Arya Ray‍ You said "for n qbits will give rise to the result of storing (2^n) classical bits" - Now part of my question is to make sure folks get their heads up out of their digital computer thinking and look a bit wider. If I remember Shannon (sampling theorem) correctly, he used a simailar argument regarding the number of analog measurements sampled and the sampling/aliasing effects.


As I discuss the 'quantum' phenomena more deeply one starts to see a number of cases where folk don't have a breadth of equivalent scenarios from which to explain what is going on, so resort to smoke and mirrors discussions. In particular the use of mathematics is an abstraction that leaves behind the real world realities. So when we reverse the maths we can pick an alternate reality (i.e. different phenomena) that uses the same mathematic abstraction. 


You may notice that all engineering formula are of the sort F=m.a, or V=I.R, etc, where we create a local linear formula with a sutable parameter of proportionality which we hold 'fixed'. If we end up with a formula with eponentials or powers we call that science ;-). Slightly hypercritically, we do allow certain square law effects where upon we call it Energy...


Thus back to Quantum, I do see Quantum phenomena as just faster electrical phenomena, while electrical phenomena are just faster mechabical phenomena (think of mechanical image stabilisation versus electronic image stabilisation - moving mirrors have higher inertia than the electrons/bits within the electronic image. Thus I expect, eventually, to see that Quantum computers do have a 'speed limit'.


I've not seen any good lecture material on Quantum..


If I understand correctly, one of the 'entanglement' techniques is photon splitting where a photon (stream) each of energy E is split into photon pairs of ~E/2 with matching characteristics, and half are sent (it's like creating biased 2p coins, splitting then into a pair of 1p biased coins and then trying to measure the bias from the half you recieve - the randomness of the initial 2p coin toss hides the entanglement, and because of attenuation you don't even recieve you full half)

Arya Ray‍ You said "for n qbits will give rise to the result of storing (2^n) classical bits" - Now part of my question is to make sure folks get their heads up out of their digital computer thinking and look a bit wider. If I remember Shannon (sampling theorem) correctly, he used a simailar argument regarding the number of analog measurements sampled and the sampling/aliasing effects.


As I discuss the 'quantum' phenomena more deeply one starts to see a number of cases where folk don't have a breadth of equivalent scenarios from which to explain what is going on, so resort to smoke and mirrors discussions. In particular the use of mathematics is an abstraction that leaves behind the real world realities. So when we reverse the maths we can pick an alternate reality (i.e. different phenomena) that uses the same mathematic abstraction. 


You may notice that all engineering formula are of the sort F=m.a, or V=I.R, etc, where we create a local linear formula with a sutable parameter of proportionality which we hold 'fixed'. If we end up with a formula with eponentials or powers we call that science ;-). Slightly hypercritically, we do allow certain square law effects where upon we call it Energy...


Thus back to Quantum, I do see Quantum phenomena as just faster electrical phenomena, while electrical phenomena are just faster mechabical phenomena (think of mechanical image stabilisation versus electronic image stabilisation - moving mirrors have higher inertia than the electrons/bits within the electronic image. Thus I expect, eventually, to see that Quantum computers do have a 'speed limit'.


I've not seen any good lecture material on Quantum..


If I understand correctly, one of the 'entanglement' techniques is photon splitting where a photon (stream) each of energy E is split into photon pairs of ~E/2 with matching characteristics, and half are sent (it's like creating biased 2p coins, splitting then into a pair of 1p biased coins and then trying to measure the bias from the half you recieve - the randomness of the initial 2p coin toss hides the entanglement, and because of attenuation you don't even recieve you full half)