= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
shminux comments on Who thinks quantum computing will be necessary for AI? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (101)
I suppose we ought to define what "classical" and "quantum" means.
It's a quantum effect, but it's one that's easily taken advantage of, as opposed to the crazy difficult stuff a quantum computer can do. As such, a computer that can do that can be considered classical.
For that matter, transistors work by exploiting quantum effects. We still don't call them quantum computers.
Thanks for the first paragraph. I came here to clarify this, but you beat me to it.
More clearly: a quantum noise generator can have a design such that someone who only understands classical mechanics will understand based on that design that it is a noise generator. They just won't catch the detail that this noise has an additional property.
The above statement may depend on the implementation, but I meant in principle, so there it is.
Someone who only understands classical mechanics will not understand a noise generator. Classical physics is deterministic, so noise generators are impossible.
Only if you're omniscient. A noise generator is a way of controllably injecting your ignorance of some system into a particular channel.