Quick Navigation

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing

Entangled states considered as physical representations of classical algorithms

arXiv
Authors: Saibal Mitra

Year

2010

Paper ID

11157

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

110

Citations

N/A

Abstract

There are good reasons to believe that we are classical algorithms run on (effectively) classical machines. However, the fact that a physical state of a system in a universe described by a classical deterministic model doesn't contain any information about the model's evolution laws, gives rise to deep philosophical paradoxes with this picture of what we are. We explain these paradoxes in detail and show that they can be resolved once we take into account that in the real world, classical behavior arises as a result of decoherence. We then show that this solution naturally leads to a variant of the idea of a mathematical multiverse, originally proposed by Tegmark.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2010 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • There are good reasons to believe that we are classical algorithms run on (effectively) classical machines.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #11157 #69039 SAT, MaxSAT, and SMT for QLDPC ... #69038 Physically Constrained Ensemble... #69023 Scalable Quantum Algorithms for... #69016 Solution of the Equation-of-Mot...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.