Hey, really appreciate the work you've done to help new people get up to speed. I've been following Q since about post #6, but I was lurking and never followed to /cbts (figured it was a board for fanboys). I kind of regret that now.
Anyway, your .pdf "What is The Grid" has been an excellent help thus far. It makes getting the program together pretty trivial; I'm sure the fun has just begun.
I'm no expert in Quantum computing–I was considering making it a focus, but from what I understood it was probably going to be another twenty years before the technology went mainstream, which would put me pretty close to retirement age (maybe I was wrong). I do know that most of the explanations out there seem to be overcomplicating things and making them mysterious, which is annoying. I think people tend to emphasize the weird truths just because they're fascinating, but don't necessarily represent the whole picture. For instance, pic related is a video I'd some time ago, which is interesting but does nothing to explain why the phenomenon happens:
https://hooktube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc
(I'd forgotten about his emblem)
So I think it starts with the idea that subatomic particles, particularly electrons, really don't occupy "orbits" as per the Bohr model; it's more like a "cloud" of possible positions. I know that there's a certain tradeoff when it comes to measuring these particles–there's an actual name for it, can't quite remember…but the idea is that you really can't gauge the exact position of a particle without affecting its position…so the more accurate your determination, the less accurate it is compared to where the particle would have been had you not tried. I think this is the paradox behind all of the mysterious "Schrodinger's Cat" explanations–the cat really isn't there until you look. I think the act of "looking" is what is known as "wave collapse."
I don't know how "wave collapse" is achieved—maybe it's just a matter of "observing" the electron, as in the pic-related experiment. So the way I think of it (and this may be completely wrong), is that it's kind of like trying to clap a really fast gnat or a particle of dust between your hands–if you're successful, you have no idea where it might end up on your palms, and if not, the act of even trying will have affected its trajectory.
The other thing I think I picked up about quantum computing is that the notation is very, very close to that used in multivariable calculus:
https://medium.com/qiskitters/how-to-program-a-quantum-computer-982a9329ed02
To me, the biggest takeaway is this: as programmers, we are used to dealing with bits (0 or 1)…but a qubit gives you a whole range of possibilities. How that is used in programming beyond dice rolls, I'm not sure…but again, I know almost nothing about it.