D-Wave Quantum Computer Is Here!! (A.I)

[singular_me]

no talk of the upcoming A.I weaponry of course. The speaker explains how to this computer will handle parallel universes... cubit devices will go into another universe to get what is needed... is this NOW happening to earth/mankind, or has happened since ever ???

yes it does change the meaning of reality by MUCH!

as I have said on here for a while, this is sci-fi out there!!!


===============

This CIA-Backed D-Wave Quantum Computer Will Change Your View Of Reality Forever
3 September 2016 GMT

http://www.activistpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/d-wave.jpg


‘Meanwhile as everyone was busy arguing over the bread and circus elections, the CIA was busy funding a computer so powerful that it is described as “tapping into the fundamental fabric of reality” and the man who owns the company says being near one is like “standing at the altar of an alien God.”

What exactly do you suppose they are doing with it?

You have to take a few minutes and watch this. It will change the way you look at “reality” forever.’

Aug 25, 2015
Geordie Rose, Founder of D-Wave (recent clients are Google and NASA) believes that the power of quantum computing is that we can `exploit parallel universes’ to solve problems that we have no other means of confirming. Simply put, quantum computers can think exponentially faster and simultaneously such that as they mature they will out pace us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqN_2jDVbOU

http://www.activistpost.com/2016/09/cia-backed-d-wave-quantum-computer-video.html

=========================

Quantum Computing and AI Tutorial

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETJcALOplOA

[crimethink]

Is it immune to EMP?

[Joshua01]

Skynet!

get to da choppa!!!!

[Ares]

cubit devices

It's Qubit. :)

Technology is always a double-edge sword. We learn a lot, but most of what we learn gets used for war and oppression by (((those))) who profit from it.

[Dogman]

Sadly war or rumors of war does drive cutting edge technologies!

Then in time those technologies that have dual use filter down into commercial use !

Been that way since the invention of the mark 1 mod 0 club !

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Forum runner

[Jerrylynnb]

I regret to report that I simply do not comprehend a bi-state device existing in both states *at the same time*.

No sir.

A bit is either 0 or 1, and to claim you have a device in which that bit is both 0 and 1 (at the same time), and call it something fancy like "cubit", is nonsense. You can suppose (in your mind's eye, that is), that this bit *CAN* be 0, and then, later (at a DIFFERENT TIME) it can be 1, but, those are two DISTINCT states of being, and, it makes one hell of a lot of difference which state it is at the time it is being queried.

I don't doubt that these "quantum" machines have a superfast cpu and reference cycle (how fast can these cubits be queried and have all their various "states" be returned), and that, due to their advances in parallel processing (where you have an incredible number of processors all humming along in symphony with each other - and that process, coordinating the multitude of processors so that they don't gum up the works against each other by flipping a "cubit" when a separate processor needs it to stay put for a few cycles, boggles the mind), but to try to explain it to a non-programmer audience by some nonsense like having their primordial unit of computing (the "cubit" instead of the "bit") be both "0" and "1" *AT THE SAME TIME*, sounds like someone is playing carnival barker to me.

I don't claim, not for a single minute, that the technology that I was part of (using those behemoth IBM mainframes) has any hold over what they are doing today (even back at IBM), but, to go off on a wild goose chase with that "being both 0 and 1 at the same time" is just poppycock, and, is best viewed as an attempt to explain something very complicated by someone who themselves doesn't truly understand it (if they did, they'd do a better job of spelling out just what is the breakthrough with this "quantum cubit" business - I suspect that the true breakthrough here is using supercooled temperatures so that they can take advantage of the superfast query and retrieval speeds, and, be able to have multiple queries at the same time without "cross-talk" which might return incorrect values randomly in a less than supercooled environment).

And if their unit, the "cubit" can truly hold a "0" and a "1" simultaneously, then, by heavens, they need some way to tell their processor(s) which one of these is being queried, else, just pick either a "0" or a "1" at random because it sounds like you are saying it doesn't matter, since BOTH are true.

Nonsense.

Maybe they just have a fundamental physical device (this "cubit") which can be a combination of two or more "bits", so, it can have a cubit(a) and also that same cubit(b) has the opposite value. That might make sense, but I ain't sure what to do with it, not right away, anyhow, because your processor would necessarily need to know whether to query the cubit(a) or the cubit(b) - this is going into Alice in Wonderland world - I think somebody is pulling some wool
over someone's eyes to get big bucks for "investment".

My two cents worth, and, I think I know something about mainframe electronic computing, you hear.

