We have a very exciting

last talk coming up. Dario Gil will take us

into a quantum world. Dario is the Vice President

of Science and Solutions at IBM research, where he

leads over 1,500 engineers that are researching in technologies

and physics, math, health care, life sciences and others. And while some of

you will think, a quantum world,

that’s too far out, I’m very sure Dario

will tell us otherwise. So come up here

on stage, please. Thank you. Thank you. I was joking with

Mark that we couldn’t pick an easier topic to end

the day, on quantum computing. But I’ll try to make it

entertaining, and hopefully easy to understand. I’m going to start

with a reference to this term of beautiful ideas. And it came from hosting

a filmmaker about a year and a half ago, in the

laboratory I just showed you. At the TGA Watson Research

Center in Yorktown Heights. And he was a filmmaker

that directed this documentary called

Particle Fever, that I don’t know if you’ve had

a chance to watch, but I highly recommend it. It’s about the team

that was pursuing the discovery of

the Higgs boson, in the largest physics

experiment ever conducted. And a major

character in the film is a professor from Stanford. And at the beginning

of the film, he said something that

really captivated me. He said, “The thing that

differentiates scientists is a purely artistic ability to

discern what is a good idea, what is a beautiful idea,

what is worth spending time on, and most importantly,

what is a problem that is sufficiently interesting,

yet sufficiently difficult, that it hasn’t yet been solved,

but the time for solving it has come now.” ” So I want to tell you about

this beautiful idea, whose time for solving it has come now. And that is the possibility

to create quantum computers. If you look at how

we have created the basis of the

information revolution, and you trace it back to

other beautiful ideas, like what Shannon

taught us, to think about the world of

information abstractly. If you look at an old

punch card and DNA, we’ve come to appreciate that

both carry something in common. They carry information. And Shannon told us

that this world of bits could be decoupled from its

physical implementation. That was really interesting. But in fundamental

ways, it went too far. Leaving too much physics out. So here is two scientists that

work at IBM Research, Charlie Bennett on the right, continues

to work in our laboratory, And is an IBM fellow. And they asked the

question, at the time, of is there a fundamental

limit to how efficient number crunching can

be, computing can be? And when they asked that

question as physicists, they ended up with a

very surprising answer. And they found the

answer to be no. It turns out, that

number crunching can be thermodynamically reversible. These led to an

exploration of, what is the relationship between

physics and information? And there was a

now-famous conference that was jointly organized

between IBM research and MIT at Endicott house,

where this topic was explored in more detail. And the plenary speaker was

none other than Richard Feynman. And Feynman proposed

in that conference, that if you wanted

to simulate nature, we should build a

quantum computer. And I’m gonna explain

you what that means, and how it’s created, and the

problems that it will solve. But first I’ve got to tell you,

what is a fundamental idea? The fundamental

idea, just like we have bits in the

classical world, that can be a zero or a one. In a quantum computer,

you have qubits, which stands for quantum bits. Now, the difference

is that there can be a zero, a one, or

both at the same time. That exploits a principle

of quantum physics called superposition. And it sounds weird and

crazy, but it’s true. Now to give you this unease that

you should feel when you talk about quantum information,

and quantum computing, I’m gonna give you a

very simple example. A thought experiment that

also happens to be true. So let’s imagine that we’re

going to solve this problem. The problem involves,

you have four cards, three are identical, one is

different, one is a queen. We shuffle the cards, and

we put them face down. And the problem we’re

going to solve together, is find the queen. We’re going to be

assisted by two computers. One is a classical computer,

one is a quantum computer. So what we do, is

we turn them down, and we load them into memory. So we use four memory slots. The cards are

