5 ms·
This is not quite true. You only need to keep the qubits at a fixed temperature as you scale the system, so the resources required to add additional qubits grow
by s1dev 3y ago
This is not quite true. You only need to keep the qubits at a fixed temperature as you scale the system, so the resources required to add additional qubits grow only polynomially with the system size. Once you have many qubits with a sufficiently low (but constant) error rate, you can do quantum error correction which also only has polynomial overhead.
- alpineidyll3 3y agoNo you are missing the fact that if the qubits are coupled the systems fundamental gap has shrunk demanding a lower temperature for the same error rate. You should think more about why your rosy scheme hasn't worked yet if you can't explain that empirically maybe you don't quite understand.
- gaze 3y agoThe qubits aren't all coupled all the time. The whole point of a 2-qubit gate is the coupling is controllable. Also -- why is the gap of the bare system important? The whole point of QEC is the creation of a decoherence free subspace. Your model is wrong and you don't understand quantum error correction.
- fsh 3y agoThe qubits aren't meant to be coupled, but in practice everything is coupled at some level. I find it plausible that having a system with tons of degrees of freedom on a limited energy scale might make it difficult to isolate all the degrees of freedom from each other.
- gaze 3y agoYeah but these are the most basic of basic problems in QC and people would be discarding approaches that didn’t have potential solutions to this issue. In superconducting QCs, neighboring qubits are not necessarily even resonant, and are in their own little metal boxes. With neutral atoms, you have extremely long lived internal states that barely couple to the environment, and the atoms are macroscopic distances from each other.