Mediaboss Marketing

How can one predict a materials behavior on the molecular and atomic levels, at the shortest timescales? Whats the best way to design materials to make use of their quantum properties for electronics and information science?

These broad, difficult questions are the type of inquiries that UC Santa Barbara theorist Vojtech Vlcek and his lab will investigate as part of a select group of scientists chosen by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to develop new operating frameworks for some of the worlds most powerful computers. Vlcek will be leading one of five DOE-funded projects to the tune of $28 million overall that will focus on computational methods, algorithms and software to further chemical and materials research, specifically for simulating quantum phenomena and chemical reactions.

Its really exciting, said Vlcek, an assistant professor in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, and one of, if not the youngest researcher to lead such a major endeavor. We believe we will be for the first time able to not only really describe realistic systems, but also provide this whole framework for ultrafast and driven phenomena that will actually set the scene for future developments.

I congratulate Vojtech Vlcek on being selected for this prestigious grant, said Pierre Wiltzius, dean of mathematical, physical and life sciences at UC Santa Barbara. Its especially impressive and unusual for an assistant professor to lead this type of complex, multi-institution research project. Vojtech is in a league if his own, and I look forward to future insights that will come from the teams discoveries.

A Multilayer FrameworkAs part of the DOEs efforts toward clean energy technologies, scientists across the nation study matter and energy at their most fundamental levels. The goal is to design and discover new materials and processes that can generate, manipulate and store energy techniques that have applications in a wide variety of areas, including energy, environment and national security.

Uncovering these potentially beneficial phenomena and connecting them to the atoms they come from is hard work work that could be assisted with the use of the supercomputers that are housed in the DOEs national laboratories.

DOEs national labs are home to some of the worlds fastest supercomputers, and with more advanced software programs we can fully harness the power of these supercomputers to make breakthrough discoveries and solve the worlds hardest to crack problems, said U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer M. Granholm. These investments will help sustain U.S. leadership in science, accelerate basic energy and advance solutions to the nations clean energy priorities.

Among these hard-to-crack problems is the issue of many interacting particles. Interactions are more easily predicted in a system of a few atoms or molecules, or in very regular, periodic systems. But add more bodies or use more elaborate systems and the complexity skyrockets because the characteristics and behaviors of and interactions between every particle have to be accounted for. In some cases, their collective behaviors can produce interesting phenomena that cant be predicted from the behavior of individual particles.

People have been working with small molecules, or characterizing perfectly periodic systems, or looking at just a few atoms, Vlcek said, and more or less extending their dynamics to try to approximate the behaviors of larger, more complex systems.

This is not necessarily realistic, he continued. We want to simulate surfaces. We want to simulate systems that have large-scale periodicity. And in these cases you need to consider systems that are not on nanometer scales, but on the scale of thousands of atoms.

Add to that complexity non-equilibrium processes, which are the focus of Vlceks particular project. He will be leading an effort that involves an additional seven co-principal investigators from UC Berkeley, UCLA, Rutgers University, University of Michigan and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Essentially these systems are driven by some strong external stimuli, like from lasers or other driving fields, he said. These processes are relevant for many applications, such as electronics and quantum information sciences.

The goal, according to Vlcek, is to develop algorithms and software based on a multilayer framework with successive layers of embedding theories to capture non-equilibrium dynamics. The team, in partnership with two DOE-supported Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing (SciDAC) Institutes at Lawrence Berkeley and Argonne National Laboratories, begins with the most fundamental assumptions of quantum theory. That foundation is followed by layers that incorporate novel numerical techniques and neural network approaches to take advantage of the intensive computing the supercomputers can perform.

We still stay with the first principles approach, but were making successive levels of approximations, Vlcek explained. And with this approach well be able to treat extremely large systems. Among the many advantages of the methodology will be the ability for the first time to describe experimental systems in real-time, as they are driven by external forces.

The outcome of the project will be bigger than the sum of its parts, said Vlcek. Not only will it provide a method of studying and designing a wide variety of present and future novel materials, the algorithms are also meant for future supercomputers.

One interesting outcome will be that we will also try to connect to future computational platforms, which could possibly be quantum computers, he said. So this framework will actually allow future research on present and future novel materials as well as new theoretical research.

Go here to see the original:
Many Bodies, Many Possibilities | The UCSB Current - The UCSB Current

Srivatsan Chakram

The Superconducting Quantum Materials and Systems Center hosted by Fermilab is proud to announce the addition of a new contributing partner: Rutgers University-New Brunswick.

The SQMS Center was established in September 2020 as a National Quantum Information Science Research Center. It comprises a diverse group of collaborators from a variety of disciplines and backgrounds.

Following its inception, SQMS established a rigorous process to onboard new partner institutions into the collaboration. Rutgers-New Brunswick joins 19 other collaborating institutions, representing federal labs, academia and industry. To date, more than 275 members both national and international conduct center research activities.

Rutgers is extremely excited by this opportunity to collaborate with the efforts of SQMS. Quantum information science is a high-priority area for the university, said Robert Bartynski, chair of the department of physics and astronomy at Rutgers-New Brunswick.

Srivatsan Chakram, an assistant professor in the department of physics and astronomy at Rutgers-New Brunswick, will serve as one of the principal investigators in the SQMS technology thrust, specifically in the devices and materials focus areas. Having Professor Chakram as a principal investigator forms a natural bridge between the complementary expertise present at both organizations, said Bartynski.

Rutgers brings world-class expertise in the 3D superconducting quantum systems, said Alexander Romanenko, Fermilab chief technology officer and SQMS technology thrust leader. Professor Chakram is one of the world experts on the 3D superconducting qubit architecture and specifically on cavity-based quantum processors, where he performed some recent pioneering work.

A primary focus of the SQMS Center is the extension of the lifetime of qubits, the foundational element of quantum computing. Extending the lifetime, or coherence time, of qubits increases the amount of time that they can exist in a quantum state and hold quantum information.

Its great to be part of this collaboration, which I think will be very fruitful, said Chakram. Fermilab makes the best cavities in the world. The best cavities I have made can store single microwave photons for a few milliseconds. The cavities made at Fermilab have lifetimes approaching a second. Leveraging the extraordinary coherence of the Fermilab cavities should allow us to build better quantum processors. I have some expertise with designing and buildingthese kinds of systems, so I think this collaboration will be mutually beneficial.

The addition of new collaborators requires review from the centers leadership and must be approved by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy. New partners can be added to increase technical capabilities and strengthen the SQMS Center. The addition of a new partner often meets a specific need.

The strength of SQMS is that it brings world experts in quantum information science together as one collaboration, said SQMS Director Anna Grassellino of Fermilab. Professor Chakram is one such expert, and we are thrilled to welcome him to the SQMS Center.

The Superconducting Quantum Materials and Systems Center at Fermilab is supported by the DOE Office of Science.

Fermilab is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy. The Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States and is working to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For more information, visit science.energy.gov.

Follow this link:
SQMS Center announces the addition of Rutgers University-New Brunswick to its growing collaboration - Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

Central New York Congressmember Claudia Tenney hosted fellow representative John Katko Monday in Rome to give him an overview of the high-tech research and development begin done to thwart cyber attacks and other threats. Katko is the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, and says the work being done at the Air Force Research Lab, or Rome Lab, is remarkable and imperative for the defense of the nation.

"There's a rush to see who gets better with quantum computing, us or China. If China [beats] us, our encryption data is for nothing. So many things they're working on that impact us in every single way."

Rep. Tenney investments at the operations at Griffiss Business and Technology Park are saving lives.

"Our ability to really act with an asymmetrical battlefield that we have now with the Chinese, Russians, and Iran...there are so many enemies out there. This is where we're going, and it's happening here. Which is what's so exciting about it."

Oneida County Executive Anthony Picente says it's important not only for national security, but also for the region's economy, brain trust, and livelihood.

"What is taking place here is not taking place anywhere in the country. Now, someone might say yes it is. Not to the extent that it is, not to the diversity that it is, in terms of all the aspects of cybersecurity, quantum computing, all aspects of technology that have been developed and continue to be developed on a regular basis."

Tenney says their visit is their way to ensure accountability for the funds they secure in Congress.

"We're the ones who have advocated for it, and when we come here and see how the money is being spent and hear about it, I think it means a lot."

Rome Mayor Jackie Izzo says they're questioned about the reason they send funding requests.

"We wanted you to come what your plus-ups are doing in facilities like these. We wanted you to meet the super-talented people that we have working here that cannot be replicated. You can't just pick up our lab and think you're going to take all that talent and just move it somewhere else."

Rep. Tenney also announced the addition of 100 jobs at Defense Finance and Accounting Services, or DFAS since April. That brings their total workforce to more than 1,000. She says theyre working every day in Congress with Senators Schumer and Gillibrand to ensure funding for all of the operations at Griffiss Business and Technology Park dont get cut.

Go here to read the rest:
Congressmembers Tenney, Katko Tour Griffiss High-Tech Facilities In Rome And Discuss Their Role In Combatting Threats - WAER

The trial successfully demonstrated, according to Verizon, that it is possible to replace current security processes with protocols that are quantum-proof.

To protect our private communications from future attacks by quantum computers, Verizon is trialing the use of next-generation cryptography keys to protect the virtual private networks (VPNs) that are used every day by companies around the world to prevent hacking.

Verizon implemented what it describes as a "quantum-safe" VPN between one of the company's labs in London in the UK and a US-based center in Ashburn, Virginia, using encryption keys that were generated thanks to post-quantum cryptography methods meaning that they are robust enough to withstand attacks from a quantum computer.

According to Verizon, the trial successfully demonstrated that it is possible to replace current security processes with protocols that are quantum-proof.

VPNs are a common security tool used to protect connections made over the internet, by creating a private network from a public internet connection. When a user browses the web with a VPN, all of their data is redirected through a specifically configured remote server run by the VPN host, which acts as a filter that encrypts the information.

This means that the user's IP address and any of their online activities, from sending emails to paying bills, come out as gibberish to potential hackers even on insecure networks like public WiFi, where eavesdropping is much easier.

Especially in the last few months, which have seen many employees switching to full-time working from home,VPNs have become an increasingly popular tool to ensure privacy and security on the internet.

The technology, however, is based on cryptography protocols that are not un-hackable. To encrypt data, VPN hosts use encryption keys that are generated by well-established algorithms such as RSA (RivestShamirAdleman). The difficulty of cracking the key, and therefore of reading the data, is directly linked to the algorithm's ability to create as complicated a key as possible.

In other words, encryption protocols as we know them are essentially a huge math problem for hackers to solve. With existing computers, cracking the equation is extremely difficult, which is why VPNs, for now, are still a secure solution. But quantum computers are expected to bring about huge amounts of extra computing power and with that, the ability to hack any cryptography key in minutes.

"A lot of secure communications rely on algorithms which have been very successful in offering secure cryptography keys for decades," Venkata Josyula, the director of technology at Verizon, tells ZDNet. "But there is enough research out there saying that these can be broken when there is a quantum computer available at a certain capacity. When that is available, you want to be protecting your entire VPN infrastructure."

One approach that researchers are working on consists ofdeveloping algorithms that can generate keys that are too difficult to hack, even with a quantum computer. This area of research is known as post-quantum cryptography, and is particularly sought after by governments around the world.

In the US, for example, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) launched a global research effort in 2016 calling on researchers to submit ideas for algorithms that would be less susceptible to a quantum attack. A few months ago, the organization selected a group of 15 algorithms that showed the most promise.

"NIST is leading a standardization process, but we didn't want to wait for that to be complete because getting cryptography to change across the globe is a pretty daunting task," says Josyula. "It could take 10 or even 20 years, so we wanted to get into this early to figure out the implications."

Verizon has significant amounts of VPN infrastructure and the company sells VPN products, which is why the team started investigating how to start enabling post-quantum cryptography right now and in existing services, Josyula adds.

One of the 15 algorithms identified by NIST, called Saber, was selected for the test. Saber generated quantum-safe cryptography keys that were delivered to the endpoints in London and Ashburn of a typical IPsec VPN through an extra layer of infrastructure, which was provided by a third-party vendor.

Whether Saber makes it to the final rounds of NIST's standardization process, in this case, doesn't matter, explains Josyula. "We tried Saber here, but we will be trying others. We are able to switch from one algorithm to the other. We want to have that flexibility, to be able to adapt in line with the process of standardization."

In other words, Verizon's test has shown that it is possible to implement post-quantum cryptography candidates on infrastructure links now, with the ability to migrate as needed between different candidates for quantum-proof algorithms.

This is important because, although a large-scale quantum computer could be more than a decade away, there is still a chance that the data that is currently encrypted with existing cryptography protocols is at risk.

The threat is known as "harvest now, decrypt later" and refers to the possibility that hackers could collect huge amounts of encrypted data and sit on it while they wait for a quantum computer to come along that could read all the information.

"If it's your Amazon shopping cart, you may not care if someone gets to see it in ten years," says Josyula. "But you can extend this to your bank account, personal number, and all the way to government secrets. It's about how far into the future you see value for the data that you own and some of these have very long lifetimes."

For this type of data, it is important to start thinking about long-term security now, which includes the risk posed by quantum computers.

A quantum-safe VPN could be a good start even though, as Josyula explains, many elements still need to be smoothed out. For example, Verizon still relied on standard mechanisms in its trial to deliver quantum-proof keys to the VPN end-points. This might be a sticking point, if it turns out that this phase of the process is not invulnerable to quantum attack.

The idea, however, is to take proactive steps to prepare, instead of waiting for the worst-case scenario to happen. Connecting London to Ashburn was a first step, and Verizon is now looking at extending its quantum-safe VPN to other locations.

Read the original here:
Quantum computers could read all your encrypted data. This 'quantum-safe' VPN aims to stop that - ZDNet

It is almost impossible to overstate what a quantum computer will be able to do, Christopher Monroe told the Magazine in a recent interview.

Monroe a professor at both the University of Maryland and Duke University, as well as co-founder of the quantum computing company IonQ discussed how quantum computing will change the face of the planet, even if this might take some more time.

The Magazine also interviewed four other experts in the quantum field and visited seven of their labs at the University of Maryland.

cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });

These labs the full likes of which do not yet exist in Israel hosted all kinds of qubits (the basis of quantum computers), lasers blasting targets to cause plasma to come off to form distinctive films, infrared lasers, furnaces reaching 2,000C, a tetra arc furnace for growing silicon crystals, special dilution refrigerators to achieve cryostorage (deep freezing) and a variety of vacuum chambers that would seem like an alternate reality to the uninitiated.

Before entering each lab, there needed to be a conversation about whether this reporter should be wearing the special goggles that were handed out to avoid getting blinded.

One top quantum official at Maryland, Prof. Dr. Johnpierre Paglione, assured the Magazine that the ultrahazardous materials warning on many of the lab doors was not a concern at that moment.

From cracking the Internet as we know it, to military and economic dominance, to changing the way people manage their lives, quantum computers are predicted to make mincemeat of todays supercomputers. Put simply, they are made out of and operate from a completely different kind of material and set of principles connected to qubits and quantum mechanics, with computing potential that dwarfs classical computers capabilities.

But lets say the US wins the race who in the US would win it? Would it be giants like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM and Honeywell? Or might it be a lean and fast solely quantum-focused challenger like Monroes IonQ?

