- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
One way to think about the "dimensions" of Quantum computing.
Posted on 2/14/25 at 12:32 pm
Posted on 2/14/25 at 12:32 pm
Think of a bunch of magnetic fillings
When an input is applied, they will align themselves to the magnetic field and their expected place in that field.
Quantum Qubits are able to align in 2 states (in current architectures up spin and down spin, which can also come out as up and down spin simultaneously), and if your input question is in the form of a Hamiltonian (e.g. the equation = 0).
THEN
You can give each Qubit inputs and they will all seek the lowest common combined power level like the magnets. This is due to quantum entanglement.
Then by checking each qubit's spin you know which values were part of the correct answer for that Hamiltonian.
If there are multiple answers you would rerun and see if a different combination of inputs generate a lower (more optimal) power level.
Then classical computers re form the answer into something usable.
What about those dimension?
In classical computing you calculate bit by bit, each "mathematical dimension has to be calculated separately vs another one, in a GPU the smaller calculations happen on many small threads that combined later, which is significantly more efficient, but nothing like quantum.
In quantum, like the magnets, they all snap into place near instantly, you get an instantaneous answer in one go, using physics to combined many degrees of freedom (or mathematical degrees) at once.
Imperfect Example, If I had 100 degrees of temperature, 100 blocks, and 20 materials, a classical way would be to calculate each of the blocks one at a time (or 100 separate calculations on a gpu) and then sum the resulting temperatures as a final step.
A quantum equivalent, I would form a calculation with the 3 degrees of freedom and calculate it in one shot, the qubits would snap to lowest power, and then I would take those values and use them for the answer.
For 3 degrees of freedom it would be faster to do it traditionally, but for 100, no classical computer would be capable.
Caveat, by no means am I a quantum physicist, but I have had exposure to the field and this is my high level analogy to what happens.
Hope this helps when people start talking about "alternate dimensions in quantum"
When an input is applied, they will align themselves to the magnetic field and their expected place in that field.

Quantum Qubits are able to align in 2 states (in current architectures up spin and down spin, which can also come out as up and down spin simultaneously), and if your input question is in the form of a Hamiltonian (e.g. the equation = 0).
THEN
You can give each Qubit inputs and they will all seek the lowest common combined power level like the magnets. This is due to quantum entanglement.
Then by checking each qubit's spin you know which values were part of the correct answer for that Hamiltonian.
If there are multiple answers you would rerun and see if a different combination of inputs generate a lower (more optimal) power level.
Then classical computers re form the answer into something usable.
What about those dimension?
In classical computing you calculate bit by bit, each "mathematical dimension has to be calculated separately vs another one, in a GPU the smaller calculations happen on many small threads that combined later, which is significantly more efficient, but nothing like quantum.
In quantum, like the magnets, they all snap into place near instantly, you get an instantaneous answer in one go, using physics to combined many degrees of freedom (or mathematical degrees) at once.
Imperfect Example, If I had 100 degrees of temperature, 100 blocks, and 20 materials, a classical way would be to calculate each of the blocks one at a time (or 100 separate calculations on a gpu) and then sum the resulting temperatures as a final step.
A quantum equivalent, I would form a calculation with the 3 degrees of freedom and calculate it in one shot, the qubits would snap to lowest power, and then I would take those values and use them for the answer.
For 3 degrees of freedom it would be faster to do it traditionally, but for 100, no classical computer would be capable.
Caveat, by no means am I a quantum physicist, but I have had exposure to the field and this is my high level analogy to what happens.
Hope this helps when people start talking about "alternate dimensions in quantum"
Posted on 2/14/25 at 12:35 pm to Narax
quote:
Hope this helps
Not in the least. But thanks for trying!
Posted on 2/14/25 at 12:36 pm to Narax
quote:
Hamiltonian (e.g. the equation = 0).
I'm pretty sure this is incorrect.
This is a Lagrangian.
Hamiltonian is H = KE + PE
Lagrangian is L = KE - PE
Posted on 2/14/25 at 12:38 pm to GumboPot
I’d just use it to see titties in 4k.
Posted on 2/14/25 at 12:39 pm to Narax
What does this have to do with helping Pornhub load faster?
Posted on 2/14/25 at 12:45 pm to Narax
Great explanation.
But how will it help keep crawfish prices low?
But how will it help keep crawfish prices low?
Posted on 2/14/25 at 12:49 pm to GumboPot
quote:
I'm pretty sure this is incorrect.
This is a Lagrangian.
Hamiltonian is H = KE + PE
Lagrangian is L = KE - PE
Agreed, lazy analogy
H=KE+PE
The ground state is the solution of H Psi=E Psi with the lowest eigenvalue E0.
This post was edited on 2/14/25 at 12:50 pm
Posted on 2/14/25 at 12:55 pm to bird35
Think of quantum computing like titties being released from a bra. Instead of each cell and tissue falling into position one at a time like a traditional computer, the entire breast instantly falls into the most desired and lowest energy placement.
Posted on 2/14/25 at 1:00 pm to Bwmdx
quote:
Think of quantum computing like titties being released from a bra. Instead of each cell and tissue falling into position one at a time like a traditional computer, the entire breast instantly falls into the most desired and lowest energy placement.
Yea that's better than mine lol

Posted on 2/14/25 at 1:17 pm to Narax
I don't know what this was all about but this thread made me laugh with the witty replies.


Posted on 2/14/25 at 2:02 pm to Bigdawgb
Now, if I could just apply quantum theory to my life. I could be in two different states at one time. I could be at work and at the beach at the same time and be with my wife and girlfriend at the same time. It might be confusing but I am willing to give it a shot.
This post was edited on 2/14/25 at 2:03 pm
Posted on 2/14/25 at 2:27 pm to Narax
quote:
One way to think about the "dimensions" of Quantum computing.
quote:
Hope this helps when people start talking about "alternate dimensions in quantum"
First try to explain it for a 4th grader to understand it. Otherwise it's just nerding out, and not something most will understand.
Posted on 2/14/25 at 2:39 pm to HagaDaga
quote:
First try to explain it for a 4th grader to understand it. Otherwise it's just nerding out, and not something most will understand.
I think Bwmdx put it well.
quote:
Bwmdx Posted on 2/14/25 at 12:55 pm to bird35
Think of quantum computing like titties being released from a bra. Instead of each cell and tissue falling into position one at a time like a traditional computer, the entire breast instantly falls into the most desired and lowest energy placement.
Posted on 2/14/25 at 2:42 pm to Bwmdx
quote:
Think of quantum computing like titties being released from a bra. Instead of each cell and tissue falling into position one at a time like a traditional computer, the entire breast instantly falls into the most desired and lowest energy placement.
But then you would miss the bouncing. Sign me up for the Commodore 64.
Popular
Back to top
