Re: The Future of Chess and Getting It "Unstuck"

On May 7, 9:32=A0am, David Richerby <dav...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> zzbun...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 <zzbun...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >On Apr 18, 10:18=3DA0pm, John Bailey <john_bai...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote=
:
> >> In [Deutsch's] paper, the convenience of thinking that all
> >> computing can be reduced to an equivalentTuringmachine is
> >> considered and rejected.http://xyz.lanl.gov/abs/math.HO/9911150"As
> >> a matter of fact, Richard Feynman, in his talk during the First
> >> Conference on the Physics of Computation held at MIT in 1981,
> >> observed that it appears to be impossible to simulate a general
> >> quantum evolution on a classical probabilistic computer in an
> >> efficient way.
>
> > That is largely because the only thing Feynman knew about computers
> > or computations was main frame computers. =A0But since most of today's
> > computations depend on massively parellel networks, not mainframes,
> > his observation mostly concern 1950s Burroughs history, not
> > computers.
>
> No. =A0Combining two classical computers together makes a computer twice
> as big that can do (roughly) twice as much work in a given time.
> Connecting two quantum computers would make a computer twice as big
> that can do (roughly) the square of the amount of work in a given time.
>
> Networking classical computers together gives you at best linear
> growth; adding qubits to your quantum computer gives exponential
> growth.

   Networking classical computers gives you microcomputers,
laserdisks,
   satellites,, HDTV,  Holograms, fiber optics, robots, and a
paycheck,
   rather than idiots like computer scientists, that's why they were
invented.


>
> So, while parallel computation will let you efficiently simulate
> bigger quantum computers than Feynman might have imagined would be
> practical, the infeasibility of the general problem isn't impacted by
> advances in parallelization or networking of classical computers.
> And, if Moore's Law were to hold for quantum computers, too (doubling
> of the number of qubits in a system every N years), the power of
> quantum computers would run away so quickly that you'd never catch up.
>
> Dave.
>
> --
> David Richerby =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0
Fro=
zen Dictator (TM): it's like awww.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/=A0 =A0
=A0=
 =A0totalitarian leader but it's frozen
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0
=
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0in a block of ice!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -