* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Quantum Complexity and Fundamental Physics
Theoretical and experimental justification for the Schrödinger equation wikipedia , lookup
Aharonov–Bohm effect wikipedia , lookup
Double-slit experiment wikipedia , lookup
Wave–particle duality wikipedia , lookup
Delayed choice quantum eraser wikipedia , lookup
Bohr–Einstein debates wikipedia , lookup
Quantum decoherence wikipedia , lookup
Basil Hiley wikipedia , lookup
Bell test experiments wikipedia , lookup
Particle in a box wikipedia , lookup
Density matrix wikipedia , lookup
Relativistic quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Probability amplitude wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization wikipedia , lookup
Measurement in quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Topological quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
Scalar field theory wikipedia , lookup
Coherent states wikipedia , lookup
Path integral formulation wikipedia , lookup
Quantum dot wikipedia , lookup
Quantum entanglement wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization group wikipedia , lookup
Quantum electrodynamics wikipedia , lookup
Hydrogen atom wikipedia , lookup
Quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
Copenhagen interpretation wikipedia , lookup
Bell's theorem wikipedia , lookup
Quantum fiction wikipedia , lookup
Many-worlds interpretation wikipedia , lookup
Symmetry in quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Orchestrated objective reduction wikipedia , lookup
Quantum teleportation wikipedia , lookup
EPR paradox wikipedia , lookup
Quantum group wikipedia , lookup
Quantum key distribution wikipedia , lookup
Interpretations of quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Quantum machine learning wikipedia , lookup
Quantum computing wikipedia , lookup
Quantum state wikipedia , lookup
History of quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
Quantum cognition wikipedia , lookup
Quantum Complexity and Fundamental Physics Scott Aaronson MIT RESOLVED: That the results of quantum complexity research can deepen our understanding of physics. That this represents an intellectual payoff from quantum computing, whether or not scalable QCs are ever built. A Personal Confession When proving theorems about QCMA/qpoly and QMAlog(2), sometimes even I wonder whether it’s all just an irrelevant mathematical game… But then I meet distinguished physicists who say things like: “A quantum computer is obviously just a souped-up analog computer: continuous voltages, continuous amplitudes, what’s the difference?” “A quantum computer with 400 qubits would have ~2400 classical bits, so it would violate a cosmological entropy bound” “My classical cellular automaton model can explain everything about quantum mechanics! (How to account for, e.g., Schor’s algorithm for factoring prime numbers is a detail left for specialists)” “Who cares if my theory requires Nature to solve the Traveling Salesman Problem in an instant? Nature solves hard problems all the time—like the Schrödinger equation!” The biggest implication of QC for fundamental physics is obvious: “Shor’s Trilemma” Because of Shor’s factoring algorithm, either 1. the Extended Church-Turing Thesis—the foundation of theoretical CS for decades—is wrong, That’s why YOU 2. textbookshould quantum mechanics is wrong, or care 3. there’sabout a fastquantum classical factoring algorithm. computing All three seem like crackpot speculations. At least one of them is true! Rest of the Talk Eleven of my favorite quantum complexity theorems … and their relevance for physics PART I. BQP-Infused Quantum Foundations BQP P#P, BBBV lower bound, collision lower bound, limits of random access codes PART II. BQP-Encrusted Many-Body Physics QMA-completeness and the limits of adiabatic computing PART III. Quantum Gravity With a Side of BQP Black holes as mirrors, topological QFTs, computational power of nonlinearities, postselection, and CTCs PART I. BQP-Infused Quantum Foundations BQP Quantum Computing Is Not Analog is a linear equation, governing d i H quantities (amplitudes) that are not directly observable dt This fact has many profound implications, such as… The Fault-Tolerance Theorem Absurd precision in amplitudes is not necessary for scalable quantum computing EXP P#P BQP QCs Don’t Provide Exponential Speedups for Black-Box Search I.e., if