Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 1 of 11

Quantum computer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A quantum computer is a device for computation that makes

direct use of quantum mechanical phenomena, such as
superposition and entanglement, to perform operations on data.
Quantum computers are different from traditional computers
based on transistors. The basic principle behind quantum
computation is that quantum properties can be used to represent
data and perform operations on these data.[1] A theoretical model
is the quantum Turing machine, also known as the universal
quantum computer.

Although quantum computing is still in its infancy, experiments

have been carried out in which quantum computational
operations were executed on a very small number of qubits
(quantum bit). Both practical and theoretical research continues, The Bloch sphere is a representation
and many national government and military funding agencies of a qubit, the fundamental building
support quantum computing research to develop quantum block of quantum computers.
computers for both civilian and national security purposes, such
as cryptanalysis.[2]

If large-scale quantum computers can be built, they will be able to solve certain problems much faster
than any current classical computers (for example Shor's algorithm). Quantum computers don't allow the
computations of functions that are not theoretically computable by classical computers, i.e. they do not
alter the Church–Turing thesis. The gain is only in efficiency.

Contents
■ 1 Basis
■ 2 Bits vs. qubits
■ 3 Operation
■ 4 Potential
■ 4.1 Quantum decoherence
■ 5 Developments
■ 6 Relation to computational complexity theory
■ 7 See also
■ 8 References
■ 8.1 General references
■ 9 External links

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010
Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 2 of 11

Basis
A classical computer has a memory made up of bits, where each bit represents either a one or a zero. A
quantum computer maintains a sequence of qubits. A single qubit can represent a one, a zero, or,
crucially, any quantum superposition of these; moreover, a pair of qubits can be in any quantum
superposition of 4 states, and three qubits in any superposition of 8. In general a quantum computer with
n qubits can be in an arbitrary superposition of up to 2n different states simultaneously (this compares to
n
a normal computer that can only be in one of these 2 states at any one time). A quantum computer
operates by manipulating those qubits with a fixed sequence of quantum logic gates. The sequence of
gates to be applied is called a quantum algorithm.

An example of an implementation of qubits for a quantum computer could start with the use of particles
with two spin states: "down" and "up" (typically written and , or and ). But in fact any
system possessing an observable quantity A which is conserved under time evolution and such that A has
at least two discrete and sufficiently spaced consecutive eigenvalues, is a suitable candidate for
implementing a qubit. This is true because any such system can be mapped onto an effective spin-1/2
system.

Bits vs. qubits

Consider first a classical computer that operates on a three-bit
register. The state of the computer at any time is a probability
3
distribution over the 2 = 8 different three-bit strings 000, 001,
010, 011, 100, 101, 110, 111. If it is a deterministic computer,
then it is in exactly one of these states with probability 1. However,
if it is a probabilistic computer, then there is a possibility of it being
in any one of a number of different states. We can describe this
probabilistic state by eight nonnegative numbers a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h
(where a = probability computer is in state 000, b = probability
computer is in state 001, etc.). There is a restriction that these
probabilities sum to 1.

The state of a three-qubit quantum computer is similarly described Qubits are made up of controlled
by an eight-dimensional vector (a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h), called a ket. particles and the means of
However, instead of adding to one, the sum of the squares of the control (e.g. devices that trap
2 2 2 particles and switch them from
coefficient magnitudes, | a | + | b | + ... + | h | , must equal one state to another).[3]
one. Moreover, the coefficients are complex numbers. Since states
are represented by complex wavefunctions, two states being added
together will undergo interference. This is a key difference between quantum computing and
probabilistic classical computing.[4]

If you measure the three qubits, then you will observe a three-bit string. The probability of measuring a
string will equal the squared magnitude of that string's coefficients (using our example, probability that
we read state as 000 = | a | 2, probability that we read state as 001 = | b | 2, etc..). Thus a measurement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010
Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 3 of 11

of the quantum state with coefficients (a,b,...,h) gives the classical probability distribution
( | a | 2, | b | 2,..., | h | 2). We say that the quantum state "collapses" to a classical state.
Note that an eight-dimensional vector can be specified in many different ways, depending on what basis
you choose for the space. The basis of three-bit strings 000, 001, ..., 111 is known as the computational
basis, and is often convenient, but other bases of unit-length, orthogonal vectors can also be used. Ket
notation is often used to make explicit the choice of basis. For example, the state (a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h) in the
computational basis can be written as

,
where, e.g., = (0,0,1,0,0,0,0,0).

