The word
“quantum” gained currency in the late 20th century as a descriptor signifying
something so significant, it defied the use of common adjectives. For example,
a “quantum leap” is a dramatic advancement (also an early ’90’s television
series starring Scott Bakula).
At best,
that is an imprecise (though entertaining) definition. When “quantum” is
applied to “computing,” however, we are indeed entering an era of dramatic
advancement.
Quantum
computing is technology based on the principles of quantum theory, which
explains the nature of energy and matter on the atomic and subatomic level. It
relies on the existence of mind-bending quantum-mechanical phenomena, such as superposition
and entanglement.
Erwin
Schrödinger’s famous 1930’s thought experiment involving a cat that was both
dead and alive at the same time was intended to highlight the apparent
absurdity of superposition, the principle that quantum systems can exist in
multiple states simultaneously until observed or measured. Today quantum
computers contain dozens of qubits (quantum bits), which take advantage of that
very principle. Each qubit exists in a superposition of zero and one (i.e., has
non-zero probabilities to be a zero or a one) until measured. The development
of qubits has implications for dealing with massive amounts of data and
achieving previously unattainable level of computing efficiency that are the
tantalizing potential of quantum computing.
While
Schrödinger was thinking about zombie cats, Albert Einstein was observing what
he described as “spooky action at a distance,” particles that seemed to be
communicating faster than the speed of light. What he was seeing were entangled
electrons in action. Entanglement refers to the observation that the state of
particles from the same quantum system cannot be described independently of
each other. Even when they are separated by great distances, they are still
part of the same system. If you measure one particle, the rest seem to know
instantly. The current record distance for measuring entangled particles is
1,200 kilometers or about 745.6 miles. Entanglement means that the whole
quantum system is greater than the sum of its parts.
If these
phenomena make you vaguely uncomfortable so far, perhaps I can assuage that
feeling simply by quoting Schrödinger, who purportedly said after his
development of quantum theory, “I don’t like it, and I’m sorry I ever had
anything to do with it.”
Various
parties are taking different approaches to quantum computing, so a single
explanation of how it works would be subjective. But one principle may help
readers get their arms around the difference between classical computing and
quantum computing. Classical computers are binary. That is, they depend on the
fact that every bit can exist only in one of two states, either 0 or 1.
Schrödinger’s cat merely illustrated that subatomic particles could exhibit
innumerable states at the same time. If you envision a sphere, a binary state
would be if the “north pole,” say, was 0, and the south pole was 1. In a qubit,
the entire sphere can hold innumerable other states and relating those states
between qubits enables certain correlations that make quantum computing
well-suited for a variety of specific tasks that classical computing cannot
accomplish. Creating qubits and maintaining their existence long enough to
accomplish quantum computing tasks is an ongoing challenge.
IBM
researcher Jerry Chow in the quantum computing lab at IBM’s T.J. Watson
Research Center.
Humanizing
Quantum Computing
These are
just the beginnings of the strange world of quantum mechanics. Personally, I’m
enthralled by quantum computing. It fascinates me on many levels, from its
technical arcana to its potential applications that could benefit humanity. But
a qubit’s worth of witty obfuscation on how quantum computing works will have
to suffice for now. Let’s move on to how it will help us create a better world.
Quantum
computing’s purpose is to aid and extend the abilities of classical computing.
Quantum computers will perform certain tasks much more efficiently than
classical computers, providing us with a new tool for specific applications.
Quantum computers will not replace their classical counterparts. In fact,
quantum computers require classical computer to support their specialized
abilities, such as systems optimization.
Quantum
computers will be useful in advancing solutions to challenges in diverse fields
such as energy, finance, healthcare, aerospace, among others. Their
capabilities will help us cure diseases, improve global financial markets,
detangle traffic, combat climate change, and more. For instance, quantum
computing has the potential to speed up pharmaceutical discovery and
development, and to improve the accuracy of the atmospheric models used to
track and explain climate change and its adverse effects.
I call this
“humanizing” quantum computing, because such a powerful new technology should
be used to benefit humanity, or we’re missing the boat.
Intel’s
17-qubit superconducting test chip for quantum computing has unique features
for improved connectivity and better electrical and thermo-mechanical
performance. (Credit: Intel Corporation)
An Uptick in
Investments, Patents, Startups, and more
That’s my
inner evangelist speaking. In factual terms, the latest verifiable, global
figures for investment and patent applications reflect an uptick in both areas,
a trend that’s likely to continue. Going into 2015, non-classified national
investments in quantum computing reflected an aggregate global spend of about
$1.75 billion USD,according to The Economist. The European Union led with $643
million. The U.S. was the top individual nation with $421 million invested,
followed by China ($257 million), Germany ($140 million), Britain ($123
million) and Canada ($117 million). Twenty countries have invested at least $10
million in quantum computing research.
At the same
time, according to a patent search enabled by Thomson Innovation, the U.S. led
in quantum computing-related patent applications with 295, followed by Canada
(79), Japan (78), Great Britain (36), and China (29). The number of patent
families related to quantum computing was projected to increase 430 percent by
the end of 2017
The upshot
is that nations, giant tech firms, universities, and start-ups are exploring
quantum computing and its range of potential applications. Some parties (e.g.,
nation states) are pursuing quantum computing for security and competitive
reasons. It’s been said that quantum computers will break current encryption
schemes, kill blockchain, and serve other dark purposes.
I reject
that proprietary, cutthroat approach. It’s clear to me that quantum computing
can serve the greater good through an open-source, collaborative research and
development approach that I believe will prevail once wider access to this
technology is available. I’m confident crowd-sourcing quantum computing
applications for the greater good will win.
If you want
to get involved, check out the free tools that the household-name computing
giants such as IBM and Google have made available, as well as the open-source
offerings out there from giants and start-ups alike. Actual time on a quantum
computer is available today, and access opportunities will only expand.
In keeping
with my view that proprietary solutions will succumb to open-source,
collaborative R&D and universal quantum computing value propositions, allow
me to point out that several dozen start-ups in North America alone have jumped
into the QC ecosystem along with governments and academia. Names such as
Rigetti Computing, D-Wave Systems, 1Qbit Information Technologies, Inc.,
Quantum Circuits, Inc., QC Ware, Zapata Computing, Inc. may become well-known
or they may become subsumed by bigger players, their burn rate – anything is
possible in this nascent field.
Developing
Quantum Computing Standards
Another way to get involved is to join the
effort to develop quantum computing-related standards. Technical standards
ultimately speed the development of a technology, introduce economies of scale,
and grow markets. Quantum computer hardware and software development will
benefit from a common nomenclature, for instance, and agreed-upon metrics to
measure results.
Currently,
the IEEE Standards Association Quantum Computing Working Group is developing
two standards. One is for quantum computing definitions and nomenclature so we
can all speak the same language. The other addresses performance metrics and
performance benchmarking to enable measurement of quantum computers’
performance against classical computers and, ultimately, each other.
The need for
additional standards will become clear over time.
Comments