On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 at 6:16:33 PM UTC-5, Lawrence Crowell wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 at 5:29:21 PM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> But the path integral is both interpretation of quantum computing - >> https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0607151 (2006) - and algorithm for the >> Google quantum computer simulator - https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.10749 >> (2018). The Google quantum computer paper does not mention "many worlds". >> >> @philipthrift >> > > No it is not. I have worked a derivation of a path integral here before. > If I have to I will do it again. There is nothing in a path integral > outside of plain vanilla QM or QFT. Dowker and others start to assign > ontological meaning to paths and the rest and launch into interpretation. > > LC >
That's not what the two arXiv papers linked to above suggest. And as the first one points out, there is the version of QM based on *state vectors and the wave function*. But saying these exist (in an interpretation of quantum computing) is as "outlandish" as positing *paths or histories *as the basic ingredients. @philipthrift -- 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/4159a0ab-2bbb-41a2-ac1c-58e869f102ca%40googlegroups.com.