The computational basis for a single qubit (two dimensions) is = (1,0), = (0,1), but another
common basis are the eigenvectors of the Pauli-x operator: and
.

Note that although recording a classical state of n bits, a 2n-dimensional probability distribution, requires
an exponential number of real numbers, practically we can always think of the system as being exactly
one of the n-bit strings—we just don't know which one. Quantum mechanically, this is not the case, and
all 2n complex coefficients need to be kept track of to see how the quantum system evolves. For
example, a 300-qubit quantum computer has a state described by 2300 (approximately 1090) complex
numbers, more than the number of atoms in the observable universe.

Operation
While a classical three-bit state and a quantum three-qubit state are both eight-dimensional vectors, they
are manipulated quite differently for classical or quantum computation. For computing in either case, the
system must be initialized, for example into the all-zeros string, , corresponding to the vector
(1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0). In classical randomized computation, the system evolves according to the application
of stochastic matrices, which preserve that the probabilities add up to one (i.e., preserve the L1 norm). In
quantum computation, on the other hand, allowed operations are unitary matrices, which are effectively
rotations (they preserve that the sum of the squares add up to one, the Euclidean or L2 norm). (Exactly
what unitaries can be applied depend on the physics of the quantum device.) Consequently, since
rotations can be undone by rotating backward, quantum computations are reversible. (Technically,
quantum operations can be probabilistic combinations of unitaries, so quantum computation really does
generalize classical computation. See quantum circuit for a more precise formulation.)

Finally, upon termination of the algorithm, the result needs to be read off. In the case of a classical
computer, we sample from the probability distribution on the three-bit register to obtain one definite
three-bit string, say 000. Quantum mechanically, we measure the three-qubit state, which is equivalent
to collapsing the quantum state down to a classical distribution (with the coefficients in the classical
state being the squared magnitudes of the coefficients for the quantum state, as described above)
followed by sampling from that distribution. Note that this destroys the original quantum state. Many
algorithms will only give the correct answer with a certain probability, however by repeatedly
initializing, running and measuring the quantum computer, the probability of getting the correct answer
can be increased.

For more details on the sequences of operations used for various quantum algorithms, see universal
quantum computer, Shor's algorithm, Grover's algorithm, Deutsch-Jozsa algorithm, amplitude

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010
Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 4 of 11

amplification, quantum Fourier transform, quantum gate, quantum adiabatic algorithm and quantum
error correction.

Potential
Integer factorization is believed to be computationally infeasible with an ordinary computer for large
integers only if they are the product of few prime numbers (e.g., products of two 300-digit primes).[5] By
comparison, a quantum computer could efficiently solve this problem using Shor's algorithm to find its
factors. This ability would allow a quantum computer to decrypt many of the cryptographic systems in
use today, in the sense that there would be a polynomial time (in the number of digits of the integer)
algorithm for solving the problem. In particular, most of the popular public key ciphers are based on the
difficulty of factoring integers (or the related discrete logarithm problem which can also be solved by
Shor's algorithm), including forms of RSA. These are used to protect secure Web pages, encrypted
email, and many other types of data. Breaking these would have significant ramifications for electronic
privacy and security.

