Reddit Reddit reviews Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition

We found 39 Reddit comments about Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Computers & Technology
Books
Computer Science
Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition
Cambridge University Press
Check price on Amazon

39 Reddit comments about Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition:

u/QSIT_Researchers · 50 pointsr/science

Here go some resources I like (I might update this list). LdR

Books:

u/dupelize · 30 pointsr/compsci

>So do you guys have any ideas on a title?

"Everything I Learned About Quantum Computing After I Stopped Worrying About the Title and Learned About the Content"

>and can you recommend any good books?

What level? The standard intro is Mike and Ike if you have a calculus and linear algebra background.

It sounds like you might be in high school (or equivalent) so you probably don't have much linear algebra knowledge beyond knowing what a matrix is.

It isn't a book, but Scott Aaronson has a decent blog. There is a lot of non Quantum talk too, but if you sift through there is a lot of interesting stuff.

u/ataraxic89 · 20 pointsr/videos

YOU HAVE COME TO THE RIGHT PLACE MY BOY! TODAY I GOT LINKS FOR DAYZZZ


IBM-Q is an online cloud based 5 qubit quantum computer open to the public. You can "write" simple algorithms here and it has resources to learn. https://www.ibm.com/quantum-computing/learn/what-is-quantum-computing

This video is a good introduction to Quantum computer by one of the lead QC scientists/engineers at IBM, https://youtu.be/JRIPV0dPAd4

A video overview of the math involved in quantum computing, https://youtu.be/IrbJYsep45E

For a full understanding of the topic at a college introductory level, buy this book: https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Computation-Information-10th-Anniversary/dp/1107002176

Along the way you should also look into languages like q# by microsoft. I believe google uses a python library for it.

u/Horizivertigraph · 16 pointsr/QuantumComputing

Don't get discouraged, it's possible to get to a reasonable understanding with some sustained effort. However, you need to get the following into your head as quickly as possible:

Popular level explanations of anything quantum are a waste of your time.

Go back and read that again. You will never get close to understanding the field if you rely on someone else managing to "find the right metaphors" for you. Quantum computing is a mathematical field, and if you want to understand a mathematical field, you need to do mathematics. This sounds super scary, but it's actually no problem! Math is not what you think it is, and is actually a lot of fun to learn. You just need to put some work in. This just means maybe doing an hour or so of learning every day before you go to work, or afterwards.

Let's look at a little bit of a roadmap that you can follow to get to a reasonable understanding of quantum computing / quantum information. This is pretty much the path I followed, and now I am just about to submit my PhD thesis on quantum computational complexity. So I guess it worked out OK.

  1. You can get really far in quantum computing with some basic understanding of linear algebra. Go to Khan Academy and watch their fantastic introduction.

    If Sal asks you to do an exercise, do the exercise.

  2. Now you know what a vector is, can kind of grasp what a vector space is, and have some good intuition on how matrix-vector and matrix-matrix multiplication works, then you can probably make a reasonable start on this great intro book: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Quantum-Computing-Computer-Scientists-Yanofsky/dp/0521879965

    Start from the start, take it slowly, and do all of the exercises. Not some of the exercises, do all of the exercises. If you don't know a term, then look it up on wikipedia. If you can't do an exercise, look up similar ideas on Google and see if you can muddle your way through. You need to get good at not being scared of mathematics, and just pushing through and getting to an answer. If there is an explanation that you don't understand, look up that concept and see if you can find somebody else's explanation that does it better. Do the first few intro chapters, then dip in to some of the other chapters to see how far you get. You want to get a pretty good coverage of the topics in the book, so you know that the topics exist and can increase your exposure to the math involved.

  3. If you manage to get through a reasonable chunk of the book from point 2), then you can make a start on the bible: Quantum information and computation by Nielsen and Chuang (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Quantum-Computation-Information-10th-Anniversary/dp/1107002176/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_img_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=S2F1RQKXKN2268JJF3M2). Start from the start, take it slowly, and do all of the exercises.

    Nielsen and Chuang is not easy, but it's doable if you utilise some of the techniques I mention in point 2): Google for alternative explanations of concepts that the book explains in a way that confuses you, do all of the exercises, and try to get good coverage throughout the whole book. Make sure you spend time on the early linear algebra and basic quantum chapters, because if you get good at that stuff then the world is your oyster.

    Edit:

    Just remembered two more excellent resources that really helped me along the way

    A) Quantum mechanics and quantum computation, a video lecture course by Umesh Vazirani (YouTube playlist here) is fantastic. Prof. Vazirani is one of the fathers of the field of quantum computing, with a bunch of great results. His lecture course is very clear, and definitely worth devoting serious attention to. Also, he has a wonderful speaking voice that is very pleasant to listen to...

    B) Another lecture course called "Quantum Computing for the determined", this time given by Michael Nielsen (YouTube playlist here). In my opinion Nielsen is one of the best scientific communicators alive today (see also his unrelated discourse on neural networks and machine learning, really great stuff), and this series of videos is really great. Communicating this sort of stuff well to non-practitioners is pretty much Nielsen's whole jam (he quit academia to go on and write about science communication ), so it's definitely worth looking at.
u/vvillium · 14 pointsr/compsci

https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Computation-Information-10th-Anniversary/dp/1107002176

Best book hands down. This will bring you to the frontier of quantum computing. The book is also very approachable and meant for people trying to learn. It covers some linear algebra as well as physics in order to bring you up to speed.



Michael Nielson is an amazing educator and expert in the field. His you tube lecture course https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1826E60FD05B44E4 Quantum Computing for the Determined, is a short version of that book. He also has a free book online on Neural Networks that is probably the most referenced source on the matter. http://neuralnetworksanddeeplearning.com/index.html

u/The_Serious_Account · 13 pointsr/QuantumComputing

Don't think jumping directly into a programming language for quantum computing is the best idea. To me it seems like trying to understand addition and multiplication by learning Java. I would tell you to spend time at a university to learn the things required, but it doesn't sound like that's an option.

I think your best bet for a shortcut is to pick up Quantum Computation and Quantum Information by Nielsen and Chuang and start reading. It's the standard intro textbook for the field. Whenever you read something you don't understand, you find some resources that explains the concept to you. You can always come back here and ask if you're stuck on something.

u/adventuringraw · 9 pointsr/MachineLearning

dude, ten hours of intro that can help you intuitively navigate relevant research questions when jumping into the actual research is completely fine and appropriate. You're welcome to your opinion, but a roadmap is all the more helpful when the challenge of Arxiv for a beginner is the double wammy of finding 'worthwhile papers' to read in the first place (citation count? Topic? Survey papers? Which papers are most important to start with?) along with the timesink of parsing even a single individual paper. Concept learning in deep RL is also an incredibly active area of research (one I'm just wading into), but if I could have a really engaging, intuitive, hands on 5 hour whirlwind tour through different established results, theories, contrasting approaches and so on, then sign me up, that sounds great to me. You'll still need to roll up your sleeves and get into some gnarly concepts and really intense math if you want to actually implement one of the cutting edge approaches, but starting with this kind of high level eli5 overview can be immensely helpful when deciding how to use your precious time. Even in a 100 lifetimes I don't know I could do all the things I want to do, so any time savings are more than welcome.

Granted, this particular course might not function well as a road map, but that would be a specific critique on this course in particular. I call bullshit that a course of this kind is useless in general in an emergent field. Perhaps it is for you, but not everyone learns like you, let others have their road if it suits them. We're all adults here, and I hope we can judge for ourselves where our time is most wisely spent.

Shitty courses being slapped together to take advantage of novices and pop science hype is a potential related problem, but if that's the chip on your shoulder, I'd challenge that potentially perverse incentive structure giving rise to a high number of worthless courses doesn't mean the 'ideal' intro course couldn't exist and be valuable.

also for what it's worth... I'm dabbling in this book, and it's doing a great job of laying framework. There might be divergent ideas and theories, but they'll all share a unified framework... why not start by exploring there? even bleeding edge doesn't have NOTHING but disconnected ideas.

u/sinesha · 7 pointsr/quantum

I work on quantum information theory, and there are lots of researchers with a maths, computer science or electrical engineering background (I did physics). So the answer is no, you don't need to go through classical physics. You do need linear algebra, and things like general algebra and calculus are also important. Then, work through Nielsen and Chuang's book Quantum Information and Quantum Computation. Where in Australia are you based?

(edit: link)

u/Narbas · 6 pointsr/compsci

Can we not put this in the sidebar by now? This question has been posted so many times lately. Use this book. The prerequisites are basically nothing.

u/Statici · 4 pointsr/Physics

I got the most understanding out of reading Nielson and Chuang's Quantum Computation and Quantum Information.

It delves into what happens and what can be done with quantum information - that is, how qubits are different from bits. Philosophically, I don't think there is anything more important than that; it's nice to see what particles make reality up, but you don't get much idea as to what those particles are actually doing. As a forewarning though: This book will probably push you towards a many-worlds interpretation. Not because they push it; it's just (kind of) necessary to think that way, when considering large sets of quantum information interacting.

In terms of physics, it has only a single chapter dedicated to the direct exploration of Schrodinger's equation. After that, it starts to dig into "what's it like when we have more than one quanta?" which is...well, I can't summarize it in a post. If you would like a PDF copy, I found one online a long time ago, I could PM it to you :)

In any sense: I've had this book for three years now and it is by far the best buy I have made in ever. QI is growing in importance (mostly with regards to the AdS/CFT correspondence in quantum gravity theories) and it is also always nice to know (ahead of time) how quantum computers are going to be working!

u/fishoutofshui · 4 pointsr/QuantumComputing

I feel like I gained traction coming from statistics by ping-ponging between these three books. Nielsen and Chuang is a great place to start, especially the first two chapters. There’s a lot that will go over your head but you will pick up enough. Then Aaronson like you have been doing for a different perspective. Then McMahon holds your hand a bit on the computations, which will help if you aren’t familiar with quantum mechanics, as I was not. When you get stuck, switch books. I feel like once I bought all three books and started going back and forth and reading previous chapters again that is when things started to click and I gained some maturity. I have a long way to go but this has been the greatest self-learning journey I’ve been on in the past year. I hope you get as much as I have. Good luck.

https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Computation-Information-10th-Anniversary/dp/1107002176/ref=nodl_

https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Computing-Explained-David-Mcmahon/dp/8126564377/ref=mp_s_a_1_fkmrnull_1?crid=382OF32JOGTRH&keywords=quantum+computing+explained+mcmahon&qid=1551223235&s=gateway&sprefix=quantum+computing+explained&sr=8-1-fkmrnull

u/Strilanc · 4 pointsr/programming

Honestly not sure. Maybe some sort of university course? I gained my understanding almost by happenstance. I took a computer science degree, got interested in QC, bought and read Mike and Ike, and spent a lot of time developing/playing-with/trying-to-solve-problems-using my simulator Quirk. The simulator time probably helped the most.

u/YuvalRishu · 4 pointsr/QuantumComputing

Hi, I work on programming quantum computers. I studied in Canada (PhD from the Institute for Quantum Computing at the University of Waterloo) and I now live and work in Sydney, Australia. Your TL;DR is actually a bit different from the rest of your post, so I'll answer the questions in the TL;DR first.

I started getting interested in quantum computing when I was an undergraduate in Physics. I began with an interest in quantum entanglement and did a couple of summer research projects in the subject. I did my Master's degree with my supervisor for the last of those projects, and even wrote my first paper based on that work.

Quantum entanglement is of course very important in quantum computing but the study of the subject is more under the heading of quantum information theory. I switched over to quantum computing when I was deciding where to go for my PhD, and decided that I wanted to do the PhD to answer one simple question to myself: how far away are we, really, from a quantum computer? While I was finishing my PhD, the opportunity in Sydney came up and I decided that I liked the work happening here. I was (and am) interested in simulating quantum fields on a quantum computer, and have gotten interested in simulating physics in general (doesn't have to be quantum) as well as solving problems on a quantum computer in general (doesn't have to be physics).

We're talking about close to half my life at this point, so it's hard to summarise that story in any reasonable way. But if I had to try, I'd say that I followed my nose. I was interested in stuff, so I found ways to learn as much as I could about that stuff from the best people I could find who would give me the time of day or, better yet, a pay check. One of the nice things about doing science as a student is that there are plenty of people willing to pay you to study science if you know how to ask nicely.

Training a scientist is a long and arduous process, from the perspective of the student, the teacher, and the society as a whole. Take your time to learn properly. Don't let the bumps in the road stop you!

With the motivational stuff out of the way, my best advice is to learn everything. I mean everything. Physics, maths, computer science, engineering, chemistry, philosophy, sociology, history, everything. I know you can't possibly become an expert in all of that, but get at least a passing knowledge in whatever strikes your interest. When you hit on the thing that you simply can't stop thinking about, the thing that you literally lose sleep over, then you've found the topic for your PhD thesis. Find a supervisor and work on that as hard as you can for as long as you can until they tell you to get out and get a real job.

If that's not the advice you're looking for, then I'll try another piece. Go study functional analysis. You can't possibly understand quantum physics without knowing some functional analysis. If you're serious about quantum physics, this is now your bible. And when you give up on that book (and you will give up on that book), read this. When you're done, read this.

u/rbudhrani · 4 pointsr/QuantumComputing

There was a similar post a while back and I listed out some resources. Here they are, edited for your case:

Intro book (good to start with or use as a companion in your case): https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Computation-Information-10th-Anniversary/dp/1107002176 (you can probably find this online)

Youtube playlist by Nielson: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1826E60FD05B44E4

Quantum cryptography: https://www.edx.org/course/quantum-cryptography-0

Understanding the basics of how computers works: https://www.coursera.org/learn/digital-systems

I added a basic course for digital systems and how computers work. I guess you don’t need any intro courses on Quantum physics. The cryptography course really starts off with basic stuff and it’s easy to pick up.

I would recommend just getting started right away with these and looking for resources on classical computing as you make your way through the resources. You can hit me up if you want to get started with something more advanced like quantum error correction and fault tolerant quantum computing.

u/tburke2 · 3 pointsr/Physics
u/Orphion · 3 pointsr/quantum

I would recommend The Feynman Lectures on Physics. They're expensive books, but the description of quantum mechanics is particularly good, albeit 50 years old. Moreover, the lectures cover all of the other things you'll need to know in physics as well.

The problem with the Feynman lectures being old is that in the 50 years since they were given, quantum information has emerged as a field entirely separate from quantum mechanics/physics. The Mike and Ike book is the best single introduction to the field, but it, too, is expensive.

Luckily, there is a huge number of articles published on the physics arxiv, some of which are quite approachable. This introduction to quantum information is written by many of the giants in the field.

u/csp256 · 3 pointsr/compsci

The Mathematical Theory of Communication is short and sweet.

Once you have had your linear algebra, you might be interested in looking at quantum computing. The canonical text there is Quantum Computation and Quantum Information.

u/ocusoa · 3 pointsr/Physics

Do you know which fields of physics are you interested in?

If Quantum Information/Quantum Computation sounds interesting, I would look at this book. I used it when I first learned about the topic. It doesn't assume much advanced math, just basic matrix/vector multiplications will suffice.
There's a reason the book doesn't assume much prior knowledge. It has two parts, Quantum Information and Quantum Computation. Roughly speaking the former is physics and the latter is computer science. And usually physicists don't know much about computer science and computer scientists don't know much about physics.


There's also another book, "Q for Quantum", published very recently by Terry Rudolph. I haven't read the book myself (I plan to), but from what he described in an email it might be something you're looking for:


> I have finally finished a book, "Q is for Quantum", that teaches the fundamentals of quantum theory to people who start off knowing only basic arithmetic.

> I have successfully used this method in outreach with students as young as 12, but of course it is much easier when you can have a proper back-and-forth dialogue. In practice it is late-stage high school students I am most passionate about reaching with this book - I believe quantum theory can (and should) be taught quantitatively in high school, not 2 years into an undergraduate physics degree! In fact I would be delighted if the 3rd and 4th year students entering my undergraduate lecture courses already understood as much quantum theory as covered in the book.


Have fun!

u/mctuking · 3 pointsr/quantum

If you're looking for something that's an actual text book, there's no better than Nielsen and Chuang.

https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Computation-Information-10th-Anniversary/dp/1107002176

u/magus42 · 3 pointsr/computerscience

What's your education level? I can't speak for the one that you linked but the 'standard' textbook in the field is Nielsen & Chuang's Quantum Computation and Quantum Information.

u/shivstroll · 2 pointsr/AskScienceDiscussion

For trapped ion quantum computation if just looking at books:

Atomic Physics by Budker, Kimball, and Demille

Laser Trapping and Cooling by Metcalf and van der Straten

Quantum Computation and Quantum Information by Nielsen and Chuang

u/Crankenterran · 2 pointsr/DebateReligion

I do not believe that is true. Classically you are correct, but if we look at qubits instead of bits (quoting from wikipedia because I am too lazy to flick through my quantum computing textbook):

"However, the computational basis of 500 qubits, for example, would already be too large to be represented on a classical computer because it would require 2^500 complex values to be stored.[10] (For comparison, a terabyte of digital information stores only 243 discrete on/off values.)"

u/tibblf · 2 pointsr/QuantumComputing

Full disclosure: I'm a software engineer at Microsoft

Here's a few resources I found useful. I just started learning quantum computing recently too:

u/ilmmad · 2 pointsr/science

Mike&Ike for the uninitiated.

u/eightOrchard · 2 pointsr/QuantumComputing

This page has some decent resources https://codeforces.com/blog/entry/65063

Also there is a free QC MIT course https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-435j-quantum-computation-fall-2003/

Last but not least I am trying to put together a QC learning resource https://stevefroehlich.github.io/ I have a graduate degree in CS so I'm trying to make it a resource for people like us that come from a CS background. I picked up the standard text book https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Computation-Information-10th-Anniversary/dp/1107002176?SubscriptionId=AKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q&tag=duckduckgo-ffab-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=1107002176 and realized I am missing some of the core Linear Algebra concepts (Basis, Vector Space, Hamiltonian matrix, ect) so that is where my site starts. Its a work in progress and should get better/more helpful as I add more to it.

u/jmct · 2 pointsr/compsci

There are a few good tutorials online. In fact Scott Aaronson has linked to several of them from his blog when that question comes up. I have a bias for this one

Quantum Computing Tutorial

Since Dr. Braunstein is my former supervisor. Also, in my opinion the best introductory book on the subject is:

This

though some academics seem more partial to:

this

u/DevFRus · 1 pointr/neurophilosophy

My reply was uncivil for the specific purpose of trying to motivate you to either learn the basics of quantum computing or stop talking about it.

What you were doing is equivalent to what Descartes did when he said that consciousness resided in the pineal gland, or others do by dropping the word 'emergent'. You are taking something you don't understand and can't define well scientifically (in this case consciousness) and saying it must depend on something you don't understand but is currently popular and studied by scientists (in your case: quantum computing).

However, in no way are showing an understanding of quantum computing or consciousness. Do you know what it means to "calculate in super-position states"? Have you bothered to look it up (apart from popular news articles)? Say by grabbing Nielsen & Chuang? Or are you using the word based on some 'intuitive' understanding of it which is not grounded in science?

Of course, it was very rude of me to take out my anger at the ignorance of many on just you. However, your comment embodied the worst of philosophy and popular science and that is why I reacted as such.

u/n4r9 · 1 pointr/AskReddit

This is the standard text for many quantum information and foundation courses. It introduces most of the mathematical requirements but it's very useful to have a handle on linear algebra.

For more foundational issues, this is a good start, although a little too outdated to cover the stuff talked about here.

u/nullcone · 1 pointr/QuantumComputing

...also I recommend to you the textbook by Kaye, Laflamme, and Mosca. Alternatively, if you're feeling daring you can pick up the QC bible. And if you're feeling too cheap to buy books, you can find lecture notes from a lot of QC courses posted online. Check out John Preskill's website, or maybe MIT open courseware.

u/cmonnats · 1 pointr/OMSCS

I presume this is the book you are referring to, correct? this

It seems pretty old, considering they have 10th anniversary editions out. Is it still regarded as one of the better textbooks out there for this subject matter today?

u/wnoise · 1 pointr/QuantumComputing

Mike and Ike is still a great intro. Restricting to finite-dimensional systems really does let you work with concrete representations that cover most of the unintuitive bits of quantum mechanics with mere linear algebra.
https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Computation-Information-10th-Anniversary/dp/1107002176/

u/SoSweetAndTasty · 1 pointr/AskPhysics

Books like Griffiths quantum or Nielsen and Chuang quantum information? From the sounds of your post you have some large gaps in your understanding.

u/HelloAnnyong · 1 pointr/askscience

You're either a troll or you're just exceptionally bad at what you do. Pick up a copy of Nielsen and Chuang if you actually want to learn this stuff. Otherwise I'm done responding to you.

Scott Aaronson also has an excellent series of lectures available online which may help you.

u/-nirai- · 1 pointr/philosophy

As far as we know quantum computation does not transcend Turing computability. The following is from Nielsen's book on Quantum Computation:

> quantum computers also obey the Church–Turing thesis. That is, quantum computers can compute the same class of functions as is computable by a Turing machine. The difference between quantum computers and Turing machines turns out to lie in the efficiency with which the computation of the function may be performed

u/Quadra_Slam · 1 pointr/IAmA

Just Googled the textbooks, as I do not really know the field so well, but are you referring to this book?

u/ericGraves · 1 pointr/askscience

I wasn't aware that we had a standardized protocol on quatum key distribution.

It is surprising that they would standardize an abort for no reason.

Edit-- Can not find anything on this standard. By ``they'' do you refer to the authors of BB84? Because as I linked, they did later work showing that by privacy amplification you can handle a good amount of error from adversary observations. If you have access to Mike and Ike, they explicitly discuss privacy amplification as part of BB84. And it handles a large fraction of errors.

edit-- I need to relax.