Re: Quantum Computer Hardware

Dan Clemmensen (
Fri, 17 Apr 1998 21:59:49 -0400

Michael Nielsen wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Apr 1998, Dan Clemmensen wrote:
> > Quantum Electronics is an exciting field with tremendous promise, but what
> >
> > this article really shows is the quantum electronics is still in its early
> > ...
> This is a confusion of terms. Quantum electronics is not the same as
> quantum computing. Quantum electronics is simply electronics at a scale
> where quantum effects become important. It is not necessary to create a
> superposition of computational basis states in order to have a
> functioning quantum electronic device. Such superpositions are, however,
> essential to the functioning of a quantum computer (and they were
> certainly created in this implementation of Grover's algorithm), and they
> are what makes quantum computing a lot more difficult to achieve than
> quantum electronics.

Yes, I confused the terms. However, my point remains valid. The article
was about quantum computing, and demonstrates that quantum computing
is still primitive. IMO quantum electronics is also still primitive,
which was the point of departure for the rest of my message, which
argued that nanoelectronics is harder than nanomechanics. Basically
quantum electronics is necessary for both nanoelectronics and
quantum computing, but is not sufficient for quantum computing.