default | grid-3 | grid-2

Post per Page

Physicists Propose a 'Force Field' to Protect Sensitive Quantum Computers From Noise

The softest of touches must be used to gently stroke the borders of reality in order to build a quantum computer. When there is too much "noise," the delicate mechanism collapses, leaving you with an extremely pricey paperweight.

Checks and balances that serve to insulate the hazy state of reality at the heart of quantum computers are one method to lessen the likelihood of this happening. Now, scientists have proposed a novel technique to achieve precisely that.

German theoretical physicists at RWTH Aachen University have devised a "synthetic magnetic field" that they believe might help safeguard the delicate qubits required for a quantum computer.

In their work, the group claims that they have created a circuit that may be used to passively implement the GKP quantum error-correcting code. This circuit is made up of modern superconducting circuit parts and a nonreciprocal device.

The design is based on an idea that's been around for close to 20 years (we'll get to that in a second), but it's just not practical since it calls for insanely powerful magnetic fields. The new strategy makes an effort to circumvent this problem.

Quantum computing relies on a less binary, and far less conclusive, method of number crunching than the solid, bit-based language of 1s and 0s that governs the operations of your smartphone or PC.

Qubits, also known as quantum bits, are discrete language units based on the probability of quantum physics. If you put enough of them together, their seemingly random tumble creates the framework for an original method of problem solving.

A qubit, however, is a peculiar being with no true analogue in our everyday lives. It might be concurrently in the positions of 1 and 0 or both if unobserved. The qubit, however, settles into a single, more commonplace state the moment you look at it.

In terms of physics, this act of staring need not even be a deliberate stare. electromagnetic radiation's buzz, a nearby particle's accidental bump... ... that qubit may soon find itself blending into the background, losing its fundamental probabilistic abilities.

As we expand devices to incorporate more qubits, which is essential to create quantum computers strong enough to perform the high-level computing we anticipate of them, this "noise" only grows worse.

Entanglement, or making a qubit's probabilities reliant on other, similarly fuzzy particles situated in areas unlikely to be hit by the same noise, is a potential strategy for guaranteeing that a qubit remains fuzzy for as long as is necessary.

Engineers may provide a level of quantum error correction if they do it correctly, providing an insurance policy that enables the qubit to withstand the occasional shake, rattle, and roll of background noise.

We now return to the new paper at this point. In 2001, a group of scientists led by Daniel Gottesman, Alexeir Kitaev, and John Preskill developed a method to include this type of security into the circuitry that houses the qubits, possibly enabling the development of more compact hardware.

The Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill (GKP) code was given to it. There was just one issue: the GKP code depended on a method that is just impractical for restricting an electron to just two dimensions utilising strong, powerful magnetic fields. Furthermore, error detection and recovery procedures require additional hardware because they are also rather complex.

Quantum engineers would require a more passive, hands-off method for securing and retrieving a qubit's information from noise in order to truly profit from the GKP code.

As a result, in this novel concept, researchers propose replacing the impossibly enormous magnetic field with a superconducting circuit made up of parts that have essentially the same function—removing noise.

The setup's technicalities aren't meant for casual reading, but Anja Metelmann of APS Physics does a fantastic job of breaking them down step-by-step for those who are interested in the specifics.

It would need to be possible for photons, which are essentially ripples in the electromagnetic field and carry the forces of the electron, to be controlled by that field itself in order for it to function. This is just not a possibility because of the photon's neutrality.

However, there is a workaround. In recent years, scientists have discovered a method for controlling photons so they may be channelled like electrons. This method involves modifying a space's optics such that it develops certain magnetic-like properties.

Engineers may design systems in which light waves can be made to behave more like a current by using so-called synthetic magnetic fields, which allow photons to be guided.

The current research describes how to employ this artificial magnetic field to shield a fictitious single electron trapped in a 2D plane of a crystal. They demonstrated that their new setup could safeguard it when they did simulations to determine how it would respond when exposed to a high, actual magnetic field, which typically would interfere with the system.

The team writes in their research, "We discover that the circuit is naturally shielded against the typical noise channels in superconducting circuits, such as charge and flux noise, hinting that it may be employed for passive quantum error correction."

There are many experimental quirks to iron out before we have a functioning prototype of our quantum error-correcting apparatus. On paper, everything looks excellent, but whether the technology will actually work as intended remains to be seen.

The notion of scaling up quantum computers, which is currently just theoretical, may one day be realized with the help of a relatively basic device. This would pave the way for error-tolerant technology, which has hitherto been largely theoretical.

Physical Review X published the results of this study.

No comments

Error Page Image

Error Page Image

Oooops.... Could not find it!!!

The page you were looking for, could not be found. You may have typed the address incorrectly or you may have used an outdated link.

Go to Homepage