identical, we put zeros. The one that has a

queen, we put a one. So in our four slots, we

will have three zeros, and one is a one. We load them on

the two computers. Now we has to write a program

to find the queen, find the one. How would it be

done classically? You would go and

pick a random number, you don’t know where it is. You go look under that memory

slot, see if it’s a one, if not, you go to the next

slot, and so on, and so on. On average, it would take you

the equivalent of 2 and 1/2 turns to find it. It turns out, that with

a two-qubit quantum computer for this

problem, you can always solve it in one shot. So that uneasy feeling

that you have now, should be an explanation that

quantum computer is not just about building a

faster computer. It is building something

that is fundamentally different than a

classical computer. Now, a way to think about

it, an abstraction of it, is that a quantum

computer is always going to have a classical

computer next to it. They have to go together. So you have a classical

set of bits, right? The problem that you’re

trying to explore. And what that quantum computer’s

gonna allow you to do, is to explore these

exponential number of states. These 2 to the n, where n is a

number of qubits that you have. So now, we have relatively

small quantum computers, with few qubits. But just think of the

number, that by the time you have 50 qubits, you

have 2 to the 50 states. That’s a phenomenally

large number. But in the end, after you

explore these number of states, you go back to a

classical output. A string of zeros and

ones, that you interpret with a normal computer. So why is this interesting? And I think in this

audience, I don’t need to explain in

great detail, you know, what exponentials mean,

and why 2 to the 50 is a very large number. But it’s still, I think

it’s an interesting way to communicate

the power of this, and I like to map

it to some problems. But I like to go after

this apocryphal story that actually, IBM

used in the 1960s to explain to people the

power of exponentials. And it had to do

with the person who invented chess, that goes

to the emperor, and says, well here’s his wonderful game. And asks, what do

you want in return? And the person who

invented it says, give me a grain of

rice on the first day, for the first square,

and the second day you give me twice as much. And on the third square, third

day, you give me twice as much as the day before. And the emperor agrees

promptly that that seems quite reasonable. And after a week you

only have 127 grains. After a month,

you have more rice then you’ll eat in your

lifetime, for sure. But just by the time you get

to the end of the chessboard, you have more rice

than Mount Everest. So there are a large

number of problems in the world that have this

characteristic, that they blow up exponentially. And a dirty secret in

the world of computing is that we obviously talk

a lot about all the things that computers can solve, and

can solve a lot of things. But then, there’s

a lot of things that computers can not solve. And very interestingly, they

cannot solve it now, nor ever. And the reason is because they

have this exponential built into them. So take as an example, this

fairly simple equation. Factoring. So if I have a number,

M, that is made out of the multiplication of

two large prime numbers. And I only give you M, and

I ask you find me p and q. It turns out, that that

is phenomenally difficult to solve. There’s no other way but to

divide it sort of sequentially, by prime numbers. So in fact, it’s

so difficult, we use it as the basis

of all encryption. But, if you had a very large

universal fault-tolerant quantum computer, which

is many, many years away, you could solve that

problem in seconds, what would take billions of

years in a classical computer. That tells you something

about the power of what is going to be possible. Take chemistry, as a problem. Because it also has

this characteristic, that it blows up exponentially,

if you try to calculate it. This equation that you see

here is very interesting, because it’s predicted

to occur at the ocean floor near volcanic

sites, and famously has been hypothesized to be the

basis of the formation of life on Earth. But if you take a molecule

like iron sulfide, and you try to do relatively

simple calculations with a normal

machine, it turns out, that we’re not very accurate. And the reason is

that molecules form when electron orbitals

overlap, and the calculation of each orbital requires a

quantum mechanical calculation. So for that simple

molecule, you have on the order of 76 orbitals,

and two to the power of 76, is intractable with a classical

computer, so we can not solve it. Again, on this theme of our

assumptions that computers solve everything,

but they don’t. If you look at calculating

for example, the bond length of a simple molecule

like calcium monoflouride, we still get it off

by a factor of two, even using the largest

supercomputers in the world. To me, this has been

very interesting, this recognition of all these

problems we cannot solve. It’s also true in

optimization problems, that are the basis of

logistics and routing, and you know,

portfolio optimisation. There’s tons and tons of

problems in which at best we do approximations, but

we’re far from optimal, because a number of

possibilities is enormous. So if there’s one message I

want to be able to come across, it’s that we have these

easy problems, which is the world where

classical computers fit, and the problem it’s solved. But then there these other

hard problems, that go outside. And if you don’t

believe that p equals np, which I would say the

majority of mathematicians don’t believe that that is the

case, that those problems are hard for a reason, the only

avenue to go and tackle that, aside from approximations,

will be to the creation of quantum computers. So where are we? We believe that small

practical quantum computers are going

to be possible, and we’re building them now. It requires reinventing

the whole stack. The device is different. It’s not the

traditional transistors. As an example,

this is the device we use for that

quantum computers that we create at IBM, based

on superconducting Josephson junctions. And you’re seeing an example

of one of these device, is superconducting device. And because it’s

superconducting, you have to cool it. So this is what a small

quantum computer looks like. What you’re seeing

here is something called a dilution refrigerator. And this quantum processor

sits at the bottom of this refrigerator,

at the nice temperature of 15 millikelvin. So that is colder

than outer space, where we have to put this

quantum processor in. This is what, for example,

a 16-qubit quantum processor looks like. And you know, inside,

you see the square where the qubits are, and you

see these squiggly lines, which is these coupling

resonators that allow you to send information

uncoupled to the qubits, To send the information. This is what the

wiring looks like, into the refrigerator going

into a quantum processor. There’s these coaxial

cables, because the way you send information

to a quantum processor, is through a series of

microwave pulses, that go in, and then you’re

able to take it out. Now, if you look at pictures

of what computers were like, right, in the ’40s

and the ’50s, it’s kind of like where

we are today, right? That’s what, you know,

quantum computer, that’s the signal processing

required to actually send all those signals down

the coaxial cables, it looks like that. But we’ve also seen

this movie before, in the sense that we know

how much progress we have made from those early system. And while we don’t anticipate

that quantum computers will be on your phone, because they

require cryogenic cooling, we definitely

believe that access to quantum computers

in the cloud will be something that people

will be able to leverage, behind the scenes,

even not knowing. Because we believe that,

we created a small quantum computer last year, and we

made it available to the world. In something called the

IBM Quantum Experience. And all of you can go and log

in and have access to this. It’s available for free. It’s a 5-qubit machine. And since we launched it,

we have over 36,000 users from over 100 countries

that have been doing it. And 15 scientific

publications have gone on it, and people are learning how

to program, and to learn about this new world, and

what is being created. And you can actually

run things on this. So I was telling you about

these chemistry problems. So this is an example of

the expected theoretical calculation, and the actual

calculation, on a small quantum machine, of hydrogen.

So we’re starting to solve small problems. And what is coming in the years

ahead, in the next few years, will be machines that

no classical computer will be able to emulate. Because by the time you

have order of 50 qubits, think about that, that’s

2 to the 50 states. And no classical machine

will be able to emulate what that can do. And that is new territory. And that’s the territory

we’re all going to enter. And now is the most

interesting part, because it’ll be the path of

discovery of what we can do, and what value we can

create, on problems we couldn’t solve before. So I’ll close with

Feynman, who proposed this original idea of creating

these quantum machines. In his inimitable

style, he said, “Nature isn’t classical,

dammit, and if you want to make a

simulation of nature, you better make it

quantum mechanical, and by golly, it is a

wonderful problem, because it doesn’t look so easy.” Thank you.

quantum computing is fraud

The comments here are very funny, they are upset because they did not get a comprehensive explanation of quantum computers in a 16 minute video? Who needs years of education and research? Short you tube videos tell me all I ever need to know. I actually have three PhD's all from You Tube University, my doctoral dissertation's can be found in the comment sections. 🙂

That's a really great projection screen. What coating did you use? And what kind of projector?

Where was the deck of cards?

STILL doesn't make sense and is not understandable.

"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."

