Hacker News Reader

Comment by smaddox | Hacker News Reader

The article is a high-level summary of the past year and a half of work. If you want to see the derivations, you have to read the research papers, which are available from the website: https://www.wolframphysics.org/

In particular, the three documents linked at the top of https://www.wolframphysics.org/technical-documents/

View on HN

Need a read to what real physicist thinks on it, especially the second and third paper. I am not smart enough to understand most of it, honestly.

I'm certainly not claiming to be a "real physicist", whatever that is, but I'm involved in the project (I actually named and continue to work on the "token-event graphs" that Max Piskunov developed for his local multi-way systems), and I don't think the project has convincingly shown yet how the basic ingredients of Hilbert spaces, complex amplitudes, operator algebras, density matrices, etc. are supposed to work. Which to me is an extremely important first step. I think we'll fix that, though.

I think his stuff must be in conflict with standard quantum mechanics, since his systems can be simulated with a polynomial number of steps per "generation". That means quantum computers won't work, since they can implement algorithms that are believed to have super-polynomial complexity on classical computers. Granted, quantum computers are a rather extreme prediction of QM and we don't really know whether they can work, so the discrepancy is ok if he can still explain things like the double slit experiment. It's ok to say standard QM is non-physical at the level of quantum computers. I didn't notice if he comes out and says so though.

Each possible update path can be stimulated in linear time (or is it polynomial? It depends how you measure the cost of searching for a location to apply the update rules, and weather the update rules are fixed), but stimulating the full multiway system has unbounded complexity in the general case.

The reason they suspect that quantum computers will not provide an inherent speedup has to do with the cost of "completion", i.e. measurement, which is explicit and finite in these models.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com