![]() When I moved to UT Austin three years ago, most offices in CS had whiteboards, but I deliberately chose one with a blackboard. In interesting math news beyond Quanta magazine, the Berkeley alumni magazine has a piece about the crucial, neglected topic of mathematicians’ love for Hagoromo-brand chalk (hat tip: Peter Woit). For more, see also this post by Gil Kalai-who appears here not in his capacity as a quantum computing skeptic. This reasonable-sounding conjecture has now been falsified by Yaroslav Shitov. Briefly, Hedetniemi’s Conjecture stated that, given any two finite, undirected graphs G and H, the chromatic number of the tensor product G⊗H is just the minimum of the chromatic numbers of G and H themselves. The randomness aspect will be addressed in a paper that I’m currently writing for now, see these slides.Īs long as I’m linking to interesting recent Quanta articles, Erica Klarreich has A 53-Year-Old Network Coloring Conjecture is Disproved. The article cites my paper with Lijie Chen, which shows that under suitable computational assumptions, the outputs in my protocol are hard to spoof using a classical computer. one due to me, the other due to Brakerski et al. This piece covers two schemes for using a quantum computer to generate “certified random bits”-that is, bits you can prove are random to a faraway skeptic. I say only that, regardless of what anyone believes is the ultimate rate of progress in QC, what’s already happened today puts the ball firmly in the skeptics’ court.Īlso in Quanta, Anil Ananthaswamy has a new article out on How to Turn a Quantum Computer Into the Ultimate Randomness Generator. In reality, I’m reluctant to fit a polynomial or an exponential or any other curve through a set of numbers that so far hasn’t exceeded about 50. The quote is perfectly accurate, but in context, it might give the impression that I’m endorsing Neven’s Law. ![]() They’re the ones who need to articulate where and why the progress will stop.” ![]() ![]() “I think the undeniable reality of this progress puts the ball firmly in the court of those who believe scalable quantum computing can’t work. Near the end, the Quanta piece quotes some UT Austin professor whose surname starts with a bunch of A’s as follows: (Jonathan Dowling tells me that he expressed the same thought years ago.) In Quanta magazine, Kevin Hartnett has a recent article entitled A New Law to Describe Quantum Computing’s Rise? The article discusses “Neven’s Law”-a conjecture, by Hartmut Neven (head of Google’s quantum computing effort), that the number of integrated qubits is now increasing exponentially with time, so that the difficulty of simulating a state-of-the-art QC on a fixed classical computer is increasing doubly exponentially with time. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |