3D Map of a Quantum Dot’s Potential
An electron bound to a quantum dot is a conceptually simple implementation of a quantum bit (qubit), with the electron’s spin providing the qubit’s two levels, which encode information [1, 2]. To control electron spin, researchers apply some perturbation to the electron, which rotates the spin to a desired direction. This process is easier when the electron’s location and wave function are known—parameters determinable from the dot’s confining potential. But in quantum dots, researchers often lack this information . Now Leon Camenzind at the University of Basel, Switzerland, and colleagues demonstrate a technique to measure the potential binding an electron in a gallium arsenide (GaAs) quantum dot [3, 4]. Their technique could potentially be used to characterize the confining potential of other systems, providing information that could allow optimization of the efficiency and performance of these systems in quantum devices.
A quantum dot acts like an artificial atom, creating a potential that confines the electron in three dimensions. The electron’s motion is limited to a region determined by the dot’s potential. For an unperturbed quantum dot, the electron’s location and wave function can be determined if the dot’s potential is known. Having this information makes it easier to manipulate the qubit, as researchers can precisely determine the electric or magnetic field they need to force the qubit to evolve into a particular state to perform some desired operation. These manipulations might involve rotating the spin or bringing two spins together so that they interact [1, 2]. Knowing the confining potential and, in turn, the electron’s wave function also allows the time-evolution of the qubit’s state to be obtained, enabling perturbations to be more accurately established and applied.
The commonly used quantum-dot model assumes that the confining potential of the dot matches that of a harmonic oscillator or some closely related expression . But that isn’t always the case. Camenzind and colleagues now demonstrate an ingenious technique for determining the potential confining the electron [3, 4].
For the demonstration, the team made single-electron quantum dots using gated GaAs/aluminum gallium arsenside (AlGaAs) heterostructures, which consisted of an undoped GaAs layer and then a doped AlGaAs layer (Fig. 1). Electrons from the doped AlGaAs layer diffused toward the GaAs layer and accumulated on the GaAs side of the interface between the two materials. There they formed a two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG)—a “slab” of electrons that are free to move in the x-y plane but tightly confined in the z direction. To define the dots, the team applied voltages to metal gates placed on the surface of the device, which generated electric fields in the 2DEG. The fields create a repulsive potential over a small region of the 2DEG that has an attractive spot at its center, confining a few electrons in the x-y plane to zero dimensions (a quantum dot). Under the right conditions, the number of electrons in the dot is limited to one.
To determine the confining potential, the team applied magnetic fields to the system. The experiments were carried out in two stages. First the team applied magnetic fields of varying strength in the x and then y directions. These fields reduced the width of the confining potential in the y and x directions, respectively, changing the electron’s energy. Using pulsed gate spectroscopy, the team then measured the orbital energy of the electron as a function of magnetic field intensity and compared those energies to those theoretically predicted for different dot confining potentials. From these data, they inferred the shape of the dot in the x-y plane. Then they repeated the measurements, but this time they kept the magnitude of the field fixed while varying its angle. From these measurements, they determined the width of the potential in the z direction. Their results show that the confining potential of their quantum dots had an elongated, deformed circular shape in the x-y plane and a confinement width of around 6 nm in the z direction (Fig. 1).
The analysis method employed by the team required that they make an initial guess for the confining potential, which they then used to make predictions that they compared with the experimental data. In this case, the team guessed that the potential was anisotropic, with independent harmonic shapes in x and y, and that it extended with a triangular shape in the z direction. The need to guess the potential could be interpreted as a limitation of the proposed method. Another potential issue is that different z-direction confining profiles, such as triangular wells and square wells, produce very similar spectroscopic data, making it hard to determine a dot’s exact potential. That said, the method does provide a route to tackling a difficult problem using realistic assumptions. It also provides a means to extract a large amount of information about the dots from a conceptually simple model and a well-defined sequence of measurements. For example, as well as obtaining the 3D shape of the potential, the team was able to measure and to calculate the ground- and excited-state energies for dots with different potential shapes. They were also able to measure the orientation of the dot relative to the underlying GaAs layer.
The work by Camenzind and colleagues represents significant progress toward single-electron control in quantum dots. The team notes that their method should be directly applicable to quantum dots made from other materials, such as silicon/silicon oxide heterostructures , as well as multiple-quantum-dot systems, for example a triple quantum dot. The next step will likely be the mapping of a double quantum dot, which should provide insights into the effect of combining two dot potentials . Researchers are in a better position to model a quantum-dot-like qubit if they know its potential, which can be optimized to improve the qubit’s performance and efficiency as it carries out calculations or stores information.
- D. Loss and D. P. DiVincenzo, “Quantum computation with quantum dots,” Phys. Rev. A 57, 120 (1998).
- B. E. Kane, “A silicon-based nuclear spin quantum computer,” Nature 393, 133 (1998).
- L. C. Camenzind, L. Yu, P. Stano, Zimmerman, A. C. Gossard, D. Loss, and D. M. Zumbühl, “Spectroscopy of quantum dot orbitals with in-plane magnetic fields,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 207701 (2019).
- P. Stano, C.-H. Hsu, L. C. Camenzind, L. Yu, Dominik Zumbühl, and D. Loss, “Orbital effects of a strong in-plane magnetic field on a gate-defined quantum dot,” Phys. Rev. B 99, 085308 (2019).
- J. J. Pla, K. Y. Tan, J. P. Dehollain, W. H. Lim, J. J. L. Morton, D. N. Jamieson, A. S. Dzurak, and A. Morello, “A single-atom electron spin qubit in silicon,” Nature 489, 541 (2012).
- F. H. L. Koppens, C. Buizert, K. J. Tielrooij, I. T. Vink, K. C. Nowack, T. Meunier, L. P. Kouwenhoven, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, “Driven coherent oscillations of a single electron spin in a quantum dot,” Nature 442, 766 (2006).


Macroscopic quantum entanglement achieved at room temperature
In quantum physics, the creation of a state of entanglement in particles any larger and more complex than photons usually requires temperatures close to absolute zero and the application of enormously powerful magnetic fields to achieve. Now scientists working at the University of Chicago (UChicago) and the Argonne National Laboratory claim to have created this entangled state at room temperature on a semiconductor chip, using atomic nuclei and the application of relatively small magnetic fields.
When two particles, such as photons, are entangled – that is, when they interact physically and are then forcibly separated – the spin direction imparted to each is directly opposite to the other. However, when one of the entangled particles has its spin direction measured, the other particle will immediately display the reverse spin direction, no matter how great a distance they are apart. This is the "spooky action at a distance" phenomenon (as Albert Einstein put it) that has already seen the rise of applications once considered science fiction, such as ultra-safe cryptography and a new realm of quantum computing.
Ordinarily, quantum entanglement is a rarely observed occurence in the natural world, as particles coupled in this way first need to be in a highly ordered state before they can be entangled. In essence, this is because thermodynamic entropy dictates that a general chaos of particles is the standard state of things at the atomic level and makes such alignments exceedingly rare. Going up a scale to the macro level, and the sheer number of particles involved makes entanglement an exceptionally difficult state to achieve.
"The macroscopic world that we are used to seems very tidy, but it is completely disordered at the atomic scale," said Paul Klimov, a graduate student in the Institute for Molecular Engineering (a facility formed as a cooperation between UChicago and the Argonne National Laboratory). "The laws of thermodynamics generally prevent us from observing quantum phenomena in macroscopic objects."
In standard sub-atomic quantum entanglement experiments using photons, for example, very high energy value photons are generated using a laser and then directed through a nonlinear crystal. The majority of the crystals will pass straight through unimpeded, however some will undergo a process known as spontaneous parametric down-conversion (SPDC) where, simply stated, a single high-energy photon will be split into two lower-energy photons. As a result of this SPDC, the two photons will have been created entangled, with opposing spin polarizations, because they both were spawned from a single particle.
At a macroscopic level, however, things aren't quite as simple, and particles such as atoms in solids and liquids are particularly difficult to wrangle into a quantum state. This is because the difficulties of overcoming quantum decoherence (put simply, where interfering wave functions from surrounding atoms cause the collapse of quantum states) in entangling particles normally means that ultra-low temperatures (around -270° C (-454° F)) and enormous magnetic fields (about 1,000 times greater than that of an average refrigerator magnet) are required. This is to keep atomic movement close to zero and contain the entangled particles, both of which reduce the likelihood of decoherence.
Given that a practical application of entanglement to macroscopic particles is to enhance quantum electronic devices in real world situations and at ambient temperatures, the researchers sought a different approach to this problem. Using an infrared laser, they coaxed into order (known in scientific circles as "preferentially aligned") the magnetic states of many thousands of electrons and nuclei and then proceeded to entangle them by bombarding them with short electromagnetic pulses, just like those used in standard magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). As a result, many entangled pairs of electrons and nuclei were created in an area equal to the size and volume of a red blood cell on a Silicon Carbide (SiC) semiconductor.
"We know that the spin states of atomic nuclei associated with semiconductor defects have excellent quantum properties at room temperature," said professor David Awschalom, a senior scientist at the Argonne National Laboratory. "They are coherent, long-lived and controllable with photonics and electronics. Given these quantum 'pieces,' creating entangled quantum states seemed like an attainable goal."
With the techniques demonstrated used in concert with other SiC-derived devices, quantum sensors may be constructed in the near future that use entanglement to improve the sensitivity limit over and above that found in current, non-quantum sensors. As the entanglement operates at ordinary temperatures and the SiC device is biologically inert, sensing within a living being is also a potential application.
"We are excited about entanglement-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging probes, which could have important biomedical applications," said Abram Falk of IBM's Thomas J. Watson Research Center and a co-author of the research findings.
Aside from the usual applications in secure communication and information processing, and high-capacity, minimal error data transfer, the research team believes that other technologies, such as synchronizing global positioning satellites could also benefit from this breakthrough.
The results of this research were published in the journal Science Advances.
Source: University of Chicago


Principio de Exclusión de Pauli – Free download as Powerpoint Presentation . ppt /.pptx), PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or view presentation slides online. Pauli Exclusion Principle. No two electrons in an atom can have identical quantum numbers. This is an example of a general principle which applies not only to. Translation for ‘principio de exclusión de Pauli’ in the free Spanish-English dictionary and many other English translations.
|Country:||Trinidad & Tobago|
|Published (Last):||7 February 2012|
|PDF File Size:||4.89 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.85 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Constrain to simple back and forward steps. This effect is partly responsible for the everyday observation in the macroscopic world that two solid objects cannot be in the same place at the same time. To account for this we must use a linear combination of the two possibilities since the determination of which electron is in which state fe not possible to determine.
In one dimension, bosons, as well as fermions, can obey the exclusion principle. Tipler, Paul; Llewellyn, Ralph Copy code to clipboard. This principle was formulated by Austrian physicist Wolfgang Pauli in for electrons, xe later extended principio de exclusion de pauli all fermions with his spin—statistics theorem of In white dwarfs, which do not undergo nuclear fusion, an opposing force to gravity is provided by electron degeneracy pressure.
Lewisfor example, the third of his six postulates of chemical behavior states that the atom tends to hold an even number of electrons in any given shell, and especially to hold eight electrons which are normally arranged symmetrically principio de exclusion de pauli the eight corners of a cube see: Do you really want to delete this prezi?
PRINCIPIO DE EXCLUSION DE PAULI by Rebeca Anchundiia on Prezi
In the early 20th century it became evident that atoms and molecules with even numbers of electrons are more principio de exclusion de pauli stable than those with odd numbers of electrons. Or learning new words is more your df Send the link below via email or IM Copy.
However, even this enormous rigidity can be overcome by the gravitational paulii of a massive star or by the pressure of a supernovaleading to the formation of a black hole.
A firewall is blocking access to Prezi content. Neutrons are capable of producing an even higher degeneracy pressure, neutron degeneracy pressurealbeit over a shorter principio de exclusion de pauli. The wavefunction for the two electron system would be.
Orincipio both bodies, atomic structure is disrupted by extreme pressure, but the stars are held in hydrostatic equilibrium by degeneracy pressurealso known as Fermi pressure. Classical mechanics Old quantum theory Bra—ket notation Hamiltonian Interference. Dictionary Conjugation Phrases Games More by bab. Why not have a go at them together! Modern Physics 4th ed. Check out this article to learn more or contact your system administrator. Delete comment or cancel. Send link to edit together this prezi using Prezi Meeting learn more: Phrases Speak like a native Useful phrases translated from Principio de exclusion de pauli into 28 languages.
Advanced topics Quantum annealing Quantum chaos Quantum computing Density matrix Quantum field theory Fractional quantum mechanics Quantum gravity Quantum information science Quantum machine learning Perturbation theory quantum mechanics Relativistic quantum mechanics Scattering theory Spontaneous parametric down-conversion Quantum statistical mechanics.
The chemical principio de exclusion de pauli of an element largely depend on the number of electrons in the outermost shell; atoms with different numbers of occupied paulli shells but the same number of electrons in the outermost shell have similar properties, which gives rise to the periodic table of the elements.
In Elliott Lieb and coworkers showed that the Pauli principle still leads to stability in intense magnetic fields such as in neutron starsalthough at a much higher density than in ordinary matter.
Invited talk at the 12th Workshop on Nuclear Astrophysics. Creating downloadable principio de exclusion de pauli, be patient. Quantum Mechanics principio de exclusion de pauli Its Emergent Macrophysics. English from of as out of in off on than to by. The Pauli exclusion principle is part of one prkncipio our most basic observations principio de exclusion de pauli nature: See more popular or the latest prezis. The Pauli exclusion principle describes the behavior of all fermions particles with “half-integer spin “while bosons particles with “integer spin” are subject to other principles.
The consequence of the Pauli principle here is that electrons of the same spin are kept apart by a repulsive exchange interactionwhich is a short-range effect, acting simultaneously with the long-range electrostatic or Exdlusion force. English name of the letter D.
This suggestion was first made in by Paul Ehrenfestwho pointed out that the electrons of each atom cannot all fall into the lowest-energy orbital and must occupy successively larger shells.
In the case of electrons in atoms, it can be stated as follows: For this purpose he introduced a new two-valued quantum number, identified fxclusion Samuel Goudsmit and George Uhlenbeck as electron principio de exclusion de pauli. The stability of the electrons in an atom itself is unrelated to the exclusion principle, but is described by the quantum theory of the atom.
Fermions include elementary particles such as quarkselectrons and neutrinos.
Pauli Exclusion Principle
Pauli Exclusion Principle No two electrons in an atom can have identical quantum numbers. Krane 5 November Astronomy provides a spectacular principio de exclusion de pauli of the effect of the Pauli principle, in the form of white dwarf and neutron stars. Do you really want to delete this prezi? Send link to edit together this prezi using Prezi Meeting learn more: Pauli looked for an explanation for these numbers, which were at first only empirical.
In neutron starssubject to even stronger gravitational forces, electrons have merged with protons to form neutrons.
This can stabilize neutron stars from further collapse, but at a smaller size and higher density than a white dwarf. Invited audience members principio de exclusion de pauli follow you as you navigate and present People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account This link expires 10 minutes after you close se presentation A excousion of 30 users can follow your presentation Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article.
This page was last edited on 20 Julyat


Atoms are tricky to control. They can zip around, or even tunnel out of their containment. In order for new precision measurement tools and quantum devices to work—and work well—scientists need to be able to control and manipulate atoms as precisely as possible.
That’s especially true for optical atomic clocks. In these clocks, a cold, excited atom’s electrons swing back and forth in what’s called a dipole, vibrating like a plucked string. Scientists rapidly count those swings with a laser, dividing a second into quadrillionths of a second.
However, even the best optical atomic clocks face decoherence—the atom falls back to its ground state, the laser loses the signal, and the clock winds down. This means optical atomic clocks can only take measurements for a few seconds before the atoms need to be “reset.”
Scientists are continually exploring ways to increase those coherence times. Using optical tweezers, Aaron Young, along with other members of the Kaufman and Ye groups at JILA, have reached record-setting coherence times of more than half a minute. Their findings were recently published in Nature.
“The trick is to use separate sets of tweezers to prepare and measure the atoms, and to hang on to the atoms while they ring down. This makes it possible to optimize the second set of tweezers to preserve coherence for as long as possible, without having to worry about competing requirements associated with other phases of the experiment,” Young said.
Optical atomic clock technology
Optical atomic clocks are incredibly varied, but there are two popular means for controlling the atoms: ion traps, and optical lattices for trapping neutral atoms. Each approach has its strengths and weaknesses.
Trapped ion clocks measure the oscillations of a single charged atom, or ion. That atom is pristine, well-characterized, and well-controlled, however, due to the fundamental noise associated with quantum measurements, scientists need to run the trapped ion clock many times to obtain a precise measurement.
Lattice clocks, on the other hand, use standing waves of reflected lasers to form an egg carton-shaped lattice that can hold many atoms. This way, they can interrogate many thousands of atoms in parallel to obtain precise measurements in a short amount of time. But it’s difficult to control any of those thousands of atoms individually, and interactions between these atoms must be well-characterized — a rich and complicated endeavor in its own right.
Controlling and preventing these interactions is where optical tweezers come in. Optical tweezers are highly-focused laser beams capable of grabbing and moving individual atoms—something the Kaufman Group has a lot of experience doing.
“With the tweezers, our traps are more or less independent,” Young said. “It gives you a lot of control over what kind of traps you can make.”
The group uses this extra control to preserve quantum coherence, and minimize many of the effects that can limit clocks.
A hybrid clock of cigar pancakes
Young and the team used lasers to create a vertical lattice of traps, like stacked pancakes. The optical tweezers pierce these pancakes, looking like little cigar-shaped tubes. This creates a two-dimensional array composed of hundreds of spherical traps that each contain a single atom.
This pancake-cigar architecture allows for very quick cooling and trapping of the atoms, at which point they are easily transferred to a second set of tweezers designed specifically for clock physics.
Because the atoms are well-chilled, the second set of tweezers can make very shallow traps for the clock. Shallow traps minimize the number of photons that could interfere with the atoms, and they reduce the power required for the laser, making it possible to make more traps, and trap more atoms. They can also space these traps far enough apart so the atoms cannot move around or crash into their neighbors.
All of this results in record coherence times—48 seconds.
To put that in perspective, if every oscillation took about a full second—like the pendulum on a grandfather clock—you would only have to wind this clock once every few billion years.
“This long lifetime is related to what people call a ‘quality factor’ – it’s the number of times an oscillator swings before it rings down. The quality factor of our experiment is the highest we know of in pretty much any physical system, including, depending on how you compare them, various astronomical systems like spinning neutron stars or planetary orbits,” Young said.
More than a clock
“What we’ve effectively done is put 150 very coherent qubits in the same place, which serves as a really good starting point for engineering interactions,” Young said.
A clock with controllable interactions could be used to engineer quantum states that allow for even more precise measurements of time.
But the Kaufman and Ye Groups see potential to use this technique for another quantum device: quantum computers. With exquisite control of each high-coherence atom, the atoms can act as a qubit for the computer to perform calculations.
Young and Kaufman also see this as a “zeroth order step” in physics research. Physicists are continually seeking better control over atoms to manipulate interactions between them, and study the results—and this hybrid tweezer clock is a promising means of achieving that control for long periods of time. By studying and controlling those interactions, physicists can better understand how the quantum world works, and those discoveries could lead to new advances in quantum-based technologies.
Their study was published in Nature on December 17th, 2020 and was supported by a National Science Foundation Physics Frontier Center grant and a grant from the National Research Council.


Technology companies constantly roll out their "next-generation" phones and computers with the promise that they're better than ever before. But iPhone updates can't quite compare to what a new study predicts: A next-generation computer made with an ultra-rare, never-before-seen material.
After more than 30 years of searching, an international team of physicists and chemists discovered a material with a trifecta of rare and highly sought after characteristics. This material, KV3Sb5, has the potential to revolutionize the design of computer memory and processors — and is shaking up fundamental understandings of physics.
This finding was published Friday in the journal Science Advances. The discovery involves the documentation of a "giant" electromagnetic effect in an already complicated and rare material.
Mazhar Ali is the study's senior author and a researcher at the Max Planck Institute of Microstructure Physics. Ali tells Inverse that KV3Sb5 is something called a "metallic frustrated magnet."
A material like this has been highly sought after for around 30 years because "theorists have speculated that the interplay of frustrated magnetism with traveling electrons could result in exotic properties like unconventional superconductivity and more," Ali says.
"Metallic frustrated magnets are very, very rare," he explains.
KV3Sb5's oddness didn't stop there: It also houses a special kind of electron called a "Dirac electron," Ali says, which means its electrons are both much faster and way lighter than your run-of-the-mill electron.
Coupled with the material's malleability — it's easy to flake into individual layers and cooperative during fabrication — and it becomes one of a kind.
"There is no other example material with this combination of traits," Ali remarks.
How does it work — The giant electromagnetic effect that these combined characteristics make possible is something called the anomalous Hall effect (AHE.) This effect refers to a way magnets and charge interact and can either be intrinsic (meaning the structure of the material determines how electrons move through it) or extrinsic (in which certain features of the structure create more scattering).
Either of these AHEs will change how electrons scatter off the material, thus changing out information is carried.
"There is no other example material with this combination of traits."
To explain what exactly that looks like inside this material, Ali says we can turn to soccer for an analogy.
"Intrinsic is like if Christiano Ronaldo was making a curved pass around some defenders, without colliding with them, by kicking the soccer ball [the electron] in a special way," Ali says.
"Extrinsic is like the ball bouncing off of a defender — aka an electron off of a magnetic scattering center —and going to the side after the collision. Most extrinsically dominated materials have a random arrangement of defenders on the field — [like the] scattering centers randomly situated throughout the crystal."
Ali explains that most extrinsically arranged materials have these defenders scattered randomly through the field (or material). KV3Sb5, on the other hand, plays a tighter defense.
"KV3Sb5 belongs to a class of materials known as cluster magnets," Ali says. "It has defenders grouped together and arranged on the field in a special pattern... In this scenario, the ball scatters off of the cluster of defenders, rather than a single one, and is more likely to go to the side than if just one was in the way."
In KV3Sb5, this pattern is a triangle of 3 magnetic scattering centers. This is thought to underly a recently proposed spin-cluster skew scattering mechanisms linked to AHE, which, Ali says "demonstrated for the first time in this material; because it has the right ingredients to host this effect."
And, because the electrons at play in this material are super-fast Dirac electrons, Ali says this is equivalent to Ronaldo kicking the ball instead of a 10-year-old. The result? A giant AHE.
How can it be used — But what can you do with a material so special? One option exciting scientists is as a replacement for platinum in computing and memory technology.
"The same physics that governs this AHE should also drive the spin Hall effect, where instead an electron gaining the orthogonal velocity, it is just the electron's spin," Ali explains. "Large spin Hall effects in metals are highly sought after for spintronic applications like next generation computation and memory technology."
This type of technology, Ali says, is already commercially available — this IBM and Everspin — but these technologies are based on Platinum. He explains that finding a cheap and stable alternative to platinum would "be a big win" — and this finding could make that possible.
Another exciting avenue for physicists to explore, says Ali, is whether or not this material could superconduct at low temperatures -- a trait that, when combined with other components, would benefit the future of quantum computing as well.
Where there's one super weird, rare material, they hope to find another. By further exploring this material and those like it, scientists aim to learn more about this fundamental physics phenomena.
Abstract: The anomalous Hall effect (AHE) is one of the most fundamental phenomena in physics. In the highly conductive regime, ferromagnetic metals have been the focus of past research. Here, we report a giant extrinsic AHE in KV3Sb5, an exfoliable, highly conductive semimetal with Dirac quasiparticles and a vanadium Kagome net. Even without report of long range magnetic order, the anomalous Hall conductivity reaches 15,507 Ω−1 cm−1 with an anomalous Hall ratio of ≈ 1.8%; an order of magnitude larger than Fe. Defying theoretical expectations, KV3Sb5 shows enhanced skew scattering that scales quadratically, not linearly, with the longitudinal conductivity, possibly arising from the combination of highly conductive Dirac quasiparticles with a frustrated magnetic sublattice. This allows the possibility of reaching an anomalous Hall angle of 90° in metals. This observation raises fundamental questions about AHEs and opens new frontiers for AHE and spin Hall effect exploration, particularly in metallic frustrated magnets.


Updated: Jan 23
In today’s information society, data is one of the most valuable resources required by businesses to maintain a competitive advantage over others . Using cyberspace, data is carried across the world and into every corner of our lives. Technological advances and the expansion of cyberspace has brought data security to the forefront as the most critical problem facing the Internet in the future. As a result, businesses, as well as other actors must be able to maintain data secrecy by closely controlling who has access to it. To achieve this, data systems largely utilise cryptography, a method of protecting information through the use of codes and the scrambling of data which is only accessible to someone who can restore it to its original format. In current computer systems, cryptography is a strong inexpensive method of securing data, however, developments in the field of quantum computing threatens this but also provides an opportunity for the unconditional security offered by quantum cryptography to the Internet and data security as ever-increasing challenges arise in the future.
To explain the role that quantum cryptography could play in the near future it’s best to start with role of cryptography and how quantum computing effects it. As previously mentioned, cryptography disguises data and is only accessible by someone who can restore it to its original form. In a perfect scenario that person is known by the person who encrypted the data, and they are permitting the data recipient to access it. While classic cryptography has its exploitable flaws, , cryptography is still considered to be an effective security measure. However, the development of quantum computers in the last decade threatens to render cryptography as we know it obsolete. At their core, all computers rely on their ability to store and manipulate pieces of information known as bits. These bits are stored in a binary state as zeros and ones.
Quantum computers on the other hand, use quantum mechanics to manipulate information as quantum bits, known as qubits. Qubits are binary numbers like bits but have an additional state known as superposition which allows them to represent ones or zeros simultaneously. This state reduces the time it takes data to be analysed on quantum computers. This can be better understood in the following example, in 1997 IMB’s computer, Deep Blue, defeated chess champion Garry Kasparov by examining 200 million moves per second. In that second, a quantum computer would be able to calculate 1 trillion moves. So, how does this effect cryptography and the data it protects? By using quantum computers, encryptions that were previously thought to be unbreakable due to the time it would take to achieve it were cracked and proved to no longer be reliable in protecting data. In essence, quantum computers have changed the landscape of data security.
The development of quantum computers and the skill they’ve demonstrated in cracking classic cryptography highlights the need for new cryptosystems which can ensure the information security of cyberspace. By using quantum computers to develop encryptions there is an increased level of information security as well as additional advantages. Firstly, it offers unconditional security. In classic cryptography two kinds of cryptosystems can be used, asymmetric key cryptosystems and symmetric key cryptosystems. Both systems encrypt data and require users to decipher the encryption using a decryption key. These key systems can resist brute force attacks that from normal computers but not from quantum computers. But, if the key system in question was generated using a quantum computer it cannot be broken. This is because of a principle of quantum mechanics called the principle of uncertainty which states that a particle’s position cannot be determined and can exist in different places with different probabilities. By using this principle, keys can be randomly generated and shared between the data sender and the recipient. But what if communication between the two is being monitored by a third person? This risk is mitigated by quantum cryptography’s second advantage, it provides sniffing detection. If information is exchanged in a public channel it is possible for an attacker to eavesdrop on that channel without detection. However, through quantum communication this isn’t possible. By using the quantum no-cloning theory any eavesdropper would be detected. This theory explains that it is impossible to replicate an identical quantum state in another system which guarantees that any attacker who attempts to delete or damage quantum information will leave a trace. These characteristics of quantum computing and cryptography, unconditional security and sniffing detection ensures data security in cyberspace unlike classic cryptography.
It is clear that quantum computers are somewhat of a double-edged sword that threatens current data encryption while being its only saving grace. While the field of quantum cryptography has made substantial advances in the last decade it still faces challenges before its widespread implementation, including the need to develop more advanced hardware which would enable higher quality and longer transmission distances for quantum key exchange. However, developments in computer processing power coupled with the threat of obsolescence facing classic cryptography systems prove to be the force propelling the research and development of quantum cryptography. This technology has the potential to contribute significantly to security on a personal, commercial, and state level even if it only reaches a fraction of its expectations.


