Mediaboss Marketing

The Colorado Economic Development Commission normally doesnt throw its weight behind unproven startups, but it did so on Thursday, approving $2.9 million in state job growth incentive tax credits to try and land a manufacturing plant that will produce hardware for quantum computers.

Given the broad applications and catalytic benefits that this companys technology could bring, retaining this company would help position Colorado as an industry leader in next-generation and quantum computing, Michelle Hadwiger, the deputy director of the Colorado Office of Economic Development & International Trade, told commissioners.

Project Quantum, the codename for the Denver-based startup, is looking to create up to 726 new full-time jobs in the state. Most of the positions would staff a new facility making components for quantum computers, an emerging technology expected to increase computing power and speed exponentially and transform the global economy as well as society as a whole.

The jobs would carry an average annual wage of $103,329, below the wages other technology employers seeking incentives from the state have provided, but above the average annual wage of any Colorado county. Hadwiger said the company is also considering Illinois, Ohio and New York for the new plant and headquarters.

Quantum computing is going to be as important to the next 30 years of technology as the internet was to the past 30 years, said the companys CEO, who only provided his first name Corban.

He added that he loves Colorado and doesnt want to see it surpassed by states like Washington, New York and Illinois in the transformative field.

If we are smart about it, and that means doing something above and beyond, we can win this race. It will require careful coordination at the state and local levels. We need to do something more and different, he said.

The EDC also approved $2.55 million in job growth incentive tax credits and $295,000 in Location Neutral Employment Incentives for Nextworld, a growing cloud-based enterprise software company based in Greenwood Village. The funds are linked to the creation of 306 additional jobs, including 59 located in more remote parts of the state.

But in a rare case of dissent, Nextworlds CEO Kylee McVaney asked the commission to go against staff recommendations and provide a larger incentive package.

McVaney, daughter of legendary Denver tech entrepreneur Ed McVaney, said the companys lease is about to expire in Greenwood Village and most employees would prefer to continue working remotely. The company could save substantial money by not renewing its lease and relocating its headquarters to Florida, which doesnt have an income tax.

We could go sign a seven-year lease and stay in Colorado or we can try this new grand experiment and save $11 million, she said.

Hadwiger insisted that the award, which averages out to $9,500 per job created, was in line with the amount offered to other technology firms since the Colorado legislature tightened the amount the office could provide companies.

But McVaney said the historical average award per employee was closer to $18,000 and the median is $16,000 and that Colorado was not competitive with Florida given that states more favorable tax structure.

See the article here:
Colorado makes a bid for quantum computing hardware plant that would bring more than 700 jobs - The Denver Post

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory computer scientist Sriram Krishnamoorthy. (PNNL Photo)

Imagine a future where new therapeutic drugs are designed far faster and at a fraction of the cost they are today, enabled by the rapidly developing field of quantum computing.

The transformation on healthcare and personalized medicine would be tremendous, yet these are hardly the only fields this novel form of computing could revolutionize. From cryptography to supply-chain optimization to advances in solid-state physics, the coming era of quantum computers could bring about enormous changes, assuming its potential can be fully realized.

Yet many hurdles still need to be overcome before all of this can happen. This one of the reasons the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and Microsoft have teamed up to advance this nascent field.

The developer of the Q# programming language, Microsoft Quantum recently announced the creation of an intermediate bridge that will allow Q# and other languages to be used to send instructions to different quantum hardware platforms. This includes the simulations being performed on PNNLs own powerful supercomputers, which are used to test the quantum algorithms that could one day run on those platforms. While scalable quantum computing is still years away, these simulations make it possible to design and test many of the approaches that will eventually be used.

We have extensive experience in terms of parallel programming for supercomputers, said PNNL computer scientist Sriram Krishnamoorthy. The question was, how do you use these classical supercomputers to understand how a quantum algorithm and quantum architectures would behave while we build these systems?

