1 |
On Friday, April 03, 2015 5:05:35 AM wabenbau@×××××.com wrote: |
2 |
> Boricua Siempre <borikua.1978.2@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > Hello |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > I have reading of quantum computing and I want know what operating |
7 |
> > systems are use in quantum computers. And I read quantum computers |
8 |
> |
9 |
> I don't think that (yet) there exists computers that are completely |
10 |
> based on quantum components. Maybe they have a quantum based arithmetic |
11 |
> unit but the other components are certainly conventional. I don't know |
12 |
> what kind of OS is used on such machines. But I wouldn't be surprised |
13 |
> if it is some kind of BSD or Linux (maybe Gentum-OS). ;-) |
14 |
|
15 |
And there probably never will. An operating system requires deterministic |
16 |
behaviour and as I understand it (and I'm not an expert) quantum computing can |
17 |
only deal with probabilities so a quantum OS would probably crash :) |
18 |
|
19 |
What we do have is the quantum equivalent of the circuits you may do on a high |
20 |
school computer club to add a few bits. The most complex ones may run simple |
21 |
algorithms but are not much more than that as far as I know. |
22 |
|
23 |
> > can use particols moving faster than light but on other book |
24 |
> > particels faster than light make analog sonar boom that can destroy |
25 |
> > universe. Is quantum computer dangerus? Sorry if my english not good, |
26 |
> > still learning. |
27 |
> |
28 |
> I'm really not an expert on quantum physics but I don't think that a |
29 |
> quantum computer could be dangerous. :-) |
30 |
> |
31 |
> In fact, "a quantum is the minimum amount of any physical entity |
32 |
> involved in an interaction" (wikipedia). |
33 |
> |
34 |
> I could imagine that a single high energy gamma quantum (that can have |
35 |
> a energy of some MeV) could maybe destroy a flash memory cell or a DNA |
36 |
> molecule. But such high energetic photons are not used in quantum |
37 |
> computers. Quantum does there only means that they are using very small |
38 |
> entities which can be described by the theories of quantum mechanic, |
39 |
> like electron spins or quantum entangled photons. |
40 |
> |
41 |
> And of course there doesn't exist particles that are moving faster than |
42 |
> light (at least no such particle is ever be detected and AFAIK there |
43 |
> are absolutely no indications that such particles exits). You probably |
44 |
|
45 |
There is a sort of analogue to a sonic boom for light speed. It happens when a |
46 |
particle travels faster than light in a medium. No massive particle can travel |
47 |
at the speed of light in vacuum but light travels much slower through a medium |
48 |
and particles can be accelerated much faster. It happens in nuclear reactors. |
49 |
Of course it doesn't destroy the universe, it just emits a blue light known a |
50 |
Cherenkov radiation. |
51 |
|
52 |
> mean "quantum teleportation". But this has nothing to to with the |
53 |
> movement of particles. It is a phenomenon that results from the quantum |
54 |
> entanglement of e.g. two electrons and has to do with the nonlocality |
55 |
> of such phenomenons. When you measure the quantum attributes of one of |
56 |
> these two electrons you instantaneous influence the quantum attributes |
57 |
> of the other one, regardless of its distance. But if you wanna know the |
58 |
> quantum attributes of the second electron you need the information |
59 |
> about the measurement of the first one. And because you cannot transmit |
60 |
> this information faster than light you also cannot use "quantum |
61 |
> teleportation" to really transmit information faster than light. |
62 |
|
63 |
The best laymen terms explanation I've heard of this is by Murray Gell-Mann in |
64 |
The Quark and the Jaguar. The state is really determined when the particles |
65 |
are "entangled". The principle of uncertainty holds because we cannot know the |
66 |
state until we make the measurement but there's "no spooky action at a |
67 |
distance." |
68 |
|
69 |
> My English as well as my knowledge about quantum physics is not |
70 |
> sufficient to explain it better. But you can find many information about |
71 |
> the strange and also fascination aspects of quantum mechanics in the |
72 |
> internet. Just look at wikipedia. |
73 |
> |
74 |
> -- |
75 |
> Regards |
76 |
> wabe |
77 |
> |
78 |
|
79 |
-- |
80 |
Fernando Rodriguez |