so stupid
ebodamusic 2 weeks ago
@ebodamusic awe man you beat me to it i was just about to comment on that hahaha :D
GetOnMyL1ama 2 weeks ago
@ebodamusic lol he so serous when he does it
qazz11q 2 weeks ago
Challenge accepted
5 months later
3 atom quantum computer
Close enough
MAGNETICSANDWICHFILM 2 weeks ago 53
@MAGNETICSANDWICHFILM gtfo, 9fag
paintballer058 2 weeks ago
what do i do after i get the echo?
hifeyracer 2 weeks ago 62
@hifeyracer lmfao i just died after reading your comment
AuburnJew22 2 weeks ago
@hifeyracer @Echo off :D
datafreak667 1 week ago
@hifeyracer I think it is like this:
The photon comes at the atom with a certain frequency, to manipulate the electron into the desired spin. Then the photon bounces off with probably a new frequency.
The original and new frequency are then compared to check if the electron actually rotates in the desired spin.
So the echo is used as a check-up. Just like the reason we use the TCP/IP-protocol.
TheDigitalStone 1 week ago
from quantum import quantum
johnnyckrock 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1) Go to wikipedia and replace the Main_page on the url with File:Comparison_semiconductor_process_nodes.svg
2) Look at the 2015 dot as compared to the HIV virus(both in bottom right).
Dear God, AIDS robots.
WarSpigotProductions 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
WarSpigotProductions 2 weeks ago
Fuck! I just declared as a computer science major. You mean I'm screwed?
Theroha 3 weeks ago
Morse law fail there's been 11 years without any speed increase...
We only get bunch processors stitched together.
Ramiromasters 3 weeks ago
@Ramiromasters moore's*
introtectist 3 weeks ago
@Ramiromasters .... Absolutely and utterly wrong in every way.... GHz does NOT equal speed in Moore's Law, it's computational power, and in that aspect, we've blown his original predictions away several times. What happend when we reached the GHz barrier? We shunk the cores, we increased front side bus, we expanded the L2 Cache, that alone could double a processors computational power at the exact same GHz clock. There is muuuch more than just what I've listed too...
jsullivan05 3 weeks ago
@jsullivan05 By those standards Nostradamus predictions would be in physics books, it would be silly.
Moore didn't made out a broad prophecy, he made a law based on one simple thing "Silicone". All that Moore's law says is that: you need small tools to make a smaller transistor, and that new smaller more powerful technology will enable you to make the next generation smaller.
Moore's law its not: oh just put a bunch of those chips together and I predict you can process more information...
Ramiromasters 3 weeks ago
@Ramiromasters Okay, you have completely changed your arguement, your original arguement is about speed (which I proved wrong), now you've changed it to size... which you are STILL wrong about lmao. We have been progressively shrinking the cores for the past 11 years, something to the tune of 32nm now, down from the originals size which was well over 100nm... now PLEASE, change your argument again, so I can shoot it down AGAIN...
jsullivan05 3 weeks ago
@Ramiromasters By the way, I love how you used a completely proposterous opening sentence to try to paint me in negative light, when it had absolutely nothing to do with my original arguement, which was very correct and falsafiable, with a little help from google you can probably stop drowning in this puddle of stupid you've seemed to trip and fall in...
jsullivan05 3 weeks ago
@jsullivan05 The context of the video was about building blocks of transistors, and Moore's law, therefor my comment along with this context is self explanatory. How come other people here don't start talking about all sort of arbitrary crap that can be done around the existing processors?
You need to check your ego, because most people can see you are aggressive, irrational, and in the wrong, but yet think you are right...
Take the advice, it could be important.
Ramiromasters 3 weeks ago
@Ramiromasters You need to read other peoples posts directed at you, they tend to agree with me, and AGAIN, you've changed your original argument from, "Processors aren't getting faster, we are just adding them together" to something completely different. This is getting extremely funny for me. Dude just admit you were wrong about your first post, IT IS IN PLAIN VIEW FOR THE WORLD TO SEE. Or, you can AGAIN try to change your arguement... :-\ Just give up man, you were wrong
jsullivan05 3 weeks ago
@jsullivan05 There is only one guy besides you that replied and he was pretty smart, he understood perfectly as expected from a normal person, unlike some trolls I can mention...
Ramiromasters 3 weeks ago
@Ramiromasters But he didn't agree with you... like you said... I love how you can't let being completely wrong go, you just gotta keep going when you've been proved wrong on every single comment you made. Come on, say something else, tell me that me that your arguement is that kittens are better than puppies next or something, change your arguement YET AGAIN lol
jsullivan05 3 weeks ago
@Ramiromasters also there have been small increase in clock speed but as the guy said above efficiency has been improved of the cloak speed, also the size and power requerments for the same amount of calculations per second has went up.
and ah f*** intel has said that moores law will break down by 2013 F*** WORLDS GOING TO END. tbh though I think they will find something before then but people really you thought that the 2008 recession was bad if this shit goes down its going to be way worse.
Etheoma 3 weeks ago
@Etheoma You know, I think is weird is that Moore's law failed at this level. Moore and the people who said we will see the limit of silicon at 20 GHz are physics. I doubt anyone would have made any calculation about a computer processors not taking heat in consideration. Looking at how the US gov don't allow the sell of a mere PS2 in some countries, due its technology, and the SOPA laws... probably technology is being held back, or classified.
Ramiromasters 3 weeks ago
im getting used to this voice, it's kind of funny. The dude is ok anyway
hegemoniuspiper 3 weeks ago
3:44 The reason HWY
I love that lol. Cool Hwip! Muahahaha!
betterdropdatdonk 3 weeks ago
cant wait till the day i get to do "Hello World" on a Quantum computer:P
messi996 3 weeks ago 2
3:04 I did it on two atoms, spinning LOL
Films4You 3 weeks ago
Intel are pushing towards NanoTechnology
Films4You 3 weeks ago
Welcome Back to the Analog World ;-)
Akileze 3 weeks ago
I'll use a lazor to write 3 on the first atom, * on the second one, 5 on the third one, = on the fourth one, and 15 on the fifth one.
Done, 3*5=15
qaiex 3 weeks ago
The good thing about molecular computers is that they may still be programmable using the programming concepts today and could still look like the technology we use today. A finished molecular processor may still be in a conventional IC because they are still stable. Quantum computers however could mean a lot of support technology for the system to work and therefore it may very rarely be in consumer devices.
DragonlordWarlock 3 weeks ago
1:40 gave me hardware instead..
KnappDrumm3r 4 weeks ago
I dont think it will take 10 years.. It is more like 5 years.
orioncheung 4 weeks ago
my compter cryed at this video it doesn't like being told its inadiquate
TheAlexagius 4 weeks ago 4
1:44 *fap fap fap* *meanwhile* *hand appears to be near my head* FOCUS FOCUS FOCUS!!!
xaiber16 4 weeks ago in playlist More videos from bigthink
I get it. He's a satire comedian.
ttJinn 4 weeks ago
3:10 I could only get it to work with 6
Napaeozapus 1 month ago
I really like this guy. He can make such a complex subject seem decently simple.
MechWarrior324 1 month ago
@MechWarrior324 and the other way around.
Lucas7Claus 1 month ago
@Lucas7Claus Yeah! Haha
MechWarrior324 1 month ago
where the fuck am I gonna get 5 atoms?!
TheMercuryHero 1 month ago
@TheMercuryHero wall mart
sagar246246 1 month ago
Pentium? LOL
psp3602 1 month ago
"everything that can be computed is computable by a Turing Machine" -- Church-Turing Thesis. So, shouldn't they be equivalent despite one is more powerful than the other.
fewboys 1 month ago
1:42 lol
TigerStrikeX 1 month ago
18 months? Last time I checked, it was every 2 years. It must be speeding up... damn!
HaloModder555 1 month ago
Comment removed
karanjoe5 1 month ago
@HaloModder555 yes it is. exponentially
karanjoe5 1 month ago
Can molecular computers alter DNA?
boarding5401 1 month ago
You could have one quantum computer and many other computers connect to it via the internet or something
Scwirul 1 month ago
then silicon valley will be called molecule valley or quantum valley ?
X3rztesp 1 month ago
HA he's a noob!! It took me 5 hours to compute on 5 atoms!! 5 + 5 is 55!! yeah!! :P
Thet3 1 month ago
I'm not sure how i found these videos but, I can't stop watching for some reason...
DBFLPIMP 1 month ago
why build quatum computer when we already have the most powerful portable processor on earth
OUR BRAIN
only if we can harness it
y512516 1 month ago
@y512516
wow. mind blown.
think if there would be a UI that would enable us to literally use our brain as a PC. like work on Photoshop or play a game IN OUR OWN HEADS! man...
ILGAR93 1 month ago
@ILGAR93
but the problem is
what if a program crash?
remember how when explorer.exe crash , your computer will freeze?
and we have to reboot the program MANUALLY
now, if a program crashes in our brain ....
y512516 1 month ago
Michio Kaku always *overestimates* the impact of quantum computing on the field of AI.
Quantum computing just does a *subset* of what today's computers do, but much *faster*. And more computing speed in-no-way means more intelligence.
extropian314 1 month ago
@extropian314 I didn't see Kaku mention AI not even once.
Gretgor666 1 month ago
@Gretgor666 ,
At 3:40, he says that building larger quantum computers would enable us to build human-level AI. That's a bit of an overstatement.
Granted, time-efficiency counts for something in a measure of intelligence, but it plays "4th fiddle" to *organization* and the ability to generalize.
Look, a human brain "running more slowly" (with the electrical signals somehow slowed down) would still be capable of solving the same problems, just in more time.
[continued]
extropian314 1 month ago
@extropian314 But when we take computational complexity into account, we are not only referring to "faster processing", we are referring to literally solving problems in infinitely more efficient ways.
Gretgor666 1 month ago
@Gretgor666 ,
"solving problems in infinitely more efficient ways."
And by "efficient", you mean time-efficient. Yes, with thousands of qubits, we really could solve problems that would never be attainable with classical computers. My point is that while that *could* make general-AI a little easier, I just don't see it making that big of a difference. Even if it eventually does, there is no way Kaku has grounds to say that today (If he does, he needs to present that evidence).
extropian314 1 month ago
@Gretgor666 ,
[continued]
But no matter how fast I make a cockroach's brain run, it'll never understand anything new.
extropian314 1 month ago
@Gretgor666 He did, at 3:50
Timei 1 month ago
@extropian314 Plus, you have to take computational complexity into account when making this affirmation. It might be that pure speed alone won't mean more intelligence, but when you can solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time, that's quite an accomplishment, and it does imply more "intelligence", so to say.
Gretgor666 1 month ago
Yea, if we move away from bi-stable system, programming would be near impossible. Not to mention, through a few months of wear and tare, voltages change, which would render a quantum computer a peice of expensive garbage.
sozo45 1 month ago
this tutorial sucks
larrybagina 1 month ago 136
@larrybagina do a better one, i challenge you!
KKsKrissvs121 1 month ago
is there anything this guy doesn't know?
what I mean is, although his discription for computer is quite basic. but the way he explains it is just so much simpler that the discussion of our instructors in Programming101
qqcq9z92 1 month ago
I know you probably wont get to read this, but this is what will probably happen: As you said previously, we are heading towards a type 1 civ. This will probably affect the computing world in its very roots; instead of buying each a computer strong enough to perform said operation(3x5=15), i think there will be ONE, or few computers, accepting requests from over the world, and sending out the answer almost in real time.
vicloon46 1 month ago
lol y wont u upgrade ?
imagine the components of your gaming pc change in color , size and style .. wont you change it ? i personally would change my pc every year -random PC gamer
gentel916 1 month ago
I love this guy
punbaca 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
check out this computer programming video, would love feedback "youtu.be/xNjtf_WUdEQ"
supermatti78 1 month ago
This man is an addiction.
OceanWalk3r 1 month ago 4
Did he just say.. Pentium?
MinecraftHardon 1 month ago
i love this guy?
area51manah 1 month ago
How many bits does it take to calculate 3x5=15 on a regular computer? And how many atoms are in a bit?