At first glance, Google has no real challenger. In 2019, Google said it achieved quantum supremacy when its quantum computer became the first to perform a calculation that would be practically impossible for a classical machine, by checking the outputs from a quantum random-number generator.

The search-engine giant has already built a 54-qubit computer whereas IonQs largest quantum computer only has 32 qubits. Google has also promised to achieve the holy grail of quantum computing, a system large enough to revolutionize the Internet, military and economic issues, by 2029. Although China recently reproduced Googles experiment, Google is still regarded as ahead of the game.

Why is a 32-qubit quantum computer better than a 54-qubit one?

So why is Monroe so confident that his company will finish the race long before Google?

First, he takes a shot at the Google 2019 experiment.

It was a fairly academic exercise. The problem they attacked was one of those rare problems where you can prove something and you can prove the super computer cannot do it. Quantum mechanics works. It is not a surprise. The problem Google tackled was utterly useless. The system was not flexible enough to program to hit other problems. So a big company did a big academic demonstration, he said with a sort of whoop-dee-do tone and expression on his face.

Google had to repeat its experiment millions of times The signal went down by orders of magnitude. There are special issues to get the data. There are general problems where it cannot maintain [coherence]. The Google experiment and qubits decayed by seven times the constant. We gauge on one time for the constant and we can do 100 operations, with IonQs quantum computers.

In radioactive decay, the time constant is related to the decay constant and essentially represents the average lifetime of a decaying system, such as an atom. Some of the tactics for potentially overcoming decay go back to the lasers, vacuum chambers and cryostorage refrigerators mentioned above.

Monroe said from a business perspective, the experiment was a big distraction, and you will hear this from Google computer employees. They had to run simulations to prove how hard it would be to do what they were doing with old computers instead of building better quantum computers and solving useful algorithms.

We believe quantum computers work now it is time to build them, he stressed.

Describing IonQs quantum computers, Monroe said, The 32-qubit computer is fifth generation. The third and fourth generation is available to [clients of] Microsoft, Amazon and Google Cloud. It is 11 qubits, which is admittedly small, but it still runs more than any IBM machine can run. An 11-qubit computer is very clean operationally. It can run 100 or so ops [operations] before the laser noise causes coherence to be lost [before the qubits stop working]. That is many more ops [operations] than superconductors. If [a computer] has one million qubits, but can only run a few ops [operations], it is boring. But trapped ions adding more qubits at the same time makes things cheaper.

He added, The 32-qubit computer is not yet on the cloud. We are working in private with customers financials, noting that a future publication will discuss the baby version of an algorithm which could be very interesting when you start to scale it up. Maybe in the next generation, we can engineer it to solve an optimization problem something we dont get from the cloud, where we dont get any telemetry, which would be an unusual benefit for clients.

According to Monroe, that he will be able to build a 1,000-qubit computer by 2025 practically tomorrow in the sphere of new inventions will in and of itself be game-changing. This is true even if it is not yet capable of accomplishing all the extreme miracles that much larger quantum computers may someday accomplish.

A major innovation or risk (depending on your worldview) by Monroe is how he treats the paramount challenge of quantum computers and error correction basically the idea that for quantum computers to work, some process must be conceived to prevent qubits from decaying at the rate they currently decay at otherwise crucial calculations get interrupted mid-calculation.

Here, Monroe critiques both the Google approach and responds to criticism from some of his academic colleagues about his approach to error correction. Google is trying to get to one million qubits that do not work well together.

In contrast, a special encoding process could allow IonQ to create what Monroe called a single sort of super qubit, which would eliminate 99.9% of native errors. This is the easiest way to get better at quantum computing, as opposed to the quantity over quality path Google is pursuing.

But he has to defend himself from others poking holes in his approach as unrealistic, including some of his colleagues at University of Maryland (all sides still express great respect for each other). Confronted by this criticism, he responded that their path of attack was based on the theory of error correction. It implies that you will do indefinitely long computations, [but] no one will ever need this high a standard to do business.

We do not use error correction on our CPU [central processing unit] because silicon is so stable. We call it OK if it fails in one year, since that is more than enough time to be economically worthwhile. Instead of trying to eliminate errors, his strategy is to gradually add more qubits, which achieves slightly more substantial results. His goal is to work around the error-correction problem.

Part of the difference between Monroe and his academic colleagues relates to his having crossed over into a mix of business and academia. Monroes view on this issue? Industry and academia do not always see things the same way. Academics are trained to prove everything we do. But if a computer works better to solve a certain problem, we do not need to prove it.

For example, if a quantum computer doubled the value of a financial portfolio compared to a super computers financial recommendations, the client is thrilled even if no one knows how.

He said that when shortcuts solve problems and certain things cannot be proven but where quantum computing finds value academics hate it. They are trained to be pessimists. I do believe quantum computers will find narrow applications within five years.

Besides error correction, another question is what the qubits themselves, the basis of different kinds of quantum computers, should be made out of. The technique that many of his competitors are using to make computers out of a particular kind of qubit has the benefit of being not hard to do, inexpensive and representing beautiful physics.

However, he warned, No one knows where to find it if it exists So stay in solid-state physics and build computers out of solid-state systems. Google, Amazon and others are all invested in solid-state computers. But I dont see it happening without fundamental physics breakthroughs. If you want to build and engineer a device if you want to have a business you should not be reliant on physics breakthroughs.

Instead of the path of his competitors, Monroe emphasized working with natural quantum atoms and tricking and engineering them to act how he wants using low pressure instead of low temperatures.

I work with charged atoms or ions. We levitate them inside a vacuum chamber which is getting smaller every year. We have a silicon chip. Just electrodes, electric force fields are holding up these atoms. There are no solids and no air in the vacuum chamber, which means the atoms remain extremely well isolated. They are the most perfect atoms we know, so we can scale without worrying about the top of the noise [the threshold where qubits decay]. We can pick qubit levels that do not yet decay.

Why are Google and IBM investing in natural qubits? Because they have a blind spot. They have been first in solid-state physics and engineering for 50 years. If there is a silicon solid-state quantum computer, Intel will make that, but I dont see how it will be scaled, he declared.

MONROE IS far from the full quantum show at Maryland.

Paglione has been a professor at University of Maryland for 13 years and the director of the Maryland Quantum Materials Center for the last five years.

In 1986, the center was working on high-temperature superconductors, Paglione said, noting that work on quantum computers is a more recent development. The development has not merely altered the focus of the centers research. According to Paglione, it has also helped grow the center from around seven staff members 30 years ago to around 100 staff members when all of the affiliate members, students and administrative staff are taken into account.

Similarly, Dr. Gretchen Campbell, director of the Joint Quantum Institute, told the Magazine that a big part of her institutions role and her personal role has been to first bring together people from atomic physics and condensed-matter physics even within physics, we do not always talk to each other, followed by connecting these experts with computer science experts.

Campbell explained it was crucial to explore the interaction between the quantum realm and quantum algorithms, for which they needed more math and computer science backgrounds and to continue to move from laboratories to real-world applications to translating into technology and interacting more with industry.

She also guided the Magazine, adorning goggles, through a lab with a digital micromirror device and laser beams relating to atom clouds and light projectors.

Add in some additional departments at Maryland as well as a partnership with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the number of staff swells way past 100. What are their many different teams working on? The lab studies and experiments are as varied as the different disciplines, with Paglione talking about possibilities for making squid devices or sensitive magnetic sensors that could be constructed by using a superconducting quantum interference device.

Paglione said magnetometer systems could be used with squids to sense the magnetic field of samples. These could be used as detectors in water. If they were made sensitive enough, they could sense changes in a magnetic field, such as when a submarine passes by and generates a changed magnetic field.