Thats an important question given that classical and quantum computing are so extremely different from each other. Quantum computing isnt Classical Computing 2.0. A quantum computer is no more an improved version of a classical computer than a lightbulb is a better version of a candle. While you might use one to simulate the other, that simulation will never be perfect because theyre such fundamentally different technologies.

Classical computing is based on bits, pieces of information that are either off or on to represent a zero or one. But a quantum bit, or qubit, can represent a zero or a one or any proportion of those two values at the same time. This makes it possible to perform computations in a very different way.

However, a qubit can only do this so long as it remains in a special state known as superposition. This, along with other features of quantum behavior such as entanglement, could potentially allow quantum computing to answer all kinds of complex problems, many of which are exponential in nature. These are exactly the kind of problems that classical computers cant readily solve if they can solve them at all.

For instance, much of the worlds electronic privacy is based on encryption methods that rely on prime numbers. While its easy to multiply two prime numbers, its extremely difficult to reverse the process by factoring the product of two primes. In some cases, a classical computer could run for 10,000 years and still not find the solution. A quantum computer, on the other hand, might be capable of performing the work in seconds.

That doesnt mean quantum computing will replace all tasks performed by classical computers. This includes programming the quantum computers themselves, which the very nature of quantum behaviors can make highly challenging. For instance, just the act of observing a qubit can make it decohere, causing it to lose its superposition and entangled states.

Such challenges drive some of the work being done by Microsoft Azures Quantum group. Expecting that both classical and quantum computing resources will be needed for large-scale quantum applications, Microsoft Quantum has developed a bridge they call QIR, which stands for quantum intermediate representation. The motivation behind QIR is to create a common interface at a point in the programming stack that avoids interfering with the qubits. Doing this makes the interface both language- and platform-agnostic, which allows different software and hardware to be used together.

To advance the field of quantum computing, we need to think beyond just how to build a particular end-to-end system, said Bettina Heim, senior software engineering manager with Microsoft Quantum, during a recent presentation. We need to think about how to grow a global ecosystem that facilitates developing and experimenting with different approaches.

Because these are still very early days think of where classical computing was 75 years ago many fundamental components still need to be developed and refined in this ecosystem, including quantum gates, algorithms and error correction. This is where PNNLs quantum simulator, DM-SIM comes in. By designing and testing different approaches and configurations of these elements, they can discover better ways of achieving their goals.

As Krishnamoorthy explains: What we currently lack and what we are trying to build with this simulation infrastructure is a turnkey solution that could allow, say a compiler writer or a noise model developer or a systems architect, to try different approaches in putting qubits together and ask the question: If they do this, what happens?

Of course, there will be many challenges and disappointments along the way, such as an upcoming retraction of a 2018 paper in the journal, Nature. The original study, partly funded by Microsoft, declared evidence of a theoretical particle called a Majorana fermion, which could have been a major quantum breakthrough. However, errors since found in the data contradict that claim.

But progress continues, and once reasonably robust and scalable quantum computers are available, all kinds of potential uses could become possible. Supply chain and logistics optimization might be ideal applications, generating new levels of efficiency and energy savings for business. Since quantum computing should also be able to perform very fast searches on unsorted data, applications that focus on financial data, climate data analysis and genomics are likely uses, as well.

Thats only the beginning. Quantum computers could be used to accurately simulate physical processes from chemistry and solid-state physics, ushering in a new era for these fields. Advances in material science could become possible because well be better able to simulate and identify molecular properties much faster and more accurately than we ever could before. Simulating proteins using quantum computers could lead to new knowledge about biology that would revolutionize healthcare.

In the future, quantum cryptography may also become common, due to its potential for truly secure encrypted storage and communications. Thats because its impossible to precisely copy quantum data without violating the laws of physics. Such encryption will be even more important once quantum computers are commonplace because their unique capabilities will also allow them to swiftly crack traditional methods of encryption as mentioned earlier, rendering many currently robust methods insecure and obsolete.

