When it comes to quantum computing, I regard the choice made by many colleagues and friends to pursue this direction of research as entirely (3000%) justified, and it has led to beautiful mathematics and science. (I hope that my own choice to pursue the skeptical direction was justified as well, though this is a more difficult call.)I do not know who is right about that factual question, but I am included to believe that Google did not really prove it, if Kalai is till unconvinced seven years later.For the record, I expect that scalable quantum computation — and even important milestones toward this goal — are inherently impossible. ...
One very clear and important point of disagreement between Scott and me concerns the following simple factual question:
Is it currently possible to produce (without classical-computing interference) samples of size 500K for depth-14 random circuits with 20 qubits and an XEB fidelity above 0.2? (This is something Google claimed in 2019.)
I tend to think that the answer to this question is negative; Scott strongly believes that this and much more have already been achieved experimentally. Thus these are sharp factual disagreements, and I hope they will be resolved within the next few years.
Aaronson is also wound up about some Middle East war issues. I understand why he is so pro-Israel, but I do not understand why he is so anti-Trump. At any rate, it is out of my expertise.
No comments:
Post a Comment