Thinking On Paper Quantum vs Classical Computing: Why Intuition Fails | Joe Fitzsimons
Quantum computing doesn't make computers faster. It changes what's computable.
Joe Fitzsimons, CEO of Horizon Quantum, explains why quantum progress is so hard to grasp: it's exponential in a way that breaks everyday intuition.
Here's the math that matters:
Each additional qubit doubles the difficulty of simulating the system on classical computers. Meanwhile, quantum processors are scaling faster than Moore's Law as the industry accelerates.
Put those together: exponential difficulty meets exponential growth. The result is capability that quickly surpasses what any classical computer—or human intuition—can comprehend.Why this matters:
Early computers didn't just speed up arithmetic. They unlocked tasks you could never complete by hand: weather prediction, aircraft design, nuclear simulation. Things that were mathematically possible but practically impossible.
Quantum computing does the same—except the tasks are even more fundamental:
- Drug discovery: simulating molecular interactions at quantum level- Cryptography: breaking encryption that protects the internet- Materials science: designing room-temperature superconductors- Optimization: solving logistics problems with trillions of variables- AI: training models that classical computers can't handleJoe's point: we're not making computers a bit better. We're unlocking a category of problems that were previously unsolvable—not just hard, but impossible with any amount of classical computing power.The comparison that clicks:Before computers, you could theoretically calculate pi to a million digits by hand—it would just take lifetimes. But some quantum problems aren't like that. They're not "hard with classical computers"—they're impossible, full stop. Like asking a typewriter to stream video.This short episode breaks down why quantum isn't incremental improvement. It's categorical change.
If you've been following quantum computing skeptically (wondering when it'll actually matter), this episode shows you why the inflection point is closer than you think.
--
Other ways to connect with us:
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on X
Follow Mark on LinkedIn
Follow Jeremy on LinkedIn
Read our Substack
Email: hello@thinkingonpaper.xyz