/sci/ - Science & Math

Yes. I suggest you master mathematics, physics, computer scientist and engineering before trying to tackle quantum computing.
But really, this is actually a brainlet tier question, no memes. You're asking us to give you a comprehensive study guide to understand something this complicated? All of it. Just learn all of it.

>>9454459
Ah yes, /sci/ being as useful as ever.

>>9454461
What the fuck else do you want? You're asking for a comprehensive work on something that people go to school for and get a PhD in. You're asking us to sum up a decades worth of work and doctorate dissertations.

>>9454466
Well, first of all, since I know you're probably one of the numerous undergraduates, or worse, high schoolers on /sci/, I'm going to cut straight to the point.
You told me to master ALL OF MATHEMATICS, much of it wont apply.
The same for computer engineering.
And you didn't even mention quantum physics.
So, are you going to stop LARPing, or?

linear algebra is a good starting point

>>9454456
Some people in QC are mathematicians, they mostly study the possible quantum algorithms
Some people are material scientists, they study how to actually make quantum computers.
It's one or the other, you only need a cursory understanding of the physics if you're an algorithmicist, and vice-versa.

>>9454459
sounds like you have exactly the same amount of knowledge on quantum computing as OP and your comments in this thread are next to useless
>YOU HAVE TO MASTER EVERYTHING, QUANTUM COMPUTING REQUIRES ALL KNOWLEDGE
I'm no expert, but I think that's an exaggeration

>>9454483
Thank you, that's as concise as I wanted.

>>9454472
I'm not an undergrad in any of those. I'm just simply pointing out you're not smart enough to do quantum computing, as you don't even understand what it is. It's not one guy who got a degree in "quantum computing". It's a team of several people who got separate degrees. Such as, the team will consist of people with engineering degrees, mathematics degrees, computer science degrees, physics degrees. All of these people didn't just get their PHD and jump into quantum computing. They worked in their field for multiple years. How are you so daft to not recognize this? You want us to summarize, ALL of these works from multiple different people from multiple different field of study.
>>9454485
It wasn't an exaggeration. He asked for a comprehensive work, and as stated above that's a lot of fields.

>>9454499
>I'm not an undergrad in any of those.
And I didn't say you were, I said you were an undergraduate (or a high school graduate) in an open subject, so any STEM subject (hopefully).
>I'm just simply pointing out you're not smart enough to do quantum computing, as you don't even understand what it is.
>Not understanding something you haven't studied yet means you're unintelligent.
Ah, okay, so I guess because Witten didn't study physics, or chemistry, or any other field outside of his remit he is therefore unintelligent by this metric.
My friend, you're apparently not even intelligent enough for this conversation, let alone anything higher level.
>It's not one guy who got a degree in "quantum computing".
>It's a team of several people who got separate degrees.
Whoa, no really? It isn't like I said ANYTHING about that in my post, almost like you're implying something that isn't even inferred in the slightest.
>Such as, the team will consist of people with engineering degrees, mathematics degrees, computer science degrees, physics degrees.
That's funny, taking exactly the same fields I posted and reordering them.
I know you did this, to attempt to feign knowledge, where you have none, but I don't know if you knew this, once you go into graduate study, you specialise, so no it wouldn't just be a:
>engineering degree (this would be computer engineering, by the way, in this clause: "computer scientists and engineers" it is meant to apply to both, as in: 'computer scientists' and computer engineers', this is how I know you're copying it from my original post.)
It would be a subfield of computer engineering, applying specifically to the specialty.
>All of these people didn't just get their PHD and jump into quantum computing.
Apparently none of them have any graduate qualification, if we're going to start inferring things.

Part 1:

>>9454499
>>9454509
Part 2:

Also, the abbreviation for Doctor of Philosophy is:
>PhD, Ph.D., DPhil, or Dr. phil
Another reason I can tell you're either an undergraduate, or more likely at this point, a high schooler.
>They worked in their field for multiple years.
How many years do you think?
>How are you so daft to not recognize this?
Well, certainly less than you, considering you're still LARPing.
>You want us to summarize, ALL of these works from multiple different people from multiple different field of study.
No, work on that reading comprehension, I wanted 'you' (the community, no you, as you're retarded) to summerise enough to truly understand it, not the whole subject (everything isn't black and white).

>>9454509
>Witten didn't study physics, or chemistry
I meant:
Witten didn't study biology, or chemistry

>>9454456
For Comput[math]ing[/math]

Arithmetic
Algebra
Precalculus
Calculus
Matrix Algebra
Differential Equations
Proofs and Mathematical Reasoning
Systems and Signals / Fourier Methods
Complex Variables
Probability Theory
Linear Algebra of Finite Dimensional Vector Spaces
A taste of Tensors / Multilinear Algebra
A taste of Functional Analysis
Abstract Algebra
Information Theory
Coding Theory (Error Correcting Codes)

Freshman Physics
Undergrad Quantum (Schumacher and Westmoreland)

A taste of digital logic and computer architecture (Manga Guide)
Algorithm Design (Kleinberg)
High school level Theory of Computation (Sipser)

For Comput[math]ers[/math], you're going to need more physics and math.

>>9454456
What a pretty infographic that has zero information.

>>9454523
Thank you very much, this is what it looks like when someone isn't talking out of their arse, >>9454499, maybe you should try it sometime.
Thank you so much, anon, this is roughly what I thought I should be studying, thank you for the confirmation and the obligatory manga guide.

>>9454523
that girl has a pawn in her hair

>>9454528
I chose it for looks.

Oh and OP if you're interested in solid state physics, I can only recommend this lecture and the accompanying book.
https://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/series/oxford-solid-state-basics

Be warned, like the lecturer said in the first vid, SSP is deep. Deeper than we expect when we get into it.

>>9454532
>Ayumi is a world-class shogi (Japanese chess) player who can’t be beaten—that is, until she loses to a powerful computer called the Shooting Star. Ayumi vows to find out everything she can about her new nemesis. Lucky for her, Yuu Kano, the genius programmer behind the Shooting Star, is willing to teach her all about the inner workings of the microprocessor—the “brain” inside all computers, phones, and gadgets.

>>9454538
I'll take a look at it is certainly within my realm of interest, thank you.

You don’t need all that shit to understand quantum computing. It’s like saying you have to understand CPUs down to transistor physics to understand normal computing. You only need to know that if you want to develop quantum computers or work on very low level stuff
Just sign up for the IBM quantum computing program and try it out.

Do you think it's possible to gain good knowledge about quantum computing (software/hardware) in a bachelor of electrical engineering? I'm already getting taught about basic quantum mechanics(and optics) in my physics courses, but because it's a relatively new technology i doubt there will be more informations

I suggest you attain mastery of science fiction, because the theory of "quantum advantage" computing is exactly that.

>That last part is where the dream collides with reality. There is no general-purpose method for instantly discovering which, if any, of the “branches” of the calculation yielded the desired result. All you have at the end of the calculation is a quantum system in a superposition of thousands of states, and if you simply measure the state of that system, the probability of observing the one result that tells you something useful is vanishingly small. You might just as well have run a single classical computer on a randomly chosen input! There are ingenious things that can be done for particular problems: approaches that exploit the detailed structure of the problem to enable a quantum computer to reach a state where it has a high probability of telling you something useful (Peter Shor's algorithm for factoring numbers is the most celebrated example of that). But what the 1997 “BBBV” paper showed was that the naive idea of taking a completely general problem and expecting a quantum computer to give the answer in the same manner, and just as rapidly, as if you were dealing with as many classical computers as there are branches to the quantum calculation, is untenable. I suppose I can’t be blamed for failing to know this result five years before it was proved, but this is fatal for most of Nick’s quantum feats, which amount to him “smearing”, simultaneously trying every alternative among thousands or millions, then choosing to collapse to the branch that happened to succeed.
Sauce:
https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/51807/first-use-of-a-quantum-computer-in-science-fiction

>>9454456
i can read quantum computing papers fairly easily, but i also work as a mathematician. there's a good paper called "Quantum Computing for Non-physicists" on the Arxiv; it's a little old, but good and accessible. after that, you can buy a textbook on it and work through that.
you'll have an easier time if you have a strong grasp of linear algebra, complexity theory, and field theory.

>>9454456
i can read quantum computing papers fairly easily, but i also work as a mathematician. there's a good paper called "Quantum Computing for Non-physicists" on the Arxiv; it's a little old, but good and accessible. after that, you can buy a textbook on it and work through that.
you'll have an easier time if you have a strong grasp of linear algebra, complexity theory, and field theory.

>>9454456
i can read quantum computing papers fairly easily, but i also work as a mathematician. there's a good paper called "Quantum Computing for Non-physicists" on the Arxiv; it's a little old, but good and accessible. after that, you can buy a textbook on it and work through that.
you'll have an easier time if you have a strong grasp of linear algebra, complexity theory, and field theory.

>tfw gateway timeouts on mobile
posting has never been such a pain

>>9454483
Some people in QC are just developers that don't know shit about quantum computing lel
t. had the opportunity to work on QISKit, rejected it because of aforementioned reasons

>>9455300
What're you implying?

>>9455392
Seriously?

wtf is a quantum computer and how does it differ from a normal computer? does it does anything better or faster? is anyone actually using one or is it a theory?

>>9456971
>>wtf is a quantum computer and how does it differ from a normal computer?
quite a bit
>>does it does anything better or faster?
potentially simulating quantum systems faster than regular computers could.
>> is anyone actually using one or is it a theory?
no one has been able to build a quantum computer with sufficient qubits to do anything better than a regular computer.

All you need to know is that it won't help with playing vidya, but it has the potential to make cool stuff possible.

>>9457006
so basically, its just theoretical right now and might be complete bullshit

>>9457009
no, we have quantum computers, but the challenge is making them big and complex enough to compete with regular computers at certain tasks.

>>9457034
how does a quantum computer differ? what can it do that a regular computer cant?

>>9457293
>>how does a quantum computer differ?
quite a bit
>>what can it do that a regular computer cant?
nothing at the moment. Potentially simulating quantum systems and cracking cryptography faster than a regular computer can.