English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

My 2018 lecture at the ICA workshop in Singapore dealt with quantumcomputation as a meeting point of the laws of computation and the laws ofquantum mechanics. We described a computational complexity argument against thefeasibility of quantum computers: we identified a very low-level complexityclass of probability distributions described by noisy intermediate-scalequantum computers, and explained why it would allow neither good-qualityquantum error-correction nor a demonstration of "quantum supremacy," namely,the ability of quantum computers to make computations that are impossible orextremely hard for classical computers. We went on to describe generalpredictions arising from the argument and proposed general laws that manifestthe failure of quantum computers.  In October 2019, "Nature" published a paper describing an experimental workthat took place at Google. The paper claims to demonstrate quantum(computational) supremacy on a 53-qubit quantum computer, thus clearlychallenging my theory. In this paper, I will explain and discuss my work in theperspective of Google's supremacy claims.

The Argument against Quantum Computers, the Quantum Laws of Nature, and Google's Supremacy Claims