Re:Quantum computers ready to leap out of the lab in 2017
by groovy2shoes on Thursday January 05, 2017 @12:41PM
(#13329333)
I'm reminded of the film "October Sky" where Jake Gyllenhaal's character (and I feel like a terrible nerd for not recalling the character, who is (was?) an actual NASA engineer, iirc), upon witnessing Sputnik-1 on a clear night, became obsessed with space flight and rocketry in particular. Got himself a bunch of really advanced texts on the subject and just powered through them, lazily learning the necessary math as needed, as you suggest. Once a poor student (bit of a slacker), he went on to make himself some rockets in relatively short order.
Excellent flick. If you haven't seen it, I recommend giving it a watch.
Re:Quantum computers ready to leap out of the lab in 2017
by Ar-Curunir on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @11:08AM
(#13319387)
I can understand your approach. It helps to learn a topic (like linear algebra) when you can immediately see it's applications. However, I'm not sure it would work here; for one, quantum mechanics is not an "easily" understood application, like, say PCA, or DFT, or other such things.
Edit: just to elaborate on this. I hear often from people "what math do i need to learn so i can do X?" And I just think that alot of the time people should just do X and this will force them to figure out the math as needed. Learning math from a book is brutally difficult! Just like learning a programming language, what is the best way to do that? You start with a project that you want to do. People who want to read the "pre-requisite book" often-times just seem to be deferring the real crunch that happens when you actually get down to the business of actually learning X.