Research Publication: Brief Comments On Quantum Computers and NP-Complete Problems

 

I think I should publish my thoughts on quantum computing and AI.  The claim is, due to the fact that Dr. Peter Shor's discrete logarithm algorithm, which is an efficient BQP quantum algorithm, can be used, along with the properties of logarithms (ln x^c = c*ln^x) to solve the modular square root problem, we have that NP is a subset of BQP.  That means, using the Occam's razor idea, quantum computers will revolutionize AI.  Based on something I read in Leonard Susskind's "theoretical minimum" books about physics, I believe that also, if people die, they will be able to come back to life in the future based on quantum computing and information in the universe that is "saved" into the physical universe in a sense--it's retrievable.  The ability to solve NP-complete problems will surely help.  Probably, quantum computing AI will cure cancer when quantum computers exist.


My Godel's Lost Letter proof was correct.  It's not clear to me if Dr. Scott Aaronson was telling the truth that Kurt Godel had already thought of the result.  Anyway, it's clear to me at this point that the GLL proof, which shows that if ZFC is consistent, P != NP cannot be proved, is basically the last word on P vs. NP.  Even if I or someone else had been able to prove P != NP or something like it, Dr. Shor's algorithm would still be more important.  The nice thing about GLL is, it probably yields some insights that physicists can use to help them build quantum computers more readily.  Unfortunately, it appears that there are no more insights beyond the GLL proof into P vs. NP.


Those are my thoughts.  I'm not a professional researcher, and my claims are not verified by peer review or any other examination.  I believe I'm correct, but please take my claims with a grain of salt and do not automatically believe me--I have made lots of mistakes in my proofs.  I still like math and economics, but it looks like I'm going to have to find another outlet for my economics ideas other than research journals.  I doubt I can go back to school.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Math Update: My P != NP Proof Might Be Correct!!!!! -- (update, no it's not, see the note at the beginning and the updates near the bottom)

EDIT:  No, this proof is not correct.  See the updates at the bottom for details on why (based on Dr. Zelinsky's comment).  Fortunately, my GLL proof and MSR proofs still appear to be correct. It could be that Joshua Zelinsky's comment actually helps me to complete the proof. The GLL proof appears to be correct, AFAIK. The thing is, the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent --> P != NP" within PA and the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent" as a theorem of ZFC just shows that P != NP is a theorem of PA.  That isn't a contradiction, it's just another step in the proof. I think the striking idea is, P != NP is a theorem of PA, but not of ZFC.  That is what I worked to prove.  AFAIK it is possible for a proposition to be a theorem of PA but not of ZFC.  In particular, PA can be proved consistent from ZFC, so we would think it s possible and even likely that there are some non-theorems of ZFC that are theorems of PA. So this is great!  It l...
Read more

Hello, Texas - A Quick Monopoly Lesson

  So today, I thought I saw some people running around blurting code gestures at me.  One of the codes seemed to say, "Riot for a[buse] v[ictim] time -M".  Oh, M?  M as in Monolith, or M as in Monopoly fan who doesn't get it? Here, Houstonian code-talkers...let me teach you how to play Monopoly, since you are so hungry for free knowledge:  - Make deals with other players that benefit you.  - Offer deals to difficult players that are somewhat beneficial to them, knowing that they might reject.  - Watch which deals other players reject, and identify what *deal types* they are not likely to accept from you or anyone else.  - Be very very careful about your own deals--and behavior--lest you get figured out by your opponents and backed into a corner, with good, beneficial deals being made without you by cunning adversaries who know your every move. There's a poker lesson in there, too, but I don't want to get too educational right now.
Read more

Flash Non-Fiction: James Bond and Masculinity

  This was going to be a longer essay, but I decided to just blurt out my point rather than trying to write well. Basically, I think James Bond movies are good, and the songs are high-quality too, but it sends semi-dangerous messages to men in particular about what it means to be a man.  The Bond character is intransigent, aggressive, violent, and absolutely sure of himself in all cases.  He is portrayed as a big winner--able to date and have sex with beautiful women, almost impossible to kill, and lethal and elite at both armed and unarmed combat. I'm concerned that some men, including my estranged father ASW, have had their sense of morality warped by Bond movies.  They think that this dramatically presented way to be masculine is the only way.  I think that's unhealthy, and when people get the not-so-original idea to "try to be more Bond-like" in their personal lives, that leads to catastrophic conflicts with and major potential for deep pain for people that ...
Read more