On 7/11/2021 5:08 AM, John Clark wrote:
Brent Meeker' via Everything List <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> /As I recall even Shor's algorithm has a probabilistic step so
that the answer is only correct with high probability, not
certainty. /
So your argument is that a Quantum Computer can't be intelligent
because it is capable of committing error.
That's not only not my argument it's not my opinion either. From where
to you pull these assumptions?
Well,.. a human brain is most certainly capable of committing error,
in fact it's very very good at doing exactly that, and yet it seems to
be capable of intelligent behavior, at least some of the time.
/> I don't think a "being" can have knowledge that can be quantum
erased. Such a "being" would have to be isolated from the
environment /
A quantum computer, or a computer of any sort for that matter, that is
totally isolated from the environment would be absolutely useless.
Both a quantum computer and a human brain must be isolated to some
degree, that's why we have a bone skull; admittedly for a Quantum
Computer the isolation must be more sophisticated and extensive so
that the only changes made from the outside come from deliberate
changes carefully made by keyboards and other precision input devices.
/> and have a relatively small number of degrees of freedom. /
That is nonsense, the entire advantage of Quantum Computers is that
they have vastly more degrees of freedom than a conventional computer.
To describe the state of a n bit conventional processor you'd need n
real numbers; but to describe the state of a n qubit Quantum Computer
you'd need 2^n complex numbers, and thanks to the Born rule you need 2
complex numbers to define a unique real number so that means a n qubit
Quantum Computer has 2*(2^n) -2 real degrees of freedom. The -2 is
there because you have to remove 2 to normalized phase and amplitude.
You seemed to have missed the conditional "...that can be quantum erased".
Brent
/> you're never going to find a being that behaves intelligently
based on information that can be quantum erased./
If that is true it would mean there's something in the fundamental
laws of physics that would preventthe construction of large scale
Quantum Computers, as we already know it's possible to make small
Quantum Computers because we've already done it. Quantum Computer
expert Scott Aaronsonhas said that if somebody could demonstrate that
that it's true they can't be made then for him personally it would be
even more exciting then if somebody actually made a large scale
Quantum Computer because he is a theoretician, and as the fundamental
laws of physics are currently understood a large scale quantum
computer is possible, so if it's proved it's not possible after all
then that could only mean new laws of fundamental physics have been
discovered. To insist they can't be made you must invoke new
hypothetical physics.
John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
qqnn
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv38svFM7XGsu%3DYCvH6TM0Lyrx8C6qryYZBcRYDJDfKQow%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv38svFM7XGsu%3DYCvH6TM0Lyrx8C6qryYZBcRYDJDfKQow%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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/40d9ee5e-8003-9e12-6aec-efc63f681a1a%40verizon.net.
