 |
| Illinois' most famous citizen working on a quantum computer |
The governor of Illinois, JB Pritzker, unveiled his budget last week including $500 million for quantum computing research. Is this the best way to spend my tax dollars?
As long-time readers know, I have strong doubts about the real-world applications of quantum computing and the hype for the field. But the article does not suggest any applications of quantum computing, rather
Pritzker says he's optimistic that the Illinois state legislature will embrace his proposal as a catalyst for job creation and investment attraction.
That does make sense. Investing in quantum may very well bring in extra federal and corporate investment into quantum in Chicago. At the least it will bring in smart people to Illinois to fill research roles. And it's not if this money would go to any other scientific endeavor if we don't put it into quantum.
So it makes sense financially and scientifically even if these machines don't actually solve any real-world problems. Quantum winter will eventually come but might as well take advantage of the hype while it's still there. Or should we?
A physicist colleague strongly supports Illinois spending half a billion on quantum. He lives in Indiana.
Hi Lance,
ReplyDeleteI do not think there is anything wrong with pouring money using the Quantum hype as a vehicle for (1) investing in general in an area that might have an investment problem (I am not in US so I cannot judge) and (2) getting as a byproduct a lot of interesting tech like superconducting material/technology which is (at the moment) much more crucial and needed.
Netherlands tried to do something similar recently with 615 million Euros which for EU standards is pretty insane. (https://www.government.nl/latest/news/2021/04/21/innovative-projects-given-additional-%E2%82%AC1.35-billion-boost-due-to-funding-from-national-growth-fund)
I am not sure that the goals of the Dutch government align with the more "pragmatic" (to be seen of course) approach of Illinois.
Given such a ridiculous "investment" and statement, surely quantum winter must be just around the corner.
ReplyDeleteCould you say more about the intuition behind your skepticism? For example, how does it relate to https://gilkalai.wordpress.com/2025/02/17/robert-alicki-michel-dyakonov-leonid-levin-oded-goldreich-and-others-a-summary-of-some-skeptical-views-on-quantum-computing/ ? Is it just based on quantum computing’s limitations and challenges not getting through to the different groups of people you describe in your “Quantum Stories” blog post?
ReplyDeleteI know that some of your favorite proofs involve quantum complexity, such as the proof that MIP* = RE. Would it be surprising if quantum computing, while being intellectually rich, had little practical impact, especially considering it is at the intersection of two extremely impactful theories, namely computer science and quantum physics?
How would your answers to the above change if the questions were extended to the whole of quantum technology, including quantum metrology, quantum communication, etc.?
"Quantum winter will eventually come." The counterargument is that: (1) Shor's algorithm has cybersecurity implications; (2) security doesn't tend to have winters.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like there are lots of parallels between the causes and drivers of the space race and those of quantum technology.
Delete