you want more than the N Grover speedup for solving an NP-complete problem, then you’ll The “BBBV Noproblem SuperSearch Principle” can even need to exploit structure be applied in physicsBrassard, (e.g., to lower-bound [Bennett, Bernstein, Vazirani 1997] tunneling times) Is it a historical accident that quantum mechanics courses teach the Uncertainty Principle but not the No SuperSearch Principle? Computational Power of Hidden Variables Consider the problem of breaking a cryptographic hash function: given a black box that computes a 2-to-1 function f, find any x,y pair such that f(x)=f(y) Can also reduce graph isomorphism to this problem QCs can “almost” find collisions with just one query to f! Conclusion [A. 2005]: N x mechanics, y 1 If, in a hidden-variable theory like Bohmian f x x f x nd your N whole life trajectoryMeasure flashed2before you2at the x 1 register moment of your death, then you could solve problems that are presumably hard even for quantum Nevertheless, any quantum algorithm needscomputers (N1/3) queries tonot find a collision [A.-Shi 2002] (Probably NP-complete problems though) The Absent-Minded Advisor Problem Can you give your graduate student a state | with poly(n) qubits—such that by measuring | in an appropriate basis, the student can learn your answer to any yes-or-no question of size n? NO [Ambainis, Nayak, Ta-Shma, Vazirani 1999] Some consequences: Any n-qubit state can be “PAC-learned” using O(n) sample measurements—exponentially better than quantum state tomography [A. 2006] One can give a local Hamiltonian H on poly(n) qubits, such that any ground state of H can be used to simulate on all yes/no measurements with small circuits [A.-Drucker 2009] PART II. BQP-Encrusted Many-Body Physics BQP QMA-completeness One of the great achievements of quantum complexity theory, initiated by Kitaev Just one of many things we learned from this theory: In general, finding the ground state of a 1D nearest-neighbor Hamiltonian is just as hard as finding the ground state of any physical Hamiltonian [Aharonov, Gottesman, Irani, Kempe 2007] The Quantum Adiabatic Algorithm An amazing quantum analogue of simulated annealing [Farhi, Goldstone, Gutmann et al. 2000] This algorithm seems to come tantalizingly close to solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time! But… Why do these two energy levels almost “kiss”? Answer: Because otherwise we’d be solving an NP-complete problem! [Van Dam, Mosca, Vazirani 2001; Reichardt 2004] PART III. Quantum Gravity With a Side of BQP BQP Black Holes as Mirrors Against many physicists’ intuition, information dropped into a black hole seems to come out as Hawking radiation almost immediately—provided you know the black hole’s state before the information went in [Hayden & Preskill 2007] Their argument uses explicit constructions of approximate unitary 2-designs Topological Quantum Field Theories TQFTs BQP Aharonov, Jones, Landau 2006 Jones Polynomial Beyond Quantum Computing? If QM were nonlinear, one could exploit that to solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time [Abrams & Lloyd 1998] I interpret these results as providing Quantum computers with postselected additional evidence that nonlinear QM, measurement outcomes could solve postselection, and closed timelike curves notphysically only NP-complete problems, but are impossible. even counting problems [A. 2005] Why? Because I’m an optimist. Answer C R CTC R CR 000 Quantum computers with closed timelike curves (i.e. time travel) could solve PSPACE-complete problems—but not more than that [A.-Watrous 2008] For Even More Interdisciplinary Excitement, Here’s What You Should Look For A plausible complexity-theoretic story for how quantum computing could fail (see A. 2004) Intermediate models of computation between P and BQP (highly mixed states? restricted sets of gates?) Foil theories that lead to complexity classes slightly larger than BQP (only example I know of: hidden variables) A sane notion of “quantum gravity polynomial-time” (first step: a sane notion of time in quantum gravity?) A bold (but true) hypothesis linking complexity and fundamental physics… There is no physical means to solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time. Encompasses NPP, NPBQP, NPLHC… Prediction: Someday, this hypothesis will be as canonical as no-superluminal-signalling or the Second Law GOLDBACH CONJECTURE: TRUE NEXT QUESTION