Usamah Sedqi Al-Baik أسامة صدقي البيك

In my previous articles, I explored two related questions. The first was about entropy, information theory, and the fundamental limits of computers . Information may appear abstract, but computation ultimately happens in the physical world. Bits require physical states. Processing requires energy. And even our most sophisticated machines remain subject to the laws of physics. The second article took the question further: if computers have limits, does intelligence itself have limits? I argued that humanity has always extended its intelligence through tools—language, writing, mathematics, scientific instruments, computers, and now artificial intelligence. Yet seeing farther does not mean seeing everything. The Qur'an captures that intellectual humility beautifully: (وَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّنَ الْعِلْمِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا) "And you have not been given of knowledge except a little." — Qur'an 17:85 But there is another question behind both arti...

Can AI solve humanity’s hardest mathematical problems without quantum computers — and what happens to science if it can? In my previous reflections on quantum computing and artificial intelligence , I argued against a simple “AI versus quantum” narrative. I still believe that. Artificial intelligence and quantum computing are fundamentally different technologies with different strengths. AI is already extraordinarily capable at pattern recognition, language, reasoning, search, prediction and increasingly scientific discovery. Quantum computing offers something different: the ability to manipulate quantum states in ways that could eventually make certain simulations and mathematical operations tractable when they are prohibitively difficult for classical machines. My expectation was therefore a heterogeneous future: CPU + GPU + AI + QPU , with each type of processor handling the part of a problem for which it is best suited. IBM is already explicitly pur...