Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by devodo 715 days ago
> (Pro-strong-AI)... This is basically a disbelief in the ability of physics to correctly describe what happens in the world — a well-established philosophical position. Are you giving up on physics?

This is a very strong argument. Certainly all the ingredients to replicate a mind must exist within our physical reality.

But does an algorithm running on a computer have access to all the physics required?

For example, there are known physical phenomena, such as quantum entanglement, that are not possible to emulate with classical physics. How do we know our brains are not exploiting these, and possibly even yet unknown, physical phenomena?

An algorithm running on a classical computer is executing in a very different environment than a brain that is directly part of physical reality.

2 comments

> there are known physical phenomena, such as quantum entanglement

QC researcher here, strictly speaking, this is false. Clifford circuits can be efficiently simulated classically and they exhibit entanglement. The bottom line is we're not entirely sure where the (purported) quantum speedups come from. It might have something to do with entanglement, but it's not enough by itself.

Re: about mermin's device, im not sure why you think it can not be simulated classically when all of the dynamics involved can be explained by 4x4 complex matrices.

Could you accurately simulate the device on a computer precisely following the rules of the challenge? So that means the devices are isolated and therefore no global state is allowed. The devices are not aware of each others state nor results. You are only allowed to use local state to simulate the entangled particle. You can use whatever local hidden variables you want as long as it doesn't break the global state rule.
> there are known physical phenomena, such as quantum entanglement, that are not possible to emulate with classical physics

This is wrong. You can even get a mod for Minecraft which implements quantum mechanics.

https://www.curseforge.com/minecraft/mc-mods/qcraft-reimagin...

More precisely: you can emulate quantum mechanics using a classical computer, but the best known algorithms to do so take exponential running time.
This is not true. For example, Mermin's device cannot be done using classical physics regardless of running time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mermin%27s_device
The first reference in the article you linked is titled "Computer simulation of Mermin's quantum device".
The paper is saying that attempting to simulate the device in code is a valuable lesson to students for precisely the reason that it cannot be done (correctly), thereby illustrating the limits of classical computation.

> In the current paper, we make use of the recently published work in quantum information theory by Candela to have students write code to simulate the operation of the device in that article. Analysis of the device has significant pedagogical value—a fact recognized by Feynman—and simulation of its operation provides students a unique window into quantum mechanics without prior knowledge of the theory.

Nowhere in the text you quoted (nor in the article body) it is said that simulation of this device can not be done. Had you read the paper you'd see that it _is_ about simulating this device. From the introduction: "After students are introduced to several projects in quantum computer simulation, they write code to simulate the operation of Mermin’s quantum device."

This is immaterial, however. It is a well known fact that BQP is in PSPACE and Clifford circuits (a subclass of quantum circuits) can not only be simulated classically, but done so efficiently. It is not controversial.