“The division of labor fragments us. There is no other way: everything I must do regularly and competently (for instance, to earn a living within the current economic order) demands knowledge and skills that—as I cultivate them—sever me from other innate talents, simply because I have neither the time nor the energy left for them. No one can do everything. Depending on the state of productive forces, technology expands the spectrum of knowledge and skills primarily by adding things that can be automated: construction robots, math software, translation programs. These embody the past efforts of human beings—intellectual efforts, initially. The next technology on the horizon has, for several months now, been preoccupying and exciting the venture capital world, Donald Trump, and Emmanuel Macron. They all speak of 'quantum' technologies with high expectations.
Computers developed using this field of research do not encode the data they process—as familiar machines do—in so-called bits consisting of two possible states (0 and 1); instead, they use 'qubits,' which can assume states of superposition between 0 and 1 [1]. 'Qutrits'—using ternary rather than binary units—are also conceivable; there is no telling what people might come up with next.
Quantum computers already exist, but they still require complex error correction and involve high manufacturing costs (involving photonics, spin technology, superconducting materials—the toolkit is full of exotic components). None of this is currently scalable—that is, suitable for mass production.
In practical terms, however, quantum computers promise processing speeds thousands of times faster than classical devices for specific types of problems.
In October 2025, Google’s 'Quantum Echoes' algorithm has already [tackled] one of these select problems - cracked thirteen thousand times faster than would have been possible using old-fashioned approaches.
However, it remains a matter of debate whether—and, if so, how quickly—the hurdles to efficient and profitable quantum computing can be overcome. Yet the emerging field of quantum technology encompasses more than just computers; it ranges from measurement technology for electromagnetic fields or acceleration (including gravitational effects) to applications in medicine, geosciences, and traffic control—and the list goes on. There is also significant potential for overlap with the field of AI.
"Telephone" and Startling Knowledge
Behind this lies a field of knowledge that severely challenges our intuition. Its reputation for extreme strangeness has long since permeated pop culture folklore—spread much like the game of "Telephone." The results range from psychological thriller novels (Robert J. Sawyer’s 2016 *Quantum Night*) and existentialist streaming dramas (Alex Garland’s 2020 *Devs*) to atmospheric background music (electronic pioneers Tangerine Dream, for instance, have described themselves as being in their "Quantum Years" for some time now). This folklore thrives on the thrill of goosebumps induced by peculiar rumors from the research world: light, it is said, is both wave and particle; indeed, every object in the world possesses a wavelength (a man named Louis de Broglie is said to have determined its measure); certain properties of tiny particles cannot be determined with arbitrary precision in tandem; and at the smallest scale, a form of mathematics prevails in which *p* times *q* is not the same as *q* times *p*.
And that is not all: matter can supposedly pass through walls (the "tunnel effect").
The craziest concept of all is "entanglement" [2]: two quantum particles that have once interacted remain connected in a way that no longer allows us to assign them specific, unambiguous individual attributes—"local" and "real"—prior to measurement to be categorized.
Is all of this accurate? More or less: there is a vast amount of popular literature and YouTube videos on the subject. The matter itself is, after all, nothing new. As the relevant equations, measurement protocols, tests, and counter-tests were developed over the course of roughly a century, those involved experienced a compulsion—unprecedented in physics—to interpret, construe, and explain: How can one express the insights of quantum physics in terms that connect to older, familiar worldviews? And if absolutely no such connections exist, what would a completely new worldview look like?
Well-known interpretations surrounding these questions include the "Copenhagen interpretation" ("quantum mechanics describes what we can measure, but not a world-in-itself"), the "Many-Worlds interpretation" (everything possible actually happens, just not here and now, in my world or yours), and "Bohmian mechanics" (there is a real configuration of the quantum system, even when unobserved). Joining these theories new ones are added from time to time—most recently, for instance, "QBism" (or "extreme quantum Bayesianism"), which we will discuss shortly.
In any case, all these theories attempt to come to terms with the more unsettling findings of quantum mechanics—findings that were long regarded as merely optional add-ons to the core subject matter. That core theory yielded laser technology, semiconductors, atomic clocks, and electron microscopes. However, with the latest technical developments now attracting investment—and quantum computing above all—the dictum of physicist A. Douglas Stone applies: "This time, the weirdness is the point"—the oddities are the crucial element (rather than just a nagging itch at the back of one's mind). This explains why scientific papers now bear titles such as "Multi-qubit nanoscale sensing with entanglement as a resource." What was once a source of bewilderment is becoming a raw material.
Physicist Christopher A. Fuchs—a leading figure behind the aforementioned "QBism"—described the evolution of his field in his book *Coming of Age with Quantum Information* (2011). Written in powerfully poetic prose and structured as a fascinating, entertaining collection of emails, the book notes that the field reveals "philosophy at every turn."
QBism, which Fuchs helped develop, is a prime example of this; it is built upon Bayes' rule [3], which structures expectation-based learning in light of probability assumptions and new information.
In doing so, it challenges—in a way that can certainly be described as "philosophical"—traditional views of probability based on objective occurrences ("frequencies").
Proponents of those traditional views regard the rule as a subjectivist aberration. Anyone wishing to join the discussion must engage with a dynamic interplay of distinctions, comparisons, and inferences drawn from premises—all of which require precise linguistic articulation. Rarely have there been problems that have so powerfully intertwined physics and language. It is hardly surprising, then, that the singular physics adventurer Bob Coecke—who, among other things, built a quantum guitar (and even performed with it for heavy metal fans)—is now applying his physics-inspired mathematical expertise to the understanding of textual structures. Language has always been in a state of historical evolution; it never stands still. Along the thread upon which language strings its philosophical pearls, quantum mechanics—one of the first of the exact sciences to do so—has fortunately learned to reflect on its own origins (yielding beneficial social effects, such as the book *Women in the History of Quantum Physics*, edited by Patrick Charbonneau, Michelle Frank, and Margriet van der Heijden, published last year).
Technology without science?
Thinking historically soon leads to thinking politically. The birth of new quantum technology is, after all, taking place under a political-historical imperative: "technological sovereignty." Who is ahead—Europe, the USA, or China? The People's Republic launched its quantum satellite, Micius, into Earth's orbit a full decade ago; Trump has made noises about government stakes in quantum companies; and Berlin now has something called "Leap," a coordination hub for a quantum business ecosystem.
Some pronouncements from the worlds of politics and finance sound as if the desire were for "technology without science"; capital likes to cut back on personnel, while authoritarian politics has no use for broad-based education (science's most important social prerequisite).
However, clarifying the relationship between humanity and nature—a relationship without which technology cannot exist—is impossible without the interplay of specialized sciences on the one hand and philosophical conceptual analysis on the other.
Rarely has this been more evident than with quantum technology. Here, the most profound insights and the most counterintuitive concepts complement one another to form a mirror—one into which the human being, no longer fragmented by the division of labor, might one day gaze and say: “Is that what I look like? I never would have imagined it!”” [4]
1. Quantum Mechanics (Quantum Superposition)
In quantum physics, a particle (like an electron or a qubit in quantum computing) does not exist in just one definite state. Instead, it exists in a superposition of all its possible states at once, behaving like a combination of those possibilities.
• The Mechanism: The particle has a certain probability of being found in any given state.
• The "Collapse": This superposition remains until an observation or measurement is made. The act of measuring "collapses" the quantum system, forcing it to choose a single, definite reality (e.g., a qubit becomes either a 0 or a 1).
• Famous Analogy: Schrödinger’s Cat—a hypothetical cat placed in a box is considered to be simultaneously in a superposition of both dead and alive until you open the box to observe it.
2. Quantum entanglement is a phenomenon where two or more particles become inextricably linked so that they share a single quantum state. Measuring the state of one particle instantly determines the state of the other, regardless of the physical distance separating them.
Key Characteristics
• Shared Identity: Instead of being two independent entities, entangled particles behave as a single, unified quantum system.
• No Communication Lag: The correlation between them is instantaneous, occurring even if the particles are light-years apart. Albert Einstein famously referred to this as "spooky action at a distance".
• Probabilistic Nature: Before they are measured, the particles exist in a state of "superposition" (a combination of multiple possible states). The specific outcome of a measurement is always random.
How It Works (The Shoe Analogy)
A common way to visualize this (though an imperfect analogy) is the "pair of shoes" concept. If you put a left shoe in one box and a right shoe in another, then shuffle them without looking. If you open your box and find the right shoe, you instantly know your friend has the left shoe, even if they traveled to Mars.
However, quantum entanglement takes this a step further. In the quantum realm, the shoe doesn't exist definitively as a "left" or "right" shoe until you open the box. Opening the first box (measuring the particle) forces the entire system to make a choice, instantly assigning properties to both boxes simultaneously.
Common Misconceptions
• Faster-Than-Light Communication: You cannot use entanglement to send messages or information faster than the speed of light. Because the state of the first particle is entirely random, you have no way of controlling what information the distant particle will reveal upon measurement.
• Changing the Other Particle: Measuring one particle doesn't actively "send a signal" to change the other. Instead, it simply reveals that the two measurements will always perfectly correlate with one another.
Why It Matters
While deeply weird, entanglement is a proven, fundamental rule of nature. It is the driving force behind modern developments in Quantum Information Science, such as Quantum Computing and hack-proof quantum cryptography.
3. Bayes' Rule (or Bayes' Theorem) is a fundamental mathematical formula used to calculate the probability of an event based on prior knowledge of conditions that might be related to that event. It allows you to update your beliefs as new evidence is introduced.
The Formula
In mathematical terms, Bayes' Rule is expressed as:
P(A|B) = P(B|A) x P(A)/P(B)
Where:
• P(A|B) (or "P(A pipe B)") (Posterior Probability): The probability of event A happening, given that event B has occurred.
• P(B|A) (Likelihood): The probability of event B happening, given that event A has occurred.
• P(A) (Prior Probability): The initial probability of event A happening before any new evidence is considered.
• P(B) (Marginal Probability): The total probability of event B happening under any circumstance.
________________________________________
How it Works: Medical Testing Example
A classic way to understand Bayes' Rule is through a medical screening, where it corrects for "false positives" to find the real chance of an accurate result.
Let's say:
• A rare disease affects 1% of the population: P(A) = 0.01
• The test is highly accurate, identifying the disease 100% of the time: P(B|A) = 1.00
• However, the test also gives a "false positive" for healthy people 10% of the time: (0.01 × 1.00) + (0.99 × 0.10) = 0.109 (or 10.9%)
If you test positive, what is the actual chance you have the disease? Intuitively, people might guess around 90-100% because the test is so "accurate." But using Bayes' Rule:
1. Calculate the overall chance of testing positive P(B):
(True positive rate) + (False positive rate)
(0.01 × 1.00) + (0.99 × 0.10) = 0.109 (or 10.9%)
2. Apply the formula:
(P(Disease|Positive) = 1.00 x 0.01/0.109 = approx 0.0917
Even though the test is fantastic, testing positive only gives you about a 9.2% chance of actually having the disease because the condition itself is so rare.
________________________________________
Real-World Applications
Beyond medical screening, Bayes' Rule is an essential tool in many fields:
• Spam Filters: Evaluating the probability that an email is spam (Event A) given that it contains certain words like "buy now" or "viagra" (Event B).
• Machine Learning & AI: Allowing self-driving cars and algorithms to update their predictions as new sensor data arrives.
• Finance: Helping investors update the probability of a market event or stock movement as new economic data is released.
4. Eine Technik, die will, dass wir denken: Der Schock namens "Künstliche Intelligenz" ist noch nicht verdaut, da naht der nächste: die Quantenära. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung; Frankfurt. 12 Mar 2026: 11. DIETMAR DATH
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą