Yeah, sorry I didn't word that very well. I do think that question would be of value to shareholders, but it doesn't require an announcement as per ASX listing rules. I therefore, don't think that going to the ASX is appropriate but you're welcome to try.
I understand Zero Spin Silicon is a unique form of isotopically purified silicon. The presence of Si-29 in concentrations above 100ppm (0.01%) prevents effective performance. With natural grade silicon having 4.7% Si-29, Silex effectively just eliminates this unwanted isotope. The lower the concentration of Si-29, the better a silicon quantum
processor will perform in terms of computational power, accuracy and reliability. What Mr Dzurak is working on is separate to what Silicon Quantum Computing Pty Limited (SQC) are working on, yes. However, given they are both part of CQC2T, I would presume the choice to use silicon in Mr Dzurak's quantum computer is taking advantage of the properties of silicon established by his colleague, and associate at UNSW, Michelle Simmons. It states on CQC2T's website: ANFF–NSW (which Mr Dzurak is a director of) is valued at more than $30 million and is
crucial to CQC2T’s silicon qubit programs. Most of the biggest players in quantum computing like Google, IBM and Alibaba are all working mainly on superconducting quantum computers. UNSW seems synonymous with silicon-based QC, I don't know of any other organisation doing it better. I would say the elimination of Si-29 is beneficial in
most, if not
all, silicon-based quantum computer processors? I know that Mr Dzurak's company uses silicon in the processor because the nature article (original source for the ABC article is titled:
'Operation of a silicon quantum processor unit cell above one kelvin'). I mean, it seems rationale to me that you would remove something that doesn't impact performance in a positive way. Although, that would be an interesting question to get an answer to.
In relation to the question:
does this use of ordinary CMOS technology at room temperature make any difference to what Silex are doing?
I think it's impossible to know theoretically, given every development in quantum computers is technically impacting Silex in some way, isn't it? The fact is this finding would be no different if it was released by Google, because Mr Dzurak's company is not part of SQC. The company are not going to give their IP to SQC in the same way SQC aren't going to give IP to any other company. This isn't a development for Silex, which I think is at the heart of what the question seeks to answer. It is also important to remember it is Silex's role to remove an isotope using their SILEX process not create a quantum computer, I believe these questions are best suited to SQC not anyone at Silex. To expect them to have an answer to these questions is somewhat harsh, I feel. It takes a PhD in quantum computing to even understand this stuff.
I hope I haven't come across like I don't want this question answered, I really do! I just don't think it's a question for anyone at Silex. If they can provide a detailed response, I would be pleasantly surprised. I presume it will be along the lines of: "Not that we are aware of, given Mr Dzurak's company is not an entity Silex has any association with". P.S. sorry for the long answer at this time of night
(20min delay)