I think people that THINK they know what quantum computing is and what it can do and can be used for have quantum entangled brains. (but please do give them more money for research — they will have the problem solved any day now)

Although, EVERYONE KNOWS that you only need 42 qubits to solve any and all problems of the world so that you know the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything.

Q.E.D.

This guy looks like that one prankster dude from collegehumor

It says 999 comments..i had to do this to be 1000

See my excellent video: Quantum computing explained by taking a shit.

13:45 Hence 5G

Not only did he not explain it… He explained an idea I had back when I was 16, some 39 years ago… Basically he said there are 3 answers Yes, No and Maybe… I have come to figure out that there is more than that. Yes, No, Maybe yes, maybe no, and just down the line maybe. It will depend on your resolution of using maybe….

I knew most of this already. Where's the explanation of how a quantum computer only requires one try to find the queen?

6:28. gotcha.

This lecturer did NOT explain quantum computing but instead described it's potential. That's fine but the title is very misleading.

In fact, he explained nothing. Again, another video on quantum computing full of rubbish talk. At least explain why it is faster than a classical computer without showing the degrees of complexities. Don't waste your time listening to this video.

So, you take a deck of cards. And then wow. Very well explained.

So frustrating the he doesn't explain anything. "2 to the 50 is hard" but "quantum computer could solve it in seconds". Why? How? Or the whole card analogy held promise, with the full setup and then the punchline "quantum computers can find the queen in 1 operation." Again, what? Why? How? We just do this because we are IBM and you don't need to know any details. Card analogy was false and clickbait. As a university professor, I invest in the principled mantra of "simplify, but explain". Dario very deftly espouses the used-car salesman stereotype; promise the world, show you the ground, expect you to believe that is it. And what is the limiting factor of moving from 5 qubits to 50? My C64 can run circles over 2^5.

IBM Quantum Research: 1500 scientists doing nothing. Or everything. Just need to wait for the collapse to find out.

A difficult problem that we must solve now: How can we end poverty AND promote sustainability?

How can we make prices honest (so profits align with what is good for society and the larger environment and share natural wealth (so no one faces the prospect of not having any material sustenance).

We can charge fees to industries that put pollution, deplete resources, or disturb / destroy wildlife habitat. Sharing fee proceeds to all people will end poverty. It will embody in practice the idea that natural wealth belongs to all.

Maybe quantum computing teams would want to adopt this problem as a public service. But for a limited time, I have $1000 that I can put toward whatever team that can find the three best proposals for ending poverty AND bringing impacts on the environment into line with what most people think is acceptable.

We might look at efficiency, fairness and consistency with democratic principles as criteria, or other criteria might be suggested. If the proposal linked here is not among the three best, I hope someone can say in what sense it falls short.

Integration of human society and the environment:

http://gaiabrain.blogspot.com/2007/09/gaia-brain-integration-of-human-society.html

Quantum is overrated, D.N.A computers are better a classical computer has two states 1 and 0 .

A quantum computer 4 states ( 0,0,1,1 ) a DNA has 4 squared or 16 states. 1, 2, 3, 4 whait what ?

Artificial DNA strings have the edge on normal computer code .

A DNA computer can solve two different problems at the same time a present one correct answer no classical computer needed.

A DNA computer also eliminates calculations that do not facilitate the computation

To use the card example

The problem find the queen the premes is there are 4 cards 3 are the same one of them is a queen

This is what happens with a DNA computer ( sorry a ADNA computer)

1 calculating the four states at once

2 calculating the three states at once

3 calculating the two states at once

4 calculating the one states at once

The answer is X4 = 1

The artificial DNA strings have two parts called top cells and low cells

Top cells does half of the calculations the low cell the other half and the conditions between them called ABAS combine both calculations at the same time given the

We are trying to simulate nature just like we are being simulated. How ironic.

Only applications of the Quantum computing explained not the principle not an apt title

Shiniest forehead

I think he's Peter Sellers pretending to explain quantum computing – got nothing out of this – questions I'd like to see answered – how do you "pose the problem" to the qubits? How do you "set" them? Or do they have all possible answers to all possible questions just there? How do you run the "program"? If the quantum computer can do things in one step – why does it take 100 seconds in his example? How do you query the quantum computer? – all states are there including the answer – how do you pick it out? How do you recognize the answer as being the one you want? I guess there's software written (that sort of hides the base reality) – but how physically is it done without "observing" the quantum states and thus collapsing them. Nice if he had touched on some of these – Feynman quote on explaining "spin" "I couldn't do it. I couldn't reduce it to the freshman level. That means we don't really understand it.". try this guy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNzzGgr2mhk

At 5:55, why it takes 2,5 turns to find the Queen ?

Well, this means that an entire blockchain will be unblocked in a manner of hours if not minutes with a quantum computer. so Bitcoin and etherium and other Cryptos will stop being encrypted and "safe". I thought 5G will change things but this, this will change absolutely everything.

I didn’t believe in quantum computing before this video and I believe in it even less now… !

As always it is my theory that if you’re trying to explain something to someone, you should try it out on a class of attentive third graders and if they don’t get it, then you explaining it wrong !

是IBM公司做广告的，关键 四张牌 的 解释 跳过去了 ，浪费 人家时间 ！

This talk shows everything wrong with quantum computing explanations.

We are promised an explanation however we are not give a explanation. And this has to be the worst of what I have seen. Explains traditional computing and then simply ASSERTS that quantum computing will do it super ultra mega fast and never explains anything.

It's a train wreck of a crappy advertisement.

All I know about quantum computing is that its never explained and smells like one big scam.

I have no idea why this video was not down voted to hell at this point.

Is this Peter Sellers leading the discussion?

Worst (non-existent) explanation ever

Quantum 200 sec and classic 10,000 years.

There's part of me that watched the whole video, but at the same time there's part of me that looked at the comments before watching and didn't watch it at all. That is the essence of it. Therefore I have chosen to not watch it and so there is another me who has chosen to watch it. I feel bad for that mfer

renting quantum computer time will become a norm but later on we will develop materials that will allow us to do quantum computing at room temperature.

We just need to advance our material science a little further.

But we are getting amazing results with graphite and other synthetically arranged materials.

..Maybe you’re right maybe you’re wrong.. there is a dark side to this story. Russia are 40 years ahead in this field of quantum to administer double superposition quibits .

Teleportation Spectrum of protons of synchronised white light, at a single point of contact between two states. At this point lightspeed is halfed, this action increases multiply its intensity as to damage eyes retina! … as displayed on video from USA planes , As Russia’s /dome of light/ Expansion of light with a controlled duration .. Jacktar

Not explained at all.

Why does 3% of world wide money can solve peace yet 97% is spent on war

My way of trying to understand and explain quantum computing.

know those things that you know you dont know but you want to know. And a normal computer cant tell you or solve? Well, quantum computer can find out those answers. How? Because it's not limited to binary way of operating. It operates in 1 0 or 1and0 at the same time.

2433

We are moving rapidly toward quantum computing. How does the technology work and what does it mean for our future? Scientist Dario Gil, VP of Science and Solutions at IBM, provides clarity on this complex topic. David Morczinek gives the introduction.

oh please stop explaining 🙂

Pay no heed to the mean comments. They're just 'little people' Dari O'Gil.

Einstein: Spooky action at a distance

Me: Supernatural

What computing …

It's a secret they don't want to share.

Sigh. Another supposed explanation that doesn't explain anything; just that the quantum computer can do it. I know that two to the 50th is a big number. I also know that I can get 2^50 combinations from 50 bits of my phone's memory. I don't understand how the qubit states are (finally) set (settle?) to 1s and 0s.

Shamelessly executed commercial! Completely wasting learning people's time, by not at all explaining what was promised by the title.

Ok it's been a few years where we at with QM now?

I could not find any explanatation in this talk.

Come on, I can take 6 comparators, 4 on the first level and 2 on the second level, and I'll get the answer to the 4-card example in one operation that is subject only to the delay through the two levels. The example is contrived and usually rests on some "authority" of the presenter. What helps is the (quiet) audience of people hoping for the funding where nobody asks questions. On top of that, if the quantity of cards doubles the number of comparators also doubles and there is no hardware runaway in the classical configuration.

Note to Feynman: If you only knew how to create nature's systems with geometry you would not need to swear in frustration. RIP

Queen of spades is the bitch and ace of spades is the death card – what's not to understand?

As I understand it, and I could be wrong. Standard computers use two Constants, "0" and "1", or yes and no. Quantum computers introduce a variable "0-1", or maybe. Written as "yes" "no" "maybe" using two constants and one variable they somehow do their magic.

What he says about Rolf Landauer seems to be a wrong summary of his work. He didn't believe in the usefulness of quantum computing since it is restricted to reversible algorithms. His contribution to physics was to show that erasing information must produce heat, which would lead to the collapse of the quantum states.

Who is Google

I'm not a math major. For that matter, I didn't do well in High School with math. I considered Algebra an invitation to fail 9th grade. But it sounds to me like this system would allow anyone missing or hiding to be found. Goober-mints would love that technology.

A clueless guy leads an IBM department. Nothing new.

The title is as true as "A deck of cards explained by quantum computing". Peace

I guess for those who commented that the video did nothing to add to their understanding of Quantum Computing either had too high an expectation of what can be conveyed in a short video, a lack of intelligence or failed to pick up some of the “Gems” that were spoken on in simple language: “Number crunching can be thermo-dynamically reversible” Anyone pick up any others?

I understand finally but took me 2 weeks of research.

Qcomputer can pick out the right card because all states are entangled whereas in classical computers you have to check (compute) each state.

these idiots are being led down the DEMONIC rabbit hole. being fed a drop at a time.

A bit more. Read three at a time wow.

Electronic Ouija board.

He should do yoga. He looks really stiff.

Should have simply shown a movie of Richard Feynman lectures

Humanity does NOT NEED IT!

When you watch a video and wind up far more confused than you were going in, something is wrong.

"quantum" is just another invented bullshit term, like "gravity"….it has no meaning

?? ? Title

It's not often I down-thumb someone's well-meaning vid. But this one is a really deserving case. I doubt whether this bloke could explain how a spoon works, let alone quantum anything.

Good – so far he explained nothing about Q computers, he stated some things it can possibly be used for. His cards analogue was totally wrong, because after making an assumption the cards have 52 outcome, there were already Single Instruction Multiple Processing (SIMP) computers such as Distributed Array Processor (DAP), that could pick out the requested card in one instruction. DAP type of machines are regular computers. The secret of quantum computer power will lie in the new quantum mechanics type of algorithms.

It is exciting to know that the QCs will be accessible via cloud. I like to know more about that.

How the hell can you predict 1 out of 4 card with 1 shot? Makes absolutely no sense to me, and since there's already a 5-qubit machine why doesn't this asshole demonstrate the card thing with the cloud machine for us to see the awesome power of quantum computing in action.

True scale quantum computing does not exist today however it will but it could be years or close to never? so does one exist today "1,000 logical quantum bits around on a quantum computer, and really up to 10,000 logical quantum bits?" – research.microsoft.com -Brian LaMacchia

Shor's Algorithm

This sure must be quantum! Sounds like trav! 🙂

So, did you actually explain why the quantum computer could find that Queen in one shot or am I left with more questions?

This guy doesn't explain how to find queen in quantum way…

The amount of combinations of a deck of cards is more than the theoretical number of particles in the universe. 52! is much more than 10 to the 80.

Nope you are nitpicking and biased, I win, bye bye

If you do not understand something you can't explain it.

Waste of time!