lukan 8 hours ago

"This study shows that quantum computers are starting to deliver value in real chemical simulations — not just toy problems or idealized systems."

Looking forward towards it. But I am sceptical how much value exactly was added, but I lack the insight here.

  • gsf_emergency 7 hours ago

    Given that nobody, and I mean nobody [including Scott Aaronson[0]] understands Grover's algorithm[1], one can only be certain that value was only delivered to the stakeholders.

    The whole industry exists to prove Feynman, uh, consistent[2]. Didn't he say nobody understands quantum, but didn't he also claim that quantum computing can be useful?

    [0]https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611976014.5

    Although Scott is the most honest of them all

    [1]3b1b was in good company, not sure about now?

    https://youtu.be/Dlsa9EBKDGI

    [2]he demonstrated that not fooling oneself was of the utmost importance by continuing to provide the prime example of fooling oneself?

    • fxwin 7 hours ago

      How does the paper from [0] show that Aaronson doesn't understand Grover's algorithm? What level of "understanding" are you looking for here?

tiahura 6 hours ago

How’s that Lockheed fusion reactor coming along?

https://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyle/science/lockheed-s...

  • XorNot 6 hours ago

    There was so much HN confidence that this would be the bold disrupter that would prove ITER was a waste of money by being the <buzzword buzzword buzzword> about that.

    Which isn't to the project was bad, but boy does a lot of stuff like this get announced and then people start making victory lap posts as though it's already succeeded.

    • datadrivenangel 6 hours ago

      Gotta declare success to get the next round of funding