irljf

3 ms·

1.
by irljf 10y ago
I strongly disagree. The IC and PCB analogy is not accurate. The equivalent would be saying that computer scientists should not need to learn about ion traps and SQUIDs, and I would agree with that. Quantum algorithms, on the other hand, ar
2.
by irljf 10y ago
But this is like arguing that computer scientists shouldn't take algorithms courses. Actually, it's not just like it, it -is- arguing that they shouldn't bother learning to understand certain types of algorithms. Without that
3.
by irljf 10y ago
Yes. Grover's algorithm searches a disordered database in time sublinear in the number of elements, and provides a quadratic speedup over any possible classical algorithm. There are similar results for finding collisions etc. There is
4.
by irljf 11y ago
Yes, this is true for any unitary operation on a different subsystem, and is known as the no-signalling principle. But this doesn't let you remove the second system: you are still stuck with a mixed state on the first system, not a pur
5.
by irljf 11y ago
I agree, but not all bugs are subtle. This seems to be the equivalent to someone having trouble with "hello world" because they forgot to include iostream.
6.
by irljf 11y ago
infparadox: This isn't about credentials, but da-bacon is the "Bacon" in Bacon-Shor codes. I think you are misunderstanding the situation or the math. You say "For example, consider a two subsystems entangled with each o
7.
by irljf 11y ago
Yes, Eq. 16 certainly does not follow from 15. They should have a mixed state of the system. You should recognize this, since it's the graph isomorphism approach everyone tries. infparadox: It's a subsystem, not a subspace. When y