As with many new technologies, it can be challenging to envisage all of the potential uses and problems quantum computing might bring about, which is one reason why business and industry need to become involved in its development early on. Adopting an interdisciplinary approach could yield all kinds of new ideas and applications and hopefully help to build what is ultimately a trusted and ethical technology.

How do you all work together to make it happen? asks Krishnamoorthy. I think for at least the next couple of decades, for chemistry problems, for nuclear theory, etc., well need this hypothetical machine that everyone designs and programs for at the same time, and simulations are going to be crucial to that.

The future of quantum computing will bring enormous changes and challenges to our world. From how we secure our most critical data to unlocking the secrets of our genetic code, its technology that holds the keys to applications, fields and industries weve yet to even imagine.

See original here:
How researchers are mapping the future of quantum computing, using the tech of today - GeekWire

In 2012, the quantum physicist John Preskill wrote, We hope to hasten the day when well controlled quantum systems can perform tasks surpassing what can be done in the classical world. Less than a decade later, two quantum computing systems have met that mark: Googles Sycamore, and the University of Science and Technology of Chinas Jizhng. Both solved narrowly designed problems that are, so far as we know, impossible for classical computers to solve quickly. How quickly? How impossible? To solve a problem that took Jizhng 200 seconds, even the fastest supercomputers are estimated to take at least two billion years.

Describing what then may have seemed a far-off goal, Preskill gave it a name: quantum supremacy. In a blog post at the time, he explained Im not completely happy with this term, and would be glad if readers could suggest something better.

Were not happy with it either, and we believe that the physics community should be more careful with its language, for both social and scientific reasons. Even in the abstruse realms of matter and energy, language matters because physics is done by people.

The word supremacyhaving more power, authority or status than anyone elseis closely linked to white supremacy. This isnt supposition; its fact. The Corpus of Contemporary American English finds white supremacy is 15 times more frequent than the next most commonly used two-word phrase, judicial supremacy. Though English is the global lingua franca of science, it is notable that the USTC team avoided quantum supremacy because in Chinese, the character meaning supremacy also has uncomfortable, negative connotations. The problem is not confined merely to English.

White supremacist movements have grown around the globe in recent years, especially in the United States, partly as a racist backlash to the Black Lives Matter movement. As Preskill has recently acknowledged, the word unavoidably evokes a repugnant political stance.

Quantum supremacy has also become a buzzword in popular media (for example, here and here). Its suggestion of domination may have contributed to unjustified hype, such as the idea that quantum computers will soon make classical computers obsolete. Tamer alternatives such as quantum advantage, quantum computational supremacy and even quantum ascendancy have been proposed, but none have managed to supplant Preskills original term. More jargony proposals like Noisy Intermediate Scale Quantum computing (NISQ) and tongue-in-cheek suggestions like quantum non-uselessness have similarly failed to displace supremacy.

Here, we propose an alternative we believe succinctly captures the scientific implications with less hype andcruciallyno association with racism: quantum primacy.

Whats in a name? Its not just that quantum supremacy by any other name would smell sweeter. By making the case for quantum primacy we hope to illustrate some of the social and scientific issues at hand. In President Joe Bidens letter to his science adviser, the biologist Eric Lander, he asks How can we ensure that Americans of all backgrounds are drawn into both the creation and the rewards of science and technology? One small change can be in the language we use. GitHub, for example, abandoned the odious master/slave terminology after pressure from activists.

Were physics, computer science and engineering more diverse, perhaps we would not still be having this discussion, which one of us wrote about four years ago. But in the U.S., when only 2 percent of bachelors degrees in physics are awarded to Black students, when Latinos comprise less than 7 percent of engineers, and women account for a mere 12 percent of full professors in physics, this is a conversation that needs to happen. As things stand, quantum supremacy can come across as adding insult to injury.

The nature of quantum computing, and its broad interest to the public outside of industry laboratories and academia means that the debate around quantum supremacy was inevitably going to be included in the broader culture war.

In 2019, a short correspondence to Nature argued that the quantum computing community should adopt different terminology to avoid overtones of violence, neocolonialism and racism. Within days, the dispute was picked up by the conservative editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal, which attacked quantum wokeness and suggested that changing the term would be a slippery slope all the way down to cancelling Diana Ross The Supremes.

The linguist Steven Pinker weighed in to argue that the prissy banning of words by academics should be resisted. It dumbs down understanding of language: word meanings are conventions, not spells with magical powers, and all words have multiple senses, which are distinguished in context. Also, it makes academia a laughingstock, tars the innocent, and does nothing to combat actual racism & sexism.

It is true that supremacy is not a magic word, that its meaning comes from convention, not conjurers. But the context of quantum supremacy, which Pinker neglects, is that of a historically white, male-dominated discipline. Acknowledging this by seeking better language is a basic effort to be polite, not prissy.

Perhaps the most compelling argument raised in favor of quantum supremacy is that it could function to reclaim the word. Were quantum supremacy 15 times more common than white supremacy, the shoe would be on the other foot. Arguments for reclamation, however, must account for who is doing the reclaiming. If the charge to take back quantum supremacy were led by Black scientists and other underrepresented minorities in physics, that would be one thing. No survey exists, but anecdotal evidence suggests this is decidedly not the case.

To replace supremacy, we need to have a thoughtful conversation. Not any alternative will do, and there is genuinely tricky science at stake. Consider the implications of quantum advantage. An advantage might be a stepladder that makes it easier to reach a high shelf, or a small head start in a race. Some quantum algorithms are like this. Grovers search algorithm is only quadratically faster than its classical counterpart, so a quantum computer running Grovers algorithm might solve a problem that took classical computers 100 minutes in the square root of that time10 minutes. Not bad! Thats definitely an advantage, especially as runtimes get longer, but it doesnt compare to some quantum speedups.

Perhaps the most famous quantum speedup comes from Shor's algorithm, which can find the factors of numbers (e.g. 5 and 3 are factors of 15) almost exponentially faster than the best classical algorithms. While classical computers are fine with small numbers, every digit takes a toll. For example, a classical computer might factor a 100-digit number in seconds, but a 1000-digit number would take billions of years. A quantum computer running Shor's algorithm could do it in an hour.

When quantum computers can effectively do things that are impossible for classical computers, they have something much more than an advantage. We believe primacy captures much of this meaning. Primacy means preeminent position or the condition of being first. Additionally, it shares a Latin root (primus, or first) with mathematical terms such as prime and primality.

While quantum computers may be first to solve a specific problem, that does not imply they will dominate; we hope quantum primacy helps avoid the insinuation that classical computers will be obsolete. This is especially important because quantum primacy is a moving target. Classical computers and classical algorithms can and do improve, so quantum computers will have to get bigger and better to stay ahead.

These kinds of linguistic hotfixes do not reach even a bare minimum for diversifying science; the most important work involves hiring and retention and actual material changes to the scientific community to make it less white and male. But if opposition to improving the language of science is any indication about broader obstacles to diversifying it, this is a conversation we must have.

Physicists may prefer vacuums for calculation, but science does not occur in one. It is situated in the broader social and political landscape, one which both shapes and is shaped by the decisions of researchers.

This is an opinion and analysis article.

View post:
Physicists Need to Be More Careful with How They Name Things - Scientific American

When Zak Romaszko finished his physics degree at the University of Liverpool, a PhD in computing was his obvious next step. I have always been fascinated with computers, says the 27-year-old. I broke my dads PC when I was younger and he was away in the forces, so I had to fix it myself. His interest grew from there, but Romaszkos choice of focus for his research isnt just any type of computing but the cutting-edge quantum variety.

Thought by many to be the next step in the field, and key to solving complex problems in a manageable amount of time, quantum computers use quantum bits rather than the regular bits used by standard computers.

It will be able to solve problems that might take computers millions and billions of years in timescales that are more realistic to humans, says Romaszko. It seemed to be that this would be the way forward in how big calculations would be done in the future.

