Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

This_Username_42 t1_j0ii7fm wrote

Higher cost, same function. Waste.

A missile isn’t limited by its computation. It’s limited by information gathering (knowing position and vector of its true target) and physical limitations of itself a a physical aircraft.

A quantum computer won’t do a better job of analyzing incoming info (cpus don’t gather information) and certainly won’t help it fly any better, other than adding weight

195

extra_specticles t1_j0ii8ry wrote

And? Can you actually put some details in your question?

52

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0ije06 wrote

You missed the point by miles, I was suggesting we could communicate with the projectile indirectly with a quantum computer, as we can't with normal communication equipment because of plasma

−139

_ara t1_j0iju8w wrote

I dooooon't think you know what you're talking about...

53

drLagrangian t1_j0ijv8u wrote

I see the question now.

But that sort of info is exactly the kind of thing one should put in the "text" portion of the post.

Otherwise everyone will miss the point entirely.

108

earsplitingloud t1_j0ik2c2 wrote

What if a quantum computer was used to benefit mankind?

17

Ape_Togetha_Strong t1_j0iko6x wrote

What do you think "what if" means? If a quantum computer could navigate a hypersonic missile, then... a quantum computer could navigate a hypersonic missile.

If you think that quantum computers have some sort of advantage when it comes to communicating across vast distances or through interference, that's not how quantum computers work. I assume you think entanglement allows for communication. It doesn't.

Which is really ironic considering what a smug dipshit you are when replying to people as if they should be able to interpret your stupidly vague question with no detail that's based on a completely false premise.

61

Mr_Lumbergh t1_j0ikxg2 wrote

Considering that escape velocity is 11.186 kps, anything launched into space can be considered hypersonic.

1

ShuRugal t1_j0ilgkd wrote

why would we need a quantum computer to do that? normal computers do it just fine.

14

armorhide406 t1_j0ilk23 wrote

Could that quantum computer overcome physics?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOE0-sL0nQ4

TL;DW: to operate efficiently at Mach 5, i.e. hypersonic, they'd need a scramjet. But they're moving so fast they're not as maneuverable. And on terminal phase they will be subsonic lest they melt, plus the scramjet won't work. Which is relatively easy to intercept

Edit: ok so you brought up the plasma but how would the computer meaningfully guide the missile? I thought entanglement meant no data could be transmitted. Have a spotter?

6

armorhide406 t1_j0ilzur wrote

Yes but you ignored the information gathering and the physical limitations of said vehicle. Because it's so fast it's hard to maneuver. It can't guide itself or beam ride with a target illuminator. Plus it'd only be hypersonic in high altitude to be able to use its scramjet. On terminal it'll probably still be unpowered and subsonic

16

GhostCheese t1_j0imqmy wrote

man, I'd hate to be the thermal engineer tasked with the requirements to make that work.

3

pbjames23 t1_j0imsvw wrote

What if a quantum computer could operate my toaster???

42

just_thisGuy t1_j0inl4z wrote

You are just using two buzz words, it really does not mean anything. Hypersonic missile could also mean many things. And if you are talking about hypersonic powered vehicle that can change direction, that can easily be controlled by a computer slower than what is in your phone, the hard part is not computer control, the hard part is having an engine with power and vehicle that does not melt from air resistance before you reach your target.

12

SoUdontKnowWhoIam t1_j0inn5k wrote

This guy is one of those people that would give you vague directions while working on a project, then huff and puff and act like you’re an idiot for unclear, dog shit instructions… I hope he’s not a manager of something.

16

metametapraxis t1_j0io6i3 wrote

Quantum communication (instant communication over an arbitrary distance) isn't possible.

2

deep_fried_cheese t1_j0io76p wrote

Then a hypersonic missile would be navigated by a quantum computer.

3

RPC3 t1_j0iozh0 wrote

Why would you use a quantum computer as opposed to classical computing? A classical computer is cheaper and better at navigating a missile. Just because it's quantum doesn't mean it's classical 2.0 and it's better in every way. It's good for very specific cases.

5

LaunchTransient t1_j0ip4kd wrote

You mean the whole "Let's use quantum entanglement as a method of communication" idea? It's not a new idea, I'm afraid.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work because of the basic fundamentals of quantum physics. If you observe one of your entangled pairs, that is you interact with it to take a measurement, you break the entanglement.
There's no way for you to know whether that state it collapsed into was a result of your interaction, or of a manipulation of the entangled partner.

To give an analogy, you have a box which contains a magic ball that changes colour, blue to red, or red to blue if its partner ball is observed, and vice versa. The partner ball is in an identical box held by a friend, and you go to opposite sides of the town and open your boxes. Neither of you know the colour of your ball before opening.

Your ball is red. But is that because your ball was originally red and you just flipped your friend's ball? or is it because your friend opened their box before you and flipped your originally blue ball to red? You don't know without communicating with them, but that defeats the whole purpose of trying to use entangled states to communicate.

22

LiamtheV t1_j0ip4t8 wrote

How would a quantum computer better transmit the information in that case? If the problem is the transmission itself (radio), then changing the thing hooked up to the radio wouldn't address the problem at all.

5

KovolKenai t1_j0ip7cu wrote

Then a quantum computer could navigate a hypersonic missile..

I'll ask you one better u/dcRoWdYh. What if a quantum computer could love?

Serious answers only, as OP would want.

8

forsennata t1_j0iptp2 wrote

Was it not the SR-22 Blackbird that used to outrun SCUD missiles? Is that the same as hypersonic? I'm not well educated on missiles that need atmosphere to operate.

1

Sammy81 t1_j0iqlqj wrote

In the 90s I worked on hypersonic projectiles to intercept nuclear missiles. They were doing mach 6 out of the barrel and yes, the air around them was plasma. We had an on board control loop that used feedback from a LIDAR sensor. The window for the sensor had to be ruby so it wouldn’t melt.

The projectile was spun at 50 hz, so we got samples back at that rate. Even with the primitive chips at that time and a 50hz sample rate, we could control the projectile to within 1m of the target. This was with no ground communication and not even an inertial reference, so all control was in the frame of the projectile. My point is that while ground communication would have its uses, it’s not a fundamental problem with hypersonic projectiles. We can already get them where we want them to go.

10

[deleted] t1_j0iqmym wrote

whoa chill. Am I missing some comments? But you are right, entanglement is not used or an advantage in quantum computing. The advantage is the leverage of quantum interference to more efficiently solve problems that are too difficult for traditional binary computing. So the evolution of quantum computing will only advance the solution of certain problems. Unless computer scientist can get creative or my understanding of this is flawed.

1

norbertus t1_j0ir2v2 wrote

That's not really what quantum computers are for, and quantum computers are very sensitive to noise of various types, such as vibration or thermal noise, which would make them impractical in a very hot projectile creating lots of vibration.

The first and most important applications of quantum computers will be in the areas of cryptography and complex physical simulations.

3

Itsworthoverdoing t1_j0iraa7 wrote

You're talking about quantum entanglement, not a quantum computer. You don't need a full computer to communicate, you just need the communication bit. We are still miles away from accomplishing anything like what you're talking about.

11

superdonkey23 t1_j0isa01 wrote

Well then it could. But we already have INS and internal radar that works pretty flawlessly. This would just be a gross over complication.

3

ZaxLofful t1_j0isx6u wrote

It still wouldn’t matter…First, because of what was already said.

Second, because that’s not how a quantum computer even works…The recent “wormhole” stuff also called “spooky action at a distance” by Einstein, requires to complete quantum entangled entities to function. To send even a small amount of data it requires you to destroy the connections at one end, to receive the data at the other end. Which means at best you could receive one small burst of data.

Third, there really is just no need; we use missiles on stationary targets or at least semi-stationary.

Simple is almost always better in the case of technology like this, heat seeking missiles only need a small amount of data.

The missile would need to be able to relay its position back to this quantum computer in real-time, for it to be effective.

4

ZaxLofful t1_j0it2eq wrote

Have you even read the latest development of wormhole in a quantum chip?

