Thoughts and Rantings

The class of problems that can be efficiently solved by quantum computers is called BQP, for "bounded error, quantum, polynomial time". Quantum computers only run probabilistic algorithms, so BQP on quantum computers is the counterpart of BPP ("bounded error, probabilistic, polynomial time") on classical computers. It is defined as the set of problems solvable with a polynomial-time algorithm, whose probability of error is bounded away from one half. ] A quantum computer is said to "solve" a problem if, for every instance, its answer will be right with high probability. If that solution runs in polynomial time, then that problem is in BQP. BQP is contained in the complexity class #P (or more precisely in the associated class of decision problems P #P ), which is a subclass of PSPACE. BQP is suspected to be disjoint from NP-complete and a strict superset of P, but that is not known. Both integer factorization and discrete logare in BQP. Both of these pro...

When things get small — like atoms and electrons small — physics gets weird. Schrödinger’s Cat weird. Quantum superposition weird. Quantum entanglement weird. Atoms, electrons and photos obey quantum mechanical laws so spooky (Einstein’s word for it) and complex, we can’t even simulate them with our most advanced supercomputers. Because we can’t simulate quantum behavior, legendary and Nobel Prize winning physicist Richard Feynman proposed building a new class of computers called quantum computers which “hitch a ride” on quantum mechanical properties to try and model this behavior. So what is a quantum computer? How is it different from a traditional transistor-and-Boolean algebra computer like the one you are reading this on? What can a quantum computer do that a traditional computer can’t do? What practical applications are there? Will quantum computers mean the end of crypto as we know it? And how accurate was Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on that day he won the Internet...

Maybe, like us, you’ve heard about quantum computing and you think it sounds interesting but you’re still not sure how it works or what it means. Quantum-anything is hard right? Turns out this isn’t true. We spent the last few weeks digging around in some of the more obscure corners of the internet, and discovered that the problem isn’t conceptual. The problem is that perhaps more any other subject in tech journalism and popular science, most of what’s written about quantum computing turns out to be bullshit. Here’s the standard explanation: In regular computing, we rely on lots of little switches called bits. A bit has a binary value, either 0 or 1, and when you combine lots of bits together you can store data and execute instructions. This is the stuff that makes your mobile phone go beep. In quantum computing, the switches are different. Instead of representing just a 1 or 0, as conventional processors do; they represent multiple values simultaneously. Here for example, is an explan...

Exactly 10 years ago, we were months way from a  world-shaking financial crisis . By late 2006, we had an  inverted yield curve steep  to be a high-probability indicator of recession. I estimated at that time that the losses would be $400 billion at a minimum. Yet, most of my readers and fellow analysts told me I was way too bearish. Turned out the losses topped well over $2 trillion and triggered the financial crisis and  Great Recession . Conditions in the financial markets needed only a spark from the subprime crisis to start a firestorm all over the world. Plenty of things were waiting to go wrong, and it seemed like they all did at the same time. We don’t have an inverted yield curve now.  But when the central bank  artificially holds down short-term rates , it is difficult if not almost impossible for the yield curve to invert. We have effectively suppressed the biggest warning signal. But there is another recession in our future (there i...

While in 2nd year of engineering, I came to an interesting realization by virtue of two observations. Observation 1.  A cat always lands on it feet no matter how it falls (in this case , read how it is thrown). Observation 2 . A buttered toast (my favourite breakfast) always fall the buttered side down (to my dismay :@ ) Now the  Realization.   According to Murphy’s Law , the buttered toast SHOULD fall on the buttered side down. This can be established as a fact, an undeniable truth. But what also is a statistically proven truth is, the cat always lands on it feet. So what happens if we tie/glue the buttered toast on the back of a cat and then throw it down ? Which side will the buttered cat land on? a) On its feet? b) Or buttered side down? Truth is,  at the time our group of “researchers” never attempted to perform this experiment and resolve the paradox for fear of violating the sacrosanctity of the universal truth resulting in the uni...

What is the deadliest animal in the world? Lions? Sharks? Bears? Bees? Snakes? Rats? It was bears, wasn't it? Is it bears? No, it's the lowly mosquito, and it's not even close. Thanks to their ability to spread diseases like malaria they take out a mind-boggling two million people a year. Mankind's desire to stop the little murderous bastards has reached the point of desperation, and our schemes for fighting them have strayed into Mad Scientist Bond Supervillain territory. We're not exaggerating here. Mankind's plans for conquering the world of mosquitoes includes... #5.Death Rays You have to start here. Giant lasers have been essential to at least three different Bond villain schemes, so scientists know that if humanity is to be the ultimate nemesis to the mosquito, we need a goddamned death ray. The development of mosquito-destroying lasers was thus an inevitability. And just in case you think we're stretching the definition of "death ...

Before I start, let me inform you that this is a conjecture by Stephen Hawking and is absolutely not my view. I will explain my views in a critical analysis of his theory. Science & religion have never been on good terms, atleast for the most part of it. From Socrates to Copernicus to Galileo Galelei, scientist have been admonished even executed when their views, either correct or otherwise, differed from that of religious men and their teachings. Long ago, the answer to any unanswered question was always same, God. Why does it rain? Because God wants it to. Why does day and night occur? Because God made it that way. Why do stars shine? Because god makes them shine. Why do we exist? Because God wanted us to. Since early times civiliztions have resorted to using god as explanation of anything which they were unable to grasp. For example, the Norse believed lighting was caused by a god named Thor, not because it had any rationale, but because they needed to make sense of so...