Re: Does God play dice?
Its been a while since I studied Davies's arguments, but I remembered
thinking at the time that what Davies was proposing was in
contradiction with standard QM, hence amenable to experimental
falsification.
Cheers
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 02:08:09PM -0500, Jesse Mazer wrote:
>
> Tom Caylor wrote:
>
> >
> >Saibal Mitra wrote:
> >
> >>http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/18/12/2/1
> >
> >Not that there aren't enough discussions going on already, I wanted to
> >know what people think about Paul Davies' argument using Seth Lloyd's
> >calculations, concluding that a quantum computer can never be built? I
> >suppose there are people here that believe that the multiverse makes the
> >quantum computer possible regardless of what Davies says, but if so, why?
> >
> >Here's a post that sums up some of it and provides some links:
> >
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAS-Group/message/456
>
> Some quick criticisms of Davies' argument can be found in the comments of
> this blog entry by a physicist working on quantum computation:
>
> http://dabacon.org/pontiff/?p=1142#comments
>
> Jesse
>
--
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.
A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics0425 253119 (")
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Australiahttp://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
pgpdRzYMDOslz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
RE: Does God play dice?
Tom Caylor wrote: Saibal Mitra wrote: http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/18/12/2/1 Not that there aren't enough discussions going on already, I wanted to know what people think about Paul Davies' argument using Seth Lloyd's calculations, concluding that a quantum computer can never be built? I suppose there are people here that believe that the multiverse makes the quantum computer possible regardless of what Davies says, but if so, why? Here's a post that sums up some of it and provides some links: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAS-Group/message/456 Some quick criticisms of Davies' argument can be found in the comments of this blog entry by a physicist working on quantum computation: http://dabacon.org/pontiff/?p=1142#comments Jesse
Does God play dice?
Saibal Mitra wrote: http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/18/12/2/1 Not that there aren't enough discussions going on already, I wanted to know what people think about Paul Davies' argument using Seth Lloyd's calculations, concluding that a quantum computer can never be built? I suppose there are people here that believe that the multiverse makes the quantum computer possible regardless of what Davies says, but if so, why? Here's a post that sums up some of it and provides some links: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAS-Group/message/456 By the way, the belief vs. knowledge and G/G* gap and naming issue is very interesting to me, but I am still in the process of thinking about it some more... Tom Caylor
RE: Does God play dice?
Or, perhaps we are indeed living in a Bostromian simulation. QM is used at the microscopic scale of the simulation, and for computational economy GR is used for macroscopic modelling (stars and planets and satellites and Buicks). While both are true descriptions of reality (in that the simulation does actually utilize them as in model), they are in actuality incompatible. There *is* no unified theory, and we will never develop a successful theory of quantum gravity because there isn't one; the microscopic and macroscopic run on different rules. Jonathan Colvin Saibal Mitra wrote: >http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/18/12/2/1
Does God play dice?
http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/18/12/2/1