They figured out a method to do the exact thing you are talking about, you are out of date my friend…

The paper talks about how they are able to push information thru another version of space time, essentially another dimension that only this QBits interact with and not us.

Edit: Here is a better explanation of what happened:

https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/physicists-observe-wormhole-dynamics-using-a-quantum-computer

^that one talks about how ER = EPR, which is really the most important part of the discovery and how Einstein initially disregarded it^

−3

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0itvv6 wrote

Yeah my understanding was that the communication window was super super tiny, I'm just wondering if it'll be possible in the future as we scale up quantum entanglement projects

−1

bradland t1_j0iu4ux wrote

The quantum effects used in quantum computing only work over extremely short distances. A quantum computer is not the same as a (this is totally made up) "quantum entanglement transceiver". Quantum computers also must be kept extremely cold. A hypersonic missile is about the worst imaginable environment for quantum computing... Which doesn't solve any communications problems on its own.

3

ZaxLofful t1_j0iu4xl wrote

Not really, as stated by the other commenter it would be like sticking a 50K single use battery in a missile you intend to destroy.

What would really make sense is to find a different way of overcoming the plasma interference.

Like with StarLink or something similar.

5

Jump-impact t1_j0iuf87 wrote

only a question of perception - can you shrink the thought process down to small enough to make it practical for an effect to be made on the missile and make it practical to be put on the payload (maybe at that speed kinetic becomes a real thing )

1

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0iumb1 wrote

You can't. That's the purpose of suggesting quantum entanglement. Its all these other people that are making this a sour thing though, I just wanted to poke around, but apparently free thinking is discouraged on Reddit

−1

ZaxLofful t1_j0iv4xc wrote

It’s not that it’s discouraged, it’s that there are clear and absolute barriers to what you are talking about…Ones that are much more insurmountable that the option I just provided.

Yet you still think it’s everyone else’s fault for having more info on the topic than you, instead of just realizing that your thought was neither correct nor complete.

Either take the opinions you are given, when you post on an opinion board; or just stop caring…

While it may technically be “possible” at some point in our future, we have given you clear reasons why it would not be used for this type of scenario.

People use to think quantum entanglement was a joke or not something useful, even Einstein was confused by it…now we are using it more and more.

If something like that can be overcome, then it would stand to reason there is a different way that we are yet unaware to overcome the plasma problem…

Edit: You are using absolutely terms like “it can’t”, but no one else talking to you is doing so. They are telling you why it would be impractical for use on something that is intended to blow up.

7

SpaceShark01 t1_j0ixqj5 wrote

Or you could just not use a hypersonic missile since they’re pretty trash at what they are meant to do anyway.

3

Itsworthoverdoing t1_j0ixsuh wrote

See what we needed to answer your question? You needed to ask a question, get it answered, notice you didn't ask the correct question, and then give a bit more information so someone could help you. Next time that happens try to be a bit nicer to the people in the chain because we all needed to come together to figure out what you were talking about :)

8

ZaxLofful t1_j0iy1rt wrote

As far as we are currently aware, there are no limitations on this effect; we understand it more and more everyday…It’s really only a matter of time until someone figures something out.

−4

TameVulcan t1_j0izyh9 wrote

I’m sorry everyone is being so hostile about your question. Not everyone has the same understanding about things and ripping them for that is sad and weak. Hope someone answered your question respectfully

1

Snaz5 t1_j0izzw7 wrote

Reminds me of Battletech, where nobody uses huge advanced missiles anymore because of how cheap it is to shoot them down, so now they just use huge volleys of very basic missiles

11

CommanderAGL t1_j0j136i wrote

Are you talking an interceptor missile or payload delivery missile?

Its not needed for payload delivery as the trajectory can largely be precomputed.

For intercept, you either start increasing the turning radius or pushing the limits of structural integrity to actually follow a target.

Theres a speed sweet spot, and hypersonic aint it

2

flomflim t1_j0j43ys wrote

Quantum computer won't be able to do anything to be able to get around that problem. All a quantum computer provides is the ability to solve certain computational problems that a regular classical computer can't. If you give a quantum computer a classical problem, it will take just the same amount of time as a classical computer with equal computing power.

