1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52612
    16 Jul '18 21:02
    https://www.livescience.com/63067-quantum-entanglement-record-china.html

    If you had an actual quantum computer working with 18 bits, what would it buy you in terms of actual computation power?
  2. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    78502
    16 Jul '18 21:16
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    https://www.livescience.com/63067-quantum-entanglement-record-china.html

    If you had an actual quantum computer working with 18 bits, what would it buy you in terms of actual computation power?
    In the 1980's most of the machines were 16 bit. The thing is the only quantum algorithm known (that's at all non-trivial) is Schorr's algorithm for factorizing composite numbers. Since factorizing 16 bit numbers is slow (in the sense that there is nothing better than trial division) but feasible since there are only 65,000 odd cases to test there's a dearth of real world applications. As a proof of concept it's great.
  3. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52612
    17 Jul '18 00:14
    Originally posted by @deepthought
    In the 1980's most of the machines were 16 bit. The thing is the only quantum algorithm known (that's at all non-trivial) is Schorr's algorithm for factorizing composite numbers. Since factorizing 16 bit numbers is slow (in the sense that there is nothing better than trial division) but feasible since there are only 65,000 odd cases to test there's a dearth of real world applications. As a proof of concept it's great.
    Yes but doesn't 18 bits mean more than that in the quantum world? Are you saying it is linear, 16 bits describes 65000 numbers and 18 bits describe a quarter million and that's it for the quantum world?