Google's Quantum Computer accurately simulates a molecule

[Sparko]

Google’s quantum computer just accurately simulated a molecule for the first time.
Google's engineers just achieved a milestone in quantum computing: they’ve produced the first completely scalable quantum simulation of a hydrogen molecule.

That’s big news, because it shows similar devices could help us unlock the quantum secrets hidden in the chemistry that surrounds us.

Researchers working with the Google team were able to accurately simulate the energy of hydrogen H2 molecules, and if we can repeat the trick for other molecules, we could see the benefits in everything from solar cells to medicines.

These types of predictions are often impossible for 'classical' computers or take an extremely long time – working out the energy of something like a propane (C3H8) molecule would take a supercomputer in the region of 10 days.

To achieve the feat, Google's engineers teamed up with researchers from Harvard University, Lawrence Berkeley National Labs, UC Santa Barbara, Tufts University, and University College London in the UK.

more at: http://www.sciencealert.com/google-s...uantum-physics

[shunyadragon]

Neat!!!

[Sparko]

Can you imagine it takes that much computational power to simulate just one hydrogen molecule, one of the simplest molecules in the universe, and scientists think life itself is just an accident of time? Amazing.

(yes, I freely admit that is an argument from incredulity. But dang it. I am simply amazed at this universe that God created)

[TheLurch]

Can you imagine it takes that much computational power to simulate just one hydrogen molecule, one of the simplest molecules in the universe, and scientists think life itself is just an accident of time? Amazing.

(yes, I freely admit that is an argument from incredulity. But dang it. I am simply amazed at this universe that God created)

I think that's the big area of common ground that frequently gets lost in the arguments. Regardless of what your faith is or whether you lack faith entirely, we all stand in awe at the astonishing things we've found out about the universe (or would, if more of us took the time to think about it). I think back on all that we've discovered since i've started paying attention, and then marvel at the fact that we're likely to discover just as much in the next 40 years.

[Sparko]

I think that's the big area of common ground that frequently gets lost in the arguments. Regardless of what your faith is or whether you lack faith entirely, we all stand in awe at the astonishing things we've found out about the universe (or would, if more of us took the time to think about it). I think back on all that we've discovered since i've started paying attention, and then marvel at the fact that we're likely to discover just as much in the next 40 years.

Yeah, less than a hundred years ago we didn't even know about DNA and thought life was so simple. Now we realize that a single molecule is so complex that it takes a quantum super computer to model just one hydrogen atom.

I remember not so long ago that futurists were predicting that we would be able to model an entire human brain in a computer by now. Man they were wrong. I think we are still struggling to model something like an ant's brain.

[shunyadragon]

Can you imagine it takes that much computational power to simulate just one hydrogen molecule, one of the simplest molecules in the universe, and scientists think life itself is just an accident of time? Amazing.

(yes, I freely admit that is an argument from incredulity. But dang it. I am simply amazed at this universe that God created)

Yes it is unfortunately and argument from incredulity.

What the computer must do that is to simulate the very complicated Quantum Mechanics of the basic particles of matter which is the problem. Once that is done any of the elements and many molecules may be simulated.

Fortunately they cannot simulate God, actual Creation and Revelation. Neither can they package it in one book and take it home.

[Sparko]

Yes it is unfortunately and argument from incredulity.

What the computer must do that is to simulate the very complicated Quantum Mechanics of the basic particles of matter which is the problem. Once that is done any of the elements and many molecules may be simulated.

Fortunately they cannot simulate God, actual Creation and Revelation. Neither can they package it in one book and take it home.

I never made any such claims. I am just awed how complex even the simplest of things are in this universe.

[shunyadragon]

I never made any such claims. I am just awed how complex even the simplest of things are in this universe.

OK! I am also awed at the nature of our existence, but that in and of itself does not offer the basis for the argument for the existence of God.

[Sparko]

OK! I am also awed at the nature of our existence, but that in and of itself does not offer the basis for the argument for the existence of God.

and I said that too by freely admitting it was an argument from incredulity. but as a Christian, this universe constantly amazes me at what a wonderful God we have that could make something this great.

[TheLurch]

Yeah, less than a hundred years ago we didn't even know about DNA and thought life was so simple. Now we realize that a single molecule is so complex that it takes a quantum super computer to model just one hydrogen atom.

The molecule really is simple. It's just that it obeys quantum mechanics, and quantum mechanics is very complex....

I remember not so long ago that futurists were predicting that we would be able to model an entire human brain in a computer by now. Man they were wrong. I think we are still struggling to model something like an ant's brain.

Yeah, a good rule of thumb is that, if the Singularity enthusiasts are excited about it, it's not going to happen any time soon.

[shunyadragon]

I remember not so long ago that futurists were predicting that we would be able to model an entire human brain in a computer by now. Man they were wrong. I think we are still struggling to model something like an ant's brain.

The futurist may off on timing, and the reality that science has and developed neural networks like those in our brain in a computer simulation or as an artificial neuron network. In the future it is not realistic to develop the equivalent of an animal or even human brain.

Source: http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/users/reingold/courses/ai/cache/neural2.html

2.0 What are Artificial Neural Networks?

Artificial Neural Networks are relatively crude electronic models based on the neural structure of the brain. The brain basically learns from experience. It is natural proof that some problems that are beyond the scope of current computers are indeed solvable by small energy efficient packages. This brain modeling also promises a less technical way to develop machine solutions. This new approach to computing also provides a more graceful degradation during system overload than its more traditional counterparts.
These biologically inspired methods of computing are thought to be the next major advancement in the computing industry. Even simple animal brains are capable of functions that are currently impossible for computers. Computers do rote things well, like keeping ledgers or performing complex math. But computers have trouble recognizing even simple patterns much less generalizing those patterns of the past into actions of the future.

Now, advances in biological research promise an initial understanding of the natural thinking mechanism. This research shows that brains store information as patterns. Some of these patterns are very complicated and allow us the ability to recognize individual faces from many different angles. This process of storing information as patterns, utilizing those patterns, and then solving problems encompasses a new field in computing. This field, as mentioned before, does not utilize traditional programming but involves the creation of massively parallel networks and the training of those networks to solve specific problems. This field also utilizes words very different from traditional computing, words like behave, react, self-organize, learn, generalize, and forget.

© Copyright Original Source

[Sparko]

yep I have a degree in digital electronics and have been active in computer science since 1980. theoretically we might one day model a human brain, but that is a long way off. It might never be able to be done. they can model the "hardware" (neurons, various areas of the brain) but the mind might not be doable. we just dont know enough about the brain and mind to model it even if we had the computational power to do it. maybe if they develop a way to do a brain scan at the cellular level. but who knows.

But futurists like Kurtzweil love to predict such things are only 10 years away. they are generally overly optimistic on AI and such things