Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

BQP PSPACE NP P PostBQP Quantum Complexity and Fundamental Physics Scott Aaronson MIT.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "BQP PSPACE NP P PostBQP Quantum Complexity and Fundamental Physics Scott Aaronson MIT."— Presentation transcript:

1 BQP PSPACE NP P PostBQP Quantum Complexity and Fundamental Physics Scott Aaronson MIT

2 RESOLVED: That the results of quantum complexity research can deepen our understanding of physics. That this represents an intellectual payoff from quantum computing, whether or not scalable QCs are ever built. A Personal Confession When proving theorems about QCMA/qpoly and QMA log (2), sometimes even I wonder whether its all just an irrelevant mathematical game…

3 A quantum computer is obviously just a souped-up analog computer: continuous voltages, continuous amplitudes, whats the difference? A quantum computer with 400 qubits would have ~2 400 classical bits, so it would violate a cosmological entropy bound My classical cellular automaton model can explain everything about quantum mechanics! (How to account for, e.g., Schors algorithm for factoring prime numbers is a detail left for specialists) Who cares if my theory requires Nature to solve the Traveling Salesman Problem in an instant? Nature solves hard problems all the timelike the Schrödinger equation! But then I meet distinguished physicists who say things like:

4 The biggest implication of QC for fundamental physics is obvious: Shors Trilemma 1. the Extended Church-Turing Thesisthe foundation of theoretical CS for decadesis wrong, 2. textbook quantum mechanics is wrong, or 3. theres a fast classical factoring algorithm. All three seem like crackpot speculations. At least one of them is true! Thats why YOU should care about quantum computing Because of Shors factoring algorithm, either

5 Eleven of my favorite quantum complexity theorems … and their relevance for physics PART I. BQP-Infused Quantum Foundations BQP P #P, BBBV lower bound, collision lower bound, limits of random access codes PART II. BQP-Encrusted Many-Body Physics QMA-completeness and the limits of adiabatic computing PART III. Quantum Gravity With a Side of BQP Black holes as mirrors, topological QFTs, computational power of nonlinearities, postselection, and CTCs Rest of the Talk

6 PART I. BQP-Infused Quantum Foundations BQP

7 Quantum Computing Is Not Analog The Fault-Tolerance Theorem Absurd precision in amplitudes is not necessary for scalable quantum computing is a linear equation, governing quantities (amplitudes) that are not directly observable This fact has many profound implications, such as… BQP EXP P #P

8 I.e., if you want more than the N Grover speedup for solving an NP-complete problem, then youll need to exploit problem structure [Bennett, Bernstein, Brassard, Vazirani 1997] QCs Dont Provide Exponential Speedups for Black-Box Search BBBV The BBBV No SuperSearch Principle can even be applied in physics (e.g., to lower-bound tunneling times) Is it a historical accident that quantum mechanics courses teach the Uncertainty Principle but not the No SuperSearch Principle?

9 Computational Power of Hidden Variables Measure 2 nd register Consider the problem of breaking a cryptographic hash function: given a black box that computes a 2-to-1 function f, find any x,y pair such that f(x)=f(y) Can also reduce graph isomorphism to this problem QCs can almost find collisions with just one query to f! Nevertheless, any quantum algorithm needs (N 1/3 ) queries to find a collision [A.-Shi 2002] Conclusion [A. 2005]: If, in a hidden-variable theory like Bohmian mechanics, your whole life trajectory flashed before you at the moment of your death, then you could solve problems that are presumably hard even for quantum computers (Probably not NP-complete problems though)

10 The Absent-Minded Advisor Problem Some consequences: Any n-qubit state can be PAC-learned using O(n) sample measurementsexponentially better than quantum state tomography [A. 2006] One can give a local Hamiltonian H on poly(n) qubits, such that any ground state of H can be used to simulate on all yes/no measurements with small circuits [A.-Drucker 2009] Can you give your graduate student a state | with poly(n) qubitssuch that by measuring | in an appropriate basis, the student can learn your answer to any yes-or-no question of size n? NO [Ambainis, Nayak, Ta-Shma, Vazirani 1999]

11 PART II. BQP-Encrusted Many-Body Physics BQP

12 QMA-completeness Just one of many things we learned from this theory: In general, finding the ground state of a 1D nearest-neighbor Hamiltonian is just as hard as finding the ground state of any physical Hamiltonian [Aharonov, Gottesman, Irani, Kempe 2007] One of the great achievements of quantum complexity theory, initiated by Kitaev

13 The Quantum Adiabatic Algorithm Why do these two energy levels almost kiss? An amazing quantum analogue of simulated annealing [Farhi, Goldstone, Gutmann et al. 2000] This algorithm seems to come tantalizingly close to solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time! But… Answer: Because otherwise wed be solving an NP-complete problem! [Van Dam, Mosca, Vazirani 2001; Reichardt 2004]

14 PART III. Quantum Gravity With a Side of BQP BQP

15 Black Holes as Mirrors Against many physicists intuition, information dropped into a black hole seems to come out as Hawking radiation almost immediatelyprovided you know the black holes state before the information went in [Hayden & Preskill 2007] Their argument uses explicit constructions of approximate unitary 2-designs

16 Topological Quantum Field Theories Freedman, Kitaev, Larsen, Wang 2003 Aharonov, Jones, Landau 2006 Witten 1980s TQFTs Jones Polynomial BQP

17 Beyond Quantum Computing? If QM were nonlinear, one could exploit that to solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time [Abrams & Lloyd 1998] Quantum computers with closed timelike curves (i.e. time travel) could solve PSPACE-complete problemsbut not more than that [A.-Watrous 2008] Quantum computers with postselected measurement outcomes could solve not only NP-complete problems, but even counting problems [A. 2005] R CTC R CR C 000 Answer I interpret these results as providing additional evidence that nonlinear QM, postselection, and closed timelike curves are physically impossible. Why? Because Im an optimist.

18 For Even More Interdisciplinary Excitement, Heres What You Should Look For A plausible complexity-theoretic story for how quantum computing could fail (see A. 2004) Intermediate models of computation between P and BQP (highly mixed states? restricted sets of gates?) Foil theories that lead to complexity classes slightly larger than BQP (only example I know of: hidden variables) A sane notion of quantum gravity polynomial-time (first step: a sane notion of time in quantum gravity?)

19 A bold (but true) hypothesis linking complexity and fundamental physics… GOLDBACH CONJECTURE: TRUE NEXT QUESTION There is no physical means to solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time. Encompasses NP P, NP BQP, NP LHC… Prediction: Someday, this hypothesis will be as canonical as no-superluminal-signalling or the Second Law

Download ppt "BQP PSPACE NP P PostBQP Quantum Complexity and Fundamental Physics Scott Aaronson MIT."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google