> On 30 Jul 2018, at 07:10, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 7/29/2018 8:11 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 6:44 PM, <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >> On Sunday, July 29, 2018 at 11:23:49 PM UTC, [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> On Sunday, July 29, 2018 at 10:31:05 PM UTC, Jason wrote: >> Quantum computers represent a disproof of the conjecture that the wave >> function is merely a convenience or tool for estimating probabilities of >> experimental outcomes, rather than something that is real. The reason: it >> does things we cannot. >> >> Jason >> >> Can you be specific? Why does quantum computing depend on both states of a >> qubit(?) be occupied simultaneously? Can the system toggle between those >> states, yet not be in both simultaneously? Couldn't quantum computing work, >> or say be conceptualized with his model? TIA, AG >> >> IOW, is the model of superposition you use in quantum computing a necessary >> condition for its success, or could you use the information-only model of >> the superposition and get the same result. AG >> >> >> >> >> In order to explain the final result of the computation appearing in the >> measured qubits, each of the intermediate states must have existed and >> interacted, all the while remaining in a super position (completely isolated >> from the environment that contains the quantum computer) for the duration of >> the computation. The computation might have been a very long one, and may >> have involved vast numbers of states simultaneously held by the qubits >> during the computation. Each of these states is designed by the quantum >> computation to interfere in such a way to that in most of the branches the >> measured qubits will yield the same result. >> >> We know we can prepare a quantum computation. We know we can measure the >> qubits afterwards to get the final answer. >> The big question of "what is going on in the middle?" can only be answered >> by resorting to asking what the theory can tell us of what the wave function >> is doing to perform and implement the computation while we are not measuring >> it. >> >> If one denies the existence of the wave function however, it leaves no room >> for talking about these intermediate states that are necessary to explain >> how the final result of the computation ends up in the qubits. > > And all those qubits exist in the same world since they have to interfere in > order to amplify the probability of the result and suppress others.
If they interfere it means those qubits exist in the same wave or multiverse. In a sense, the universal wave described all the internal relative states, and that gives rise to diverging quasi-classical histories. The word “world” was ambiguous in your phrasing. Bruno > > Brent > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
