Me and my friend like talking about quantum physics I'm a more familiar with the subject (we are only A level students) and he despises the idea of an uncertain universe and asked since wave functions can be collapsed through decoherence could our universe become fully certain if all the wave functions in our universe hyperthetically collapsed into a single state. I argued that this could never happen but then j realised surely just moments after The Big Bang and all the high energy photons around surely they would be in sufficient amounts to cause decoherence in the entire (small) Universe and therefore simultaneously collapsing into a single state. I thought of a few possible solutions but I am really curious about this. First I thought maybe when wave functions underdo decoherence they collapse into a near certain state. Not quite 100% definite but the uncertainty is negligible. This would allow the universe to remain uncertain. The second possibility I considered was that when photons began to form the first particle/ antiparticle pairs they were produced in random states (ie random momentum) which would form a wave function. If there is a reason that any of you know please let me know and include references of possible Thanks

I'm an undergraduate physics student, I do want to study relativistic quantum mechanics. What is the best study guide or map of the topics I should learn to get to RELATIVISTIC QM?

Hello, i am just a second year biochem student that has gotten a course in quantum chemistry but i am still having a hard time processing a few ideas. This question might be very simple and easily understood to many of you but im still new to this science. At the moment i have trouble understanding a system where a quantum particle approaches an infinitely thick potential barrier and the particle has less energy than the energy of the barrier. Quantum tunneling doesn’t occur at such systems and the probability of particle reflecting can be easily calculated to be 1 (100%). Yet if we calculate the probability of the particle being inside the potential barrier it is clear that the integral (probability) cannot be equal to 0. It seems arbitrary to me and would love an insight

Do you wish there was something more people in the field of physics, or lateral fields, knew more about in quantum mechanics?

I have only seen unitary time evolution operator using time-independent Hamiltonian, but will the time-dependent also work for this?

Hello everyone,

I'm a theoretical physics graduate trying to pursue a PhD in Quantum Informatics in the UK. My research background is in cosmology, so I’m seeking advice from those in the field. What would you look for in a CV or statement of intent from someone with transferable skills but no direct experience in Quantum research?

I have extensive experience in quantum topics, taking modules in Advanced Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Field Theory, and Quantum Optics and Computing. But the closest I've gotten to research experience is implementing Shor's Algorithm for the number 35 using qiskit as part of my quantum computing coursework.

Thanks!

What happens if a part of the double split experiment is observed and the other one isn't? Do both of them go back to behave live particles or only the part observed?

https://preview.redd.it/wq7hpf8jqu2e1.png?width=500&format=png&auto=webp&s=7f6d7eb96de8e57b41ed9b33c3faacaca4d1df20

Hi r/Quantum community,

I've been away from physics for a decade but have remained passionate about tools for scientific computing. Every year, I look for opportunities to contribute to accelerating or scaling computations in science (like this), particularly through the open-source libraries I maintain.

Recently, I've been optimizing for tasks like fast Bilinear Forms and Mahalanobis distances. While the latter is more common in statistics, I suspect the former might have valuable applications in quantum computing and related fields. Before further expanding my library of SIMD kernels, I wanted to reach out to this community for some insights:

1. Low-Dimensional Representations: Are small vectors (e.g., <16 dimensions or <32 dimensions) common in quantum computing workflows? Would dedicated optimizations for these cases be useful?
2. Mixed-Precision Kernels: How inclined is the community to adopt mixed-precision (e.g., f16, bf16) kernels for Bilinear Forms or similar computations? With the inherent noise in quantum measurements, is there a shift toward these formats, especially on modern CPUs?
3. Complex Representations: Given that Hamiltonians often include non-zero imaginary components, how critical is support for complex-valued computations? Should I prioritize complex-number optimizations across all hardware generations (e.g., AVX2, AVX-512, Arm NEON) and numeric types (f64, f32, f16, bf16)?
4. Programming Ecosystem: While I assume BLAS wrapped via NumPy remains a dominant workflow, how common are tools like Julia or Rust in quantum computing? Are these becoming more prevalent for performance-critical tasks?

I’m eager to hear about your experiences and what the community feels is most pressing or under-supported in terms of tooling. Would love to be useful. Looking forward to your thoughts!

Hey,

I'm a CS grad student working with a professor in quantum networking/cryptography research. While discussing ways to make quantum networking concepts more approachable, I proposed creating educational games for students. My professor loved the idea!

