Advertisement

Foundations of Physics

, Volume 48, Issue 3, pp 333–354 | Cite as

Completing the Physical Representation of Quantum Algorithms Provides a Quantitative Explanation of Their Computational Speedup

  • Giuseppe Castagnoli
Article
  • 73 Downloads

Abstract

The usual representation of quantum algorithms, limited to the process of solving the problem, is physically incomplete. We complete it in three steps: (i) extending the representation to the process of setting the problem, (ii) relativizing the extended representation to the problem solver to whom the problem setting must be concealed, and (iii) symmetrizing the relativized representation for time reversal to represent the reversibility of the underlying physical process. The third steps projects the input state of the representation, where the problem solver is completely ignorant of the setting and thus the solution of the problem, on one where she knows half solution (half of the information specifying it when the solution is an unstructured bit string). Completing the physical representation shows that the number of computation steps (oracle queries) required to solve any oracle problem in an optimal quantum way should be that of a classical algorithm endowed with the advanced knowledge of half solution.

Keywords

Quantum computational speedup Retrocausality Quantum algorithms Time-symmetric quantum mechanics Relational quantum mechanics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Thanks for useful discussions and comments are due to Eli Cohen, Artur Ekert, Avshalom Elitzur, David Finkelstein, Daniel Shehan, and Ken Wharton.

References

  1. 1.
    Grover, L.K.: A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search. In: Proc. 28th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, ACM Press, New York, pp. 212–219 (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ekert, A.K.: Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem. Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Castagnoli, G., Finkelstein, D.R.: Theory of the quantum speedup. Proc. R. Soc. A 1799(457), 1799–1807 (2001)ADSCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Castagnoli, G.: The quantum correlation between the selection of the problem and that of the solution sheds light on the mechanism of the quantum speed up. Phys. Rev. A 82, 052334–052342 (2010)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Castagnoli, G.: Highlighting the mechanism of the quantum speedup by time-symmetric and relational quantum mechanics. Found. Phys. 46(3), 360–381 (2016)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Castagnoli, G.: On the relation between quantum computational speedup and retrocausality. Quanta 5(1), 34–52 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Castagnoli, G.: A retrocausal model of the quantum computational speedup. In: Proceedings of the 92nd Annual Meeting of the Pacific Division of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Quantum Retrocausation III, Program organizer Daniel Sheehan (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deutsch, D.: Quantum theory, the Church Turing principle and the universal quantum computer. Proc. R. Soc. A 400, 97–117 (1985)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rovelli, C.: Relational quantum mechanics. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 35, 637–658 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rovelli, C.: Relational quantum mechanics (2011). http://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/quant-ph/9609002v2
  11. 11.
    Rovelli, C., Smerlak, M.: Relational EPR. Preprint: arXiv:quant-ph/0604064
  12. 12.
    Bennett, C.H., Bernstein, E., Brassard, G., Vazirani, U.: Strengths and weaknesses of quantum computing. SIAM J. Comput. 26(5), 1510–1523 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Long, G.L.: Grover algorithm with zero theoretical failure rate. Phys. Rev. A 64, 022307–022314 (2001)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Toyama, F.M., van Dijk, W., Nogami, Y.: Quantum search with certainty based on modified Grover algorithms: optimum choice of parameters. Quantum Inf. Process. 12, 1897–1914 (2013)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Deutsch, D., Jozsa, R.: Rapid solution of problems by quantum computation. Proc. R. Soc. A 439, 553–558 (1992)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Simon, D.: On the power of quantum computation. In: Proceedings of the 35th Annual IEEE Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 116–123 (1994)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kaye, P., Laflamme, R., Mosca, M.: An Introduction To Quantum Computing, pp. 146–147. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shor, P.: Algorithms for quantum computation: Discrete log and factoring. In: Proceedings of the 35th Annual IEEE Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 124–131 (1994)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wheeler, J.A., Feynman, R.P.: Interaction with the absorber as the mechanism of radiation. Rev. Mod. Phys. 17, 157 (1945)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Watanabe, S.: Symmetry of physical laws. Part III. Prediction and retrodiction. Rev. Mod. Phys. 27(2), 179–186 (1955)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Aharonov, Y., Bergman, P.G., Lebowitz, J.L.: Time symmetry in the quantum process of measurement. Phys. Rev. B 134, 1410–1416 (1964)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cramer, J.: The transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 58, 647 (1986)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dolev, S., Elitzur, A. C.: Non-sequential behavior of the wave function (2001). arXiv:quant-ph/0102109 v1
  24. 24.
    Aharonov, Y., Vaidman, L.: The two-state vector formalism: an updated review. Lect. Notes Phys. 734, 399–447 (2008)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Aharonov, Y., Popescu, S., Tollaksen, J. A.: Time-symmetric formulation of quantum mechanics. Phys. Today (November issue) 27–32 (2010)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Aharonov, Y., Cohen, E., Elitzur, A.C.: Can a future choice affect a past measurement outcome? Ann. Phys. 355, 258–268 (2015)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fredkin, E., Toffoli, T.: Conservative logic. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 21, 219–253 (1982)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Landauer, R.: Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process. IBM J. Res. Dev. 5(3), 183–191 (1961)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Finkelstein, D.R.: Space-time structure in high energy interactions. In: Gudehus, T., Kaiser, G., Perlmutter, A. (eds.) Fundamental Interactions at High Energy. Gordon & Breach, New York, pp. 324–338 (1969)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bennett, C.H.: The thermodynamics of computation—a review. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 21, 905–940 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Aaronson, S., Ambainis, A.: Forrelation: a problem that optimally separates quantum from classical computing (2014). arXiv:1411.5729
  32. 32.
    Grover, L.K.: From Schödinger’s Equation to the quantum search algorithm. arXiv:quant-ph/0109116 (2001)
  33. 33.
    Venagas-Andraca, S.E.: Quantum walks: a comprehensive review (2012). arXiv:1201.4780
  34. 34.
    Jozsa, R.: Entanglement and quantum computation. In: Huggett, S., Mason, L.K.P., Tod, L.K.P., Tsou, S.T., Woodhouse, N.M.J. (eds.) Geometric Issues in the Foundations of Science. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1997)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jozsa, R., Linden, N.: On the role of entanglement in quantum computational speed-up. Proc. R. Soc. A 1097 (2002)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vedral, V.: The elusive source of quantum effectivenessGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Morikoshi, F.: Problem-solution symmetry in Grover’s quantum search algorithm. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 50, 1858–1867 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Workshop on Quantum Foundations and Quantum Information—Theory and Experiment. Yakir Aharonov, Avshalom Elitur, and Eliahu Cohen organizers. https://indico.cern.ch/event/559774/page/8707-workshop-on-quantum-foundations-and-quantum-information
  39. 39.
    Cay, Y., Le, H.N., Scarani, V.: State complexity and quantum computation (2015). arXiv:1503.04017v2
  40. 40.
    Price, H., Wharton, K.: Disentangling the quantum world (2015). arXiv:1508.01140v2
  41. 41.
    Finkelstein, D.R.: Private communicationGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Elsag Bailey Quantum LaboratoryGenoaItaly

Personalised recommendations