Quantum Processing: Possible or Impossible

Post Reply New Topic

D-Wave has a history of making greatly exaggerated claims about the capabilities of their devices. They even used to claim that their devices could solve NP-hard problems which is complete nonsense.

Current evidence [1] suggests that the D-Wave machine is a quantum device but is not a general purpose computer and is only capable of performing a narrow set of tasks (certain quantum annealing tasks). There is also no evidence that the "quantumness" exhibited by the D-Wave machine can be used to solve any problems more quickly than classical computers.

The D-Wave machine might have many more qubits than the small experimental quantum computers that have been built so far, but it can't solve problems like factoring (one of the main problems where quantum computers have an advantage).

1. arXiv:1304.4595

There is a whole article in march 2013 Science et Vie on D-wave and the difficulty to prove something surrounded by so many secrets that it's working.

Nasa seems to think so

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22554494

Until verified and made public it is just a story.

ruveyn

That's the thing... They have provided enough data for nasa to invest in a D-wave computer

There's clear evidence now that the D-Wave machine does not perform general-purpose quantum computations or anything close. In fact, there's not even any evidence that the D-Wave machine can do anything existing technology cannot. Rather, current results suggest the opposite.

Not being confrontational... but I have to ask... then why did nasa buy one?

That is NOT proof and it is hardly a recommendation. NASA put astronauts and test pilots aboard craft that were built by the lowest bidder and some of which blew up to smithereens.

ruveyn

There’s an extremely fast quantum computer. It’s called reality

I did not say that it was proof...

Google is also buying one...

They have to have convinced someone with some kind of results...

That's nice. Does the thing work or not? If it works, has the demonstrable practicality of the device been established by tests made by multiple parties and properly written up in -respectable- technical journals? I am raising these questions because of what happened back in 1988 with so-called "cold fusion". Ponds and Fleischer did not publish their results in a proper vetted scientific journal. The publicized their claims in the newspapers and popular press. We all know how scientifically sophisticated the journalists are, don't we? In any case there was a dust up and it turned out after a year or two the the claims for cold fusion turned out to be totally bogus.

I hope you can see where my caution and Reluctance to Believe comes from.

ruveyn

Ask me if I believe it works...

I am simply stating that they managed to impress the people enough to convince them to buy one... if it doesn't work... that is two groups that will sue them into absolute and utter destitution.

Are you kidding?

How many companies have either Google or NASA filed suit against for selling them something that didn't meet their expectations?

Google sues all the time... Patents, fraud... You think a multibillion dollar company won't hesitate to sue over a 15 million dollar piece of gar...

NASA would have sued over the challenger... if it hadn't been shown that the issues with the o-rings were known upon purchase and launched anyway...

Watch the swift reaction to lunar DUST that someone found in a film can and the lawsuit filed 40 years after the missions over a camera that they LET an astronaut take...

YES. They will sue

From what I've read, D-wave's machine is well suited for solving problems where multiple solutions exist, but the most efficient solution is sought after. It's more of a niche product according to the article.

You argument is that if they ever sued about anything, then they would sue over a piece of equipment they bought that doesn't meet expectations? The only possible grounds for that is that it doesn't do what it is represented to do. If the company promised them that it could solve a certain problem and it failed to be able to do so, then they might have grounds for a lawsuit. But if they are less than thrilled with the results would hardly give them a cause of action.

As for the lunar dust issue you mentioned, what lawsuit was filed? Who did they sue? I'm not aware that any lawsuit was filed although they might have used the threat of a lawsuit or of criminal prosecution.

And for Google, yes they have been known to file lawsuits involving patents, often in response to being sued. And there has likely been other lawsuits. But that's a very long way from filing lawsuits over a piece of equipment that they are unhappy with.

Remember that it takes more than just being unhappy with a purchase to file a lawsuit. Just what grounds do you think would be their reason for filing a lawsuit against the company?

Do you want a hint? There would have to be a contract between them for something like this to be done. If D-Wave doesn't meet their contractual obligations, then there might be a reason to file a lawsuit to enforce the terms of the contract.

Just being less than happy with the result would not be enough.