Talk:Quantum tech: Difference between revisions
(Real world tech?) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Okay, so, is this currently real world tech? No. Is it eventually going to be real world tech? Yes. I was told to look at the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_technology wikipedia] article, but the sensor section is about technology being worked on, and using entanglement for cryptography is very much not something that has the bugs worked out. The one instance of genuine "quantum tech", as in, something actually made is D-wave, which [https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1400 isn't a quantum computer]. Rather it uses a specific optimization process involving some quantum behavior to get randomization instead of normal computer generated random numbers. This is not sufficient for it to be "quantum tech". Unless we also consider transistors or lasers "quantum tech", since they only work due to quantum mechanical principles. But that's highly counter intuitive based on how we use the terms. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 19:59, June 26, 2020 (UTC) | Okay, so, is this currently real world tech? No. Is it eventually going to be real world tech? Yes. I was told to look at the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_technology wikipedia] article, but the sensor section is about technology being worked on, and using entanglement for cryptography is very much not something that has the bugs worked out. The one instance of genuine "quantum tech", as in, something actually made is D-wave, which [https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1400 isn't a quantum computer]. Rather it uses a specific optimization process involving some quantum behavior to get randomization instead of normal computer generated random numbers. This is not sufficient for it to be "quantum tech". Unless we also consider transistors or lasers "quantum tech", since they only work due to quantum mechanical principles. But that's highly counter intuitive based on how we use the terms. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 19:59, June 26, 2020 (UTC) | ||
:I don't feel strongly either way, but given that we like to future-proof articles it seemed sensible to me to add [[:Category:Technology from the real world]]. -- [[User:Jack "BtR" Saxon|Saxon]] ([[User talk:Jack "BtR" Saxon|✉️]]) 20:22, June 26, 2020 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:22, 26 June 2020
Real world
Okay, so, is this currently real world tech? No. Is it eventually going to be real world tech? Yes. I was told to look at the wikipedia article, but the sensor section is about technology being worked on, and using entanglement for cryptography is very much not something that has the bugs worked out. The one instance of genuine "quantum tech", as in, something actually made is D-wave, which isn't a quantum computer. Rather it uses a specific optimization process involving some quantum behavior to get randomization instead of normal computer generated random numbers. This is not sufficient for it to be "quantum tech". Unless we also consider transistors or lasers "quantum tech", since they only work due to quantum mechanical principles. But that's highly counter intuitive based on how we use the terms. Najawin ☎ 19:59, June 26, 2020 (UTC)
- I don't feel strongly either way, but given that we like to future-proof articles it seemed sensible to me to add Category:Technology from the real world. -- Saxon (✉️) 20:22, June 26, 2020 (UTC)
