Hello guest, if you read this it means you are not registered. Click here to register in a few simple steps, you will enjoy all features of our Forum.
Rules have been updated! Here

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

[-]
Tags
entanglement researchers quantum achieve stunning chinese record

Chinese Researchers Achieve Stunning Quantum-Entanglement Record
#1
The feat could pave the way for more powerful computing, although the technology is still in its early stages

Scientists have just packed 18 qubits—the most basic units of quantum computing—into just six weirdly connected photons. That’s an unprecedented three qubits per photon, and a record for the number of qubits linked to one another via quantum entanglement.

So why is this exciting?


All the work that goes on in a conventional computer, including whatever device you’re using to read this article, relies on calculations using bits, which switch back and forth between two states (usually called “1” and “0”). Quantum computers calculate using qubits, which similarly waver between two states but behave according to the weirder rules of quantum physics. Unlike conventional bits, qubits can have indeterminate states—neither 1 nor 0, but a possibility of both—and become oddly connected or entangled, so that the behavior of one bit directly impacts the other. This, in theory, allows for all sorts of calculations that regular computers can barely pull off. (Right now, however, quantum computing is in its very early experimental stages, with researchers still testing the waters of what’s possible, as in this study.)

The achievement, according to Sydney Schreppler, a quantum physicist at the University of California, Berkeley who was not involved in the research, was likely only possible because the team at the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) managed to pack so many qubits into so few particles.

“If the goal is to make 18, the way groups… would have done that in the past is to make 18 entangled particles with one [qubit] each," she said. “It’s going to be a slow process.”

It takes “many seconds” to entangle just the six particles used in the experiment, she said—already an eternity in computer time, where a new entanglement process must begin for each calculation. And each additional particle added to the entanglement takes longer to join the party than the last, to the point that it would be completely unreasonable to build an 18-qubit entanglement, one qubit at a time.

(There are plenty of quantum experiments involving more than 18 qubits, but in those experiments, the qubits aren’t all entangled. Instead, the systems entangle just a few neighboring qubits for each calculation.)

To pack each of the six entangled particles (photons, in this case) with three qubits, the researchers took advantage of the photons’ “multiple degrees of freedom," they reported in a paper that was published June 28 in the journal Physical Review Letters and is also available on the server arXiv.

When a qubit is encoded into a particle, it’s encoded into one of the states the particle can flip back and forth between—like its polarization, or its quantum spin. Each of those is a “degree of freedom.” A typical quantum experiment involves just one degree of freedom across all the particles involved. But particles like photons have many degrees of freedom. And by coding using more than one of those at the same time—something researchers have dabbled in before, but not to this extreme, Schreppler said—a quantum system can pack a lot more information into fewer particles.

“It’s as though you took six bits in your computer, but each bit tripled in how much information it could hold,” Schreppler said, “and they can do that pretty quickly and pretty efficiently.”

The fact that the USTC researchers pulled off this experiment, she said, doesn’t mean quantum computing experiments elsewhere will start to involve many more degrees of freedom at a time. Photons are particularly useful for certain kinds of quantum operations, she said—most importantly, quantum networking, in which information is transmitted among multiple quantum computers. But other forms of qubits, like those in the superconducting circuits Schreppler works on, might not take to this kind of operation as easily.

One open question from the paper, she said, is whether all of the entangled qubits interact equally, or whether there are differences between qubit interactions on the same particle or qubit interactions across different degrees of freedom.


Down the road, the researchers wrote in the paper, this sort of experimental setup might allow for certain quantum calculations that, until now, had been discussed only theoretically and had never been put into action.

Code:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/chinese-researchers-achieve-stunning-quantum-entanglement-record
[-] The following 4 users say Thank You to tao for this post:
  • BALTAGY, highlander934jp, vidi, WALLONN7
Reply
#2
OP edited. Hiperlink removed and coded.  Guidelines

How to code links. See picture below:

[Image: Snap11.png]
Anything wrong?!
Doubt about something in the forums?!

Please push Report button or send me a PM!!! 

Guidelines

Member Ranks

How to use various forum functionalities
======================================================================================

AiOwares is a community whose existence takes place by itself, not by movements unrelated to it.

======================================================================================
[-] The following 2 users say Thank You to WALLONN7 for this post:
  • BALTAGY, vidi
Reply
#3
Great. Thank you.

But what does the following mean?:

"# 3. Links hidden behind other objects (i.e. worlds) are accepted for all urls."

Should it be "word"? And links hidden behind words are accepted. No?
Please clarify (as it seems to me that #1 and #3 are contradictory) as I may misunderstand or not understand correctly. Thank you.
[-] The following 2 users say Thank You to tao for this post:
  • BALTAGY, vidi
Reply
#4
(07-18-2018, 11:19 PM)tao Wrote: Great. Thank you.

But what does the following mean?:

"# 3. Links hidden behind other objects (i.e. worlds) are accepted for all urls."

Should it be "word"?  And links hidden behind words are accepted. No?
Please clarify (as it seems to me that #1 and #3 are contradictory) as I may misunderstand or not understand correctly.  Thank you.

Where did you find this rule ? i can't find it

The only rule for links is C. Use code link tags with url.  No direct linking allowed except for internal forum links.
[-] The following 2 users say Thank You to BALTAGY for this post:
  • vidi, WALLONN7
Reply
#5
http://aiowares.com/showthread.php?tid=139&pid=457#pid457
[-] The following 3 users say Thank You to tao for this post:
  • BALTAGY, vidi, WALLONN7
Reply
#6
(07-18-2018, 11:38 PM)tao Wrote: http://aiowares.com/showthread.php?tid=139&pid=457#pid457

That's not the rules but fixed it, thanks for pointing it out
[-] The following 2 users say Thank You to BALTAGY for this post:
  • vidi, WALLONN7
Reply
#7
(07-18-2018, 11:42 PM)BALTAGY Wrote:
(07-18-2018, 11:38 PM)tao Wrote: http://aiowares.com/showthread.php?tid=139&pid=457#pid457

That's not the rules but fixed it, thanks for pointing it out

Let's say that mona described part of the Guidelines in a more didactic way.
Anything wrong?!
Doubt about something in the forums?!

Please push Report button or send me a PM!!! 

Guidelines

Member Ranks

How to use various forum functionalities
======================================================================================

AiOwares is a community whose existence takes place by itself, not by movements unrelated to it.

======================================================================================
[-] The following 2 users say Thank You to WALLONN7 for this post:
  • BALTAGY, vidi
Reply
#8
So, when I posted the article, I was within the guidelines. ;-)

In jest: Let a member not be blamed when it's not his fault, eh. ;-)
[-] The following 1 user says Thank You to tao for this post:
  • vidi
Reply
#9
(07-18-2018, 11:57 PM)tao Wrote: So, when I posted the article, I was within the guidelines.  ;-)

In jest: Let a member not be blamed when it's not his fault, eh.  ;-)

There's no blame here 1
Reply
#10
(07-19-2018, 12:02 AM)BALTAGY Wrote:
(07-18-2018, 11:57 PM)tao Wrote: So, when I posted the article, I was within the guidelines.  ;-)

In jest: Let a member not be blamed when it's not his fault, eh.  ;-)

There's no blame here 1

Of course.  No need to reply to a post in jest.

But since you insist, let me say:  It's best to spare no effort to ensure that the guidelines are written correctly without an iota of error!  Good luck!   Heart
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)