However, other existing cryptographic algorithms don't appear to be broken by these algorithms.[6][7]
Some public-key algorithms are based on problems other than the integer factorization and discrete
logarithm problems to which Shor's algorithm applies, like the McEliece cryptosystem based on a
problem in coding theory.[6][8] Lattice based cryptosystems are also not known to be broken by quantum
computers, and finding a polynomial time algorithm for solving the dihedral hidden subgroup problem,
which would break many lattice based cryptosystems, is a well-studied open problem.[9] It has been
proven that applying Grover's algorithm to break a symmetric (secret key) algorithm by brute force
requires roughly 2n/2 invocations of the underlying cryptographic algorithm, compared with roughly 2n
in the classical case,[10] meaning that symmetric key lengths are effectively halved: AES-256 would
have the same security against an attack using Grover's algorithm that AES-128 has against classical
brute-force search (see Key size). Quantum cryptography could potentially fulfill some of the functions
of public key cryptography.

Besides factorization and discrete logarithms, quantum algorithms offering a more than polynomial
speedup over the best known classical algorithm have been found for several problems,[11] including the
simulation of quantum physical processes from chemistry and solid state physics, the approximation of
Jones polynomials, and solving Pell's equation. No mathematical proof has been found that shows that
an equally fast classical algorithm cannot be discovered, although this is considered unlikely. For some
problems, quantum computers offer a polynomial speedup. The most well-known example of this is
quantum database search, which can be solved by Grover's algorithm using quadratically fewer queries
to the database than are required by classical algorithms. In this case the advantage is provable. Several
other examples of provable quantum speedups for query problems have subsequently been discovered,
such as for finding collisions in two-to-one functions and evaluating NAND trees.

Consider a problem that has these four properties:

1. The only way to solve it is to guess answers repeatedly and check them,
2. There are n possible answers to check,
3. Every possible answer takes the same amount of time to check, and
4. There are no clues about which answers might be better: generating possibilities randomly is just
as good as checking them in some special order.

An example of this is a password cracker that attempts to guess the password for an encrypted file
(assuming that the password has a maximum possible length).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010
Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 5 of 11

For problems with all four properties, the time for a quantum computer to solve this will be proportional
to the square root of n. That can be a very large speedup, reducing some problems from years to
seconds. It can be used to attack symmetric ciphers such as Triple DES and AES by attempting to guess
the secret key.

Grover's algorithm can also be used to obtain a quadratic speed-up [over a brute-force search] for a class
of problems known as NP-complete.

Since chemistry and nanotechnology rely on understanding quantum systems, and such systems are
impossible to simulate in an efficient manner classically, many believe quantum simulation will be one
of the most important applications of quantum computing.[12]

There are a number of practical difficulties in building a quantum computer, and thus far quantum
computers have only solved trivial problems. David DiVincenzo, of IBM, listed the following
requirements for a practical quantum computer:[13]

■ scalable physically to increase the number of qubits;

■ qubits can be initialized to arbitrary values;
■ quantum gates faster than decoherence time;
■ universal gate set;
■ qubits can be read easily.

Quantum decoherence
One of the greatest challenges is controlling or removing quantum decoherence. This usually means
isolating the system from its environment as the slightest interaction with the external world would
cause the system to decohere. This effect is irreversible, as it is non-unitary, and is usually something
that should be highly controlled, if not avoided. Decoherence times for candidate systems, in particular
the transverse relaxation time T2 (for NMR and MRI technology, also called the dephasing time),
typically range between nanoseconds and seconds at low temperature.[4]

These issues are more difficult for optical approaches as the timescales are orders of magnitude lower
and an often cited approach to overcoming them is optical pulse shaping. Error rates are typically
proportional to the ratio of operating time to decoherence time, hence any operation must be completed
much more quickly than the decoherence time.

If the error rate is small enough, it is thought to be possible to use quantum error correction, which
corrects errors due to decoherence, thereby allowing the total calculation time to be longer than the
decoherence time. An often cited figure for required error rate in each gate is 10−4. This implies that
each gate must be able to perform its task in one 10,000th of the decoherence time of the system.

Meeting this scalability condition is possible for a wide range of systems. However, the use of error
correction brings with it the cost of a greatly increased number of required qubits. The number required
to factor integers using Shor's algorithm is still polynomial, and thought to be between L and L2, where L
is the number of bits in the number to be factored; error correction algorithms would inflate this figure
by an additional factor of L. For a 1000-bit number, this implies a need for about 104 qubits without
error correction.[14] With error correction, the figure would rise to about 107 qubits. Note that
2 7
computation time is about L or about 10 steps and on 1 MHz, about 10 seconds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010
Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 6 of 11

A very different approach to the stability-decoherence problem is to create a topological quantum

computer with anyons, quasi-particles used as threads and relying on braid theory to form stable logic
gates.[15][16]

Developments
There are a number of quantum computing candidates, among those:

■ Superconductor-based quantum computers (including SQUID-based quantum computers)[17]

■ Trapped ion quantum computer
■ Optical lattices
■ Topological quantum computer[18]
■ Quantum dot on surface (e.g. the Loss-DiVincenzo quantum computer)
■ Nuclear magnetic resonance on molecules in solution (liquid NMR)
■ Solid state NMR Kane quantum computers
■ Electrons on helium quantum computers
■ Cavity quantum electrodynamics (CQED)
■ Molecular magnet
■ Fullerene-based ESR quantum computer
■ Optic-based quantum computers (Quantum optics)
■ Diamond-based quantum computer[19][20][21]
■ Bose–Einstein condensate-based quantum computer[22]
■ Transistor-based quantum computer - string quantum computers with entrainment of positive
holes using an electrostatic trap
■ Spin-based quantum computer
■ Adiabatic quantum computation[23]
■ Rare-earth-metal-ion-doped inorganic crystal based quantum computers[24][25]

The large number of candidates demonstrates that the topic, in spite of rapid progress, is still in its
infancy. But at the same time there is also a vast amount of flexibility.

In 2005, researchers at the University of Michigan built a semiconductor chip which functioned as an
ion trap. Such devices, produced by standard lithography techniques, may point the way to scalable
quantum computing tools.[26] An improved version was made in 2006.[citation needed]

In 2009, researchers at Yale University created the first rudimentary solid-state quantum processor. The
two-qubit superconducting chip was able to run elementary algorithms. Each of the two artificial atoms
(or qubits) were made up of a billion aluminum atoms but they acted like a single one that could occupy
two different energy states.[27][28]

Another team, working at the University of Bristol, also created a silicon-based quantum computing
chip, based on quantum optics. The team was able to run Shor's algorithm on the chip.[29]

Relation to computational complexity theory

Main article: Quantum complexity theory

The class of problems that can be efficiently solved by quantum computers is called BQP, for "bounded
error, quantum, polynomial time". Quantum computers only run probabilistic algorithms, so BQP on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010
Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 7 of 11

quantum computers is the counterpart of BPP on classical

computers. It is defined as the set of problems solvable with a
polynomial-time algorithm, whose probability of error is
bounded away from one half.[30] A quantum computer is said to
"solve" a problem if, for every instance, its answer will be right
with high probability. If that solution runs in polynomial time,
then that problem is in BQP.

BQP is contained in the complexity class #P (or more precisely

in the associated class of decision problems P#P),[31] which is a
subclass of PSPACE.
The suspected relationship of BQP
BQP is suspected to be disjoint from NP-complete and a strict to other problem spaces.[30]
superset of P, but that is not known. Both integer factorization
and discrete log are in BQP. Both of these problems are NP problems suspected to be outside BPP, and
hence outside P. Both are suspected to not be NP-complete. There is a common misconception that
quantum computers can solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time. That is not known to be true,
and is generally suspected to be false.[31]

Although quantum computers may be faster than classical computers, those described above can't solve
any problems that classical computers can't solve, given enough time and memory (however, those
amounts might be practically infeasible). A Turing machine can simulate these quantum computers, so
such a quantum computer could never solve an undecidable problem like the halting problem. The
existence of "standard" quantum computers does not disprove the Church–Turing thesis.[30] It has been
speculated that theories of quantum gravity, such as M-theory or loop quantum gravity, may allow even
faster computers to be built. Currently, it's an open problem to even define computation in such theories
due to the problem of time, i.e. there's no obvious way to describe what it means for an observer to
submit input to a computer and later receive output.[32]