This has drawn attention from the US Department of Defense.

A multidisciplinary mix of Pagliones team recently captured the most direct evidence to date of a quantum quirk, which permits particles to tunnel through a barrier as if it is not even there. The upshot could be assisting engineers in designing more uniform components to build both future quantum computers and quantum sensors (reported applications could detect not only submarines but aircraft).

Pagliones team, headed by Ichiro Takeuchi, a professor of materials science and engineering at Maryland, successfully carried out a new experiment in which they observed Klein tunneling. In the quantum world, tunneling enables particles, such as electrons, to pass through a barrier even if they lack sufficient energy to actually climb over it. A taller barrier usually makes climbing over harder and fewer particles are able to cross through. The phenomenon, known as Klein tunneling, happens when the barrier becomes completely transparent and opens up a portal that particles can traverse regardless of the barriers height.

Scientists and engineers from Marylands Center for Nanophysics and Advanced Materials, the Joint Quantum Institute and the Condensed Matter Theory Center along with the Department of Materials Science and Engineering and Department of Physics, succeeded in making the most compelling measurements of the phenomenon to date.

Given that Klein tunneling was initially predicted to occur in the world of high-energy quantum particles moving close to the speed of light, observing the effect was viewed as impossible. That was until scientists revealed that some of the rules governing fast-moving quantum particles can also apply to the comparatively sluggish particles traveling near the surface of some highly unusual materials.

It was a piece of serendipity that the unusual material and an elemental relative of sorts shared the same crystal structure, said Paglione. However, the multidisciplinary team we have was one of the keys to this success. Having experts on topological physics, thin-film synthesis, spectroscopy and theoretical understanding really got us to this point.

Bringing this back to quantum computing, the idea is that interactions between superconductors and other materials are central ingredients in some quantum computer architectures and precision-sensing devices. Yet, there has always been a problem that the junction, or crossover spot, where they interact is slightly different. Takeuchi said this led to sucking up countless amounts of time and energy tuning and calibrating to reach the best performance.

Takeuchi said Klein tunneling could eliminate this variability, which has played havoc with device-to-device interactions.

AN ENTIRELY separate quantum application could be physics department chairman Prof. Steve Rolstons work on establishing a quantum communications network. Rolston explained that when a pair of photons are quantum entangled you can achieve quantum encryption over a communications network, by using entangled particles to create secure keys that cannot be hacked. There are varying paths to achieve such a quantum network and Rolston is skeptical of others in the field who could be seen as cutting corners.

He also is underwhelmed by Chinas achievements in this area. According to Rolston, no one has figured out how to extend a secure quantum network over any space sizable enough to make the network usable and marketable in practical terms.

Rather, he said existing quantum networks are either limited to very small spaces, or to extend their range they must employ gimmicks that usually impair how secure they are. Because of these limitations, Rolston went as far as to say that his view is that the US National Security Agency views the issue as a distraction.

In terms of export trade barriers or issues with China, he said he opposes controls and believes cooperation in the quantum realm should continue, especially since all of his centers research is made public anyway.

Rolston also lives up to Monroes framing of the difference between academics and industry-focused people. He said that even Monroe would have to admit that no one is close to the true holy grail of quantum computers computers with a massive number of qubits and that the IonQ founder is banking on interesting optimization problems being solvable for industry to an extent which will justify the hype instead.

In contrast, Rolston remained pessimistic that such smaller quantum computers would achieve sufficient superiority at optimization issues in business to justify a rushed prediction that transforming the world is just around the corner.

In Rolstons view, the longer, more patient and steadier path is the one that will eventually reap rewards.

For the moment, we do not know whether Google or IonQ, or those like Monroe or Rolston will eventually be able to declare they were right. We do know that whoever is right and whoever is first will radically change the world as we know it.

Originally posted here:
Who will dominate the tech arms race? - The Jerusalem Post