I've started with a quantum version of Snakes & Ladders (This is a rough idea for now) where:

• Snakes represent quantum decoherence
• Ladders become quantum teleportation paths
• Players use entanglement tokens for special moves
• Quantum dice using superposition principles determine moves
• Special squares trigger network effects (repeaters, error correction)

I'm looking for creative ideas to teach concepts like:

• Quantum entanglement distribution
• Error correction in quantum channels
• Quantum repeater networks
• Channel fidelity and noise effects

Whether it's adaptations of existing games or completely new concepts, I'd love to hear your ideas! These games could really help students grasp these complex topics in an interactive way.

Any input on this idea (positive/negative) is welcomed.

Thanks

The pace of advancements in Quantum Error Correction (QEC) has been incredible, and I’m finding it challenging to keep up. I’m looking for advice on how to dive into the field effectively. Ideally, I’d love suggestions for:

• Beginner-friendly resources or crash courses to grasp the basics
• Insights into current open problems and research directions
• Tutorials or guides for both theoretical aspects and hardware implementation

For context, I have a background in Physics and would greatly appreciate any recommendations to help me get started.

Thanks so much!

Hi everyone,
I wanted to know if there are QDS protocols where quantum mechanics has been directly used in the signing and verification stages. This is a very new field to me and I am struggling to find a paper where such protocols have been proposed. Well, there's one by Gottessman and Chuang from 2001, but it'd be great if I could find something more recent and implementable. Thank you!

Hello good people of quantum I am an electrical engineering undergraduate student (mostly high voltage) ,but I have really enjoyed studying quantum mechanics, and what really excites me is to apply such in real world application one being quantum technologies.So I have decided to opt this as a career path but ,due to lack of infrastructure at my uni getting any experience in it is impossible, except for internships so I have decided to get into a research group which works on quantum entanglement (theoretical) , and there is another research group on rf (which I can join later) , will these research experience be beneficial to my journey or should I look for some new opportunities Besides I am currently enrolled in courses such as hardware of a quantum computer,qm 1 so on Thank you good fellas!

Hi everyone,

Since I am passionate about the topic, i'm considering an offer for a PhD position in a non-top Univeristy in experimental quanutm computing (superconducting platform). I arleady work as RF enigneer and would consider this transition only if the market will offer good opportunities in industry (I mean, I don't plan to be rich but at least to have some financial stability after the PhD).

I've read a lot about the current market in quantum computing but would love to hear opinions form people that actually work in the field (both in Academia and industry).

Thank you!

Are there any credible (and useful) courses to take on Quantum that can help launch a new career in the future?

I'm quantum theory nerd, have been a fan since my teenage years, read all available "reader-friendly" theory through the years. I'd like to take it to the next step and start getting some sort of formal more credible education, something more than "I read a lot".

In my previous life I was in tech consulting for Enterprise Technology.

Thank you

I am a CS undergrad student with no background on Quantum physics or Quantum Computing save for the two youtube videos that i watched. i have been thrust into this project by someone related to my college, expecting me to do a breakthrough at Quantum Positioning Systems through simulations (We do not have access to quantum computers). I am expected to do this as soon as possible. So how likely am i to complete this project?

On a side note, I am very interested in this field and i would like to explore on this. Where do i need to start on it? and is there any hope for someone who probably wouldn't be able to do PhD on the subject?

I was admitted straight from undergrad into a quantum PhD program at a great school, and am currently at the start of my second year, but I'm seeking some advice.

First of all, I didn't have a strong research background; I transferred halfway through my undergrad into my computer science program. I took some courses on Qiskit and QIS, but nothing with actual quantum mechanics. I had internships at quantum companies prior to my PhD, but in all honesty, I got more software skills and exposure to research areas, but not a lot of direct research experience. I tried to do a thesis on an area of VQAs for 6 months, but the material was too dense without proper coursework. I really felt like I tried, but knew I'd be interested in optimization research if I pursued quantum.

The PhD program I was admitted to is in an EE department. I took a quantum error correction course that was very physics/OQS based and it definitely filled some foundational gaps, but I didn't feel like it gave me a strong background in optimization background, and I was not interested in QEC. The Quantum Algorithms course I took was a nice introduction, but it was a seminar style class, and we never actually were given rigorous problem sets to practice-- the professor did inform me to take an optimization course if I were to work with him. The next semester I had to take the required department screening exam courses, but they were EE-focused.

I'm now at the start of the second year, and I'm just now taking my first optimization course that really let me build the start of the background I needed. my department's screening exam is next semester, and I have another EE course to take.

However, I still feel underprepared. The EE coursework isn't "irrelevant" totally, but I feel frustrated I did not get to build a foundation focused on real analysis, optimization, or algorithms, and at least some machine learning to let me feel somewhat confident engaging in the quantum optimization literature.

It's actually been kind of hard coming in straight from undergrad honestly.

I'm having hesitation wanting to pursue a PhD at the moment due to the lack of cohesive background and thinking a CS/optimization masters program would have been a good first step for me. I really have been trying to be committed, but as I've taken my optimization course, I'm realizing that I genuinely love the purity of the subject and want/need time to really learn the material well, and I'm not even sure anymore I want to confine myself to quantum. I am doing well in the course and it's pretty proof-based, but I genuinely don't see myself being confident enough yet to pursue any research with quantum algorithms.

Would it be wise to take a step back and focus on developing a good foundation first in optimization theory?

Does anyone know computationally efficient numerical methods to solve the Lindblad (GKSL) master equation?

This might be a long shot, but I don’t know where else to ask. My premise could be wrong, in which case the idea might be moot. But here goes: I’m writing a sci fi story and in it one of the characters is building a communication device that uses quantum mechanics. I’m trying to incorporate real concepts if possible (even if they’re fictitiously modified to fit the story). Is there some kind of phenomena that could possibly happen if the character makes a mistake? It could be a catalyst for something bigger, but ideally not so big that it would destroy everything. I try to research as much as I can on my own, but this idea came to me the other day and I’m not sure how to run with it, or if I even can. Are there any possibilities here?

An article based on interviews with Quantum Machines and Nvidia about how they used reinforcement learning to optimize pulses, improving performance and fidelity

https://techcrunch.com/2024/11/02/quantum-machines-and-nvidia-use-machine-learning-to-get-closer-to-an-error-corrected-quantum-computer/

Morning everyone. I am trying to define an algorithm which receives in input a parameterization of any form (for example a matrix) and convert it to a valid parameterization for the chi representation of a (P.S. CPTP) quantum channel. While I can do it for a subset of chi matrices I am not sure for the general setting, i.e. allowing the algorithm to map parametrizations to the whole set of chi matrices associated to CPTP maps (of some fixed dimension). Any suggestion?

Hey all - I made this video (it is sponsored just a disclosure) on the Variational quantum eigensolver. I hope some of yall find it useful!

Also feel free to leave any suggestions, I’m continuously trying to improve these so outside perspectives can be super helpful.

The Quantum Algorithm That Could Make Big Pharma Billions https://youtu.be/Fvwyd0536Gc

Hi everyone,

Since I received an offer for a PhD in the field, I would like to know the possibilities and job prospect post PhD (I do want to explore the field but possibly in industry)

Would love to know your opinions!

Hi everyone,

I'm curios to know if there exist courses/master in the field of quantum computing (also expensive ones) that one can follow remotely (I arealdy work as RF engineer).

While I have the possibility of pursuing a PhD in quantum computing, I don't feel confortable in leaving my job and was wondering if there are coruses and certifications which can be acknowleged from the community.

I personally believe wave-particle duality is a junk concept, clearly a confused notion using classical physics language (which was the only language available), and stretched to the limit by DeBroglie & Schrödinger at the request of Einstein.

There is no wave. The Schrödinger equation is not a wave equation (it's a 3D complex diffusion equation), and solutions only look wave-like in very limited cases. Particles I have no issue with, as upon measurement objects certainly appear particle-like.

What I wonder is why we don't have "field-particle duality". This also utilizes the dominant terminology of the early 20th Century, and appears more precise: wavefunctions have a complex amplitude at every point in space, which changes over time.

Do you think it's reasonable to teach "field-particle duality" to early-level undergraduates (here I'm taking about non-relativistic QM, obviously QFT deals with this), or do I still fall into a trap of poor terminology?

I was woindering how many of you guys work in this field and most importantly are you satisfied with the work/life balance and money you make?

I know that many of the people that approach this field (especially from the research part) would be interested in pushing the boundaries of knowledge etc.. but I do think that highly specialised people in such field are unique for their skillset and since they are not so many, this could bring the market to value them the most. Is this true in industry ora not?

Love to know you experiences/ stories!