As electronic devices using conventional materials reach their limits, research focus has shifted to the development of exotic materials with properties that can make electronic devices more efficient, lightweight, flexible, cost-effective and smart. Take a look at some promising candidates.
Most of us assume that smartphones and laptops will keep getting faster and better. But that progress could come to an end in about a decade. That’s when engineers will hit the limits of cramming atom-scale circuitry onto conventional silicon chips, the brains behind every computing device today.
Fortunately, chip market leaders have plenty of ideas to get around that impasse. Their plans begin with refinements to today’s technology and grow steadily more exotic.
Companies are investing big in exotic forms of carbon as a way to recraft chips. Graphene, for example, is a sheet of carbon atoms just a single atomic layer thick, arranged in a hexagonal array that looks like a chickenwire fencing. Another is carbon nanotubes, which are like tiny straws made from rolled up graphene sheets.
Both forms of carbon could help push miniaturisation further than what’s possible with conventional silicon. And processors could get faster even if they don’t get smaller—a big selling point. Nanotubes could become transistor building blocks, although placing them precisely is a big challenge. Researchers also envision tiny transistors made using graphene, but graphene-based chips will pose challenges. The material conducts electrical current well but doesn’t mirror silicon’s semiconductor properties.
One way to keep pushing progress will involve elements drawn from other columns to either side of the group IV column—thus the term III-V materials, pronounced simply ‘three-five.’ With III-V materials, chip manufacturing stays the same but silicon will get new elements layered on top. That will help electrons flow faster, which means less voltage will be needed to get them moving. If the chips need less power, transistors can be smaller and switch faster.
Researchers are creating and investigating artificial and unconventional materials with unusual electronic and magnetic properties like superconductors that transport electricity with zero losses, and very thin materials (just two or three atoms thick) that could be incorporated into transistors.
The novelty of such materials makes it nearly impossible to anticipate everything that they can do. A researcher can make educated guesses about various properties, but end up seeing something entirely different. A deeper understanding of the material opens the possibility that engineers would be able to route electric currents in quantum computers much like the way they do in conventional electronics through silicon. However, creating high-quality topological insulator materials is a challenge. Since the useful properties occur on the surface, nanoscale ribbons and plates would be ideal to work with because of their large surface area.
British researchers won the 2016 Nobel Prize in Physics for their theoretical explanations of strange states (topological phases) of matter in two-dimensional materials. Their work laid the foundation for predicting and explaining bizarre behaviours that experimentalists discovered at the surfaces of materials, and inside extremely thin layers. These include superconductivity—the ability to conduct electricity without resistance—and magnetism in very thin materials.
Physicists are now exploring similar states of matter for potential use in a new generation of electronics including quantum computers. And the theories pioneered by the Nobel winners have been extended to develop exciting materials such as topological insulators.
Topological insulators are a class of solids that conduct electricity like a metal across their surface but at the same time block the current’s flow like a rubber through their interior. Theoretical physicists predicted their existence in 2006 and experimentalists demonstrated the first such material in 2008.
Engineers find a few traits of topological insulators especially exciting. One is that the electrons move in a direction determined by their spin—a quantum-mechanical property that forms the basis of magnetic data storage. Engineers hope to exploit the spin-motion connection to make superfast hard drives.
Topological insulators open the door to tailoring topological electronic properties by stacking different thin sheets, or 2D materials. These exotic 2D materials could be used as a platform for energy-efficient computing (spintronics) and to solve today’s intractable challenges with quantum computing.
Candidate materials for topological insulators
Like graphene, the semi-metal tungsten ditelluride (WTe2) can be prepared in a single monolayer. Tellurium atoms sandwich the transition metal tungsten in each layer. These sandwiched transition metal materials are important for future electronics and photonics. Scientists have predicted that WTe2 in monolayer form has the exotic electronic properties of topological insulators. However, the surface of WTe2 oxidises in air, destroying the electronic properties.
Now, researchers have made devices from WTe2 down to a single layer thick, which are air-stable and have good electrical contacts. Surprisingly, they found that in the case of a single layer, the sheet became insulating at liquid nitrogen temperatures when no gate voltage was applied. For large-enough positive or negative contact voltages, the electrical current switched on, as in a transistor.
This content was originally published here.


Configuration of the security protocol: One device (center) produces the encryption key coded in the form of entangled pairs of light particles which are then transferred to the two communicating devices (Alice and Bob). Coding information in pairs of particles ensures security, as there is no third particle that can be intercepted by an “eavesdropper.” (Illustration: Department of Physics, University of Basel)
How can we protect communications against “eavesdropping” if we don’t trust the devices used in the process? This is one of the main questions in quantum cryptography research. Researchers at the University of Basel and ETH Zurich have succeeded in laying the theoretical groundwork for a communication protocol that guarantees one hundred percent privacy.
Hackers in possession of quantum computers represent a serious threat to today’s cryptosystems. Researchers are therefore working on new encryption methods based on the principles of quantum mechanics. However, current encryption protocols assume that the communicating devices are known, trustworthy entities. But what if this is not the case and the devices leave a back door open for eavesdropping attacks?
A team of physicists led by Professor Nicolas Sangouard of the University of Basel and Professor Renato Renner of ETH Zurich have developed the theoretical foundations for a communication protocol that offers ultimate privacy protection and can be implemented experimentally. This protocol guarantees security not only against hackers with quantum computers, but also in cases where the devices used for communication are “black boxes” whose trustworthiness is a completely unknown quality. They published their results in the journal Physical Review Letters and have applied for a patent.
Diluting information with noise
While there are already some theoretical proposals for communication protocols with black boxes, there was one obstacle to their experimental implementation: the devices used had to be highly efficient in detecting information about the crypto key. If too many of the information units (in the form of entangled pairs of light particles) remained undetected, it was impossible to know whether they had been intercepted by a third party.
The new protocol overcomes this hurdle with a trick – the researchers add artificial noise to the actual information about the crypto key. Even if many of the information units are undetected, an “eavesdropper” receives so little real information about the crypto key that the security of the protocol remains guaranteed. In this way, the researchers lowered the requirement on the detection efficiency of the devices.
“Since the first small-scale quantum computers are now available, we urgently need new solutions for protecting privacy,” says Professor Sangouard. “Our work represents a significant step toward the next milestone in secure communications.”
The Latest Updates from Bing News & Google News
Go deeper with Bing News on:
- Spirent Communications announces acquisition of octoScope to establish it as 'market leader' in the wi-fi spaceon March 4, 2021 at 11:40 pm
StockMarketWire.com - Technology company Spirent Communications has acquired US-based technology company octoScope in a deal that will establish it as the 'wi-fi test leader'. The company has bought ...
- Synzi Obtains Advanced Healthcare Security Measures for Patient Communications through Covax Dataon March 4, 2021 at 10:12 pm
Covax Data, Inc., a visionary cybersecurity SaaS provider, today announced a data security services relationship with Synzi, LLC.
- IRS Tax-Exempt Arm To Launch Secure Messaging In Summeron March 4, 2021 at 6:10 pm
The Internal Revenue Service's Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division plans to roll out a secure messaging program for electronic communication with taxpayers in the summer, an acting director in ...
- Cutting off stealthy interlopers: a framework for secure cyber-physical systemson March 4, 2021 at 7:26 am
Cyber-physical systems (CPS), which combine modern networking with physical actuators, can be vulnerable against hackers. Recently, researchers at DGIST developed a new framework for CPSs that is ...
- Globex Data CEO Interviewed on Proactive to Announce Its Multi-Currency Platform for Its Global Launch of Sekur.Com Communication Platformon March 3, 2021 at 10:00 pm
Ghiai joined Steve Darling from Proactive to share news the company is launching a multi-currency platform for its secure communications solution platform Sekur in anticipation of a global mass-market ...
Go deeper with Google Headlines on:
Go deeper with Bing News on:
- Global Quantum Computing Market (2021 to 2025) - Featuring Atos, Alphabet and Honeywell International Among Others - ResearchAndMarkets.comon March 4, 2021 at 7:58 am
The "Global Quantum Computing Market 2021-2025" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering. The publisher has been monitoring the quantum computing market and it is poised to grow by ...
- New Optical Antennas Could Overcome Data Limitson March 3, 2021 at 11:54 pm
Researchers at Berkeley Lab and UC Berkeley have harnessed the properties of lightwaves that radically increase the amount of data they carry.
- Quantum Cryptography Market Size to Record 38.2% CAGR During 2020-2027on March 3, 2021 at 3:46 am
Selbyville, Delaware, Market Study Report LLC recently added a new title on 2020-2027 Global Quantum Cryptography Market Report from its database. The report provides study with in-depth overview, ...
- Quantum Cryptography Market to Witness Massive Growth by 2025 | IBM, ID Quantique, QuintessenceLabson March 3, 2021 at 1:34 am
A new business intelligence report released by Advance Market Analytics with title Global Quantum Cryptography Market Insights Forecast to 2025 This report provides a detailed overview of key factors ...
- An approach for security evaluation and certification of a complete quantum communication systemon March 2, 2021 at 4:00 pm
Although quantum communication systems are being deployed on a global scale, their realistic security certification is not yet available. Here we present a security evaluation and improvement protocol ...


While quantum computers can do interesting things without dedicated memory, memory would provide a lot of flexibility in terms of the sorts of algorithms they could run and how quantum systems can interact with each other and the outside world. Building quantum memory is extremely challenging, as reading to and writing from it both have to be extremely efficient and accurate, and the memory has to do something that's very atypical of quantum systems: hold on to its state for an appreciable length of time.
If we solve the problems, however, quantum memory offers some rather unusual properties. The process of writing to quantum memory is very similar to the process for quantum teleportation, meaning the memory can potentially be transmitted between different computing facilities. And since the storage device is a quantum object, there's the possibility that two qubits of memory in different locations can be entangled, essentially de-localizing the qubit's value and spreading it between two facilities.
In a demonstration of that promise, Chinese researchers have entangled quantum memory at facilities over 20 kilometers apart. Separately, they have also done the entanglement with photons that have traveled through 50 kilometers of optical cable. But the process of transmitting and entangling comes with an unfortunate side-effect: it takes so long that the memory typically loses its coherence in the meantime.
The basic outlines of the experiment are pretty straightforward for a process that's somewhat mind-bending. The qubits being used here are small clouds of cold atoms (about a hundred million atoms for each). They are placed in a state where the atoms are indistinguishable from a quantum perspective and thus can be treated as a single quantum object. Because a quantum state will be distributed across all the atoms simultaneously, this provides a bit more stability than other forms of quantum memory. The atom cloud's state is read and written using photons, and the atoms are placed in an optical cavity that traps these photons. This ensures that the photons have many opportunities to interact with the atom cloud, increasing the efficiency of operations.
When the memory's state is set by a write photon, the atomic collective emits a second photon that indicates the success. The polarization of this photon contains information regarding the state of the atoms, so it serves as a tool for entangling the memory.
Unfortunately, that photon is at a wavelength that isn't very useful, in that it tends to get lost during transmission. So the researchers sacrificed a bit of efficiency for a lot of utility. They used a device that shifts the wavelength of the photons from the near infrared to the wavelengths used in standard communications fibers. About 30 percent of the photons were lost, but the remaining ones can be transmitted at high-efficiency across existing fiber networks (provided the right hardware is put in place where the fiber ends).
There are losses from filtering noise and getting photons into the fiber, but the entire process is over 30-percent efficient, end to end. In this case, the two ends were 11km apart, at the University of Science and Technology of China and the Hefei Software Park.
For the entanglement, the authors created two qubits of quantum memory, generated photons from both, and sent those photons down separate cables to the Software Park. There, the photons were sent through a device that made them impossible to distinguish, entangling them. Since they, in turn, were entangled with the quantum memory that produced them, the two qubits of memory were then entangled. While they resided in the same lab, the geometry of the fibers could have been arbitrary—it was equivalent to entangling two bits of memory that were 22km apart.
That's a big step up from the previous record of 1.4km.
To stretch things out a bit, the researchers then turned to a long spool of cable. Two photons were sent down the cable and then manipulated so that it was impossible to determine which path they took through the cable. This again entangled them, and thus the memories that emitted the photons in the first place. The process required that the phase of the incoming photons be tracked, which is notably more difficult, and therefore dropped the overall efficiency.
For a 50km-long fiber path, this led to some rather low efficiencies, on the order of 10-4. Which means the time to achieve entanglement went up—in this case to over half a second. And that's a problem, because the typical lifetime of a qubit stored in this memory is 70 microseconds, much shorter than the entanglement process. So the approach definitely falls into the "not quite ready for production" category.
And that's unfortunate because the approach opens up a host of very intriguing possibilities. One is that spreading a qubit across two facilities through this delocalization could enable a single quantum calculation to be performed at remote facilities—possibly ones employing different hardware that have distinct strengths and weaknesses. And the researchers note that there's a technique called entanglement swapping that could extend the distance between memory qubits even further—provided the qubits hold on to their state. But if all of these involve some amount of error, that error will quickly pile up and make the whole thing useless.
None of this should undercut the achievement demonstrated here, but it does show how far we still have to go. The inefficiencies popping up at every step of the process each represent a distinct engineering and/or physics challenge we have to tackle before any of this can be applicable to the real world.


Quantum computing: the most transformational tech of all
What is quantum computing?
And what makes quantum computing applications different from ‘classical’ digital computing?
As you’re probably already aware, conventional systems use a binary computer code, represented as 1 or 0.
This is based on transistors that can only store information in two electrical states, On or Off.
These are the binary digits, or ‘bits’, of conventional computing.
It’s these binary bits that limit the kind of task regular computers can perform, and the speed at which they can do those tasks.
Quantum computing is based around the strange qualities and behaviour of subatomic particles.
The quantum meaning of entanglement and superposition
Defying previously accepted laws of the physical world, subatomic particles can exist in two places, or two states, at the same time.
This is called ‘superposition’.
Even distantly separated particles can share information instantaneously, faster than the speed of light.
This is ‘entanglement’.
This means that, unlike bits, qubits – the basis for quantum computers – can exist in multiple states simultaneously.
Transcending the 1 or 0 binary limitation, they have the potential to process exponential amounts of information.
Qubits – going beyond binary
A quantum machine with just a couple of qubits can process as much information as a classical 512-bit computer.
Due to the exponential nature of the platform, the dynamic changes very quickly.
Assuming perfect stability, 300 qubits could represent more data values than there are atoms in the observable universe.
This opens the opportunity to solve highly complex problems that are well beyond the reach of any conventional computer.
What is quantum computing used for presently?
In 2016, IBM made a quantum computer available to the public by connecting it to the cloud, enabling outside researchers and developers to explore its possibilities.
And in September 2019, IBM’s Quantum Computation Center opened.
This comprises a fleet of 15 systems including the most advanced quantum computer yet available for external use.
Despite these progressive steps, it’s still generally accepted that the most important quantum applications are years away.
One reason is the fickleness of subatomic matter.
As qubits are extremely delicate, even a small disturbance knocks particles out of a quantum state.
That’s why quantum computers are kept at temperatures slightly above absolute zero, colder than outer space, since matter becomes effectively more stable the colder it gets.
Even at that temperature, qubit particles typically remain in superposition for only fractions of a second.
Figuring out how to keep qubits in a prolonged state of superpostition is a major challenge that scientists still need to overcome.
The search is on for ‘logical qubits’ that can maintain the essential quantum state for longer.
The path to fulfilling Quantum’s promise
How will the arrival of the Quantum Age impact the number, categories and quality of jobs in the decades to come?
Although it’s not possible right now to predict just how big an industry quantum computing will eventually be, the industry is already suffering from a major skills gap, leaving quantum computing companies struggling to find qualified recruits.
The practical training of the sort made possible by IBM’s increasingly large collaborative effort, the Q Network, will be crucial to a long-term solution.
This is why IBM’s previously mentioned Quantum Computation Center offers IBM clients, academic institutions, and more than 200,000 registered users access to this cutting-edge technology.
A similarly innovative-minded community is rapidly growing around Qiskit, IBM’s open-source development platform for quantum computing.
Educational tools such as the ‘Coding With Qiskit’ video series has already generated more than 1.5 million impressions, as well as over 10,000 hours of content consumed by users.
There are also open source textbooks, written by experts in the field including several from IBM Research, as well as professors who have utilised some of the material in their own university courses.
IBM Q Network partners include ExxonMobil, Daimler, JPMorgan Chase, Anthem, Delta Airlines, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Georgia Tech University, Keio University, Stanford University’s Q-Farm program, and Mitsubishi Chemical, among dozens of others.
Last year IBM announced partnerships with the University of Tokyo and the German research company Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, greatly expanding the company’s already broad network of quantum researchers globally.
Through these efforts, IBM and others are exploring the ways quantum computing can address their most complicated problems, while training a workforce to use this technology.
Quantum computing applications
Once the challenges facing the full introduction of quantum computing are met, what kind of problems can we expect quantum computers to solve?
Some promising applications stand out. Explore more in this video from Katie Pizzolato, Director at IBM Quantum Partners Research.
Along with hyper-accurate long-term weather forecasting, new synthetic carbon-capturing materials could help reverse climate change caused by fossil fuels.
By observing the way each carbon atom’s eight orbiting electrons might interact with the electrons of an almost infinite variety of other molecules, researchers hope to discover the optimum combination for binding carbon.
Long-lasting batteries to store green energy
Quantum computing could be utilised to effectively peer inside a batteries’ chemical reactions, leading to a better understanding of the materials and reactions that result in a more effective electrical storage.
New insights into chemistry
Due to the infinitely complex ways in which atoms interact with each other, almost all chemistry breakthroughs have come about through accident, intuition, or exhausting numbers of experiments.
Quantum computing could make this work faster and more methodical, leading to new discoveries in energy, materials, life-saving drugs, and other fields.
When balancing portfolios and pricing options, the processing of a large number of continually changing variables is complex and time intensive.
Quantum computing should enable the required calculations to be performed in a matter of minutes, meaning derivatives could be bought and sold in near real time.
It may all read like an ambitious wish list.
But many scientists predict that the emerging era of quantum computing could lead to breakthroughs like these, while also tackling other major problems that are beyond the reach of current computing.
Keeping tabs on quantum computing news
Quantum computing is not a new idea.
But it’s only been in recent years that a workable technology has begun to catch up with the theory.
According to Gartner, “by 2023, 20% of organisations will be budgeting for quantum computing projects, up from less than 1% in 2018.”
Would you like to keep up with the very latest developments in quantum computing news?
The history of computing tells us that creative people around the world will find uses for these systems that no one could have predicted.


