Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AbstractThe fundamental flaws of qubit concept for generalpurpose quantum computing are elaborated here. We show that
from implementing of the addition operation of two bits, only
four symbolic substitution rules are needed. Superposition of
four states from the two qubits is then irrelevant for the addition
operation of two bits. The fundamental quantum processor
needed is further described here against the quibit concept. The
quantum Turing Machine is thus settled in the cellular automata
architecture. Therefore, quantum computing must be rulebased, rather than logic-gate based.
Index TermsQuantum Computing, Symbolic Substitutions,
Cellular Automata, Quantum Turing Machine, Aharonov-Bohm
Effect, Quantum Networks.
I. INTRODUCTION
The concept of qubits for quantum computing is well
known for decades now [1]. Yet for general-purpose quantum
computing, this qubit concept has been challenged recently [25]. Any general-purpose quantum computer must be able to
compute anything that is computable. But the computable
things can range from those which are purely sequential in
nature, such as addition operation, to those which are purely
parallel, such as Fourier transform. A true quantum Turing
machine is a massive parallel computing machine that must be
able to handle both extreme computations and anything that are
in between the two
extremes. Yet our understanding of
quantum computing rely on those computable things that are
purely parallel, such as Shor algorithm [6], which are specialpurpose computing. Any general-purpose parallel computer
must show how addition operation is implemented first.
The general strategy of parallel computing is to trade space
with time. That means, with millions of processors used, it can
save the number of steps (timewise) needed generally if the
nature of computing is not purely sequential. But the number of
steps required for a purely sequential- nature computing will be
the same for any machine, from a quantum parallel machine
or from a classical electronic machine. There will be no step
advantage (since each machine requires different time to
accomplish one step, there can be no comparison on the
absolute time scale needed). For example, for the addition of
3+5 operation in digital operation, the number of steps (which
is 4 steps) is fixed from any machine because of the ripple
carry requirement. But when four identical processors are
connected together, it can perform higher quality computing in
978-1-4799-8828-0/15 $31.00 2015 IEEE
DOI 10.1109/ITNG.2015.117
698
II. WHY
QUBIT CONCEPT IS
FUNDAMENTALLY
FLAWED?
The fundamental flaws of qubit concept for generalpurpose computing has been pointed out recently [3-5] Here
we would like to challenge this qubit concept for generalpurpose computing from another point of view. It is well
established that any parallel computing machine must consist
of a huge number of identical processors with some form of
interconnections between them. Each processor can execute
certain number of instructions and a storage capability of data.
The qubit concept centered
on the property of
quantum
superposition principle. A large electron wave packet
containing billion superposition of 0s and 1s can be
manipulated to perform space and time saving computing, as
many scientists have believed generally. When we use many
qubits for parallel computing purpose, we can use one qubit as
one processor or we can use two qubits as one processor and so
on. If one-qubit-one-processor scheme is used, then each
processor will have the smallest capability of computing
truth/false only. If two qubits are used as one processor, then
there are four states in superposition. Let us designate those
four states as
S1
for the (1,0) pair and S 4 for the (1,1) pair. In this case, this
two-qubit processor is in principle capable of computing the
addition operation of two bits and can function as a half-adder
processor since all four combinations of the operand pairs are
available and in superposition. However, in parallel computing,
Fig.1
WITH FOUR
699
700
S2
S4
S1
setting of ( 1 ,VV
2 ) at each cell determines the state at each
cell.
Fig 2
Fig.3
701
702