How do you feel about the Axiom of Choice?
I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
61–70 of 373 posts
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#62Hi Scott,
Do you think there is a significant chance that quantum will never take off (i.e. there are non-obvious limitations that will prevent quantum architectures like superconducting qubits / trapped ions / quantum dots /... from ever outperforming classical supercomputers)? Related, what in your opinion is the best indicator (or would be the best indicator if demonstrated) of the potential of quantum devices?
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#63Any recommended books on complexity theory?
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#64Do you think that humanity is well placed to be responsible wielders of quantum computing as a tool, and what do you feel your role (as a scientist with a large public following) is in shaping those future perceptions of responsibility?
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#65Hi Scott,
If quantum computing ever becomes commonplace, and quantum computer programs widely written and understood, do you envision that the teaching of quantum mechanics itself will be significantly impacted? Or instead will we simply see quantum complexity theory begin to redefine the undergraduate computer science curriculum?
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#66Do you have any thoughts on the IEEE Quantum Computing Nomenclature Working Group? http://standards.ieee.org/develop/wg/QCN-WG.html
No, I hadn't heard of it before your comment! Please no one tell the physicist David Mermin about this, or he'll picket the group with his long-running campaign to change the spelling of qubit to "Qbit." :-)
Is it pronounced kew-bit or kuh-bit or kwu-bit?
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#67Most people were not able to succeed in academia. What do you think you did differently than most people?
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#68How do you feel about the state of higher education? Specifically, do you think expensive degrees, underpaid PhD/Postdoc positions, and shortage of tenured jobs may discourage students from joining academia and push them into industry instead? It feels to me our best brains are at Facebook and Google doing cutting-edge research on how best to manipulate our mammal brains into buying ever more crap...
for sure more research is being done at the corporate level, and youre absolutely right about why that sucks (public institutions mean public knowledge). in some cases its the only way to it though, unless we step up and fix academia (ie provide more funding for science)
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a very wide question. How about something like: What's the likelihood of quantum computing being a practical method to solve some class of problem in the next ten years?
You're assuming it's possible without explicitly saying it?
If it's not possible, then the answer is clearly 0.
If it is possible but not practical for solving any problems, that's a thing one would want to know.
If it's possible but unlikely to be practical within the next ten years, that's even more useful.
Perhaps it's possible and already practical for some problem. I don't know what that is, so it would be good information.
In all of these cases, it's Scott's presumably better-informed opinion that's being requested.
Re: I'm Scott Aaronson, quantum computing/computational complexity researcher. AMA
#70Hi Scott, Why do we live in a universe where the Halting Problem is unsolvable?
(Not Scott!)
The Halting Problem's unsolvability is proven in a fully abstract mathematical way, and so the truth of this result is as logically necessary as the truth of other mathematical theorems. It doesn't refer to anything about physics. So it seems like this question might be better bifurcated into
Why do we live in a world in which Turing machines are a good model for what computations we can physically perform?
and
Would the laws of mathematics be the same in any universe?
Each of these questions might then be a good one to pose to Scott.