h a l f b a k e r yRenovating the wheel
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I was wondering if it would be possible to store qubits in a small particle accelerator. Then in order to encode and decode, rather than targeting the particle in a specific location, wait for it to go by and at that instant do the required manipulation on it. The particle could be attached to an identifiable
atomic entity. Waiting for the register to arrive rather than address it directly is the proposition. And after all the wait would not be long. Would a longer coherence be achievable in this medium than say NMR?
[link]
|
| |
You want to use a particle accelerator as a serial storage device? 8 track tape would be (slightly) cheaper. |
|
| |
[phoenix] that depends on the quantity of data. A floppy is unbeatably cheap if you only have 1MB to store and can spare a few seconds, but what about an Eta byte with milli-second access time. Some exotic technology may be cheaper then. |
|
| |
But [pheonix] qubits, not bits... the technologies I know of are NMR (like MRI), trapped electron, quantum dots etc... and these are all more expensive than 8track, right? |
|
| |
Yeah, I was trying to be funny. It's an interesting idea, but I can't think of a use for it unless you know of someone selling reeaallllyy small particle accelerators. |
|
| |
..well on the science channel I saw a particle accelerator about the size of an ipod. Isn't the size (of the accelerator) more about what you want to do with it (size not such an issue in this context?) We don't want to find Higg's boson, just store some qubits... |
|
| |
//Higg's boson// wasn't he in Captain Pugwash? |
|
| |
What Phoenix said - you'd neet a pretty large garage to fit your computer in - about the size of the town you live in, say... |
|
| |
..well you know so far I think it might be difficult to build any kind of quantum computer in the garage. Although I heard that someone suggested a cup of coffee would be a suitable medium... |
|
| |
I know zilch about this so I have no opinion but some proffesor at UNL where I graduated from was working on quamtum computers. If I remember right, and I may not, He managed a quauntam calculator of sorts. I think it was a big deal becasue it showed that quantam computing was possible. But again my memory on all this is pretty fuzzy. |
|
| |
Sounds a bit like a hard/floppy/CD/DVD/mini disk. They are all proven storage methods... but have traditionally been slower than direct addressing. |
|
| |
I thought the only way to read a quantum register was through entanglement, other wise when you read a value you also wipe it. |
|
| |
Quantum computers are already being proposed by hundreds of scientists, designs forthcoming. |
|
| |
Nice, *incorperates into quantum computer in garage*, While reading the value would wipe it, it is a better, more stable(?), and closer to truth method than many on the drawing board today. But then again I don't have much more than general knowledge in quantum mechanics at the time of this writing. |
|
| |
Would it be practical to store an entangled qubit in an accellerator (for whatever reason)? |
|
| |
Have a pending more scientific knowlege bun (your first after so many long years...) |
|
| |
If a qubit is accelerated to relativistic speeds, will time dilation have a corresponding positive effect on the decoherence time? |
|
| |
Not if you deparse the wavefront with dilithium... |
|
| |
You could store positrons that way too. |
|
| |
At least that would stop them gathering dust under my bed. |
|
| |
How can you say that? Positrons under the bed keep the monsters away. Well, apart from the antimatter ones of course. |
|
| |
I found one on the internet and put all of my ideas there. Now my head is empty. |
|
| |