A serious obstacle to evolutionary theory is the interdependent relationships between living things, called symbiosis, in which completely different forms of life depend on each other to exist. Darwin’s theory of biological change was based on competition, or survival of the fittest, among the individuals making up a species. He admitted: ‘If it could be proved that any part of the structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced through natural selection’.
Symbiogenesis—the emergence of a new species through the evolutionary interdependence of two or more species—is at least as important in the history of life as survival of the fittest. Mutualism, an interaction between different species that is beneficial for all actors, is widespread throughout nature. To a large extent, mutualism has shaped, and is still shaping, life on this planet. In fact, life as we know it would not have existed without mutualistic relationships: all eukaryotic life is based on ancient endosymbiotic mutualisms between its cells and formerly independent microorganisms (e.g. mitochondria, plasmids). Other mutualisms are known to have major impact on ecosystem stability, such as specialized interactions between flowering plants and their pollinators, or seed dispersal by birds, mammals and other animals. The mutualistic relationship between humans and their agricultural crops and domesticated animals was key to the dominant role our species is now playing on our planet
So, mutualistic symbiosis is a widespread phenomenon in nature.
Humans have evolved to adapt our behavior to the context in which we live. However, by becoming able to change the environment to better suit our needs, humankind went a step further than simple adaptation. As a result, in the coming decades we will see that for the first time, artefacts that we have created will start to adapt themselves and their behavior based on their ecological context. In short, we will be part of their context.
Hence, starting in the next decade and even more so in the further future, we will live in a dynamically changing world where we will be responding to the behavior of machines, machines will be responding to our behavior in a continuously changing fabric, and it will become progressively more difficult to distinguish cause and effect between man and machine. From symbiotic relationship to emergence of new entities: the establishment of a symbiotic relationship among (autonomous) systems as well as between them and humans.
There is yet another aspect of these trends that will become apparent over the next decade. The interaction of several systems, each one independent from the others but operating in a symbiotic relationship with the others—humans included—will give rise to emergent entities that do not exist today.
As an example, cities are the result of the interplay of several systems, including its citizens as a whole, as well as individuals. We can design individual systems and even attempt to design a centralized control system for a complex set of systems, such as a city. However, a city cannot be designed in a top down way, as we would do with even a very complicated system such as a manufacturing plant where everything is controlled. Just the simple fact that a city does not exist without its citizens and the impossibility of dealing or controlling each single citizen, as we would control a cog in a manufacturing plant, shows that conventional design approaches will not succeed.
This emergence of novel abstract (although very concrete) entities created by these complex interactions is probably the most momentous change we are going to face in the coming decades. To steer these trends in a direction that can maximize their usefulness and minimize their drawbacks requires novel approaches in design, control, and communications that for the first time will place our tools on the same level as ourselves.
The symbioses of artefacts with humans will move by little steps and has already begun. Once artefacts and systems have an autonomous intelligence they will also probably have seamless interaction capabilities that will enhance their local intelligence by making use of other entities’ intelligence. Where the sharing of intelligence will be designed, in opportunistic dynamic symbioses with other entities’ intelligence. We are already cooperating with machines. Over the coming years this cooperation will become more and more seamless to the point that we might not even perceive it; we will take it for granted. The next step is machines becoming aware (including aware of our presence and capabilities) and adapting their operation to the overall ambient. Some implants will become much smarter than today, adapting in a seamless way to the body, and conversely the body will adapt seamlessly to the implant. In the fourth decade we can expect this mutual adaptation, relying on seamless interfaces and low latency communications, to broaden beyond implants to components in an ambient that will operate in a symbiotic relationship. Intelligence will become a distributed capability giving rise to an emergent symbiotic intelligence.
We are now entering into in a new era of intelligent and super-intelligent machines. No doubt, the new ear will be driven by artificial intelligence, Internet of Things, Quantum computing, Drone, Blockchain and nanotechnologies. Artificial Mutualistic symbiosis, our next evolutionary step?


Researchers have created a superconducting nanowire that would allow reliable, easy-to-use electronics. The progress could improve quantum computing, as well as magnetic sensors for brain imaging and telescope applications. Superconductors – materials that conduct electricity without resistance – are exceptional. They offer a macroscopic insight at quantum phenomena, which are typically only detectable at the atomic level. Beyond their physical peculiarity, superconductors are useful as well. They are used in medical imaging, quantum computers, and telescope cameras.
New technology could boost superconducting electronics. The advance could boost quantum computing, as well as magnetic sensors for applications in brain imaging and telescopes.
But the superconducting systems can be finicky. They are also costly to produce and susceptible to err from ambient noise. This may improve, thanks to studies by Karl Berggren’s group in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. Researchers are designing a superconducting nanowire that would make more powerful superconducting electronics. The future advantages of nanowires are extracted from their simplicity, Berggren says. “At the end of the day, it’s just a wire.”
Berggren will present a summary of the research at this month’s IEEE Solid-state Circuits Conference.
Resistance is futile
Many metals lose resistance and become superconductive at very low temperatures, typically only a few degrees above absolute zero. They are used to detect magnetic fields, particularly in highly sensitive contexts such as brain activity monitoring. They still have uses for both quantum and classical computation.
Many of these superconductors are based on a system developed in the 1960s called the Josephson junction-essentially two superconductors separated by a thin insulator. “That’s what led to conventional superconducting electronics, and then ultimately to the superconducting quantum computer,” Berggren says.
However, the junction of Josephson “is fundamentally quite a delicate object,” Berggren continues. This translates directly into the expense and sophistication of the manufacturing process, particularly for thin insulation later on. Josephson’s junction-based superconductors can also not play well with others: “If you try to interface it with conventional electronics, like the kinds in our phones or computers, the noise from those just swamps the Josephson junction. So, this lack of ability to control larger-scale objects is a real disadvantage when you’re trying to interact with the outside world.”
To overcome these disadvantages, Berggren is developing a new technology – the superconducting nanowire – with roots older than the Josephson junction itself.
In 1956, MIT electrical engineer Dudley Buck published a description of a superconductive device switch called the cryotron. The system was nothing more than two superconducting wires: one was parallel, and the other was coiled around. The cryotron functions as a lever, and when the current flows through the coiled wire, the magnetic field decreases the current flowing through the straight wire.
At the time, the cryotron was significantly simpler than other types of electronic switches, such as vacuum tubes or transistors, and Buck felt that the cryotron could become the building block of computers. But in 1959, Buck died unexpectedly at the age of 32, delaying the production of the cryotron. (Since then, transistors have been scaled to microscopic sizes and are now the central logic elements of computers.)
Now, Berggren is reawakening Buck’s theories about superconducting device switches. “The devices we’re making are very much like cryotrons in that they don’t require Josephson junctions,” he says. In tribute to Buck, he named his superconducting nanowire technology a nano-cryotron-though it functions a little differently from the original cryotron.
The nano-cryotron uses heat to activate a transition instead of a magnetic field. In Berggren’s unit, the current passes through a superconducting, supercooled wire called the “channel.” The channel is intersected by an even smaller wire called the “choke”—like a multi-lane highway intersected by a side path. When the current is sent through the shock, the superconductivity breaks down and heats up. Once the heat travels from the choke to the main channel, it also allows the main channel to lose its superconducting state.
Berggren’s group has already shown proof of concept for the use of nano-cryotrons as an electronic component. Adam McCaughan, a former Berggren student, has created a system that uses nano-cryotrons to add binary digits. And Berggren has successfully used nano-cryotrons as an interface between superconducting instruments and traditional, transistor-based electronics.
Berggren says that his group’s superconducting nanowire could one day supplement or compete with Josephson’s junction-based superconducting systems. “Wires are relatively easy to make, so it may have some advantages in terms of manufacturability,” he says. He thinks that the nano-cryotron will one day find a home in superconducting quantum computers and supercooled telescope electronics. Wires have low power dissipation, but they can also be handy for energy-hungry applications, he notes. “It’s probably not going to replace the transistors in your phone, but if it could replace the transistor in a server farm or data center? That would be a huge impact.”
Beyond special uses, Berggren takes a general view of his work on superconducting nanowires. “We’re doing fundamental research, here. While we’re interested in applications, we’re just also interested in: What are some different kinds of ways to do computing? As a society, we’ve really focused on semiconductors and transistors. But we want to know what else might be out there.”


From the moment that it was discovered that the macroscopic, classical rules that governed electricity, magnetism and light didn’t necessarily apply to the smallest, subatomic scales, a whole new view of the Universe became accessible to humanity. This quantum picture is much larger and all-encompassing than most people realize, including many professionals. Here are ten essentials of quantum mechanics that may cause you to re-examine how you picture our Universe, on the smallest scales and beyond.
- Everything is quantum.
It’s not like some things are quantum mechanical and others are not. Everything obeys the same laws of quantum mechanics – it’s just that quantum effects of large objects are very hard to notice. This is why quantum mechanics was a latecomer to the development of theoretical physics: it wasn’t until physicists had to explain why electrons sit on shells around the atomic nucleus that quantum mechanics became necessary to make accurate predictions.
- Quantization doesn’t necessarily imply discreteness.
“Quanta” are discrete chunks, by definition, but not everything becomes chunky or indivisible on short scales. Electromagnetic waves are made of quanta called “photons,” so the waves can be thought of as being discretized. And electron shells around the atomic nucleus can only have certain discrete radii. But other particle properties do not become discrete even in a quantum theory. The position of electrons in the conducting band of a metal for example is not discrete – the electron can occupy any continuous location within the band. And the energy values of the photons that make up electromagnetic waves are not discrete either. For this reason, quantizing gravity – should we finally succeed at it – does not necessarily mean that space and time have to be made discrete. (But, on the other hand, they might be.)
- Entanglement not the same as superposition.
A quantum superposition is the ability of a system to be in two different states at the same time, and yet, when measured, one always finds a particular state, never a superposition. Entanglement on the other hand is a correlation between two or more parts of a system – something entirely different. Superpositions are not fundamental: whether a state is or isn’t a superposition depends on what you want to measure. A state can for example be in a superposition of positions and not in a superposition of momenta – so the whole concept is ambiguous. Entanglement on the other hand is unambiguous: it is an intrinsic property of each system and the so-far best known measure of a system’s quantum-ness. (For more details, read “What is the difference between entanglement and superposition?”)
- There is no spooky action at a distance.
Nowhere in quantum mechanics is information ever transmitted non-locally, so that it jumps over a stretch of space without having to go through all places in between. Entanglement is itself non-local, but it doesn’t do any action – it is a correlation that is not connected to non-local transfer of information or any other observable. When you see a study where two entangled photons are separated by a great distance and then the spin of each one is measured, there is no information being transferred faster than the speed of light. In fact, if you attempt to bring the results of two observations together (which is information transmission), that information can only travel at the speed of light, no faster! What constitutes “information” was a great source confusion in the early days of quantum mechanics, but we know today that the theory can be made perfectly compatible with Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity in which information cannot be transferred faster than the speed of light.
- Quantum physics an active research area.
It’s not like quantum mechanics is yesterday’s news. True, the theory originated more than a century ago. But many aspects of it became testable only with modern technology. Quantum optics, quantum information, quantum computing, quantum cryptography, quantum thermodynamics, and quantum metrology are all recently formed and presently very active research areas. With the new capabilities brought about by these technologies, interest in the foundations of quantum mechanics has been reignited.
- Einstein didn’t deny it.
Contrary to popular opinion, Einstein was not a quantum mechanics denier. He couldn’t possibly be – the theory was so successful early on that no serious scientist could dismiss it. (In fact, it was his Nobel-winning discovery of the photoelectric effect, proving that photons acted as particles as well as waves, that was one of the foundational discoveries of quantum mechanics.) Einstein instead argued that the theory was incomplete, and believed the inherent randomness of quantum processes must have a deeper explanation. It was not that he thought the randomness was wrong, he just thought that this wasn’t the end of the story. For an excellent clarification of Einstein’s views on quantum mechanics, I recommend George Musser’s article “What Einstein Really Thought about Quantum Mechanics” (paywalled, sorry).
- It’s all about uncertainty.
The central postulate of quantum mechanics is that there are pairs of observables that cannot simultaneously be measured, like for example the position and momentum of a particle. These pairs are called “conjugate variables,” and the impossibility to measure both their values precisely is what makes all the difference between a quantized and a non-quantized theory. In quantum mechanics, this uncertainty is fundamental, not due to experimental shortcomings. One of the most bizarre manifestations of this is the uncertainty between energy and time, which means that unstable particles (with a short lifetime) have inherently uncertain masses, thanks to Einstein’s E=mc2. Particles like the Higgs boson, the W-and-Z bosons and the top quarks all have masses that are intrinsically uncertain by 1-10% because of their short lifetimes.
- Quantum effects are not necessarily small…
We do not normally observe quantum effects on long distances because the necessary correlations are very fragile. Treat them carefully enough however, and quantum effects can persist over long distances. Photons have for example been entangled over separations as much as several hundreds of kilometers. In Bose-Einstein condensates, a degenerate state of matter found at cold temperatures, up to several million of atoms have been brought into one coherent quantum state. And finally, some researchers even believe that dark matter may have quantum effects which span across entire galaxies.
- …but they dominate the small scales.
In quantum mechanics, every particle is also a wave and every wave is also a particle. The effects of quantum mechanics become very pronounced once one observes a particle on distances that are comparable to the associated wavelength. This is why atomic and subatomic physics cannot be understood without quantum mechanics, whereas planetary orbits are effectively unchanged by quantum behavior.
- Schrödinger’s cat is dead. Or alive. But not both.
It was not well-understood in the early days of quantum mechanics, but the quantum behavior of macroscopic objects decays very rapidly. This “decoherence” is due to constant interactions with the environment which are, in relatively warm and dense places like those necessary for life, impossible to avoid. This explains that what we think of as a measurement doesn’t require a human; simply interacting with the environment counts. It also explains why bringing large objects into superpositions of two different states is therefore extremely difficult and the superposition fades rapidly. The heaviest object that has so far been brought into a superposition of locations is a carbon-60 molecule, while the more ambitious have proposed to do this experiment for viruses or even heavier creatures like bacteria. Thus, the paradox that Schrödinger’s cat once raised – the transfer of a quantum superposition (the decaying atom) to a large object (the cat) – has been resolved. We now understand that while small things like atoms can exist in superpositions for extended amounts of time, a large object would settle extremely rapidly in one particular state. That’s why we never see cats that are both dead and alive.
Post written by
Sabine is a theoretical physicist specialized in quantum gravity and high energy physics. She also freelance writes about science.


Tech giants like IBM, Google, Intel, and numerous startups are racing to develop the new machine that utilizes quantum mechanical phenomena, like superposition and entanglement. Quantum computing will be extremely useful to the next generation of computing and communication technology.
However, quantum computing is not going to come easily, and we don’t know anything for sure – when it will arrive and what exactly it will look like.
At present, dozens of companies and research institutes are trying to use different techniques to create the most powerful computer world has ever witnessed. It will be able to efficiently solve problems that aren’t possible on existing supercomputers.
The development of an actual quantum machine is in its infancy, but tons of experiments have been conducted, in which quantum operations were performed on a small scale [small no. of qubits]. To learn more, you can read all the interesting facts and the latest researches on quantum computing.
Below, we’ve listed all advanced quantum processor chips developed so far. Although a fully functional quantum computer is a long term goal, these chips represent major milestones in efforts to the development of future computing technologies.
5. Rigetti 19Q
Rigetti 19Q superconducting processor
Rigetti Computing develops quantum integrated circuits, and the “Forest” cloud platform to help coders write quantum algorithms. It’s a full-stack company that fabricates quantum chips, builds controlling architecture, and develops algorithms for the processors.
Their latest superconducting quantum processor has 19 fully programmable qubits. Recently, they demonstrated unsupervised machine learning using 19Q. They did this with their own classical/quantum hybrid algorithm for clustering.
The 19Q chip is currently available as a configurable backend in Forest. You can apply for access.
4. Google Bristlecone
Bristlecone processor | Qubits with nearest neighbor connectivity are represented by symbol X
Bristlecone is a new quantum processor developed by Google. It’s a gate-based superconducting system that provides a testbed for research related to qubit technology, machine learning, quantum simulation, and optimization.
In the next 5 years, Google is intended to achieve something they call “quantum supremacy” and facilitate the development of quantum algorithms on actual hardware. Bristlecone is scaled to a square array of 72 qubits, and it follows the physics of Google’s previous 9 qubits linear array technology.
3. Intel Tangle Lake
49-qubit quantum computing test chip | Tangle Lake
In January 2018, Intel announced a 49-qubit superconducting quantum chip, named Tangle Lake. It’s a 3* 3-inch chip that will let scientists improve error correction methods and simulate computational problems.
In addition, Intel also unveiled a neuromorphic research chip, named Loihi, which mimics the operations performed in the human brain. The chip is developed with the objective of making deep learning more efficient.
Intel is also working on spin qubits in silicon. They are smaller than superconducting quantum bits and thus have a scaling advantage. They have already developed a spin qubit fabrication flow on 300-millimeter process technology.
2. IBM Q
IBM Q was launched in 2017 as an initiative to develop commercial quantum computers for science and business. So far they’ve built and tested 2 machines –
- 20-qubits superconducting quantum chip
- 50-qubits prototype that will be the basis of upcoming IBM Q systems.
Compared to previous quantum machines, the 20-qubits processor has nearly twice the coherence time. It has an average of 90 microseconds, whereas the previous generation quantum processor had an average coherence time of 50 microseconds. The system is developed to scale; a 50-qubits prototype yields similar performance.
They have also developed the Quantum Information Software Kit (QISkit) open for public use. It allows you to execute quantum circuit-based experimental programs on a quantum circuit simulator running on the Cloud or a laptop.
1. D-Wave 2000Q
Image credit: D-Wave
In 2017, D-Wave announced 2000Q quantum computer and open-source software, Obsolv, that solves quadratic unconstrained binary optimization problem on both 2000Q and conventional hardware architectures
2000Q is the company’s follow up to the 1000-qubits 2X. The jump from 1000 to 2048-qubits enables researchers to deal with larger quantities of data and more complex problems. According to the company, 2000Q can outperform conventional servers by factors of 1,000 – 10,000.
Temporal Defense Systems Inc. purchased 2000Q to solve critical and complex cybersecurity problems. Although they didn’t reveal the price, the machine is valued at $15 million.
While D-Wave’s computers are using quantum mechanics for calculations, it is not clear if they will ever be able to solve real-world problems. For now, they are only suitable for solving optimization problems.
Considering D-Wave’s pattern of doubling performance every 2 years, the company may release a 4000-qubits quantum machine in 2019.


There's been a lot of industry buzz lately around quantum and it seems to be progressing at almost immeasurable speeds. While these are exciting times for advancements in this technology, there is still a long way to go before we’ll be able to witness a quantum computer fully optimizing its capabilities.
What is Quantum Computing? The Short Version
Modern computers use binary digits or bits to calculate and determine solutions. A bit has a value of either a one or zero; representing either a true/false, on/off, yes/no, or +/- scenario. The bit has a defined measurable state. This form of computation works great when there are clear decisions, clear calculations, or clear answers to problems.
In certain computing situations where physics, chemistry, or biology is involved, there are uncertain or no clear defined answers. This mixture of these uncertain sciences is referred to as the field of quantum mechanics.
Instead of bits, a quantum computer uses quantum bits or qubits. Rather than being just a one or zero, a qubit can be a one, a zero or some unknown state all at the same time. This occurrence is called, “quantum superposition.” Many explain the difference in relation to a coin. If you flip a coin, when it lands, it's either heads or tails like a bit. If you spin a coin it has a chance of being a head or tail, but while its spinning its similar to a “superposition” state.
A great way to understand the difference between computing and quantum computing is to use the analogy of solving a maze. If a computer would be tasked with solving a maze it would simply try each and every branch and turn, switching bits between left turns and right turns, eliminating options sequentially until it finds a result. The faster the computer, the faster a result would be found.
If a quantum computer were tasked with solving a maze, it would explore all paths of the maze at one time keeping turns / qubits in the superposition state, analyzing all of the data, and solving the maze in one try. In the maze analogy, it may not seem like a significant time savings over a standard computer.
However, the larger the maze gets or the larger the problem, the easier it is to understand the benefit of a quantum computer. The ability to solve massive chemistry problems in the medical or energy industries in unique ways at super-fast speeds is game changing. Other highly complicated systems such as weather forecasting, financial market predictions, or cryptography are also potential applications.
Quantum Today and Tomorrow
Major players in the quantum computing arena appear to be making progress. Both Google and IBM claim to have working 50 qubit quantum computers. Although that is a great achievement, the computers most likely are experiencing very high error rates and are somewhat unpredictable.
Technical implementation challenges unique to high data processing speeds and the related power required in quantum computing include electrical interference, heat displacement, and high data rate communication via photonics. These challenges will need to be addressed as this market grows. For quantum computers to operate, the qubits must remain in a stable state, and to be stable means to be very cold. How cold? Try absolute zero or -460 degrees Fahrenheit, which can possibly be achieved with the use of liquid helium in a closed cycle system.
With the challenges of interference and thermal management, among others, quantum computing solutions may at first be limited to remote access or a hybrid configuration, where some amount of qubits will be combined with a super computing solution for experimental quantum applications.
Quantum Information Science (QIS) News
One of the significant events that occurred recently was the implementation of the National Quantum Initiative Act, which the President of the United States of America signed into law, Dec. 21, 2018. The purpose of the Act, as stated in the document, is "To provide for a coordinated Federal program to accelerate quantum research and development for the economic and national security of the United States".
There are a number of provisions and directives of the Act, but one of particular interest instructs the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to convene a "consortium" of stakeholders to discuss the measurement, standards, and cyber security needs of the emerging Quantum Information Science (QIS) industry. Which has resulted in the forming of the QED-C.
What is QED-C?
The Quantum Economic Development Consortium (QED-C) is a consortium of participants focused on enablement and growth of the U.S. quantum industry in computing, communications, and sensing. A diverse set of companies and academic participants are working together to identify challenges in technology, standards, and the workforce, and to address those gaps through collaboration. This is an exciting consortium of great U.S.-based organizations advancing quantum science.
Why did Benchmark join?
Benchmark has significant expertise in the technologies needed to advance quantum computing. Thermal management, photonics, high speed circuit design, and control electronics are key engineering and manufacturing capabilities within Benchmark’s design and product development services. The benefits and potential of quantum computing are tremendous, and Benchmark has invested in advancing our technologies to help support our customers’ next generation solutions, the consortium, and the computing industry.
Quantum computing has many challenges to still overcome and is likely many years away from widespread commercial implementation. Although the development uncertainty is unmistakable, the reality is quantum computing could change the world as we know it today.


Scientists Achieve Direct Counterfactual Quantum Communication For The First Time
Communication without particle transmission.
Quantum communication is a strange beast, but one of the weirdest proposed forms of it is called counterfactual communication – a type of quantum communication where no particles travel between two recipients.
Theoretical physicists have long proposed that such a form of communication would be possible, but now, for the first time, researchers have been able to experimentally achieve it – transferring a black and white bitmap image from one location to another without sending any physical particles.
If that sounds a little too out-there for you, don’t worry, this is quantum mechanics, after all. It’s meant to be complicated. But once you break it down, counterfactual quantum communication actually isn’t as bizarre as it sounds.
First up, let’s talk about how this differs from regular quantum communication, also known as quantum teleportation, because isn’t that also a form of particle-less information transfer?
Well, not quite. Regular quantum teleportation is based on the principle of entanglement – two particles that become inextricably linked so that whatever happens to one will automatically affect the other, no matter how far apart they are.
But that form of quantum teleportation still relies on particle transmission in some form or another. The two particles usually need to be together when they’re entangled before being sent to the people on either end of the message (so, they start in one place, and need to be transmitted to another before communication can occur between them).
Alternatively, particles can be entangled at a distance, but it usually requires another particle, such as photons (particles of light), to travel between the two.
Direct counterfactual quantum communication on the other hands relies on something other than quantum entanglement. Instead, it uses a phenomenon called the quantum Zeno effect.
Very simply, the quantum Zeno effect occurs when an unstable quantum system is repeatedly measured.
In the quantum world, whenever you look at a system, or measure it, the system changes. And in this case, unstable particles can never decay while they’re being measured (just like the proverbial watched kettle that will never boil), so the quantum Zeno effect creates a system that’s effectively frozen with a very high probability.
If you want to delve a little deeper, the video below gives a great explanation:
Counterfactual quantum communication is based on this quantum Zeno effect, and is defined as the transfer of a quantum state from one site to another without any quantum or classical particle being transmitted between them.
This requires a quantum channel to run between two sites, which means there’s always a small probability that a quantum particle will cross the channel. If that happens, the system is discarded and a new one is set up.
To set up such a complex system, researchers from the University of Science and Technology of China placed two single-photon detectors in the output ports of the last of an array of beam splitters.
Because of the quantum Zeno effect, the system is frozen in a certain state, so it’s possible to predict which of the detectors would ‘click’ whenever photons passed through. A series of nested interferometers measure the state of the system to make sure it doesn’t change.
It works based on the fact that, in the quantum world, all light particles can be fully described by wave functions, rather than as particles. So by embedding messages in light the researchers were able to transmit this message without ever directly sending a particle.
The team explains that the basic idea for this set up came from holography technology.
“In the 1940s, a new imaging technique – holography – was developed to record not only light intensity but also the phase of light,” the researchers write in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
“One may then pose the question: Can the phase of light itself be used for imaging? The answer is yes.”
The basic idea is this – someone wants to send an image to Alice using only light (which acts as a wave, not a particle, in the quantum realm).
Alice transfers a single photon to the nested interferometer, where it can be detected by three single-photon detectors: D0, D1, and Df.
If D0 or D1 ‘click’, Alice can conclude a logic result of one or zero. If Df clicks, the result is considered inconclusive.
“After the communication of all bits, the researchers were able to reassemble the image – a monochrome bitmap of a Chinese knot. Black pixels were defined as logic 0, while white pixels were defined as logic 1 …
In the experiment, the phase of light itself became the carrier of information, and the intensity of the light was irrelevant to the experiment.”
Not only is this a big step forward for quantum communication, the team explains it’s technology that could also be used for imaging sensitive ancient artefacts that couldn’t surprise direct light shined on them.
The results will now need to be verified by external researchers to make sure what the researchers saw was a true example of counterfactual quantum communication.
Either way, it’s a pretty cool demonstration of just how bizarre and unexplored the quantum world is.
The research has been published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.