Recent content by doomCookie

Thank you both for the kind responses!

Thanks. I think see where I went wrong. I was thinking in terms of bits themselves and not particles. A bit could be described by a vector in a one-dimensional vector space, a particle by a vector in two-dimensions. So these two dimensions of each particle (x,y) would be physically something...

Thank you, I've read that but I will read it again. Ive clarified a few things for myself over the past while. The three qubits will have an infinite number of states because they can be in any quantum superposition of their 8 classical configurations, ie they are a linear combination of...

I am reading an introduction to quantum computing and I have a question about one thing I don't understand. "In classical physics, the possible states of a system of n particles, whose individual states can be described by a vector in a two dimensional vector space, form a vector space of 2*n...

Thank you for the reply. I must have misunderstood the well ordering theorem, I will try and increase my knowledge on the subject before I post again.

Thank you for the reply. I am still not sure why a set can be both uncountable and well ordered. I will clarify my confusion. So the reals are uncountable by the Cantor diagonalization proof, so they cannot be put in one-to-one correspondence with the natural numbers. But the reals are well...

Hi, So if under ZFC a well ordering exists for the reals, why isn't this in contradiction to their uncountability? Is it enough that we cannot demonstrate this well-ordering by a mapping of reals to natural numbers to say they are not countable? I ask because it seems for a set to be well...