$100,000 If You Can Prove Quantum Computers Impossible

The award was prompted by an article describing the views of a quantum computing skeptic and a proponent. As part of the discussion Scott Aaaronson was challenged to support his opinion with real money, which he now did.

Aaronson himself believes that scalable quantum computers will be possible one day and he does not think that he will ever be forced to pay out the reward. To critics, who said that his challenge is similar to being asked to prove that there is no Bigfoot, he replied that there may be future discoveries in physics that could provide evidence against the quantum computer model, which would be enough for someone being entitled to collect the prize.

Aaronson said that he does not expect this evidence to ever surface, but he "would welcome [it] as the scientific thrill of [his] life." If he had to pay, he would consider it as an "honor" to do so: "For I’d then (presumably) simply be adding a little to the well-deserved Nobel Prize coffers of one of the greatest revolutionaries in the history of physics."

In an update, Aaronson now challenged skeptics to put up a prize for "a demonstration that scalable quantum computing is possible." He added that he is "certainly not offering such a prize."

Create a new thread in the UK News comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • Lewis57
    I'll just hit them with my Athiest logic. If its possible why can't I see it? :)
  • Tab54o
    Lewis57I'll just hit them with my Athiest logic. If its possible why can't I see it?

    Its not about just not seeing it, its about making a claim and then not proving your claim is true. You don't have to disprove something you have to PROVE your claim is real. People claim there's a god and think they don't have to prove that when in fact they do. Its not up to non believers to disprove them. If i say can jump 10 feet up and not prove it then I'm full of shit if I don't prove it. Would be harder for you to not prove that wouldn't it?