On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 4:23 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < [email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 8/8/2019 2:03 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 3:48 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On 8/8/2019 11:50 AM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 11:41 AM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 8/8/2019 1:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> >> Do you not see that there is only one intermediate state and the >>> >> superposition is an artifact of expressing the state relative to a >>> >> certain basis? >>> > >>> > If it was an artfifact, one photon would not been able to interfere >>> > with itself, and there would be no Bell’s violation. >>> >>> It's an artifact of expressing the photon as a superposition of two >>> bases |left slit> and |right slit> which are not orthogonal. There is >>> still only one state, one wave function. >>> >>> >> Any multitude of things can also also be viewed as a single collection of >> that multitude. >> >> A multitude of classical computational traces can be found in a quantum >> computation. You point out this multitude of computation traces can be >> viewed as one state of a larger space. Viewing it this way, however, >> doesn't eliminate the multitude of the classical computational traces. >> >> >> To call them classical traces implies that they are not coherent and >> cannot interfere; yet their interference is an essential factor in the >> computation. >> > > As I've said already, whether or not the coherence is exploited by the > quantum computer is algorithm-dependent. > > > If it doesn't exploit coherence, is it really doing quantum computation? > > That's a question for you I suppose. What is it that distinguishes a classical computation with a single (non-superposed) input on a quantum computer from a classical computation on a quantum computer? The only distinction as I see it is the quantum computer remains isolated from the environment. The quantum computer also has the capacity to operate on inputs in a superposition, representing a vast number of inputs, and the computation then becomes a superposition of a trace of many classical computations, and eventually a superposition of possible outputs, at least until measured. > > You agree there are the many states in Shor's algorithm before the Fourier > transform, right? > Then what happens to those many states if you skip the Fourier transform > (don't use the interference), you still would say there were many states, > do you not? > > > No, it's an isolated system going through coherent evolution. To say > there are many states is just to choose an arbitrary set of basis and > vectors and call each component a "state". There's only one state. > LOL it's like pulling teeth. What word should we use to refer to the "vast number" or the "them" of your previous e-mails? Let's agree on that word and just stick to it rather than go back and forth on terminology. Jason -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUgMV%3DcjNXYaZQ6dXm6cDUPFGB-rtyMv7kGDoxTrJeVMjw%40mail.gmail.com.
