Its been a while since I studied Davies's arguments, but I remembered
thinking at the time that what Davies was proposing was in
contradiction with standard QM, hence amenable to experimental
falsification.

Cheers

On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 02:08:09PM -0500, Jesse Mazer wrote:
> 
> Tom Caylor wrote:
> 
> >
> >Saibal Mitra wrote:
> >
> >>http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/18/12/2/1
> >
> >Not that there aren't enough discussions going on already, I wanted to 
> >know what people think about Paul Davies' argument using Seth Lloyd's 
> >calculations, concluding that a quantum computer can never be built?  I 
> >suppose there are people here that believe that the multiverse makes the 
> >quantum computer possible regardless of what Davies says, but if so, why?
> >
> >Here's a post that sums up some of it and provides some links:
> >
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAS-Group/message/456
> 
> Some quick criticisms of Davies' argument can be found in the comments of 
> this blog entry by a physicist working on quantum computation:
> 
> http://dabacon.org/pontiff/?p=1142#comments
> 
> Jesse
> 

-- 
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics                                    0425 253119 (")
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         [EMAIL PROTECTED]             
Australia                                http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
            International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Attachment: pgpdRzYMDOslz.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to