Sufficiently amusing that I had no choice

32 Responses to “Sufficiently amusing that I had no choice”

  1. Rick Fleischer Says:

    That’s so sweet.

  2. maline Says:

    What was the actual EO that this is spoofing?

  3. 1Zer0 Says:

    Ironically, I suppose the statement ‘President Biden signs executive order banning people from saying “Quantum computers solve problems by just trying all possible solutions in parallel” ‘ is true in finitely (?) many mwi parallel worlds, if they exist.

  4. Job Says:

    I would’ve gone with a TSP theme.

    You know, banning travelling salesmen from QCs. With or without masks. It’s gold! 🙂

    But seriously, TSP mentions in QC articles are still really prevalent, and misleading.

  5. Tuukka Korhonen Says:

    Now that the topic is the perception of quantum computing in popular media, can I ask you Scott, and others who have thought about quantum computing in media, to comment on the following quotes about quantum computing made in Finnish TV news watched by ~1.5 million people:

    “Qubits are the quantum computing equivalent of normal computers bits, which are ones and zeros. Unlike a bit, qubit is not just one or zero, instead it can be both one and zero at the same time.”

    “-This is a device that makes the impossible possible. Even if all supercomputers of the world would do something together for years, they could not solve things that quantum computer will at some point solve in a snap of fingers.”

    “-Here we are learning how to build a quantum computer, learn to develop different parts, learn to write software and to apply them for different tasks. The real benefits will certainly come in the next phases at the end of 2020’s.”

    The context of this was the announcement of 20 million euro funding to build Finland’s first quantum computer. (text version of the news available in and an english language press release in
    The reason I’m asking is that at first I thought that this news was ridiculous: the first quote gives a wrong impression on why qubits are useful, and the following two seem overly optimistic. However, now that I’m thinking about this, maybe this was an above average quality popular news about quantum computing, and maybe this was even near optimal in explaining something about quantum computing to a large audience.

  6. Jr Says:

    A clear violation of the First Amendment.

  7. John Stricker Says:

    ;-D ;-D ;-D

  8. Olivia L Says:

    Hi Scott!

  9. Scott Says:

    Olivia #8: Hi! Hope you’re well! Thank you for making this blog’s former tagline into a meme!

  10. Itai Bar-Natan Says:

    BREAKING: University Professor Spreads Fake News to Censor Controversial Views on Quantum Physics. How Far Will Cancel Culture Go?

    (in case this doesn’t get across: That was intended as a joke and not a criticism.)

  11. Raoul Ohio Says:

    Bernie isn’t sitting in on this meeting?

  12. Vince Says:

    Scott, check out these executive orders Biden just signed.

  13. Scott P. Says:

    Also worth posting here:

  14. J Says:

    Word on the street is he’s starting to sell Australian printers. 😉

  15. Olivia L Says:

    Scott #9 Just trying to help the field in any way I can

  16. James Gallagher Says:

    He probably should post the shorter version too, banning people from saying “Quantum Computers Solve Problems”

  17. Scott Says:

    James Gallagher #16: In that case, I guess I’d need to picket the White House, with a sign demanding Biden give citizens the right to say that achieving a linear cross-entropy score of 1.002, on a given random 53-qubit quantum circuit C, counts as a “problem.”

  18. Greg Kuperberg Says:

    Scott #17 – Scott, you’re just playing into it that Democrats create their own problems in order to claim credit for solving them.

  19. Stella Says:

    The thing that really gets me is how many small things Biden has already changed that high the lengths Trump went to be cruel for no reason. Someone on Twitter called it “performative cruelty” which seemed apt. For example, the following features have been returned to the White House website:
    1. It has a Spanish language version
    2. It has a TTY/TDD phone number listed
    3. It has a sign language guided tour of the White House
    4. It has an accessibility statement and a form for giving feedback on accessibility

    He has also added (for the first time):
    1. A pronoun box on the contact form
    2. A large-font mode
    3. A high contrast mode

  20. Sorting? Says:

    Isn’t sorting in linear time in Turing model an open problem?

  21. Diffractor Says:

    Any progress on the posts explaining the proof of the independence of CH yet? The first post really piqued my interest and I’d be fascinated to read additional ones.

  22. fred Says:

    A Quantum Computer does try all the solutions in parallel, but once it’s all done it usually can’t tell which ones worked.

  23. Dufrais Constantinople Says:

    Closed timelike curve processors solve problems by just trying all possible solutions in series

  24. Scott Says:

    Diffractor #21: It’s a-comin’!

  25. Scott Says:

    Sorting? #20: Charitably interpreting the cartoon, I assumed Zack was talking about comparison-based sorting, for which Ω(n log n) is a provable lower bound. 🙂

  26. Dan Staley Says:

    Pshh, I can sort any list in the universe in constant time.

    (The constant is a multiple of the number of particles in the universe.)

  27. Sorting? Says:

    So God tried logic and mankind failed?

  28. Me Says:

    Scott, I conjecture that you are on Twitter anonymously.

  29. fred Says:

    Sorry for being off topic a bit, but going back to basics…
    In the electron double slit experiment, what if the screen was replaced with a “wire chamber”?
    It would show the trajectory taken by each electron, possibly pointing back to a specific slit.
    What would destroy the interference pattern in that situation?

  30. fred Says:

    some discussions on why using a trajectory detector to trace the electron path back to a slit can’t work
    basically the electrons generated wouldn’t have enough energy to give a clean trajectory, they would be scattered very easily.

  31. Raoul Ohio Says:


    I think the “QM without math” by Miguel F. Morales series — currently unfolding in Ars Technica — is really good. Any opinions?

    Check it out:

  32. duck_master Says:

    OP, @1ZeR0 #3: FWIW, it’s worth noting that \(BQP \stackrel{?}{=} EXP\) is open, although I strongly doubt it.

    @Me #28: I don’t know about Scott, but I’m not on Twitter at all. (I stopped trusting Twitter after the Great Twitter Hack of 2020, and I wasn’t big-brained enough to get a Twitter account before then.)