Stabiiliize 1 month ago 17
Comment removed
BlazeOrangeDeer 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Stabiiliize you need to multiply 3 bits and output 4 bits (In binary, 3 is 011, 5 is 101, and 15 is 1111). Multiplication is done by adding and shifting. to multiply numbers A and B you do the following:
start off with C = 0
1. if A ends in a 1, add B to C
2. get rid of the rightmost digit of A, add a zero to the right of B
3. if A isn't zero yet. go to step 1
When A is gone, C is your answer
BlazeOrangeDeer 3 weeks ago
@Stabiiliize 4 bits, and the other question is like asking how many peanuts are in an orange lol
rich1051414 3 weeks ago
@Stabiiliize a few million per bit
johnnymitnick 3 weeks ago
@Stabiiliize A Bit is a one, or a zero, It is an amount of energy, It Doesn't have any atoms in it. Atoms consist to matter, NOT Energy.
ChickenLordCL 3 weeks ago
@Stabiiliize it would take a 4 bit binary computer to calculate 15 because 1111 would be 1+2+4+8. and I'm assuming your actually joking I think that comment made you look stupid and another 81 at current count even more stupid. So I don't find it funny so I'm going to take you totally seriously.
well today the manufacturing process is down to 45nm and silicon atoms are 0.3nm so 0.3nmx45 to the power of 3 so 2461 roughly
Etheoma 3 weeks ago
@Etheoma but that doesn't include things like cache etc
Etheoma 3 weeks ago
what's he talking about? I typed this message on my quantum computer.
RJMM 1 month ago
i dunno if its so scary, i mean it seems simple to program an enviroment where you could do that type of calculation. Kind of in the same why you can describe a 3d word on a flat screen, or a four dimentional universe in math.
while i know a computer is not truely random, it seems quite easy to set up an enviroment in which you could practice virtually makeing quantum computational programs.
coldlogic1 1 month ago
Comment removed
51equinox 1 month ago
Comment removed
51equinox 1 month ago
I agree I'm sticking to windows 7. 8 is too soon form me i'll hold out for 9.
psyccoII 1 month ago
5 atoms * 3 atoms = 15 atoms ????
Mrpoch1234 1 month ago
Quantum computers will never replace digital computers. Think of them as a special purpose peripheral which can be used to solve certain problems much faster than a digital computer.
SherwinGooch 1 month ago
@SherwinGooch hes sying eventually you will reach the limit of silicon computing and will need a replacement a atom is so small if you made a quantum chip the size of a regular chip it would probably be millions of times faster
wellivea1 1 month ago
dna can hold more info then all the super computers in the world
Byzanking 1 month ago
@Byzanking i do not understand what u are saying. dna is made of molecules. when we write the down we write thme down as codes for convenience. even so, the whole of human genome can be stored in a DVD or a peb drive.
mignik01 1 month ago
@Byzanking untrue
purplehaze216 1 month ago
crystal holds trillions of gigs of memory look it up
WhoFartedIFarted 1 month ago
1 Atom, nuffsaid.
KristovGaedkavich 1 month ago
Spintronics = how the hell are you suppose to control the spin of an electron?
hardc0r3gam3r 1 month ago
Michio Kaku = the smart person's chuck norris
Thebrowntown1234 1 month ago
Ha, I took the five atoms, multiplied them by three, and got fifteen atoms. Jokes on you Michio--I'm a genius.
AutoTunedSoul 1 month ago
@AutoTunedSoul
lol
MrMassDeffect 1 month ago
Spintironics. Is going to wipe atomic computers. Why did you not cover spintronics. The spin of an atom controlled gives 360 * 360 integer possibilities. Let alone the floating point possibilities. Just programing an atom before and during movement through a chip will condense the size of CPU's vastly!
Spintronics covered please:)
bigstiggerNo1 1 month ago
I tried calculating it on 5 atoms, wasnt so hard :D
kinglynx 1 month ago
My brain is my computer. Still trying to surf the web though . . .
1Deejay7 1 month ago 83
@1Deejay7 My brain is also my computer. Just like a computer, it is overloaded with porn.
RyanB747 1 month ago 41
@1Deejay7 One day..
MiMa4x01 4 weeks ago
2013: Intel Q7 - 16 silicon cores, 2 quantum cores.
g0rb4k 1 month ago
Diamond will replace silicon when it's ready. If you add Boron to the mixture of gasses used to grow cultured diamonds, and you get conductivity. A cm thick plate of diamond can withstand 10 million volts. It can also switch MUCH higher frequencies. Source: watch?v=021v4BsNyZ4
KaslarProductions 1 month ago
@KaslarProductions your mom will replace silicon
drchunky 1 month ago
who uses pentium now??
feedingnub 1 month ago
No 3 x 5 = 15 isn't the world record for a quantum computer calculation, 15 = 3 x 5 is the world record for the polynomial-time composite number factorization algorithm designed for quantum computers (there is no known algorithm for normal computers). There is a world of difference. In one, you start with 2 numbers and you multiply them together. In the other, you start with a presumably composite number, and you find its prime factorization - and there is a WORLD of difference. A world of hurt.
medexamtoolsdotcom 1 month ago
Is it just me or does this not really explain anything? Asking, "try to calculate 3 x 5 using 5 atoms" is a completely ridiculous thing to say. What are you going to do with them? Why do they need EM radiation beamed over them? How does it affect spin? You'll need a 10^35 atom sized MRI machine to do it.
Doddmond 1 month ago
quantum computers are already on the market, D-Wave company from Canada already sold their first QC in May 2011.
just google some tags:
D-Wave Quantum Computer 10 milion
Shahdee17 1 month ago
Graphane will be the next step in computer component and electronics fabrication, quantum computing will become the ultimate revolution in technology but that is much further into the future, I would predict a 100 years from now. IBM has already developed transistors at 50nm which are capable of processing larger blocks of data at a much higher rate then silicon is capable of and it also solves the power and heat wall problem. The Graphene transistors is said to be able to compute @ 155GHZ!
romefox 1 month ago
@romefox They've run into problems with graphene though. For some reason why have problems making transistors out of them because they don't have a band gap like silicon does
VinylRhapsody 1 month ago
@VinylRhapsody Indeed, however, IBM has developed a dual-gate bi-layer graphene architecture which is capable of functioning with an open bandgap 0f 0.13 electron volts and now the Polytechnic Institute institute has reported that they are able to achieve 0.2 eV using water vapors, this challenge may very soon be resolved.
romefox 1 month ago
@romefox If the graphene is patterned at lateral dimensions below 100 nm, quantum confinement effects increase the bandgap and the material becomes more semiconducting (0.24 eV has been reported). A paper in Advanced Materials, however, showed evidence that the carrier mobilities in graphene drop off dramatically as the characteristic size gets down to 5-40 nm, which defeats the purpose of switching to graphene since the high carrier mobilities are what allows faster computations.
MetalMilitia5488 1 month ago
3:52 - 4:04 So wait! I'm Useless?
FireBallAX1 1 month ago
Can you elaborate more on molecular computing? What are the draw backs? What are the advantages?
REA00002 1 month ago
Not to get off track but he looks like an Asian Bill Maher....
procyclist1988 1 month ago
NO PROGRESS BAR = FUTURE
duranarts 1 month ago
AHHHHH, my brain cannot proccess all the information. Ahhhh HURTS!
calito0010 1 month ago
slowly tap 8 for Goldmember
KrWaKo 1 month ago
If any vibration will change the values of the code, there is no way that quantum computing will ever work, at least not the way they are trying to make it work.
We don't have quantum life forms, we have molecular life forms for the most part aside from the fact that the very foundation of molecular structure is quantum structure. It is like floating on water as the foundation. It makes all functions, working parts and mechanisms possible.
They need to be working hard on molecular computing.
JungleJargon 1 month ago
5 atoms? Ok... *Unzips pants*
YouGuysAreAHoles 1 month ago
What if you do it inside of a vacum?
SizzleCinema 1 month ago
I know how to resolve this problem. It's quite simple.
knowwaie 1 month ago
"Researchers at I.B.M. have stored and retrieved digital 1s and 0s from an array of just 12 atoms, pushing the boundaries of the magnetic storage of information to the edge of what is possible." Looks like we're getting close o.o
PassKod3 1 month ago
So essentially if i was browsing youtube on my Q-comp and my mom ran by and happened to nudge the table a bit, i would suddenly be watching Fetish porn, then i nudge it again in panic and it turns into a picture of a lama, chasing a fat guy into a swimming pool :P
soulextracter 1 month ago 3
@soulextracter Only if evolution is not magic.
JungleJargon 1 month ago