[Ares]

I regret to report that I simply do not comprehend a bi-state device existing in both states *at the same time*.

No sir.

A bit is either 0 or 1, and to claim you have a device in which that bit is both 0 and 1 (at the same time), and call it something fancy like "cubit", is nonsense. You can suppose (in your mind's eye, that is), that this bit *CAN* be 0, and then, later (at a DIFFERENT TIME) it can be 1, but, those are two DISTINCT states of being, and, it makes one hell of a lot of difference which state it is at the time it is being queried.

I don't doubt that these "quantum" machines have a superfast cpu and reference cycle (how fast can these cubits be queried and have all their various "states" be returned), and that, due to their advances in parallel processing (where you have an incredible number of processors all humming along in symphony with each other - and that process, coordinating the multitude of processors so that they don't gum up the works against each other by flipping a "cubit" when a separate processor needs it to stay put for a few cycles, boggles the mind), but to try to explain it to a non-programmer audience by some nonsense like having their primordial unit of computing (the "cubit" instead of the "bit") be both "0" and "1" *AT THE SAME TIME*, sounds like someone is playing carnival barker to me.

I don't claim, not for a single minute, that the technology that I was part of (using those behemoth IBM mainframes) has any hold over what they are doing today (even back at IBM), but, to go off on a wild goose chase with that "being both 0 and 1 at the same time" is just poppycock, and, is best viewed as an attempt to explain something very complicated by someone who themselves doesn't truly understand it (if they did, they'd do a better job of spelling out just what is the breakthrough with this "quantum cubit" business - I suspect that the true breakthrough here is using supercooled temperatures so that they can take advantage of the superfast query and retrieval speeds, and, be able to have multiple queries at the same time without "cross-talk" which might return incorrect values randomly in a less than supercooled environment).

And if their unit, the "cubit" can truly hold a "0" and a "1" simultaneously, then, by heavens, they need some way to tell their processor(s) which one of these is being queried, else, just pick either a "0" or a "1" at random because it sounds like you are saying it doesn't matter, since BOTH are true.

Nonsense.

Maybe they just have a fundamental physical device (this "cubit") which can be a combination of two or more "bits", so, it can have a cubit(a) and also that same cubit(b) has the opposite value. That might make sense, but I ain't sure what to do with it, not right away, anyhow, because your processor would necessarily need to know whether to query the cubit(a) or the cubit(b) - this is going into Alice in Wonderland world - I think somebody is pulling some wool
over someone's eyes to get big bucks for "investment".

My two cents worth, and, I think I know something about mainframe electronic computing, you hear.

You're confusing a bit with a Qubit (Quantum Bit). For a bit you're absolutely right, it can't be both and is a 1 or a 0. Qubits exist in the quantum realm and can be either a 1 a 0 or both at the same time.

The bit is the basic unit of information. It is used to represent information by computers. Regardless of its physical realization, a bit has two possible states typically thought of as 0 and 1, but more generally—and according to applications—interpretable as true and false, or any other dichotomous choice. An analogy to this is a light switch—its off position can be thought of as 0 and its on position as 1.

A qubit has a few similarities to a classical bit, but is overall very different. There are two possible outcomes for the measurement of a qubit—usually 0 and 1, like a bit. The difference is that whereas the state of a bit is either 0 or 1, the state of a qubit can also be a superposition of both.[4] It is possible to fully encode one bit in one qubit. However, a qubit can hold even more information, e.g. up to two bits using superdense coding.

For a system of n components, a complete description of its state in classical physics requires only n bits, whereas in quantum physics it requires 2n−1 complex numbers.[5

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qubit

[EE_]

As man gets further advanced, one day old technology will become the norm.

https://people.ucsc.edu/~caasanch/molotov.jpg

[Joshua01]

cubit devices

It's Qubit. :)

Technology is always a double-edge sword. We learn a lot, but most of what we learn gets used for war and oppression by (((those))) who profit from it.

Did someone call me?

http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/61/6189/Z441100Z/posters/star-trek-the-next-generation-q.jpg

[cheka.]

he tried to warn you

http://kbzk.images.worldnow.com/images/10252626_G.jpg

[Jerrylynnb]

Well, Ares, I've thought about this - I really have! I know something about big iron computing, you see, as I did that for over 30 years. If they've got a new device (super-cooled - that's important) that can hold more that ONE BIT, and they call it something fancy (like a quibit) because it just happens to make up more than one state (or the other), but can make two states (or the opposite, or composite, or whatever), it doesn't really matter how many "elements" it takes to fully describe the device because, in the end, each complex device "CAN" be described as an array (or directional sequence), where each item within the defining array IS but a mere "bit" (either "on" or "off"). If you studied high-school math you know that a "complex" number is really just a pair of numbers, taken both at the same time (math problems with complex numbers have to take into account MORE than just the real number value).

So it sounds like they just stumbled over a device that, as they were expecting, holds a "0", or a "1", but, then they discovered, probably to their surprise and failure to fully understand, these devices also can hold an additional state, which they are calling "both at the same time", but, which, in fact (which they probably still haven't fully grasped), is yet another value, and, so, their device is really two entities in which you can't pull them physically apart. It would be like purchasing a new kind of memory where, each bit can be a "0" or a "1", but, that same bit, without disturbing its current holding, can hold an additional value (I'd call it a "supra-bit") that comes with it, whether you like or not, or whether you use it or not.

So, the big breakthrough here is the super-cooling which yields access and retrieval speeds that boggle the mind (it leap-frogs way beyond Moore's law).

That extra state (their "quibit") is a benefit they probably haven't fully figured out just how their going to make good use of it (other than as an ordinary "bit").

It sure sounds like he is confused about it to me, and, I can promise you, I (nor any of my cohorts) would ever let any high-flutin' stage performer get away with such as that in front of an IBM crowd - no sir! We didn't put up with that kind of nonsense, and, really, nobody dared try.

Save your money. They ain't got that "super state" figured out yet, if ever.

But that super-cooling is damn worth it - you bet, cooling has always been the ticket. Just don't play it up for anything more than it really is, super fast access to memory and processing - that's enough, really.

[Ares]

Well, Ares, I've thought about this - I really have! I know something about big iron computing, you see, as I did that for over 30 years. If they've got a new device (super-cooled - that's important) that can hold more that ONE BIT, and they call it something fancy (like a quibit) because it just happens to make up more than one state (or the other), but can make two states (or the opposite, or composite, or whatever), it doesn't really matter how many "elements" it takes to fully describe the device because, in the end, each complex device "CAN" be described as an array (or directional sequence), where each item within the defining array IS but a mere "bit" (either "on" or "off"). If you studied high-school math you know that a "complex" number is really just a pair of numbers, taken both at the same time (math problems with complex numbers have to take into account MORE than just the real number value).

So it sounds like they just stumbled over a device that, as they were expecting, holds a "0", or a "1", but, then they discovered, probably to their surprise and failure to fully understand, these devices also can hold an additional state, which they are calling "both at the same time", but, which, in fact (which they probably still haven't fully grasped), is yet another value, and, so, their device is really two entities in which you can't pull them physically apart. It would be like purchasing a new kind of memory where, each bit can be a "0" or a "1", but, that same bit, without disturbing its current holding, can hold an additional value (I'd call it a "supra-bit") that comes with it, whether you like or not, or whether you use it or not.

So, the big breakthrough here is the super-cooling which yields access and retrieval speeds that boggle the mind (it leap-frogs way beyond Moore's law).

That extra state (their "quibit") is a benefit they probably haven't fully figured out just how their going to make good use of it (other than as an ordinary "bit").

It sure sounds like he is confused about it to me, and, I can promise you, I (nor any of my cohorts) would ever let any high-flutin' stage performer get away with such as that in front of an IBM crowd - no sir! We didn't put up with that kind of nonsense, and, really, nobody dared try.

Save your money. They ain't got that "super state" figured out yet, if ever.

But that super-cooling is damn worth it - you bet, cooling has always been the ticket. Just don't play it up for anything more than it really is, super fast access to memory and processing - that's enough, really.

You're not taking superpositioning into the equation. This explains what a Qubit is much better than I could.

