Subj : Re: Incomputable (was: some other thread) To : comp.programming,comp.object From : Chris Sonnack Date : Wed Aug 17 2005 07:54 pm Gerry Quinn writes: >> We had a similar discussion here recently. One point of view was that >> Q/C would *only* allow us to solve problems that were "incomputable" >> due to lack of resource (time, space, energy, etc.)--that is, that it >> would just be a MUCH faster version of current machines. >> >> The other point of view was that it would open new vistas in computation >> not even dreamed of now. >> >> Another one where we'll just have to wait until we can throw the switch! > > If you mean me by the second POV, my position was more nuanced in that Yes, it was. I did not intend to misrepresent you. It was more a sketch of an alternate POV that I didn't recall in detail enough to sketch more accuractely. Glad you spoke up! > I suggested that the *theoretical* power of quantum computing was > unprecedented, but that I believe in practice error correction will > bite it in the ass and no qualitative benefits will accrue at all, > except perhaps in the simulation of quantum systems... One of the things that totally bemuses me about Q/M is how nice, clean theory runs afoul of weirdly pedestrian pitfalls. -- |_ CJSonnack _____________| How's my programming? | |_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ ___________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL | |_____________________________________________|_______________________| .