On Wed, Jul 7, 2021, 12:14 AM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < [email protected]> wrote:
> > On 7/6/2021 6:50 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 6, 2021, 9:39 PM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 11:29 AM Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2021, 4:07 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On 7/6/2021 10:34 AM, Jason Resch wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 12:27 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> And you're never going to find a being that behaves intelligently >>>>> based on information that can be quantum erased. >>>>> >>>> You need only a quantum computer with enough qubits. >>>> >>>> Can you prove that? How does this quantum intelligence ever arrive at >>>> a definite decision? >>>> >>> >>> Prove? No. But I think I can justify it: >>> >>> 1. Quantum computers are Turing equivalent, they can compute anything a >>> classical computer can. >>> >>> 2. Human brains are believed to operate according to physical laws, all >>> known of which are computable. >>> >>> 3. Humans are conscious. >>> >>> 4. By any of: Chalmers's principle of "Organizational invariance", or >>> "multiple realizability", or the "Generalized Anti-Zombie Principle", or >>> the "computational theory of mind", a functionally equivalent computation >>> to that of a conscious human brain will be equivalently conscious to that >>> brain. >>> >>> 5. Quantum computers are reversible. >>> >>> By 1 & 2, a quantum computer can simulate a human brain. By 3 & 4, such >>> an emulation will be conscious. By 5 any computation performed by a quantum >>> computer can be quantum erased by reversing the circuit back to its >>> starting state. >>> >>> It reaches a definite decision by virtue of completing its processing >>> before ultimately being reversed. This prevents an outside observer from >>> learning the decision, but it's made nonetheless during the course of the >>> processing. >>> >> >> How do you know that it has reached a definite decision? Without having >> it print out some irreversible record? If it prints out a >> (pseudo-)classical record, the initial state is not recoverable. >> >> Bruce >> > > By either: > > 1. Analyzing the circuit > > But the question is whether such a circuit is possible. > Do you disagree with any of the five premises I defined above? If not do you see a flaw in my reasoning or conclusions? If not, then why shouldn't such a circuit be possible? 2. Having the circuit do something useful and verifiable (as in my > factoring example) > > How would you know that had a causal connection to the quantum erasable > knowledge? > This is why I had the information pass through the "AI function" before being used in Shor's algorithm. That way there was a causal connection with the result that would be communicated to the outside world. 3. Having the circuit output that it did observe a definite value but > without reporting which value it observed (as in Deutsch's original example) > > Again, how do you know such a circuit is possible? Most quantum > computations only produce probable answers in a decohered readout. > Ignoring the AI aspect this is a simple and non probabilistic circuit: 1. Initialize qubit A to 0 2. Initialize qubit B to 0 3. Put qubit A into superposition of (0 and 1) via Hadamard gate 4. Apply Controlled NOT gate to (A, B) using A as the control bit to read/copy the bit value of A to the state of B. (B now has a definite value of 1 OR it has a definite value of 0) 5. Apply Pauli-X (NOT gate) to (B) to flip the bit value of B (it is now opposite of A). 6. Apply Controlled NOT gate to (A, B), to have the effect of computing (A XOR B) and storing the result in B. If A was measured in step 4 as 0, B will now be 1. Otherwise, if A was measured in step 4 to be 1, B will now be 1. We now have evidence in qubit B that A was measured to be a 1 or a 0, but no longer have the which way information in B. 8. Invert the Hadamard gate applied to A to restore it to 0. 9. Read the qubits, while initialized to A = 0, B = 0, you will now find A = 0, B = 1. 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%2BBCJUhec5%2B-KkFzSaSkho-KW_L0tm3M-OEo8ZA1gBTg_cy5ZA%40mail.gmail.com.
