| Interesting clarification Aaronson makes here: Will Says:
Comment #9 December 2nd, 2022 at 7:26 pm
Hi Scott, I think I must be missing something in your argument. If “A foofs B” has a dual description “C blebs D”, and we establish that A does indeed foof B, would you agree that it is equally true to say that C blebs D? If so, wouldn’t it be correct to say that this experiment has created a wormhole? It’s not a wormhole in our regular universe’s spacetime, but perhaps it’s a wormhole in some… where (? not exactly clear on this). And from this, perhaps it follows why an equally-precise simulation on the classical computer wouldn’t create a wormhole in the same way? (This part seems dubious to me–I want to say that A foofing B is different from a simulation of A foofing B–after all, no matter how well you simulate a hurricane, nobody gets wet. But I’m wondering if this instinct is in conflict with my early claim that “A foofs B” is equally true as “C blebs D”. Hmm.. now that I think about it, maybe this is actually what you meant by “bring a wormhole into actual physical existence every time you sketch one with pen and paper.”) Scott Says:
Comment #21 December 3rd, 2022 at 9:12 am
Will #9: > Hmm.. now that I think about it, maybe this is actually what you meant by “bring a wormhole into actual physical existence every time you sketch one with pen and paper.” Yup! So Aaronson's position seems like, even if a system is "real", it doesn't mean its holographic dual is "real". I get that it's in his interest to steer QC as far away from this voodoo AdS/CFT stuff as possible, but his statement feels weird somehow. I agree it always makes sense to shut up and calculate, but as a lay person the holography stuff seems more significant than a classical simulation or a philosophical thought experiment, in that there are certain objects like black holes where the promising way to look at them is from the holographic viewpoint. |
>[Scott #119] Where I agree with you is this: I think that, for the vast majority of entangled states one cares about in physics, a dual description in terms of wormholes simply isn’t useful, even in those cases where it meaningfully exists (which is far from all of them).
Seems like at a high level this is indeed his position iiuc.