MIT Scientist Offers $100,000 to Anyone Who Can Prove Quantum Computing Is Impossible - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Scott Aaronson, a scientist at MIT who works mostly with theoretical quantum computers, issued a challenge to all of those deniers out there: prove that "scalable quantum computing is impossible in the physical world," and Aaronson will personally pony up $100,000 to the winner. Aaronson works with quantum computing theory all day; sounds like he's sick of the constant chatter that quantum computing is not scalable, that the theory is purely theoretical. (Check out our interview with Seth Lloyd for a great beginner's guide to quantum computing.) There are as many skeptics as believers out there, so Aaronson is asking them to step up and prove that quantum computers will never be able to do useful work. "Useful work" is a key phrase in the contest; so-called "toy" quantum computers, using only a few electrons, are already proven to exist, so the challenge is more about larger, scalable quantum computers. Here's Aaronson addressing the problem of disproving a theory, and responding to the accusation that his challenge is the equivalent of proving Bigfoot doesn't exist: [release]Whether Bigfoot exists is a question about the contingent history of evolution on Earth. By contrast, whether scalable quantum computing is possible is a question about the laws of physics. It’s perfectly conceivable that future developments in physics would conflict with scalable quantum computing, in the same way that relativity conflicts with faster-than-light communication, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics conflicts with perpetuum mobiles. It’s for such a development in physics that I’m offering this prize.[/release] It's pretty unlikely it'll ever happen; like Aaronson notes, if anybody actually managed to prove this, the world would hear about it and his $100,000 would end up supplementing some Nobel money or something. Still though, we like the gumption of offering cash money to your harshest critics.[/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-02/mit-scientist-offers-100000-anyone-who-can-prove-quantum-computing-impossible[/url]

i'm waiting for someone to say something witty and claim this prize money

Why would it be impossible if we cannot even prove its possible.

Oh that's easy x/0=E

Well, looks like I'm gonna have to learn quantum computing

Better bust out my copy of Quantum Computing for Dummies. [editline]1[/editline] [url=http://www.math.hawaii.edu/~jb/quantum.pdf]No, I'm serious.[/url]

obligatory wtf is this nerd shit.

Quantum computing is simultaneously impossible and possible

[QUOTE=teh pirate;34583747]Quantum computing is simultaneously impossible and possible[/QUOTE] You now have $100,000 but at the same time do not

Wait, wasn't it proven possible already?

So D-wave systems is a fraud? [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems#2009_Google_demonstration[/url]

Let's also go claim the prize money to prove the time cube is impossible. Those making the claims have to prove them.

Oh boy

[QUOTE=teh pirate;34583747]Quantum computing is simultaneously impossible and possible[/QUOTE] Fuck I wanted to make this joke

[QUOTE=Goberfish;34584117]You now have $100,000 but at the same time do not[/QUOTE] Schrödinger money?

Its impossible. How am I right? I'm right because I say I'm fucking right.

[QUOTE=Jrock455;34584920]Schrödinger money?[/QUOTE] Now all you have to do is donate it to the US Government and watch as the economy is simultaneously fixed and destroyed.

The money will only disappear when you look for it.

I'd laugh if it turned out that it's possible.

[QUOTE=Jrock455;34584920]Schrödinger money?[/QUOTE] Schrödinger's cash

[QUOTE=Gears of duty;34586794]Schrödinger's cash[/QUOTE] [B]Schrödinger's gift card[/B] [I]Is it valid? The Expire date has been scratched off! WHO WILL EVER KNOW[/I]

[QUOTE=BenJammin';34583690]obligatory wtf is this nerd shit.[/QUOTE] [video=youtube;qk9LK7YCfN0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk9LK7YCfN0&feature=player_detailpage[/video] Also, $100,000 is a little low, I'm not even going to make an effort :v:

[QUOTE=RichardCQ;34586712]Now all you have to do is donate it to the US Government and watch as the economy is simultaneously fixed and destroyed.[/QUOTE] Then watch Robert Peston try to explain this in his funny speaking pattern

Aren't you only supposed to prove positives?

[QUOTE=Master X;34588604]Aren't you only supposed to prove positives?[/QUOTE] Well under the scientific method you can't outright prove something, only disprove it. If 99 experiments confirm your hypothesis, but 1 experiment does not, then you have a problem with your hypothesis (assuming that all 100 experiments were conducted accurately).

[QUOTE=Camundongo;34588661]Well under the scientific method you can't outright prove something, only disprove it. If 99 experiments confirm your hypothesis, but 1 experiment does not, then you have a problem with your hypothesis (assuming that all 100 experiments were conducted accurately).[/QUOTE] I suppose you're right... =/ But in a case like proving the existence of God, it's not an atheist's job to disprove his existence, but a theists job to prove it, right? If so, why is that scenario different? Ehhhh... nvm, that's entirely different I guess.

Some dude is gonna spend twenty months designing some quantum computer, and it's gonna turn out to be possible. No $100,000 for that dumbass!

I may not be able to prove it's possible, but they can't prove it's impossible! i'll take my cheque now thankyou.

'Scalable', I think, is the keyword here. Although we have been able to put macroscale objects into superposition...

[QUOTE=Source;34590297]I may not be able to prove it's possible, but they can't prove it's impossible! i'll take my cheque now thankyou.[/QUOTE] Sorry, MIT only hands out checks. :v: