Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Simulation
Probabilistic cellular automata for interacting fermionic quantum field theories
arXiv
Authors: C. Wetterich
Year
2020
Paper ID
22277
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
116
Citations
N/A
Abstract
A classical local cellular automaton can describe an interacting quantum field theory for fermions. We construct a simple classical automaton for a particular version of the Thirring model with imaginary coupling. This interacting fermionic quantum field theory obeys a unitary time evolution and shows all properties of quantum mechanics. Classical cellular automata with probabilistic initial conditions admit a description in the formalism of quantum mechanics. Our model exhibits interesting features as spontaneous symmetry breaking or solitons. The same model can be formulated as a generalized Ising model. This euclidean lattice model can be investigated by standard techniques of statistical physics as Monte Carlo simulations. Our model is an example how quantum mechanics emerges from classical statistics.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- A classical local cellular automaton can describe an interacting quantum field theory for fermions.
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
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
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.