The Underscore Archives

Ah, the perfect link, as it leads on to this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem

I was never going to remember the name of this, although it's pretty
obvious but I was reading about it last year. I did once follow it
through. The trouble as I see it is that although your QC can work one
or perhaps many operations at orders of magnitude greater speeds (in
theory, although in practice it's mostly the other way round) than
current transistor based approaches computing tasks still will still
need to be broken down into chunks and those chunks can not output
data infinitely fast to the next chunks. Therefore we'll just have a
different set of numbers for our timing systems. Although they should
be considerably smaller and we should be getting a lot more done (but
not really infinite amounts) in much smaller times.

I'm sure there are ideas to approach it all differently and I'd hope
I'm still here to see something useful done with it. Though I think
the hype is going to prove to have been a bit like those rocket cars
and that damn tidying up robot that I was expecting to be able to buy
did.

        Steve

On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 01:38:08AM +0000, Christian Wach wrote:
> On 26 Jan 2007, at 00:16, Steve Roome wrote:
> 
> > Nearly, maybe, but instantaneous seems a little like you'd have to
> > throw relativity out of the window and I don't remember reading that
> > being the case.
> 
> Bell's Theorem, Steve.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_Theorem
> 
> Happy reading!
> 
> -- 
> underscore_ list info/archive -> http://www.under-score.org.uk