Computational Power of Infinite Quantum Parallelism
Recent works have independently suggested that quantum mechanics might permit procedures that fundamentally transcend the power of Turing Machines as well as of ‘standard’ Quantum Computers. These approaches rely on and indicate that quantum mechanics seems to support some infinite variant of classical parallel computing.
We compare this new one with other attempts towards hypercomputation by separating (1) its %principal computing capabilities from (2) realizability issues. The first are shown to coincide with recursive enumerability; the second are considered in analogy to ‘existence’ in mathematical logic.
Key WordsHypercomputation quantum mechanics recursion theory infinite parallelism
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Adamyan, V. A., Calude, C. S., and Pavlov, B. S. (2004). Transcending the limits of Turing computability. T. Hida, K. Saito, S. Si, (ed), Quantum Information Complexity. Proceedings of Meijo Winter School 2003, World Scientific, Singapore,pp. 119–137. %!http://arXiv.org/quant-ph/ 0304128!Google Scholar
- Atallah, M. J. (ed.) (1999). Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.Google Scholar
- Berlekamp, E. R., Conway, J. H., and Guy, R. K. (2004). Winning Ways for Your Mathematical Plays, vol. 4, 2nd Edn., Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Beggs, E. J. and Tucker, J. V. (2004). Computations via Experiments with Kinematic Systems, Technical Report 5–2004, Department of Computer Science, University of Wales Swansea.Google Scholar
- Burgin, M. and Klinger, A. (eds.) (2004). Super-recursive algorithms and hypercomputation. vol. 317. In Theoretical Computer Science, Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
- Calude, C. S., Dinneen, M. J., and Svozil, K. (2001). Reflections on quantum computing. In Complexity, Vol. 6(1), Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- Calude, C. S., Dinneen, M. J., and Peper, F. (eds.) (2002). Unconventional Models of Computation, Vol. 2509. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
- Calude, C. S. and Pavlov, B. (2002). Coins, quantum measurements, and Turing's barrier. In Quantum Information Processing, Vol. 1, Plenum, New York, pp. 107–127.Google Scholar
- Copeland, J. (1997). The broad conception of computation. American Behavioural Scientist 40, 690–716.Google Scholar
- Du, D.-Z. and Ker-I Ko (2000). Theory of Computational Complexity, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- M. Fürer: “The tight deterministic time hierarchy”, % pp.8-16 in Proc. 14th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing % (1982).Google Scholar
- del, K. (1940). The Consistency of the Axiom of Choice and of the Generalized Continuum-Hypothesis With the Axioms of Set Theory, Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
- Gruska, J. (1999). Quantum Computing, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
- Hopcroft, J. E., Motwani, R., and Ullman, J. D. (2001). Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
- Ord, T. (2002). Hypercomputation: Computing more than the Turing machine, Honours Thesis, University of Melbourne, Melbourne; available from \verb!http://arXiv.org/math.LO/0209332.!Google Scholar
- Odifreddi, P. (1989). Classical Recursion Theory, North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
- Soare, R. I. (1987). Recursively Enumerable Sets and Degrees, Springer, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
- Yao, A. C.-C. (2003). Classical physics and the Church–Turing Thesis. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 50(1), 100–105. Google Scholar