Re: Quantum Computers

[Brent Meeker]

On 2/3/2016 2:34 PM, John Clark wrote:
A recent paper in Nature Communications gives more evidence that 
Quantum Computers might produce as big a revolution as 
Nanotechnology,  Seth Lloyd, Silvano Garnerone and Paolo Zanardi have 
found a Quantum algorithms for the topological analysis of data:


http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160125/ncomms10138/full/ncomms10138.html

Seth Lloyd, the man who found the Quantum factoring algorithm some 
years back




The one called Shor's algorithm?

Brent

says "In a topological description, basic features of the data (How 
many holes does it have? How are the different parts connected?) are 
considered the same no matter how much they are stretched, compressed, 
or distorted. It is often these fundamental topological attributes 
that are important in trying to reconstruct the underlying patterns in 
the real world


that the data are supposed to represent. It doesn’t matter what kind 
of data set is being analyzed. The topological approach of looking for 
connections and holes works whether it’s an actual physical hole, or 
the data represents a logical argument and there’s a hole in the 
argument. This will find both kinds of holes.”


But Lloyd says the topological approach is too demanding for 
conventional computers "Topological analysis represents a crucial way 
of getting at the significant features of the data, but it’s 
computationally very expensive. This is where quantum mechanics kicks 
in. The new quantum-based approach could exponentially speed up such 
calculations." Lloyd gives this example: "If you have a data set with 
300 points, a conventional approach to analyzing all the topological 
features in that system would require a computer the size of the 
universe. That is, it would take 2300 (two to the 300th power) 
processing units — approximately the number of all the particles in 
the universe. In other words, the problem is simply not solvable in 
that way. That’s where our algorithm kicks in. Solving the same 
problem with the new system, using a quantum computer, would require 
just 300 quantum bits — and a device this size may be achieved in the 
next few years. Our algorithm shows that you don’t need a big quantum 
computer to kick some serious topological butt.”


  John K Clark

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Quantum Computers

[John Clark]

You're right I'm wrong, the Quantum factoring algorithm was found by Peter
Shor.

 John K Clark

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Brent Meeker  wrote:

>
>
> On 2/3/2016 2:34 PM, John Clark wrote:
>
> A recent paper in Nature Communications gives more evidence that
> Quantum Computers might produce as big a revolution as
> Nanotechnology,  Seth Lloyd, Silvano Garnerone and Paolo Zanardi have found
> a Quantum algorithms for the topological analysis of data:
>
>
> 
> http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160125/ncomms10138/full/ncomms10138.html
>
> Seth Lloyd, the man who found the Quantum factoring algorithm some years
> back
>
>
> The one called Shor's algorithm?
>
> Brent
>
> says "In a topological description, basic features of the data (How many
> holes does it have? How are the different parts connected?) are considered
> the same no matter how much they are stretched, compressed, or distorted.
> It is often these fundamental topological attributes that are important in
> trying to reconstruct the underlying patterns in the real world
>
> that the data are supposed to represent. It doesn’t matter what kind of
> data set is being analyzed. The topological approach of looking for
> connections and holes works whether it’s an actual physical hole, or the
> data represents a logical argument and there’s a hole in the argument. This
> will find both kinds of holes.”
>
> But Lloyd says the topological approach is too demanding for conventional
> computers "Topological analysis represents a crucial way of getting at the
> significant features of the data, but it’s computationally very expensive.
> This is where quantum mechanics kicks in. The new quantum-based approach
> could exponentially speed up such calculations." Lloyd gives this example:
> "If you have a data set with 300 points, a conventional approach to
> analyzing all the topological features in that system would require a
> computer the size of the universe. That is, it would take 2300 (two to the
> 300th power) processing units — approximately the number of all the
> particles in the universe. In other words, the problem is simply not
> solvable in that way. That’s where our algorithm kicks in. Solving the same
> problem with the new system, using a quantum computer, would require just
> 300 quantum bits — and a device this size may be achieved in the next few
> years. Our algorithm shows that you don’t need a big quantum computer to
> kick some serious topological butt.”
>
>   John K Clark
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Quantum Computers

[John Clark]

A recent paper in Nature Communications gives more evidence that
Quantum Computers might produce as big a revolution as
Nanotechnology,  Seth Lloyd, Silvano Garnerone and Paolo Zanardi have found
a Quantum algorithms for the topological analysis of data:

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160125/ncomms10138/full/ncomms10138.html

Seth Lloyd, the man who found the Quantum factoring algorithm some years
back says "In a topological description, basic features of the data (How
many holes does it have? How are the different parts connected?) are
considered the same no matter how much they are stretched, compressed, or
distorted. It is often these fundamental topological attributes that are
important in trying to reconstruct the underlying patterns in the real
world

that the data are supposed to represent. It doesn’t matter what kind of
data set is being analyzed. The topological approach of looking for
connections and holes works whether it’s an actual physical hole, or the
data represents a logical argument and there’s a hole in the argument. This
will find both kinds of holes.”

But Lloyd says the topological approach is too demanding for conventional
computers "Topological analysis represents a crucial way of getting at the
significant features of the data, but it’s computationally very expensive.
This is where quantum mechanics kicks in. The new quantum-based approach
could exponentially speed up such calculations." Lloyd gives this example:
"If you have a data set with 300 points, a conventional approach to
analyzing all the topological features in that system would require a
computer the size of the universe. That is, it would take 2300 (two to the
300th power) processing units — approximately the number of all the
particles in the universe. In other words, the problem is simply not
solvable in that way. That’s where our algorithm kicks in. Solving the same
problem with the new system, using a quantum computer, would require just
300 quantum bits — and a device this size may be achieved in the next few
years. Our algorithm shows that you don’t need a big quantum computer to
kick some serious topological butt.”

  John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.