On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 3:18 PM Brent Meeker <meekerbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>ME: Any calculation involving quantum mechanics could be done billions or >> trillions of times faster on a quantum computer. It's easy to calculate the >> light spectrum of hydrogen, the simplest element, but doing the same thing >> for helium the second simplest , requires months of calculations on the >> largest supercomputer on earth, and the sun will turn into a red giant >> before such a computer could calculate the spectrum of one of the heavier >> elements. And trying to figure out what spectrum molecules will produce is >> even more difficult. > > > > *Yes, some things are faster to measure than to calculate. And I note > that recently a classical algorithm was found for folding of proteins > (which was formerly touted as THE application for quantum computation): * > True. We have quantum algorithms that can solve problems much faster than any known classical algorithm, however nobody has been able to prove that there is not a classical algorithm that can solve any problem just as fast as the quantum variety that we just haven't found yet. The reason we haven't been able to prove that is because nobody has been able to prove that P≠ NP even though nearly every mathematician alive believes that nondeterministic polynomial problems (problems that are hard to calculate but easy to check) can *NOT* be solved in polynomial time (problems with N elements in which the time required to solve increases as N gets larger as X^N, not N^X). The P=NP question is perhaps the greatest unsolved problem in all of mathematics; if despite everybody's expectations it turns out that P really is equal to NP and if the algorithm could be found then it's true, you wouldn't need quantum computers, the conventional variety would work just as well. I could be wrong but I don't expect that to happen. John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> yum w3x > > > > >> >> Brent >> >> On 5/13/2023 2:58 PM, John Clark wrote: >> >> On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 5:14 PM Lawrence Crowell < >> goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> *> Curious, for a part of my discussions with GPT-4 involve the >>> relationship between anyons and a lattice form of supersymmetry. >>> Nonabelions can then act as a sort of supersymmetric protection of quantum >>> states.* >> >> >> If this can be made practical then this new development will be a very >> big deal, in fact about as big a deal as deals get. And as far as I can >> tell there are no scientific roadblocks, just engineering difficulties. >> They're virtual 2D Nonabelions not real ones but as far as making a >> topological quantum computer is concerned that distinction is not very >> important. >> John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis >> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> >> naa >> >> >>> >>> On Wednesday, May 10, 2023 at 1:58:03 PM UTC-5 John Clark wrote: >>> >>>> As if all the news about GPT-4 were not enough, this is an article >>>> from the journal Nature that that went online yesterday: >>>> >>>> Physicists create virtual nonabelions for fault-tolerant quantum >>>> computers >>>> <https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01574-0?utm_source=Nature+Briefing&utm_campaign=c182f988e0-briefing-dy-20230510&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c9dfd39373-c182f988e0-44221073> >>>> >>>> It's about a preprint that just went online; they claim "*unambiguous >>>> realization of non-Abelian topological order and demonstrate control over >>>> them*". Technically they're virtual Anyons not real ones, but from the >>>> perspective of an engineer trying to make a Fault Tolerant Quantum Computer >>>> the difference between real and virtual is not important: >>>> >>>> Creation of Non-Abelian Topological Order and Anyons on a Trapped-Ion >>>> Processor <https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.03766> >>>> >>>> >>>> > -- 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/CAJPayv0PMM1CxaZ2KyW5F7jkXP6v_35bgPLyvqc1GiC-L%2B7iVw%40mail.gmail.com.