See also
■ Photonic computing
■ Timeline of quantum computing
■ Quantum bus
■ Post-quantum cryptography
■ Chemical computer
■ DNA computer
■ Molecular computer
■ List of emerging technologies

References
1. ^ "Quantum Computing with Molecules
(http://www.media.mit.edu/physics/publications/papers/98.06.sciam/0698gershenfeld.html) " article in
Scientific American by Neil Gershenfeld and Isaac L. Chuang - a generally accessible overview of quantum
computing and so on.
2. ^ Quantum Information Science and Technology Roadmap (http://qist.lanl.gov/qcomp_map.shtml) for a
sense of where the research is heading.
3. ^ Waldner, Jean-Baptiste (2007). Nanocomputers and Swarm Intelligence. London: ISTE. p. 157.
ISBN 2746215160.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010
Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 8 of 11

4. ^ a b David P. DiVincenzo (1995). "Quantum Computation". Science 270 (5234): 255–261.

doi:10.1126/science.270.5234.255 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.270.5234.255) .
5. ^ Integer Factoring (http://modular.fas.harvard.edu/edu/Fall2001/124/misc/arjen_lenstra_factoring.pdf) By
ARJEN K. LENSTRA - Designs, Codes and Cryptography, 19, 101–128 (2000) Kluwer Academic
Publishers
6. ^ a b Daniel J. Bernstein, Introduction to Post-Quantum Cryptography
(http://pqcrypto.org/www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9783540887010-
c1.pdf) . Introduction to Daniel J. Bernstein, Johannes Buchmann, Erik Dahmen (editors). Post-quantum
cryptography. Springer, Berlin, 2009. ISBN 978-3-540-88701-0
7. ^ See also pqcrypto.org (http://pqcrypto.org/) , a bibliography maintained by Daniel J. Bernstein and Tanja
Lange on cryptography not known to be broken by quantum computing.
8. ^ Robert J. McEliece. "A public-key cryptosystem based on algebraic coding theory
(http://ipnpr.jpl.nasa.gov/progress_report2/42-44/44N.PDF) ." Jet Propulsion Laboratory DSN Progress
Report 42–44, 114–116.
9. ^ Kobayashi, H.; Gall, F.L. (2006). "Dihedral Hidden Subgroup Problem: A Survey". Information and Media
Technologies (J-STAGE) 1 (1): 178–185
10. ^ Bennett C.H., Bernstein E., Brassard G., Vazirani U., The strengths and weaknesses of quantum
computation (http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~vazirani/pubs/bbbv.ps) . SIAM Journal on Computing 26(5): 1510
-1523 (1997).
11. ^ Quantum Algorithm Zoo (http://www.its.caltech.edu/~sjordan/zoo.html) - Stephen Jordan's Homepage
12. ^ The Father of Quantum Computing (http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/02/72734) By
Quinn Norton 02.15.2007, Wired.com
13. ^ David P. DiVincenzo, IBM (2000-04-13). "The Physical Implementation of Quantum
Computation" (http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0002077) . http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0002077. Retrieved
2006-11-17.
14. ^ M. I. Dyakonov, Université Montpellier (2006-10-14). "Is Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation Really
Possible?" (http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0610117) . http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0610117. Retrieved 2007-
02-16.
15. ^ Freedman, Michael; Alexei Kitaev, Michael Larsen, Zhenghan Wang (2002-10-20). "Topological
Quantum Computation". Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 40 (1): 31–38. doi:10.1090/S0273-
0979-02-00964-3 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1090%2FS0273-0979-02-00964-3) .
16. ^ Monroe, Don, Anyons: The breakthrough quantum computing needs?
(http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg20026761.700-anyons-the-breakthrough-quantum-
computing-needs.html) , New Scientist, 1 October 2008
17. ^ Clarke, John; Wilhelm, Frank (June 19, 2008). "Superconducting quantum
bits" (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7198/full/nature07128.html) . Nature 453 (7198): 1031–
1042. doi:10.1038/nature07128 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1038%2Fnature07128) . ISSN 0028-0836
(http://www.worldcat.org/issn/0028-0836) . PMID 18563154
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18563154) .
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7198/full/nature07128.html.
18. ^ Nayak, Chetan; Simon, Steven; Stern, Ady (2008). "Nonabelian Anyons and Quantum
Computation" (http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1889) . Rev Mod Phys 80: 1083. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.80.1083
(http://dx.doi.org/10.1103%2FRevModPhys.80.1083) . http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1889.
19. ^ Nizovtsev, A. P.; Kilin, S. Ya.; Jelezko, F.; Gaebal, T.; Popa, I.; Gruber, A.; Wrachtrup, J. (October 19,
2004). "A quantum computer based on NV centers in diamond: Optically detected nutations of single
electron and nuclear spins" (http://www.springerlink.com/content/5p6554lg35716085/) . Optics and
Spectroscopy 99 (2): 248–260. doi:10.1134/1.2034610 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1134%2F1.2034610) .
http://www.springerlink.com/content/5p6554lg35716085/.
20. ^ Wolfgang Gruener, TG Daily (2007-06-01). "Research indicates diamonds could be key to quantum
storage" (http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/32306/118/) .
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/32306/118/. Retrieved 2007-06-04.
21. ^ Neumann, P.; Mizuochi, N.; Rempp, F.; Hemmer, P.; Watanabe, H.; Yamasaki, S.; Jacques, V.; Gaebel, T.
et al. (June 6, 2008). "Multipartite Entanglement Among Single Spins in
Diamond" (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/320/5881/1326) . Science 320 (5881): 1326–
1329. doi:10.1126/science.1157233 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.1157233) . PMID 18535240

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010
Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 9 of 11

(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18535240) .
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/320/5881/1326.
22. ^ Rene Millman, IT PRO (2007-08-03). "Trapped atoms could advance quantum
computing" (http://www.itpro.co.uk/news/121086/trapped-atoms-could-advance-quantum-computing.html) .
http://www.itpro.co.uk/news/121086/trapped-atoms-could-advance-quantum-computing.html. Retrieved
2007-07-26.
23. ^ William M Kaminsky, MIT (Date Unknown). "Scalable Superconducting Architecture for Adiabatic
Quantum Computation" (http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0403090) . http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0403090.
Retrieved 2007-02-19.
24. ^ Ohlsson, N.; Mohan, R. K.; Kröll, S. (January 1, 2002). "Quantum computer hardware based on rare-earth-
ion-doped inorganic crystals" (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6TVF-44J3RM9-
J/2/307aab59d157ddd2ebb8281f76f89138) . Opt. Commun. 201 (1–3): 71–77. doi:10.1016/S0030-4018(01)
01666-2 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2FS0030-4018%2801%2901666-2) .
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6TVF-44J3RM9-J/2/307aab59d157ddd2ebb8281f76f89138.
25. ^ Longdell, J. J.; Sellars, M. J.; Manson, N. B. (September 23, 2004). "Demonstration of conditional
quantum phase shift between ions in a solid" (http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v93/i13/e130503) . Phys.
Rev. Lett. 93 (13): 130503. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.130503 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1103%
2FPhysRevLett.93.130503) . PMID 15524694 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15524694) .
http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v93/i13/e130503.
26. ^ Ann Arbor (2005-12-12). "U-M develops scalable and mass-producible quantum computer
chip" (http://www.umich.edu/news/index.html?Releases/2005/Dec05/r121205b) .
http://www.umich.edu/news/index.html?Releases/2005/Dec05/r121205b. Retrieved 2006-11-17.
27. ^ Dicarlo, L; Chow, JM; Gambetta, JM; Bishop, LS; Johnson, BR; Schuster, DI; Majer, J; Blais, A et al.
(2009-06-28). "Demonstration of two-qubit algorithms with a superconducting quantum
processor" (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/nature08121.pdf) . Nature 460 (7252):
240–4. doi:10.1038/nature08121 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1038%2Fnature08121) . ISSN 0028-0836
(http://www.worldcat.org/issn/0028-0836) . PMID 19561592
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19561592) .
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/nature08121.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-02.
28. ^ "Scientists Create First Electronic Quantum Processor" (http://opa.yale.edu/news/article.aspx?id=6764) .
2009-07-02. http://opa.yale.edu/news/article.aspx?id=6764. Retrieved 2009-07-02.
29. ^ New Scientist (2009-09-04). "Code-breaking quantum algorithm runs on a silicon
chip" (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17736-codebreaking-quantum-algorithm-run-on-a-silicon-
chip.html) . http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17736-codebreaking-quantum-algorithm-run-on-a-silicon
-chip.html. Retrieved 2009-10-14.
30. ^ a b c Michael Nielsen and Isaac Chuang (2000). Quantum Computation and Quantum Information.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-63503-9. OCLC 174527496
(http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/174527496) .
31. ^ a b Bernstein and Vazirani, Quantum complexity theory, SIAM Journal on Computing, 26(5):1411-1473,
1997. [1] (http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~vazirani/bv.ps)
32. ^ Scott Aaronson, NP-complete Problems and Physical Reality (http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0502072) ,
ACM SIGACT News, Vol. 36, No. 1. (March 2005), pp. 30-52, section 7 "Quantum Gravity": "[...] to
anyone who wants a test or benchmark for a favorite quantum gravity theory,[author's footnote: That is, one
without all the bother of making numerical predictions and comparing them to observation] let me humbly
propose the following: can you define Quantum Gravity Polynomial-Time? [...] until we can say what it
means for a ‘user’ to specify an ‘input’ and ‘later’ receive an ‘output’—there is no such thing as
computation, not even theoretically." (emphasis in original)

General references
■ Derek Abbott, Charles R. Doering, Carlton M. Caves, Daniel M. Lidar, Howard E. Brandt, Alexander R.
Hamilton, David K. Ferry, Julio Gea-Banacloche, Sergey M. Bezrukov, and Laszlo B. Kish (2003).
"Dreams versus Reality: Plenary Debate Session on Quantum Computing". Quantum Information
Processing 2 (6): 449–472. doi:10.1023/B:QINP.0000042203.24782.9a (http://dx.doi.org/10.1023%
2FB%3AQINP.0000042203.24782.9a) . arXiv:quant-ph/0310130 (http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010
Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 10 of 11

ph/0310130) . (Alternative Location (free) at Michigan university's repository Deep Blue

(http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/45526) )
■ David P. DiVincenzo (2000). "The Physical Implementation of Quantum Computation". Experimental
Proposals for Quantum Computation. arXiv:quant-ph/0002077 (http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0002077)
■ David P. DiVincenzo (1995). "Quantum Computation". Science 270 (5234): 255–261.
doi:10.1126/science.270.5234.255 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.270.5234.255) . Table 1 lists
switching and dephasing times for various systems.
■ Richard Feynman (1982). "Simulating physics with computers". International Journal of Theoretical
Physics 21: 467. doi:10.1007/BF02650179 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1007%2FBF02650179) .
■ Gregg Jaeger (2006). Quantum Information: An Overview. Berlin: Springer. ISBN 0-387-35725-4.
OCLC 255569451 (http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/255569451) .
■ Michael Nielsen and Isaac Chuang (2000). Quantum Computation and Quantum Information.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-63503-9. OCLC 174527496
(http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/174527496) .
■ Stephanie Frank Singer (2005). Linearity, Symmetry, and Prediction in the Hydrogen Atom. New York:
Springer. ISBN 0-387-24637-1. OCLC 253709076 (http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/253709076) .
■ Giuliano Benenti (2004). Principles of Quantum Computation and Information Volume 1. New Jersey:
World Scientific. ISBN 9-812-38830-3. OCLC 179950736 (http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/179950736) .
■ David P. DiVincenzo (2000). "The Physical Implementation of Quantum Computation". Experimental
Proposals for Quantum Computation. arXiv:quant-ph/0002077 (http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0002077) .
■ Sam Lomonaco Four Lectures on Quantum Computing given at Oxford University in July 2006
(http://www.csee.umbc.edu/~lomonaco/Lectures.html#OxfordLectures)
■ C. Adami, N.J. Cerf. (1998). "Quantum computation with linear optics". arXiv:quant-ph/9806048v1
(http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9806048v1) .

