On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 9:47 AM smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl> wrote: > On 05-04-2022 01:24, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > > I have seen attempts at such accounts. The trouble is that Aspect's > > experiments were not performed in a quantum computer! It is Aspect's > > experiments that are to be explained. > > > > It would be more interesting if you could give such an account for a > > classical computer. What is it that is significant about the QC? It is > > generally understood that a quantum computer might give a speed-up on > > some tasks, but it cannot actually do anything that a classical > > computer could not do, given sufficient time. > > > > The interesting question is why quantum computer accounts do not > > correspond to laboratory experience. I think it has something to do > > with the formation of permanent records. But you might have a better > > account. > > There is a theorem that says that systems that can create entanglement > while complying with locality must be non-classical: > > https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.08994 > > So, this is a settled issue. >
I agree. Entanglement is a distinctively quantum phenomenon and cannot be simulated classically. But that does not mean that using a quantum computer will necessarily enable you to simulate a Bell experiment. The quantum computer operates essentially by classical logic. So unless you somehow generate a quantum entanglement (outside of the necessary entanglement for the operation of the computer's qubits), you are not going to be able to simulate a Bell entangled state, even on a quantum computer. Bruce -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLTUgmpuyf0urhnXAxTWdvgPUJh%3DZ2vLHwhN8yX9SuA6NA%40mail.gmail.com.
