Mike H

01:18:08

Can we get Gilâ€™s thoughts on three models, not all related: the early NMR experiments by Chuang et al, the adiabatic model of QC, and the braiding model for nonabelian anyons

Mike H

01:18:25

Are there fundamental critiques for those as well?

Eli

01:20:08

Thank you Gil for this amazing talk (like usual)!! I am wondering what do you think the most urgent task for big quantum companies is, in order to give a solid hope for the community who believes in the short term availability of fully functioning quantum computers?

michelle

01:24:01

Prof. Kalai, Can you please think of how to discourage people from dreaming that the quantum entanglement can be created at macroscale - e.g., two people (Alice and Bob) can be quantum-entangled on the Internet and one can observe Alice to predict what Bob will do. How do we explain that this is a question what we should not pose? Thanks!

Mike H

01:25:29

From a mathematical or physical perspective is there any prospect of a Maxwell demon type argument to delineate impossible devices? For instance in quantum processing, we have the Margolus Leviton theorem which bounds the # of computations possible per second per joule but that is a very loose bound; might such bounds be tightened in ways specific to physical systems, etc?

Doug Wood

01:26:33

How much of the underlying theory depends on the behavior of bosons? QCD is uncomputable in its own right

Mike H

01:29:01

A lot of the D-wave experiments failed because they essentially overheated the system; did they merely just execute poorly, or is there a foundational problem with the adiabatic model as well? Ostensibly adiabatic models try to get away from the problems of error rates and threshold issues in the circuit model.

Mike H

01:33:09

Thank you for a great presentation Professor Kalai