Month: May 2008

Posted on

Algorithmic Steampunk?

From the annals of “is that really the word you wanted?” from a New York Times article on steampunk:

“There seems to be this sort of perfect storm of interest in steampunk right now,” Mr. von Slatt said. “If you go to Google Trends and track the number of times it is mentioned, the curve is almost algorithmic from a year and a half ago.” (At this writing, Google cites 1.9 million references.)

Certainly I can interpret this as saying that the trend has a curve which can be generated by an algorirthm, but I’m guessing Mr. von Slatt meant something else, considering that the curve which is always zero is also algorithmic.

Posted on

BQP, NP, and All That

The mothership, aka Seed magazine, has a crib sheet for quantum computing. Its not half bad, considering how bad things like this can go. And of course this is probably due in part to the fact that they list the Optimizer as a consultant. But the real question is whether that little shade of black outside of NP is an illustrators trick or the result of a complexity theorist being the person they asked to vet the cheat sheet?

Posted on

In Probability We Trust?

When discussing ways that quantum computing may fail, a common idea is that it may turn out that the linearity of quantum theory fails. Since no one has seen any evidence of nonlinearity in quantum theory, and it is hard to hide this nonlinearity at small scales, it is usually reasoned that these nonlinearities would arise for large quantum systems. Which got me thinking about how to well we know that quantum theory is linear, which in turn got me thinking about something totally wacko.
Continue reading “In Probability We Trust?”