Superposition
Think of a qubit as an electron in a magnetic field. The electron's spin may be either in alignment with the field, which is known as a spin-up state, or opposite to the field, which is known as a spin-down state. Changing the electron's spin from one state to another is achieved by using a pulse of energy, such as from a laser - let's say that we use 1 unit of laser energy. But what if we only use half a unit of laser energy and completely isolate the particle from all external influences? According to quantum law, the particle then enters a superposition of states, in which it behaves as if it were in both states simultaneously. Each qubit utilized could take a superposition of both 0 and 1. Thus, the number of computations that a quantum computer could undertake is 2^n, where n is the number of qubits used. A quantum computer comprised of 500 qubits would have a potential to do 2^500 calculations in a single step. This is an awesome number - 2^500 is infinitely more atoms than there are in the known universe (this is true parallel processing - classical computers today, even so called parallel processors, still only truly do one thing at a time: there are just two or more of them doing it). But how will these particles interact with each other? They would do so via quantum entanglement.
Entanglement
Particles that have interacted at some point retain a type of connection and can be entangled with each other in pairs, in a process known as correlation . Knowing the spin state of one entangled particle - up or down - allows one to know that the spin of its mate is in the opposite direction. Even more amazing is the knowledge that, due to the phenomenon of superposition, the measured particle has no single spin direction before being measured, but is simultaneously in both a spin-up and spin-down state. The spin state of the particle being measured is decided at the time of measurement and communicated to the correlated particle, which simultaneously assumes the opposite spin direction to that of the measured particle. This is a real phenomenon (Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance"), the mechanism of which cannot, as yet, be explained by any theory - it simply must be taken as given. Quantum entanglement allows qubits that are separated by incredible distances to interact with each other instantaneously (not limited to the speed of light). No matter how great the distance between the correlated particles, they will remain entangled as long as they are isolated.

Taken together, quantum superposition and entanglement create an enormously enhanced computing power. Where a 2-bit register in an ordinary computer can store only one of four binary configurations (00, 01, 10, or 11) at any given time, a 2-qubit register in a quantum computer can store all four numbers simultaneously, because each qubit represents two values. If more qubits are added, the increased capacity is expanded exponentially.

So in part your right they have stumbled upon something they don't fully grasp as theoretical mathematics has never been able to explain the "spooky action at a distance". We're still a relatively young species, and I think Quantum Computing in combination with the discoveries at CERN, we're going to be learning a lot more about how our universe works.

[Bigjon]

I don't know enough about the subject to talk about it, but will offer my conjecture (guess).

This sounds awfully like the big science our Jew masters have fawned off on us as necessary to secure the future. Where is all that fusion power?

Mainly employing a lot of Jews to build big hardware at enormous cost and enormous salaries.

Geordie Rose, most times I see any name with Rose in it, it's a Jew.

[Ares]

I don't know enough about the subject to talk about it, but will offer my conjecture (guess).

This sounds awfully like the big science our Jew masters have fawned off on us as necessary to secure the future. Where is all that fusion power?

Mainly employing a lot of Jews to build big hardware at enormous cost and enormous salaries.

Geordie Rose, most times I see any name with Rose in it, it's a Jew.

Science is science it is not biased to races or religion. Although some races are better able to understand it than others.

As for your question about Fusion. This gentleman is working on perfecting and then selling cold fusion reactors.

http://energycatalyzer3.com/files/2016/09/fc98a6559e6eaf6c2039a9eb5a98e0ceb82ed67e_500-231x300.jpg

http://ecat.com/

Hot fusion is a scam and current technology doesn't allow for us to replicate it and have it be sustainable (like the sun). While yes we can achieve hot fusion, we still do not know of a way to sustain it and keep the reaction going. It's been that way for 4 decades now and we're not any closer to achieving it. In 4 decades of testing and billions of dollars spent we still put in more energy than what we get out of a hot fusion reaction.

[Bigjon]

Science is science it is not biased to races or religion. Although some races are better able to understand it than others.

As for your question about Fusion. This gentleman is working on perfecting and then selling cold fusion reactors.

http://energycatalyzer3.com/files/2016/09/fc98a6559e6eaf6c2039a9eb5a98e0ceb82ed67e_500-231x300.jpg

http://ecat.com/

Hot fusion is a scam and current technology doesn't allow for us to replicate it and have it be sustainable (like the sun). While yes we can achieve hot fusion, we still do not know of a way to sustain it and keep the reaction going. It's been that way for 4 decades now and we're not any closer to achieving it. In 4 decades of testing and billions of dollars spent we still put in more energy than what we get out of a hot fusion reaction.

Well "our" science is mostly smoke and mirrors. There are many science avenues that have been put off limits for fear of damaging the reputation of St. Einstein. Like everone knows there is no such thing as an aether. And don't bother to look for it as your funding has been terminated and if you persist you will be terminated.

NASA Never A Straight Answer is the most apt description of this phony agency.

Hot fusion is one of those big sciences. Looking in all the wrong places. They think that fusion of the sun occurs deep inside the sun when the Russian's proved it happens high in the solar atmosphere and is created by a magnetic pinch affect of flowing plasma.