Are electrons universal problem solvers?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of whether electrons can be considered universal problem solvers, particularly in the context of solving NP-complete problems. Participants explore the implications of knowing an electron's wave function and its potential to aid in complex mathematical problem-solving, including deciphering ciphers and theorem proving. The conversation touches on quantum mechanics, complexity classes, and the relationship between physical states and computational efficiency.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that knowing an electron's wave function could potentially allow for the efficient solving of NP-complete problems, raising questions about the nature of electrons as problem solvers.
  • Another participant counters that while simple wave functions can be solved exactly, this does not relate to complexity classes and questions the validity of the initial premise.
  • A later reply asserts a definitive "no" to the idea that electrons are universal problem solvers.
  • Discussion includes the role of electrons in classical computers and the implications for quantum computing, noting that no polynomial algorithm for NP problems is currently known in that context.
  • One participant proposes an alternative approach involving a hardware verifier for NP problems, questioning the efficiency of electron flow in solving these problems without a clock.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the role of electrons as universal problem solvers. While some explore the potential implications of electron wave functions, others reject the premise and assert that the questions posed do not make sense. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of relating quantum mechanics to computational theory, noting that assumptions about the efficiency of solving NP-complete problems using electron states are not established. The discussion also reflects on the limitations of current understanding in both quantum computing and complexity classes.

porton
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Could knowing a wave function solve an NP-complete problem?
Existence of an universal problem solver, a polynomial-time NP-complete algorithm is a $1000000 prize question.

But suppose that we were able to know something "simple", e.g. an electron state or electron wave function exactly.

Would we be able to solve complex mathematical problems (like deciphering ciphers or quickly finding theorem proofs) by knowing these physical states?

Are electron wave function "decisions" (whether at a given point the wave function values are above or below a given number) an efficient NP-complete oracle even in the case if the electron is not a part of a computer (in the usual sense) running a polynomial-time NP-complete algorithm?

Suppose yes, then would from this and also simulation model of the universe follow than an electron is driven by an "all knowing" computer or maybe an NP-complete algorithm?

In other words, are electrons universal problem solvers?

Put another way: Suppose we can calculate an electron wave function for some not very long period of time (think of 10 seconds) exactly. Would it easily make us able to solve an NP-complete problem (decipher ciphers, find proofs of a math theorem just by entering into a computer its thesis, etc.) quickly (in polynomial time)?

Trying to formulate it with mathematical exactness: Suppose we have an oracle for decisions (whether at a given point the wave function values are above or below a given number) of wave functions specified as descriptions of function in ZFC for a time (in some measurement system like SI) up to a (binary) logarithm of a given natural number. Is this oracle a polynomial solution of an NP-complete problem?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
"P" is polynomial time with a deterministic algorithm. We already know that nondeterministic systems might be different. That's the "N" in "NP"!

Simple wave functions can be solved exactly - the hydrogen atom is routinely solved in university courses. That has nothing to do with complexity classes.
If you could find the wave function of an arbitrary system efficiently with classical methods then you would make quantum computers unnecessary (it would imply P=BQP). How these are related to NP is an open question.

10 seconds is an extremely long time for an electron, by the way.
porton said:
Suppose yes, then would from this and also simulation model of the universe follow than an electron is driven by an "all knowing" computer or maybe an NP-complete algorithm?

In other words, are electrons universal problem solvers?
These questions don't make sense. And note that there is nothing special about electrons in quantum mechanics.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier
In other words, the answer is - no.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50
Electrons are also used in classical computers. That's why we call it electronics.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and PeroK
It seems the question concerns ways of using electrons in ways alternative to standard electronics (?) ... like quantum computers - for which there is still not known polynomial algorithm for NP.

Here is another alternative - NP complete problem (nondeterministic polynomial) can be transformed into search for a fixed point:
imagine a hardware implemented verifier for an instance of NP problem - which sends to own input the same if it solves the problem, "input+1" otherwise:
1622705722119.png

Such circuit with clock would test one possibility per cycle, finally reaching a satisfying input in exponential expected time.

But what if there is not clock?
We would get hydrodynamics of electrons, which fixed point solves our NP problem - could such electron flow stabilize faster than in exponential expected time?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
8K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K