[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GUT and NP

To: [email protected] (James A. Donald)
Subject: Re: GUT and NP
From: [email protected] (James A. Donald)
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 1994 16:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: [email protected]
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "James A. Donald" at Jul 27, 94 03:57:06 pm
Sender: [email protected]

Ray Cromwell writes
 >   And regardless of whether quantum computers work or not, they are
 > still algorithmic if they can be simulated (however slowly) by
 > a turing machine. It's a rigorous mathematical definition.

I think this is a misquote of the definition.

If a turing machine can *perform* it, then it is an algorithm.

Since a turing machine certainly cannot perform quantum
"algorithms", then by definition they are not algorithms.

-- 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
We have the right to defend ourselves and our
property, because of the kind of animals that we              James A. Donald
are.  True law derives from this right, not from
the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state.                [email protected]

Follow-Ups:
- Re: GUT and NP
  - From: "Perry E. Metzger" <[email protected]>

References:
- Re: GUT and NP
  - From: [email protected] (James A. Donald)

Prev by Date: Re: GUT and NP
Next by Date: Government-Controlled Trust Hierarchies
Prev by thread: Re: GUT and NP
Next by thread: Re: GUT and NP
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread