1. No, I'm not reading your article on quantum.
2. Yes, all choices are bad. That's what "breaking" means.
3. I'm glad smart people are thinking about technical mitigations.
Discussion
Can anyone explain how you could ever collapse a qubit array in a predictable way without literally dimensional traveling to a reality where you got the correct result the first attempt?
Cool, you can instantly generate an array of al possibilities. But is it not impossible to query that array without randomly collapsing its superposition?
I feel like a magician has disappeared the elephant but it's not a trick unless you can bring it back.
It's not about collapsing the wave function but about having another range of better algorithms for certain problems.
Explain how a qubit would be useful without the ability to collapse the superposition, given that we, as humans, can't use superpositions to do anything.
Have you watched the video? He explains it better than I ever could. Also, the microblogging format is not ideal to explain quantum physics.
Yes, I've seen the video before.
The problem is EVERY explanation yadda-yaddas how you collapse the "vector" or array. The algorithm can't define a probability state that's why it's called a probability not a result. The algorithm he uses in the video also gets "closer" to a result state but never arrives at it. Which is useless in computing. This is why I asked the question and much like the OP, I don't want to watch another quantum computing video. Just answer the question.
Don't mind me If I don't expand too much.
The usefulness is due to other gates such as the haddamard gate and unitary operators.
In the case of shor's algorithm, it brings back the complexity from exponential to polynomial (O(n^2log(n))), making large prime factorization much faster but not costless.
Okay, if that is true the probability has to collapse to 1. My point is you can approach the probability of 1 but it never is absolute. This is the fundamental problem (yes even using those quantum gates) with a quantum array or "vector" the inability to use the information even if you can approach a closer probability.
A high enough probability is always good enough.
