2
$\begingroup$

I just noticed that there is not "quantum-technologies" tag on physics.SE. There are various related tags such as quantum-computing, but many other realizations of quantum technologies also do not have a tag for themselves.

Quantum technologies are currently being realized all over the world and by far not limited to quantum computing, including for example quantum communication and quantum sensing (both do not have tags for themselves). Developing quantum technologies is one of the big frontiers of current physics research and also receiving much attention in the media.

Should there be a quantum technologies tag?

I am unsure what it would imply to introduce such a broad tag. For example, many existing questions may have to be retagged.

$\endgroup$
9
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Would not a 'technology' fall under the 'engineering' question exclusion? $\endgroup$ – Jon Custer May 5 '20 at 13:35
  • $\begingroup$ I'm still trying to figure out how PSE should handle engineering questions, but to me "Developing quantum technologies" seems more like engineering. (Note that I'm not saying it doesn't involve physics). $\endgroup$ – BioPhysicist May 5 '20 at 13:38
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Such a tag should be created if (i) there is an existing corpus of questions that are strongly identifiable to that tag, and (ii) those questions would be easier to organize or bring to the surface using that tag. I'm unsure about (ii), but it can be discussed later -- once a representative set of questions from the corpus in (i) has been identified. (hint, hint.) $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty May 5 '20 at 13:42
  • $\begingroup$ @JonCuster Looking at the currentt research on quantum technologies, it seems very much like physics for the most part with a tiny bit of engineering. $\endgroup$ – Wolpertinger May 5 '20 at 14:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Wolpertinger - perhaps, but wouldn't quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com really be the place for many of the questions? $\endgroup$ – Jon Custer May 5 '20 at 14:13
  • $\begingroup$ @JonCuster perhaps. I doubt they care about, for example, quantum sensing over there though $\endgroup$ – Wolpertinger May 5 '20 at 14:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Wolpertinger I'd say if you can identify, say, 20 questions which would profit from that tag (i.e. where "quantum-computer" is not enough) then this might be a good idea. But it should not just replace "quantum-computer". Off the spot, I would think about questions which are either about building quantum computers, or building other quantum information devices - metrology, communication, and so forth. I have the feeling that there are questions like that occasionally, but I'm not sure there are that many. $\endgroup$ – Norbert Schuch May 6 '20 at 14:31
  • $\begingroup$ (The way I would see such a tag is that it should specialize quantum-computer or quantum-information -- essentially as an additional tag -- pointing out that these are questions about realizations, as opposed to general questions about teleportation, circuits, cryptography, ... ) $\endgroup$ – Norbert Schuch May 6 '20 at 14:33
  • $\begingroup$ As a quick check, I checked the first 50 questions tagged with [quantum-information] and [quantum-computer], respectively. In the former, there was at most 1 about technologies, in the latter maybe 4 or so ... given that there are 650 questions on [quantum-computer], it might make sense to additionally tag those related to realizations/technology. $\endgroup$ – Norbert Schuch May 6 '20 at 14:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .