Quantum? . . . should it be?

Microsoft’s “Planetary Computer” … should it be classically-based or quantum-based?

If I thought the following was above anyone’s head … I wouldn’t write it. If I thought you wouldn’t have a profound thought about it … I wouldn’t write it. If I thought you couldn’t expound upon it and bring life to it in ways that I can’t … I wouldn’t write it. I wrote it.

Quantum … or

classical?

Microsoft’s

“Planetary Computer”

Which should it be?

I pointed out in an earlier email that Microsoft announced it’s building a “planetary computer”. Below is why I believe this computer can and should be based in quantum computing and communication. But the shortest explanation can be found in the grammatical profundity of the following Richard Feynman quote:

“Nature isn’t classical, dammit, and if you want to make a simulation of nature, you’d better make it quantum mechanical, and by golly it’s a wonderful problem, because it doesn’t look so easy.”- Richard Feynman

---“Every time you translate data from quantum data to classical data to human data … you lose data.”

Jed Anderson, Creator, EnviroAI

---“A quantum internet will be the platform of a quantum ecosystem, where computers, networks, and sensors exchange information in a fundamentally new manner where sensing, communication, and computing literally work together as one entity.”— David Awschalom, Professor of of Molecular Engineering, University of Chicago

It’s an incredible world we are living into.

Environmental intelligence. Data. Power.Speed.

More Information on EnviroAI

This is an advertisement for Ceres AI LLC