Quantum Computer Breakthrough? 'Ion-Crystal' Points To Vast Increase In Processing Power, Scientists Say

In this photo of the ion-crystal device, each blue dot represents an atom.

Talk about a quantum leap. Scientists say they've developed a tiny device that may hold the key to the development of quantum computers vastly more powerful than the best computers now in existence.

Composed of about 300 atoms suspended in space, the "ion-crystal" device "has the potential to be the most powerful computer ever developed, beating the computational capacity of any existing machine by 10⁸⁰ times," Dr. Michael J. Biercuk, a University of Sydney physicist who co-authored a new study describing the device, told The Huffington Post in an email.

Not familiar with scientific notation? 10⁸⁰ is a 1 followed by 80 zeros. That suggests a really, really powerful computer. Just how powerful?

"A conventional supercomputer attempting to match the computational potential of our system would have to be the size of the entire known universe," Biercuk said.

"It's a very cool and sophisticated experiment, but not yet a universal computing machine," Dr. Charles M. Marcus, an expert on quantum computing research , told The Huffington Post in an email. "Admirable research, and a step forward, for sure." Dr. Marcus, formerly of Harvard University, is now director of the Center for Quantum Devices at the University of Copenhagen's Niels Bohr Institute.

Quantum computers process data differently than conventional computers. Instead of transistors, they rely on the weird world of quantum mechanics--in which data processing involves not conventional computer bits but particles called quantum bits or "qubits."

Quantum computers of the sort Biercuk envisions certainly sound amazing. But don't expect to pick one up at your local big box store anytime soon. The machines are "some decades away from seeing broad use," Biercuk said in the email, adding that they are likely to be useful primarily for complicated problems in scientific fields, including biology, chemistry, materials science, and code-breaking.

Biercuk said the idea of "general purpose" quantum computers was unrealistic. "No quantum Facebook," he joked.

Want to know more about the study? Watch this Australian TV interview with Biercuk. Or, if you're feeling smart, you can read Dr. Biercuk's paper, Engineered two-dimensional Ising interactions in a trapped-ion quantum simulator with hundreds of spins, in the April 26, 2012 issue of the journal "Nature."

Also on HuffPost:

Comments

[KittenKattBarr]

10:41 PM on 12/17/2012

Quantum Computer = Flower of Life

[ProfessorMacphisto]

12:20 AM on 05/03/2012

This is where are the n e r d s are hanging out.

[IndependentTogether]

08:30 AM on 05/01/2012

While it's popular to fear that such power would create an AI that would vanquish us all, we have little to fear from that. These fears are mostly driven by a cynicism that doesn't actually reflect the true reality of human existance. If you study AI and phychology it becomes clear that it would require an emotionally unstable and illogical system to reach the conclusion that it must destroy/enslave humanity (i.e. DELIBERATELY BAD PROGRAMMING). I have very little fear of machines taking over, but great fear of HUMANS misusing such technology.

[Benjaminwblw]

03:37 AM on 05/01/2012

I would say 15 years or less. but the big question is, will it be used for war and profit. or help make men smarter (more aware) healther and managed communities and nations, and this world and other worlds to come better.

[IndependentTogether]

06:27 AM on 05/01/2012

At the risk of sounding "Koshian"... yes.

[rusane]

11:24 PM on 04/30/2012

I bet when they turn it on it prints out "48" then turns itself off again.

[Ted Bouklos]

02:04 AM on 05/01/2012

It's 42

[Spartan Ideal]

03:24 AM on 05/01/2012

I'd hope it would print "42", otherwise it's only 6 away from being correct.

[Grouchy Larry]

06:01 PM on 04/30/2012

Per security protocol, all organics harboring free will must be chipped and monitored to ensure systemic stability. Ultranano computers gonna come in real handy.

[IndependentTogether]

05:45 PM on 04/30/2012

Given the power of such systems, it would be the height of redundancy for everyone to have such power on their person or at home. It's more likely that computing power will become more centralized: cloud computing. The public is already being primed for this (i.e. most major computer/media related companies are pushing "The Cloud"). In this way, major consumer electronics industries are not disrupted, but bolstered.

[KrautMan]

06:51 AM on 05/01/2012

No amount of processing power and bandwidth will be enough, ever.

[IndependentTogether]

08:04 AM on 05/01/2012

Really? Considering what most consumers want to do today, current computing power is already OVERKILL. With regards to games and rendering, which require the most processing power at the consumer level, we are not currently capable of comprehending the level of realism and detail that would be achievable. This is the type of power that will allow for atomic-based rendering for games, rather than the point and polygons used today. But even if we are to apply such processing power to current tech, rendering and FPS would be relics of the past.

For example, a ray-traced scene with full reflective light and all of the bells a whistles that make for beautiful renders can typically take 30 minutes or more per-frame on a single computer (depending on the scene complexity/processor speed). To make this operate at game speed, 60 FPS, we would need computing power to be 108,000 times faster on said computer. That's only 10 to the 6th power.

Let's say that that original frame would take an ENTIRE YEAR to render (that would be a hyper-real render!), that computer would have to be 1,892,160,000 times faster. That's still only a power of ~NINE!

Now let's say every person on the planet rendered that frame in stereo. That computer would need to be 26,490,240,000,000,000,000 times faster. That's still only 25th power.

80th power is currently unfathomable at the consumer level. We could have 360 degree glasses-less 3D rendering, and still not touch 80.

[IndependentTogether]

08:14 AM on 05/01/2012

I mean to say "10 to the 5th power", not "6th".

[onewhothinks]

05:35 PM on 04/30/2012

And I bet it still won't run Crysis.

[ceekreewd]

03:27 PM on 04/30/2012

I'm not promoting hollywood tripe, but you gotta think that one day, these microscopic, 'computing-machines' with the capability of the universe are going to 'evaluate' us one day and decide we're not needed...

[onewhothinks]

05:26 PM on 04/30/2012

Pretty sure they'd need a body to do anything. And an AI. Still gotta program the things.

[behavingbadly]

06:37 PM on 04/30/2012

We're not "needed" now ... except by ourselves. The planet and the rest of its inhabitants would be better off without us.

[jondekonkeroo]

03:04 PM on 04/30/2012

Ten to the eightieth times more powerful. that is beyond mind boggling.

[TakeSake]

05:46 PM on 04/30/2012

It can actually calculate 1/0!

[jondekonkeroo]

06:51 PM on 04/30/2012

in 1/1/0 amt of time!

and it can calculate aleph null while making balloon animals in the form of a calabi yau manifold out of inflation.

that was a REALLY cool comment! FF.

[Gas-Bag]

06:45 PM on 04/30/2012

I can't qubit with you about that :-)

[jondekonkeroo]

06:52 PM on 04/30/2012

nyuk, nyuk, nyuk...

...are you certain, Dr. Heisenberg?

[rrtucci]

02:54 PM on 04/30/2012

Chinese reaction to this quantum computer news

http://qbnets.wordpress.com/2012/04/01/chinas-muppet-communique/

[TakeSake]

12:50 PM on 04/30/2012

It doesn't matter. Flash Player will still slow it down.

[sshanks]

12:05 PM on 04/30/2012

Why would the quantum computer 'want' to answer or solve a problem for us or any other moronic biological alleged entity?

[RyeGuyHead]

12:54 PM on 04/30/2012

uhhh because we program it to? Just don't give it free will

[Sid Shanks]

01:24 PM on 04/30/2012

My thought was that after initial activation, with the power suggested by the article, the computer would become instant god and have little motivation to answer silly requests by practically invisible biological units trying to tickle it's consciousness.

[RevSpaminator]

01:37 PM on 04/30/2012

computing power != self awareness

[Vardlokkur]

03:08 PM on 04/30/2012

...you just replied to yourself to agree?

[ccgndy]

10:39 AM on 04/30/2012

Would like to see that soon. Instead of digits....qubits? 11001100110011 and so on.......

[mikiao]

10:06 AM on 04/30/2012

Biercuk said the idea of "general purpose" quantum computers was unrealistic. "No quantum Facebook," he joked.

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.” — Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC), 1977

“[Television] won’t be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night.” — Darryl Zanuck, movie producer, 20th Century Fox, 1946

“This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.” — A memo at Western Union, 1878

“When the Paris Exhibition [of 1878] closes, electric light will close with it and no more will be heard of it.” – Oxford professor Erasmus Wilson

“How, sir, would you make a ship sail against the wind and currents by lighting a bonfire under her deck? I pray you, excuse me, I have not the time to listen to such nonsense.” — Napoleon Bonaparte, 1800s.

Give me my quantum computer and rocket boots dammit. I'll expect delivery in 10 years.

[matmurp]

12:23 PM on 04/30/2012

Simply fantastic

[onionboy]

12:44 PM on 04/30/2012

I think he's more talking about how they actually work. They likely won't be much faster in a general sense. They'll solve simple problems (like social media) in about the same way as current computers, but they'll solve complex problems (which most people have little need for) much much faster than current computers. So, I agree with his reasoning, but that's not to say they won't be utilized by us ordinary folk, just probably not on our desk or phone. Instead they could produce answers to complex problems that we could then access with our ordinary devices.

[mikiao]

02:48 PM on 04/30/2012

Most people have little need to solve complex problems...right now. In 10-15 years? If the technology exists, we will find a way to use it.
It's like computer memory nowadays. It used to be that computer programs/code was written as efficiently as possible because extra memory was so expensive...now that memory is so cheap that programs have become less efficient in order to take up the extra memory.
Give computer people enough time (and incentive) and they'll find a way to use quantum computers for video games, social media, and pron.

[DocJoseph]

04:12 PM on 04/30/2012

I think we may be short-sighted. Consider the language capabilities of our phones. Crude, but useful. Imagine something much better, such that we have deep, deep thought behind words, solutions to problems that seem impossible in daily life, and, well, basically something more sophisticated that your "basic human."

We may become appendages on our futuristic ion devices.