The Quantum Pontiff

Because Nature Isn’t Classical

Via the Computational Complexity (welcome back Lance), the list of accepted papers for CCC 2008 has been posted. Woot, that’s a lot of quantum inspired papers. By my count 7 of 33. Quoteth Feynman

…and I’m not happy with all the analyses that go with just the classical theory, because nature isn’t classical, dammit, and if you want to make a simulation of nature, you’d better make it quantum mechanical…


  1. #1 Joseph
    February 13, 2008

    Quoth Mattuck regarding progress in calculating things (exactly):
    “It might be noted here, for the benefit of those interested in exact solutions, that there is an alternative formulation of the many-body problem, i.e., how many bodies are required before we have a problem? G. E. Brown points out that this can be answered by a look at history. In eighteenth-century Newtonian mechanics, the three-body problem was insoluble. With the birth of general relativity around 190 and quantum electrodynamics in 1930, the two- and one-body problems became insoluble. And within modern quantum field theory, the problem of zero bidies (vacuum) is insoluble. So, if we are out after exact solutions, no bodies at all is already too many!”

  2. #2 classmate
    February 16, 2008

    If nobody know of what consist quanta it don’t means, that nature isn’t classical. And if you want to do simulation of nature you need nature itself, instead binary 0 dimension computer.

New comments have been disabled.