■ Joachim Stolze,; Dieter Suter, (2004). Quantum Computing. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 3527404384.

■ Ian Mitchell, (1998). "Computing Power into the 21st Century: Moore's Law and Beyond".
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/mitchell98computing.html.

■ Rolf Landauer, (1961). "Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process".
http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/053/ibmrd0503C.pdf.

■ Gordon E. Moore (1965). Cramming more components onto integrated circuits.

■ R.W. Keyes, (1988). Miniaturization of electronics and its limits.

■ M. A. Nielsen,; E. Knill, ; R. Laflamme,. "Complete Quantum Teleportation By Nuclear Magnetic

Resonance". http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/595490.html.

■ Lieven M.K. Vandersypen,; Constantino S. Yannoni, ; Isaac L. Chuang, (2000). Liquid state NMR
Quantum Computing.

■ Imai Hiroshi,; Hayashi Masahito, (2006). Quantum Computation and Information. Berlin: Springer.
ISBN 3540331328.

■ Andre Berthiaume, (1997). "Quantum Computation".

http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/article/berthiaume97quantum.html.

■ Daniel R. Simon, (1994). "On the Power of Quantum Computation". Institute of Electrical and Electronic
Engineers Computer Society Press. http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/simon94power.html.

■ "Seminar Post Quantum Cryptology". Chair for communication security at the Ruhr-University Bochum.
http://www.crypto.rub.de/its_seminar_ss08.html.

■ Laura Sanders, (2009). "First programmable quantum computer created".

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/49951/title/First_programmable_quantum_computer_created

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010
Quantum computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 11 of 11

External links
■ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: "Quantum Computing (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-
quantcomp/) " by Amit Hagar.
■ Quantiki (http://www.quantiki.org/) - Wiki and portal with free-content related to quantum
information science.
■ jQuantum: Java quantum circuit simulator (http://jquantum.sourceforge.net/jQuantumApplet.html)
■ QCAD: Quantum circuit emulator (http://www.phys.cs.is.nagoya-
u.ac.jp/~watanabe/qcad/index.html)
■ C++ Quantum Library (https://gna.org/projects/quantumlibrary)
■ Haskell Library for Quantum computations (http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-
scripts/package/quantum-arrow)
■ Video Lectures by David Deutsch (http://www.quiprocone.org/Protected/DD_lectures.htm)
■ Lectures at the Institut Henri Poincaré (slides and videos) (http://www.quantware.ups-
tlse.fr/IHP2006/)
■ Online lecture on An Introduction to Quantum Computing, Edward Gerjuoy (2008)
(http://nanohub.org/resources/4778)
■ Online Web-based Quantum Computer Simulator (University Of Patras, Wire Communications
Laboratory) (http://www.wcl.ece.upatras.gr/ai/resources/demo-quantum-simulation)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer"
Categories: Quantum information science | Computational models | Quantum cryptography |
Information theory | Computational complexity theory | Classes of computers | Theoretical computer
science

■ This page was last modified on 25 July 2010 at 23:17.

■ Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms
may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit
organization.

■ Privacy policy
■ About Wikipedia
■ Disclaimers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer 7/28/2010