Re: Quantum computer using using artificial atoms.
From: Trevor L. Jackson, III (tlj3_at_comcast.net)
Date: 02/26/05
- Next message: Randy Howard: "Re: Thou shalt have no other gods before the ANSI C standard"
- Previous message: Trevor L. Jackson, III: "Re: Quantum computer using using artificial atoms."
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Quantum computer using using artificial atoms."
- Next in thread: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Quantum computer using using artificial atoms."
- Reply: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Quantum computer using using artificial atoms."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 16:52:35 -0500
jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> Décio Luiz Gazzoni Filho wrote:
>
>>Here, James, I'll do you a favor and forward this to the sci.physics
>>newsgroup. I'm sure they'll have a word or two to say about your
>>characterization of quantum mechanics.
>>
>>Décio
>>
>
>
> Hey, go ahead. The reality is that quantum computers must implement
> ideas that can be mathematicized, and when mathematicized, they can be
> done on a gp computer.
No.
>
> So, quantum computers can already be implemented--if the math is worked
> out--on current systems which will behave like actual quantum
> computers, doing everything they can do.
No.
>
> Now I think a lot of you figure that "quantum" is some kind of magical
> thing, so the obvious escapes you, even when smart ideas like surrogate
> factoring, where actual implementations--still rough, but showing the
> potential--behave a lot like quantum computers are supposed to behave,
> come along.
No they don't. Quantum mechanics works. Your Snake Fur does not.
>
> The trouble though is that while the mainstream may reject inconvenient
> reality, like gp devices--your good 'ol computer--being programmed with
> algorithms that make them behave like quantum computers, the fringe
> will happily develop them anyway.
Be our guest. Just do your work quietly. Don't announce any more
results until you can actually deliver on the results you have already
announced.
>
> So, you see, quantum computers are already here,
No.
> and algorithms like
> those used in surrogate factoring show that they are already here,
No.
> even if imperfectly, but, you see, those algorithms can already factor more
> than 15.
So can I. On my fingers and toes.
>
> Here's an example from a recent run of my still very inefficient and
> not perfect algorithm, as it doesn't always factor, but STILL it uses
> the full set of rationals to find solutions:
[snip garbage]
/tj3
- Next message: Randy Howard: "Re: Thou shalt have no other gods before the ANSI C standard"
- Previous message: Trevor L. Jackson, III: "Re: Quantum computer using using artificial atoms."
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Quantum computer using using artificial atoms."
- Next in thread: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Quantum computer using using artificial atoms."
- Reply: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Quantum computer using using artificial atoms."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]