He found an opportunity to undertake a PhD at the University of Sussex with Prof Winfried Hensinger a subject expert linked to making an ion trap quantum computer, the next step in the computers of the future. Romaszko, who is from Barnoldswick in Lancashire, spent four years on the project as part of the universitys Ion Quantum Technology group, graduating in June 2020. He has now joined a spin-off company founded by Hensinger called Universal Quantum, which is looking to commercialise the technology to make a large-scale quantum computer.

My PhD focused on how we would scale this technology from the level we are at now and get to the point where we need to be to make a truly useful quantum computer, he says.

It sounds like science fiction but Romaszko explains that quantum computers could hold the key to solving some major issues in our world today. People are looking into things like simulation of chemicals and materials and understanding how medicines interact within the body and AI applications, he says.

While it may be difficult to grasp the scale of the computing power at work in the quantum, Romaszko is thrilled to be pushing the boundaries. With a PhD youre basically learning about a field and a very narrow area of science that you just plan to push out a little bit further and expand human knowledge. Its really exciting.

See original here:
Experience: With a PhD, the plan is to expand human knowledge - The Guardian

There are 2 types of computers: Classical and Quantum Computers

The reason why quantum computers have such a ridiculous speed advantage is due to their quantum properties. These quantum properties allow for quantum computers to be extremely fast compared to classical computers.

Since quantum computers are based on classical computers, many of the concepts and components of quantum computers are similar to classical computers.

In classical computers, the lowest level of computation is within the bits. Everything that youre seeing right now is due to the transistors in your computer switching the bits on or off. These bits are represented in 0s and 1s.

Now heres the cool part. By themselves, they can only represent 2 states: 0 & 1. But if you have 2 bits, you can represent 4 states: 00, 01, 10, 11. The number of states is equal to 2 to the power of the number of bits there are.

The property of regular bits is that they can only represent 1 state at a time. But quantum bits take that property to the next level

A quantum phenomenon that quantum computers use extensively is called superposition. Lets use an analogy! A coin has 2 states: heads or tails. But when you spin the coin, what state is it? Its both heads and tails!

Now replace a coin with a bit. A qubit is just a bit thats both 0 and 1 at the same time! This enables it to take many states at once. For example, with 1 qubit you can be in 2 states at once. But with 2 qubits its 4 states at the same time, and with 4 qubits its 16!

The major difference between classical and quantum bits is classical bits can only be in 1 state at a time, while qubits can be in many states at the same time!

This has lots of benefits that well get into later, but lets get into what exactly we do with bits and qubits in a computer.

By themselves, bits are rather useless. But with the help of classical gates, were able to transform them into powerful and useful tools. Gates are like a function, they take in 1 or multiple bits and then spit out a result.

It is through the combination of these logic gates that give rise to functions like multiplication, division, displaying images, and playing sounds!

Much like how classical gates manipulate classical bits, quantum gates manipulate qubits. But theres a big difference! Since qubits have quantum properties we can have a lot more different gates and functions for them!

When qubits are in a superposition, they have a certain probability to be a 0 or a 1. It can have a 50/50 percent to be a 0 or 1, but it can also take on different states like 30/70 or 5/95. We refer to this as the qubit having different rotations.

There are lots of gates that play around with the rotation of the qubit like the Not, Pauli-Z and Hadamard gates! These gates rotate the qubit, but also play with the probabilities and states of the qubit. These gates are very similar to classical gates.

Another cool property of qubits is entanglement! This is when 2 qubits are intertwined with each other, such that when you look at 1 qubit, you automatically know the state of the other qubit!

Several gates use this property all of which are unique to quantum computing! There are CNOT, CZ, and Toffoli gates! These gates also use multiple qubits to produce an output.

Continued here:
One Computer to Rule Them All. Quantum Computing 101 | by Dickson Wu | Feb, 2021 | Medium - Medium