* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download ppt
Hydrogen atom wikipedia , lookup
Bohr–Einstein debates wikipedia , lookup
Measurement in quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization wikipedia , lookup
Wave function wikipedia , lookup
Ensemble interpretation wikipedia , lookup
Matter wave wikipedia , lookup
Bell's theorem wikipedia , lookup
Path integral formulation wikipedia , lookup
Scalar field theory wikipedia , lookup
Quantum teleportation wikipedia , lookup
Quantum group wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization group wikipedia , lookup
Quantum machine learning wikipedia , lookup
Quantum key distribution wikipedia , lookup
Theoretical and experimental justification for the Schrödinger equation wikipedia , lookup
Quantum computing wikipedia , lookup
Many-worlds interpretation wikipedia , lookup
Wave–particle duality wikipedia , lookup
Quantum entanglement wikipedia , lookup
Orchestrated objective reduction wikipedia , lookup
Symmetry in quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
History of quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
EPR paradox wikipedia , lookup
Quantum state wikipedia , lookup
Quantum electrodynamics wikipedia , lookup
Canonical quantization wikipedia , lookup
Copenhagen interpretation wikipedia , lookup
Probability amplitude wikipedia , lookup
011011010101001001010100010010110001001010100100100110010010 010010100100101100101010010011001001011011110110001011101011 What Do You Mean 101000101110010011000101100100101001001110010010011001001001 100111001010010100011010101001001010100100101010011001001001 “Simulating a Quantum Computation?” 010010100100101100101010010011001001011011110110101110101001 101000101110010011000101100100101001001110010010011001001001 100111001010001010101010101001001010010010110000010010011010 010010100100101100101010010011001001011011110101010101110101 101000101110010011000101100100101001001110010010011001001001 100111001010001010101001001010110110101011000101001001001110 010010100100101100101010010011001001011011110110000101110101 101000101110010011000101100100101001001110010010011001001001 100111001010001010101010100111101101101010100100110010010010 010010100100101100101010010011001001011011110110101011101011 101000101110010011000101100110110101000100100101100100100101 010010100100101100101010010011001001011011100101010111010111 101000101110010011000101100100101001001110010010011001001001 100111001010001010101010100111000101 01001001111100100100101 October 2002 100111001010001010101010100111001010100100100010010011101101 David Poulin IQC, University of Waterloo & Perimeter Institute A second example of what Chris called “a bad question”. In condensed matter physics, it is often quite useful to introduce the notion of “quasi-particles”. These are excitations which behave almost like free particles but have extra weird features. For example, the mass of the quasi-particle may depend on the direction of its motion: a mass tensor. Yet, people don’t organize meetings on the interpretation of quasi-particles! David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI It is clear at this time that quantum mechanics is not the final theory. In whatever turns out to be the final theory (string theory, quantum loop gravity, etc.), quantum mechanics will only be a good approximation. It is also possible that some of the weirdness disappears. But we are here having this meeting! David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI What Do You Mean “Simulating a Quantum Computation?” How is this simulation business related to foundation of QM? “A journey from ontic to epistemic ... with consequences” Does this have consequences on the way we think about simulation? David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI Outline QS QC CC What is known • Some QSs can be simulated efficiently on a QC. • “Simulating the dynamics” of some QS is as hard as factoring. • Entanglement is necessary for Q-computational speed-up with pure states. • Finding the ground state of a QS can be NP complete. • etc. David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI Stuff about QS we usually compute with CC “simulations” (at an exponential cost). • Ground state energy • Properties of the thermal/ground state (symmetries) • Propagators • Degeneracy of energy levels • Transport properties • Properties of spectral functions • Properties of cross section () • Partition function • etc. David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI The real thing should be at least as good as the simulated one! How much of the stuff on the previous slide can we measure from the QS itself... ... or a polynomial number of copies of it? Does there exist physical quantities extractable from poly copies of a QS which requires exponential CC? “The strongest argument indicating that the simulation of QS is a hard problem is Gauss’ failure at finding an efficient algorithm for factoring.” ---Gilles (maybe in a dream...) David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI “So I know that quantum mechanics seems to involve probability --- and I therefore want to talk about simulating probability.” ---Feynman There are two ways of addressing this problem: 1. Simulate the “wave packet dynamics” (x,t) like one would do with water waves. 1 12 . Simulating “the factual probabilities”. 2. Use a probabilistic CC which “reproduces some statistical properties of the system”. David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI “One method for classically simulating a quantum computation is to directly compute the state at each step from the sequence of unitary operations prescribed in the quantum algorithm.” --- Jozsa & Linden p-blockness: 1 2 k On at most p qubits p2 n Writing the wave function requires k2 2 complex p amplitudes. p2 Every step of the computation requires at most 24p complex multiplications... must figure out what constitute the new blocs. Entanglement is only related to simulatability through the way we chose to represent the wave function. David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI If we insist on computing an exponential amount of extra unphysical information (), the exponential overhead is inevitable. Slightly weaker notion of “simulating probabilities”: Reproduce the probabilities of a fixed final measurement. Inputs: I = {Gi} Outputs: O = {Hj} Gi QM Hj pij Reproduce pij for all choice of {Hj} “Unperformed experiments have no results” ---Peres David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI Simulate physics, not counterfactual experiments p-blockness p-blockability! F = {I, Q1 , Q2 , ..., QL , O} L is the circuit’s depth Qk = A (k) j a(jk) a(jk) p-block states If F form a family of consistent histories, then the measurements Qk can be carried out --- collapsing the state to a p-block state --- without changing the factual (physically meaningful) probabilities pij . David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI Probabilistic simulation If it is possible to simulate the “wave packet’s dynamics” or the “factual probabilities” it is possible to “statistically reproduce the behavior of the QS”. ... but it seams otherwise impossible! Are we being fair with CCs? Computation: Problems which require exponential resources are intractable. Physics: Properties which require exponential resources to be estimated are practically not measurable. David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI But Avogadro’s number is so large! It takes a while before the exponential kicks in. Ex. Molecule: N = 50 hydrogen-like 2-levels atoms. Sample: m = 1g. Number of states = 250 << Number of molecules = 1024/50 (7 orders of magnitude!) If N = 100, then m has to be > 1Tonne!!! Reproducing the statistics is not a fair requirement... ... what about some coarse grained version of it? Coarse graining leads to consistency... which leads to classical simulatability! David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI Beyond simulating! When asking a CC to simulate a QS, we should only ask about things we can actually measure on that system. Should we expect more from a QC? ... it’s not completely crazy. Ex. Is the ground state of this QS degenerated? David Poulin, IQC University of Waterloo & PI