1

space-ModTeam t1_j0j77r1 wrote

Hello u/dcRoWdYh, your submission "What if a quantum computer could navigate a hypersonic missile??" has been removed from r/space because:

  • It is not related to space.

Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.

1

Still_Vacation_3534 t1_j0j7eo3 wrote

Based on today’s quantum computers, one would never be integrated into the projectile. But to say the possibilities wouldn’t change by using one may be a bit short sighted. Quantum computers are terrible about counting above 4 but they’re incredibly usueful with solving impossible problems. A better (worse?) outcome would almost be certain with more computing power and data available. No matter the source.

1

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0j7grm wrote

Ok, I'll just pretend hypersonic missiles don't fly through space! Thanks for correcting my stupidity!

1

HuntyDumpty t1_j0jgfrx wrote

You said he missed the point by miles, but you did not state the point as you clarified it to be in your initial response in this thread. They didn’t really miss the point, you really failed to provide the most crucial information in the text part of your post. Some would consider blaming him for a mistake that is really yours rude.

1

HuntyDumpty t1_j0jgieq wrote

You said he missed the point by miles, but you did not state the point as you clarified it to be in your initial response in this thread. They didn’t really miss the point, you really failed to provide the most crucial information in the text part of your post. Some would consider blaming him for a mistake that is really yours rude.

Edit: meant to respond to comment beginning with “nicer?”

1

KovolKenai t1_j0jm6uj wrote

In what way would it not be a computer. It's literally in the name. Quantum computer. It's the second word in there. It's still an incredibly complicated machine, but it can love, and it's a computer.

2

Loki12241224 t1_j0joyjq wrote

As long as this is not satirical i think this thread should be saved as an all time reddit thread. op is a fucking perfect dunning Kruger effect example.

3

This_Username_42 t1_j0jpx0x wrote

Then put that in the post lol

But also that’s an even less reasonable answer because a quantum computer isn’t a communication device. If you’re talking about quantum communication, that won’t be somehow unphased by other effects, it just pertains to fidelity of communications

Furthermore my points still stands as the limitations are not onboard computers, but rather physical realities of the missile as an aircraft

I like your level of condescension after reading a handful of articles on quantum computing

1

This_Username_42 t1_j0jpzsv wrote

Then put that in the post lol

But also that’s an even less reasonable answer because a quantum computer isn’t a communication device. If you’re talking about quantum communication, that won’t be somehow unphased by other effects, it just pertains to fidelity of communications in the face of intercepting a signal

Furthermore my points still stands as the limitations are not onboard computers, but rather physical realities of the missile as an aircraft

I like your level of condescension after reading a handful of articles on quantum computing

1

armorhide406 t1_j0nt3cb wrote

I wonder if there is a workaround, without sending information but more a matter of assigning meaning. Like red means one thing and blue means another.

And then maintaining strict discipline with who observes and what so you can take it as assumed it wasn't your friend opened your box before you.

1

LaunchTransient t1_j0pc8r3 wrote

Yeah, but the thing is that you don't know what the colour of the ball is going to be. You can't control that aspect of it. As a result, you don't know if the ball is going to collapse into the state you want it to or not.

Furthermore, due to relativity, what is your timeframe is not necessarily the time frame of another.

2

This_Username_42 t1_j0psd9a wrote

Quantum computers can’t solve impossible problems — they can solve some instances of very high complexity computation in less time compared to classical computing.

Like I said — a missile doesn’t have a hard time figuring things out quickly enough, it has a hard time gathering accurate information (flare countermeasures), or determining where the craft will be in X time (unknowable since it is piloted) and then getting to the correct position at the right time because it is a physical aircraft bound by physical laws.

Kinematics are not complex problems compared to computational techniques on a classical computer

If you were talking about some type of quantum camera that (insert made up helpful feature here), sure, maybe; but the inputs to your quantum computer are the same as the classical one. And after the quantum computer does its job, even, somehow, let’s pretend it does it instantaneously, are still limited by response time of the missile and Physical laws. Which are the real crux of the difficulties anyways

1