Quantum computing: achievable reality or unrealistic dream American Physical Society Racah Institute of Physics Workshop IV Quantum computing: achievable reality or unrealistic dream January 06, Danciger B Seminar room, Afternoon (06.01.15 @ 16.00)

Workshop’s IV Dinner Quantum computing and I Restaurant “Piccolino”, American Physical Society Racah Institute of Physics Workshop’s IV Dinner  Quantum computing and I Restaurant “Piccolino”, (06.01.15 @ 19.00)

Choice of Date –Some - Specifics of year 2015 2015 : 5 = 403, where 3 + 4 = 7 – Holy number 2015 in binary system is 11111011111 (number of digits from each side is 5!) 1+2+4+8+16+64+128+256+512+1024=20+21+22+23+24+25+26+27+28+210 =2015

Recollections from the 70th We had a medium-size conference on “Atomic structure and processes”. In the front row sat an unknown person. After each talk he was the first asking a question. Something like: “So, what does all this mean?”. Speakers were shocked and dumb. During the brake I asked who is he. “An electrician”, - was the answer. Perhaps, it is not too bad to ask questions irrespectively to the knowledge of the subject.

Basic ideas and reality I Electron spin is an ideal “yes” or “no”, or “up” – “down”. Quantum-mechanics A“yes”+ B“no” – diplomat, not virgin Feynman’s idea (1981) - a quantum wave function can store a lot of information in an atomic size volume. The idea slept many years, but then it starts to explode. As a conservative, I am afraid of groundless speculations, like “new” interpretation of quantum mechanics or “new theories of everything” that I receive 5 times/month. Each author demands to accept his new physics and abandon the old one. But I am comfortable with old ones and ready to accept new only in the case of a deadlock.

Basic ideas and reality II In 1996, during my stay at Imperial College it was Sir Peter Knight, who explained me and some others that there is quite a distance between stuffed with information quantum atom and reading this information classical system. In 1998 my friend, mathematician M. Zak, taught me the main QC theorems. At that time I had a cancer surgery so it was an ideal time for abstract thinking. I was very much impressed by Shor’s theorem

Basic ideas and reality III I started to doubt whether the theorems has something to do with physics reality of the system that is a fundament of the total QC device, with all its inevitable disturbances that make life of a physicist much more complicated than that of a pure mathematician. In spite of my admiration by Shor’s theorem, I already long ago accepted Lev Landau‘s statement: “All rigorous theorems on quantum mechanics are either meaningless or incorrect”. Soon, I started to consider QC as something similar to “manmade global warming”, Ponds cold fusion etc.

Basic ideas and reality IV By chance in 2012 I run across M. Dyakonov’s “State of the Art and Prospects for Quantum Computing”. I red it like a good detective – overnight I learned the main points: Theorems are far from reality, Quantum states are mixed without control, Different disturbances are unacceptable. Remember – pure math is not the real world I became not educated but armed and thus “dangerous”. I gained conclusions to test and as the mentioned above electrician had nasty questions to ask

Basic ideas and reality V Conclusions to test: Almost all Quantum Computing promises are a big bluff They cannot be fulfilled due to unescapable existence of the real world in 10 -1000 years Even if one would build real QC device – it has no suitable problems All this resonated with my feelings How to test? Ask publicly prominent lecturers at big conferences nasty questions!

Basic ideas and reality VI Nasty questions to ask: What QC managed to factorize using the famous Shor’s algorithm during last fifteen yeas, except 21=3x7 and 15=3x5 (not yet done)? How, e.g. use anyons , not onions, for QC? What, except modeling of not too big strongly interacting system could be subject of QC? These questions were tested at Euroscience open forum, July 2012 (~4000 attendees) and ICPEAC, July 2013 (~1000). There was no short, clear and/or convincing answer! So, we get together and listened about pro and cons from experts in the field

Quantum Computing controversy Quantum Computation: A Grand Mathematical Challenge for the Twenty-First Century and the Millennium”, S. J. Lomonaco, Jr., (2002). “I believe that, in spite of appearances, the quantum computing story is nearing its end, not because somebody proves that it is impossible, but rather because 20 years is a typical lifetime of any big bubble in science, M. I. Dyakonov (2012). Who is right? We have experts here! Listen, ask question, decide.

Thank you for attention Scientist are responsible for both informing and misinforming society. Thank you for attention GOOD APPETITE!