Go Down

Topic: Summit v Sycamore (Read 2328 times) previous topic - next topic

ardly

Summit     - 10,000 years ( estimate :) )
Sycamore - 3 minutes 20 seconds

The end of the beginning?
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored" - Aldous Huxley

TheMemberFormerlyKnownAsAWOL

Or three days, depending on which report you read/believe.
Please don't PM technical questions - post them on the forum, then everyone benefits/suffers equally

CrossRoads

How about some context?
Designing & building electrical circuits for over 25 years.  Screw Shield for Mega/Due/Uno,  Bobuino with ATMega1284P, & other '328P & '1284P creations & offerings at  my website.

ardly

How about some context?
Summit is the presently the world's fastest conventional computer.
Sycamore is a 54 qubit quantum computer Google is working on with NASA.

A report appeared briefly on a NASA website saying that Sycamore, with only 53 qubits working, had solved in minutes a problem that it was estimated would take Summit millennia to complete.

The report disappeared.
IBM dispute what has been done.

No doubt there is still a long way to go but perhaps we will see something really big in our lifetimes?
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored" - Aldous Huxley

Robin2

No doubt there is still a long way to go but perhaps we will see something really big in our lifetimes?
There is the law of unintended consequences. Maybe mankind would be better off without this technology.

I'm sure the guy who conceived of the concept of atomic fission did not envisage wiping out Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

...R
Two or three hours spent thinking and reading documentation solves most programming problems.

Delta_G

I'm sure the guy who conceived of the concept of atomic fission did not envisage wiping out Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Enrico Fermi actually worked very hard to create that bomb.  Then he spent the rest of his life trying to take it back. 
|| | ||| | || | ||  ~Woodstock

Please do not PM with technical questions or comments.  Keep Arduino stuff out on the boards where it belongs.

Robin2

Enrico Fermi actually worked very hard to create that bomb. 
My history is weak, but I thought the idea of fission had emerged before Fermi?

...R
Two or three hours spent thinking and reading documentation solves most programming problems.

Delta_G

#7
Oct 31, 2019, 10:59 pm Last Edit: Oct 31, 2019, 11:02 pm by Delta_G
My history is weak, but I thought the idea of fission had emerged before Fermi?

...R
Oh ok, yeah I don't know if he dreamed up the original idea or not, but he was certainly the one who made it go. 

Here's something from IAEA that I've not finished reading yet but looks cool and informative. 

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/pioneering-nuclear-science-discovery-nuclear-fission



EDIT:  And it would seem that they also fought hard against the bomb:

Quote
The discovery later earned Otto Hahn the 1944 Nobel Prize for Chemistry. Arguably as important as any award or prize, was Hahn's, Meitner's and Strassman's staunch refusal to be involved in the development of nuclear weapons, which their discovery had made possible. They also declared their fierce opposition to the use of nuclear technologies for military purposes. Many technological advances, from computing to flight to dynamite have been used to enable more deadly, more destructive weapons, but the discoverers of nuclear fission were adamant that their finding had its great potential in its peaceful applications.
|| | ||| | || | ||  ~Woodstock

Please do not PM with technical questions or comments.  Keep Arduino stuff out on the boards where it belongs.

Delta_G

Though I look at Chernobyl and Fukushima and wonder if even the peaceful applications are worth it. 
|| | ||| | || | ||  ~Woodstock

Please do not PM with technical questions or comments.  Keep Arduino stuff out on the boards where it belongs.

Robin2

Oh ok, yeah I don't know if he dreamed up the original idea or not, but he was certainly the one who made it go. 
That seems to me equivalent to the difference between the guy who said "oh my gosh, quantum computing might be possible" and the guys that decided to make it work.

I come back to a comment I made in this Forum long ago. I don't believe humans are any happier at the end of 2019 than they were at the end of 1319. And I don't think they will be any happier at the end of 2039 - even assuming there have not been 3 wars before then.

...R
Two or three hours spent thinking and reading documentation solves most programming problems.

TheMemberFormerlyKnownAsAWOL

#10
Nov 01, 2019, 09:28 am Last Edit: Nov 01, 2019, 09:28 am by TheMemberFormerlyKnownAsAWOL
But in 1319, people still had the Black Death to look forward to.
Please don't PM technical questions - post them on the forum, then everyone benefits/suffers equally

Robin2

#11
Nov 01, 2019, 12:37 pm Last Edit: Nov 01, 2019, 12:45 pm by Robin2
But in 1319, people still had the Black Death to look forward to.
They didn't know it was coming so they didn't care. Just like we pretend we don't know what is coming and rush headlong into a climate crisis.

Quantum computing may be wonderfully interesting for the people involved (as, no doubt, was the development of the A-bomb). But it won't make one whit of improvement to human happiness. On the other hand it could turn out to be very destructive - perhaps by putting everyone under the minute control of some dictator.

...R



Two or three hours spent thinking and reading documentation solves most programming problems.

ardly

... I don't believe humans are any happier at the end of 2019 than they were at the end of 1319. And I don't think they will be any happier at the end of 2039 - even assuming there have not been 3 wars before then.

...R
There are a lot more people alive now than in 1319 and think the overall level of happiness is greater today. Back in 1319 life must have been pretty much a short, hand to mouth, drudge of an existence.

There are some challenges on the horizon before 2039, notably climate change and disease. For the most part wars are a minor issue.

At present AI is not intellegent at all. Even so it is beating humans at tasks in specific domains and the sucess of IBM's Watson at playing Jeopardy showed progress in general knowledge.

Quantum computing may be a real game changer.
Does anybody know how it works from a computing point of view?
I know quibits can be both one and zero at the same time, but that does not really mean anything to me.
How on earth would a write a program to run on a quantum computer?
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored" - Aldous Huxley

Robin2

There are a lot more people alive now than in 1319 and think the overall level of happiness is greater today. Back in 1319 life must have been pretty much a short, hand to mouth, drudge of an existence.
Even so, I believe people were happy or unhappy to the same extent as nowadays.

Quote
There are some challenges on the horizon before 2039, notably climate change and disease. For the most part wars are a minor issue.
It is climate change that will be the cause of the war. Read Jared Diamond's "Collapse" - it happened before on smaller scales.

...R
Two or three hours spent thinking and reading documentation solves most programming problems.

Delta_G

Quote
Back in 1319 life must have been pretty much a short, hand to mouth, drudge of an existence.
How is that different from today? 

Back then you worked your ass off to grow some crops and give part to the king.  Today you work your ass off for some pieces of paper and then give some of that to the government. 

At least you could live directly from what you made then.  Today you work your ass off and get the paper and then the paper gets devalued and it doesn't even buy something to eat. 
|| | ||| | || | ||  ~Woodstock

Please do not PM with technical questions or comments.  Keep Arduino stuff out on the boards where it belongs.

Go Up