Originally Posted by mothergoose729
From what I have read, quantum computers could have up to a 13 distinct states, which could allow them to operate across many more prime numbers. The initial research suggests that they could be very powerful for purposes of cryptography, because they have the potential to factor very large prime numbers very quickly. There really is not guarantee that they would be faster or smaller for other types of computing though. I think among the biggest problems is they are having a hard time saving quantum states. It is difficult to have sophisticated software without reliable memory (at least in a Von Neumann architecture).
The transistor method shouldn't require the quantum state issue though, just adjustable voltages though. like 0 volts = 0 .00001 volts = 1, .000015 volts = 2 etc. etc.
Fine tuned enough you should be able to send a byte instead of a bit per every gate opening which would in theory make it 8 times faster than regular transistors, so if you can shrink them down to say, 48nm or whatever, at the same clock speeds, would be able to do the same amount of work as a 7nm current CPU.
I'm probably way over simplifying it and it wouldn't work the way I'm imagining it, but the multiple states of current method neurons use could in theory do the job I would think.
Pound per pound, brain matter still smashes the the most advanced of silicon by multiple orders of magnitude in processing power at a tiny fraction of power consumption using that method, so I don't see why emulating nature wouldn't be the next logical step.
Originally Posted by Mand12
Not much smaller. One of the first basic quantum mechanics problems given to new students (sophomore level) is to calculate the tunneling through an infinite potential barrier. It's basic because it just follows an exponential decay through the width of the barrier.
Even with a perfect insulator of infinite resistance, tunneling is still a problem. It's often described as leakage current, and it's charge that's not going where it's supposed to.
There really are hard limits we're about to get to. Keep in mind, the spacing between atoms in most crystalline materials, including just about everything that makes up a processor, is 0.4 nanometers. It varies a bit, 0.39, 0.41, that sort of thing, but the range really is pretty narrow.
What the number of the side of the box refers to is getting down to single digits
in terms of how many atoms across it is. Contemplate on what something that's comprised of less than ten atoms looks like.
Don't know what college you went to but in the early 2000's it was Classical Mechanics/Newtonian Gravity ---> Electro-Magnetic Force ----> Weak and Strong Nuclear Force all before touching on quantum mechanics and relativistic physics. If I recall you gotta at least have at least Calc 3 under your belt before you even have a chance at Quantum MechanicsEdited by DNMock - 7/26/16 at 12:02pm