Scientific Method / Science & Exploration

Making quantum memory from an almost-classical system





Building a better qubit






Classically coherent






Expand full story

8 Reader Comments

  1. Article on quantum computing+1 hr= Zero comments
    Article on anonymous arrests+ 15 secs= /0

    I have nothing else pertinent to add other than i just feel like quantum computing is progressing too slowly to be a viable technology. Something is gonna leapfrog it.
    132 posts | registered
  2. I love quantum computing, but a lot of it goes over my head and requires a fair bit of knowledge in the field in order to have anything relevant to add.

    With that said, do you think you can look into doing your next article on the status of biocomputing? I havent looked into it for a while, but last the time I checked it had a great potential for being the next generation of computer technology. (perhaps you could talk about growing your own microprocessors on a petri dish!)
    2038 posts | registered
  3. Let me see if I understand this correctly. The Si has two ground states, say A and B, and an excited state, say Q. A first laser is shot at the whole sample, causing all the Si to go to Q, and then because of the properties of this laser all the Si return to...say...A. A second laser is shot, so all the Si goes to Q and then back to whatever the first laser set it to, in this case A. The reflection of the second laser will be altered accordingly.

    Especially with terminology like "refreshing the coherence", this sounds similar to DRAM. I can almost imagine coding up a state machine that abstracts the gory details of the hardware into a nice clean linear memory interface for a software API...

    Also...I don't think articles like this necessarily need a lot of comments. Thankfully all the political types find this stuff boring.
    941 posts | registered
  4. I'd just like to point out that I wouldn't be offended at all if Ars started plastering links all over these types of articles that further explain the details of the details. Just color them purple or something so the geniuses know to skip them.
    1427 posts | registered
  5. Kristofff wrote:

    yeah, I could definitely use those links. just a little something for those of us that wish they understood some of this stuff, but don't.
    22 posts | registered
  6. Reading the article I was deeply entranced in trying to understand any of it. Then the phrase "nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy" came up and I couldn't help but break my own concentration with a mental image of a looming catastrophe facilitated by Gorden Freeman.
    85 posts | registered
  7. I understand that making good diagrams is a highly prized skill and Ars does not have an unlimited budget. Still, it would be nice to have a few educational illustrations on topics such as these.
    150 posts | registered
  8. i hate that you called MRI a cousin of NMR spectroscopy. if you must separate them at all, since they are exactly the same thing, MRI is a grandchild of NMR spectroscopy.

    the only reason why MRI is now MRI and not NMRI (as it was initially) is because the acronym makers thought the public would be too afraid to use a medical process with the term "Nuclear" in it. that's the only difference between the two concepts.
    969 posts | registered

You must to comment.