-1
\$\begingroup\$

Why is this question closed?

I think the question could be better worded, sure. But the gist is asking about what areas of EE might overlap with Quantum computing.

I don't see how answering to that will be opinion based, the research in EE that helps QC progress is useful, and should be talked about.

I don't see how opinion fits into a potential answer to this question.

Can anyone explain how's this so?

\$\endgroup\$
8
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I don't dislike or voted to close mentioned question. But if anything, I could see someone arguing that it might be off-topic. Possibly Physics:SE would be more willing to accept this question, as it tends to be a bit more academic in nature. \$\endgroup\$
    – Velvet
    Feb 1, 2023 at 7:44
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Hmm, I also didn't vote, but I think it might be opinion based. After all, the two answers basically make opposite points and both found proponents who upvoted them. So it appears that there can be no precise answer. \$\endgroup\$
    – tobalt
    Feb 1, 2023 at 7:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Velvel I could see that the OP (perhaps due to ignorance or whatever) seemed to imply that QC is now part of EE. However, in his question, he wonders whether EE has a role in making a practical Q.Computer. How's that off-topic? If I were a bachelor student I'd probably wonder the same. \$\endgroup\$
    – Designalog
    Feb 1, 2023 at 12:00
  • \$\begingroup\$ @tobalt your answer focuses mostly that quantum computers are not part of EE, and in your last paragraph you say that EE might be used at some level in the interface. My answer is the same, except that I focus mostly on the part that is relevant to EE. I don't see how we are contradicting each other. There are EE areas relevant to making a practical quantum computer. An opinion based question could've been "Is xxxx line of research in EE for quantum computers a dead-end? Is this approach to interfacing QC better than the other? Etc. \$\endgroup\$
    – Designalog
    Feb 1, 2023 at 12:04
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I didn't say I agree that it was off-topic. Just that I could see someone arguing so. The help center is a bit vague (which is probably a good thing). On the other hand, I don't think this question blatantly invites opinion-based answers. As such I wouldn't have closed it for that specific reason (if it was solely up to me). \$\endgroup\$
    – Velvet
    Feb 1, 2023 at 12:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Velvel well, then it'd be interesting to see the point of view of whoever voted to close it. So far all I've got is one downvote :) \$\endgroup\$
    – Designalog
    Feb 1, 2023 at 12:14
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ They both are and they both aren't, but you only find out which when you measure them. :-) \$\endgroup\$
    – Russell McMahon Mod
    Feb 2, 2023 at 4:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ Any answer will not survive the test of time. It might attract a good answer that is valid today but, by its very nature, progress will be made and invalidate any answer given. That's enough of a reason to close it IMHO. It is asking for opinions as well. What areas of EE overlap with quantum computing? <-- today's answer will be different to next year's best answer. Are there EE professors and/or researchers who are branching out into quantum computing and quantum information or related topics? <-- opinion based answers will prevail. \$\endgroup\$
    – Andy aka
    Feb 9, 2023 at 11:17

1 Answer 1

1
\$\begingroup\$

I agree that it isn't opinion-based, but part of it is off-topic.

On-topic: a question similar to "what areas of EE overlap with quantum computing?" This is for sure a question about electrical engineering.

Off-topic: a question similar to "is anyone doing research on topic x?" Which isn't a question about EE but a question about what on-going research programs that might exist across the world.

However, it is not uncommon that on-topic questions contain various derailing into off-topic matters. Like a schematic design review question (on-topic) also containing part recommendations (off-topic). Generally these can be edited into shape or we can just ignore the off-topic part of it, as long as most of the question is on-topic.

In this specific case I think it's on-topic enough for us to leave it alone. I've cast a re-open vote. However, big picture questions that are cross-disciplinary (Like EE, chemistry, physics all at once etc) might be more suitable for https://engineering.stackexchange.com. One could ask on their meta if they think questions like this are more suited there.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ Agreed. I'll modify the question title to better reflect its "on-topic"-ness in this site. \$\endgroup\$
    – Designalog
    Feb 3, 2023 at 10:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .