Talk:U-bit

Article title

Just to note, I created this article as "U-bit" for two reasons:

That is the form used in the New Scientist article referenced.
It helps to disambiguate this article with UBIT which is a redirect to an article on taxation.

Hope I have done the right thing. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work writing this interesting article.

This may be off-topic, but complex numbers can be reproduced using real numbers in Clifford algebra. Does anything in this article have anything to do with e.g. David Hestenes's work on QM using geometric algebra, algebra of physical space, spacetime algebra etc. to provide geometric interpretations of the factors of i appearing in the Schrödinger equation, Dirac equation, etc (see for example [1])? M∧Ŝc²ħε И_τlk 16:52, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment. Your question is way over my head I am afraid, I would love to know the answer too. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 17:30, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From the linked arxiv paper, it seems that these are also called Universal bits or Universal quantum bits. Maybe that is a better, more formal title? In either case it should be in the article, preferably in the lead. 0x0077BE [^talk/_contrib] 17:09, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]