Talk:Quantum information

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 August 2020 and 23 November 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SladeWillson, Lhou96. Peer reviewers: Calhin, Zpopovych.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

bit
(Compartive: A bit can be more formely described as the minimum amount of information required to resolve the ambiguity existing between two equi-probable alternatives. A Qubit contains the maximum amount of information that can be realised from choosing from an infinite (but) countable set of equi-potentials.) HEAVYMEDLEY 20:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Fantastic overview
The list of special features of quantum information that is given here is crisply written; it's a model of using verbal language to describe mathematical ideas briefly but accurately, given the brief three-line format for each bullet point. Great overview. Kudos. 178.38.97.233 (talk) 11:43, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Quantum information. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303183533/http://www.quantware.ups-tlse.fr/IHP2006/ to http://www.quantware.ups-tlse.fr/IHP2006/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:46, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Relation to quantum mechanics
"Quantum mechanics studies" is nonsensical. QM is a theory / field, therefore it cannot study. Instead of keeping by fixing the language (e.g. "the field of..."), it would be better to fix it properly by rewriting it. Widefox ; talk 01:45, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You are right to say that it is the field that studies (or to be precise '... is studied within the field of ...'). But your objection is a pedantic one, because the abbreviated form is perfectly comprehensible and this particular use of language is regular practice in academia. --Brian Josephson (talk) 21:00, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

For the journal, see Quantum Information (journal).
This is absolutely irrelevant note for multiple resons:

1. The mentioned journal is currently called Historical Social Research. This has nothing to do with quantum information. The origin of the name stems from obscure "QUANTUM association", which is probably unknown to almost everybody in the world.

2. Currently there are journals that are indeed focused on "quantum information" and have this in their titles, e.g. npj Quantum Information, so it seem to me that it is ridiculous that after the note "see Quantum Information (journal)" one is redirected to Historical Social Research. Nobody would confuse "quantum information" with "Historical Social Research" so the cautionary note "see Quantum Information (journal)" is a kind of internal SCAM in Wikipedia.

From the above 2 points, I have edited the note into something that is more meaningful, i.e.: "For the journal, see npj Quantum Information". Danko Georgiev (talk) 05:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)