|WikiProject Physics||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Computer science||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
Experimental Quantum Computing to Solve Systems of Linear Equations
Maybe we should add something about this: Experimental Quantum Computing to Solve Systems of Linear Equations
- It took six years, yet I just added something on this. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 21:45, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Quantum / Classical 'equivalence'?
"All problems which can be solved on a quantum computer can be solved on a classical computer."
Although the above may be true in some abstract mathematical sense, I don't think it is true in reality.
David Deutsch describes, in 'The Fabric of Reality' some problems which could be rapidly solved by a quantum computer that could not be solved by any classical computer that could ever conceivably be constructed. (Put another way: classical computers could solve any problem a quantum computer could solve, it the universe didn't impose the constraints that it actually *does* impose.) At the moment, I think the lead into this article might suggest that quantum computers are a bit (or a *lot*) faster than classical computers - but really, it is more than that: quantum computers can actually solve, in the physical universe, problems that will never, ever be solved (in our actual, real universe - as opposed to an abstract, hypothetical one) by a classical computer. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 18:37, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
It is extremely common to use "exponential speedup" very loosely, and say that Shor's algorithm provides an exponential speedup over GNFS. However, given that GNFS already provides sub-exponential factoring (that is, faster than $$c^n$$ for any $$c > 0$$), we should probably change the last sentence in the leading paragraph which claims that Shor's algorithm provides an "exponential speedup". Thoughts?