Видео

Thanks!

For commercial applications it’ll be a while, but I’ll have some videos coming out soon with some cool applications

@@Lukas-Lab thanks. i was not referring to something commercial, but maybe take the root of something. not just an expected 50/50 distribution 🙂 some more basic gates of quantum computing and how to connect them.

Coming soon :)

Thanks so much! I’m glad you liked it :)

Yeah there are a few good resources depending on your level. There are intro quantum computing courses on RUclips which are at the mid-high undergraduate level, meaning you should Already know quantum mechanics to understand them. You can also use the qiskit online learning materials and textbook, which IBM released. If you’re looking for a good textbook, try neilsen and chuang

@@Lukas-Lab

Yeah, it’s huge IMO, really lowers the barrier to entry and makes the field more tangible

@@Lukas-Lab So do your videos!

That’s awesome!! I’m glad you like the videos. Keep studying, it takes is a lot of hard work but if you put the time in I’m sure you’ll study some interesting stuff in the future!

Thanks!

nice

Thanks!

Glad you liked it! Thanks for the support :)

Thanks! The first one is my most viewed video, this one took me more effort so I get that I also like this one better personally, but I can’t be mad since that one did so well 🤷🏼‍♂️

I believe that anyone regardless of IQ can understand this stuff - if you didn’t understand from my video then it’s completely my fault. While I’ve been studying quantum computing a long time, I’m still learning how best to communicate it to people who don’t spend all day thinking about it. Hopefully future videos that I make do a better job.

While it seems like faster than light communication, there’s a little trick. When one particle in an entangled pair is measured it’s true that you automatically know the state of the other particle in the pair regardless of where it is. The thing is though, if you do the math you can’t actually use this instant knowledge to send any information faster than light. Any information transfer that uses entanglement requires a classical channel that is limited to the speed of light. In other words, while the particles state is instantaneously decided the second its entangled partner is measured (faster than light), it is impossible to use that for FTL communication. I’m going to do a video on this because it’s very commonly something that science articles get wrong. The fuss between GR and quantum mechanics is that gravity can’t be quantized. If you try to you get a lot of things that don’t work out, and you get singularities. Although as I’m not a GR guy I don’t know the specifics.

To add to this, check out this Wikipedia page on the no communication theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem

Also are you sure it's a flux line going to the resonator and not a charge line

Usually coupling resonators do have junction elements if you look at any of Google or IBM’s newer papers they use “flux tunable couplers” - basically resonators with squids that you can thread a flux through to tune the resonant frequency. This is a bit of a newer development, Google has been doing it for a while but IBM just recently switched from fixed frequency couplers. A charge line wouldn’t help you there unless your resonator was voltage tunable. There are tons of papers where they do things like this, it’s not just one. I would suggest not looking at companies papers. Cause they often won’t share the hardware details as it’s proprietary. Instead look at academic groups doing 2 qubit gates, there are a bunch that have done it

Hope you like it :)

I’m not actually 100% sure here, but I think it’s to provide slack in the case of thermal contraction. Since things contract as they get colder if the cables didn’t have loops they would get stretched significantly every cooldown and then relaxed every warmup, which would probably degrade them.

Glad you found that comparison useful, it’s wild to me too and I use these things on a daily basis.

I’m glad you’re interested in the field, but a word of caution. Michio kaku is not well respected in the field of quantum computing, I read the first chapter of his book and it was filled with errors. I would recommend reading with a lot of skepticism, and maybe supplement with another book like quantum computing since Democritus by Scott Aaronson

@@Lukas-Lab oh I didn't know that, thank you!

No worries, I don’t like the idea of causing drama or anything but I’m starting to think I need to post a review of that book. There are some serious issues with it.

@@Lukas-Lab I don't think you are causing drama, it was really good consumer advice. I went back and read the first chapter and noticed some things as well, I also found Scott Aaronson's review of the book. This is my first book on quantum computing and the only reason I bought it was because I saw Kaku's talk at Google. Would love to see more book recommendations from you!

Thanks!

Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it

I am currently doing my PhD in quantum computing, so I work on the hardware. That said my research is focused on improving individual qubits, so I make and measure individual qubits but not larger scale quantum processors.

@@Lukas-Lab I read quantum supremacy by Michio Kaku but he did not explain what a cubit was. That I learned from you in this last video. Thanks for being so clear on your information;)

No problem, also just a word of caution, Michio kaku is not well respected in the field of quantum computing. I read the first chapters of his book and it was filled with errors. Unfortunately there is no way for the average person that doesn’t study physics to have known this. I would recommend “quantum computing since democritus” by Scott aaronson for a more trustworthy resource.

Thanks!

Thanks for the question! It depends on the type of qubit. Superconducting qubits are usually a few to several 100s of microns. Miniaturizing them is a problem that some people are thinking about, but right now the prevailing feeling in superconducting qubits seems to be that right now it’s most important to figure out how to get coherence times and gate fidelities maximized first, and then we can worry about size later.

Just realized I didn’t answer your stability question. Not necessarily more stable if bigger on chip, but people are starting to make 3d cavity resonators, which are basically superconducting metal housings that act as resonators themselves. Those often get more stable the larger they are.

@@Lukas-Lab no wait I think I’m missing something: my reasoning is that the oscillations are electromagnetic, so a bigger oscillator could handle bigger amplitudes, end therefore the noise from the environment would be less impactful (in percentage). The waves perhaps are not electromagnetic?

Bigger amplitudes means more photons because the number of photons is literally defined by the size of the EM wave, but for measuring or interacting with qubits you want to be working with single photons meaning small amplitudes. There are some technical reasons for this but basically at too high power you overwhelm the qubit/resonator system and the qubit and resonator don’t couple.

Thanks!

Thanks!

Thanks!!

I opened a can of worms with my meme comment huh 😂

Thanks so much for the support! Glad you liked it

I appreciate these engagement comments but the fell off thing was a joke 😂

Thank you for your service 🫡

18 views in 11 mins... Don't worry, all we care about is the content itself

Don’t worry we’re here, those interesting in innovative inventions

I was joking, but thanks for the support :)

😂😂😂😂😂😂

This was the most productive 5 minutes I’ve spent in a while. Great job of tying the previous videos to a tangible product. Please keep them coming.

Um, quite the opposite

Here ya go :) I Coded a Real Quantum Computer ruclips.net/video/Gl9GVLW451s/видео.html It’s also on my channel in a playlist, there’s also a part 3 where I walk through the coding step by step

lol

It uses binary in the sense that there are the states 1 and 0, but qubits can be in any superposition of those at the same time. A classical computer can only be in one state at a given time. So the state of a two qubit quantum computer could be (1/rt2)(|00>+|11>) meaning it is in both 00 and 11 at the same time, whereas the state of a two bit computer could only be either 00 or 11. Does that make any sense?

@@Lukas-Lab To my understanding because of the neutral state in unused qubit pairs, they can't be used to store data but can process data at incredible speeds and can feed said data back to regular systems. This is very interesting and I'm glad to see it happening in my life time. I'll keep watching your vids. Thanks for making them