Quantum Bayesian Networks

September 22, 2015

China Mulling Over List of Presents to Itself For Next Christmas

Filed under: Uncategorized — rrtucci @ 9:49 pm

Check out

Visions of Future Physics, by Natalie Wolchover
(Quanta Mag., Sept, 2015)

The article is about renowned Princeton Univ. Prof. Nima Arkani-Hamed. In particular, the article describes his fascinating personal history and his quest to convince the world, starting with China, to build a 100-TeV successor to CERN’s 10-TeV Large Hadron Collider. (successor just 10 times higher in energy than the LHC)

It’s a well written and interesting article with some slight relevance, from my biased point of view, to quantum computing. As I recently reported in this blog, Alibaba and the Chinese government recently announced that they intend to build a QC lab in Shanghai

Excerpts from article

Now it is decision time. The Chinese government will release its five-year budgetary plan by the end of the year, revealing whether it plans to invest in research and development for the collider project.

To Arkani-Hamed, the Chinese collider campaign feels like pushing an open door. “When you think about it more, it’s just perfect,” he said, sipping Coke Zero on his office couch. “It would be great for physics; it would be great for China. They’re looking for something where they can just be the best in the world.” He continued, “There are very few things in life where what you want to do for idealistic reasons and what someone else wants to do for Machiavellian reasons are identical. And when that happens, you should just do it. You should just do it!”

It occurred to me that the same argument used above by Nina to sell the 100-TeV collider could be used to sell quantum computers and even aircraft carriers to China. (The following table is very approximate and speculative. This being a QC blog, you know where my loyalty lies)

Quest Final Cost time to build it scientific benefits industrial benefits military benefits
100 TeV collider $10B 25 yrs. Yes Small (Magnets)
Kitaev Quantum Computer $200M 10 yrs. Yes Yes Yes
aircraft carrier $5-10B 5 yrs. Small Yes

More on China’s 13th five year plan (2016-2020). First draft expected Oct 2015, final draft expected March 2016. It’s time to lobby your Chinese “congressman”



  1. Chinese aircraft carrier. They got a good deal on that one.

    Comment by Henning Dekant — September 23, 2015 @ 12:32 am

  2. Hi! Why sum $100M and period 10 years for quantum computer is used? I found my comment with last year estimations:
    with period of time is much more longer. The topological quantum computer was suggested about 20 years ago. What does change during the year? Recent Intel forecast and NSA “QC alert” are notable, but I still remember predictions made by quite serious people at 1995 about quantum computer during 4-5 years.

    Comment by AlexV — September 27, 2015 @ 10:24 am

  3. Hi Shura,
    I think a prob=15% of building a QC in 25 years is only if academics are in charge of the operation.

    Academics like to maximize wasting time travelling to beauty pagent conferences instead of teleconferencing on the internet, debating forever philosophical points with little practical application, working in random directions instead of in unison in the same direction, promoting projects that are obviously not going to work just to prolong their jobs until retirement, hiring people for political reasons instead of because they fit into a master plan of action, almost never removing from high positions and replacing those people who are failing the team in achieving that plan of action, while at the same time losing a large fraction of their experts every 4 years, like Sysiphus having to start rolling the stone from the bottom again every 4 years, etc, etc.

    They are as ineffective as the American Congress right now.

    They are like peacock birds that spend most of their time showing off their plummage and courting each other instead of doing any migratory flight.

    I used $200M in 10 years because that is roughly the amount of money and time DWave has taken, except this time QuTech is going to build a Kitaev QC instead of an annealer QC.

    Comment by rrtucci — September 27, 2015 @ 3:13 pm

  4. O’K, but how to explain from such a point of view predictions about quantum computer during 4-5 years made around 1994- 1995?

    Comment by AlexV — September 27, 2015 @ 3:53 pm

  5. How to explain :)? Academics Isaac Chuang and Raymond Laflamme. NMR quantum computers known not to be scalable from day one.

    Comment by rrtucci — September 27, 2015 @ 4:56 pm

  6. Bob, I am about 1995, Isaac Chuang at that time even did not have PhD, so he may not be responsible for that. Problem with NMR was not known at once. NMR at that time was most developed area, and due to that it was possible to estimate limit for scalability (seems it was about 30 qubit, the record still did not available for most over methods even now). And already 20 years time funding did not limited to NMR. European Community in they roadmap initially even excluded NMR at all.

    Comment by AlexV — September 27, 2015 @ 6:18 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: