PhD, Quantum Information and Condensed Matter Physics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the intersection of quantum information, condensed matter physics, and the foundations of quantum mechanics. Participants express their interests in pursuing research that combines these areas, while also grappling with the challenges of finding relevant literature and support for such interdisciplinary work.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant is considering a thesis on categorical formulations of quantum mechanics, polytope correlations, and complexity theory, but is also drawn to quantum field theory in condensed matter physics.
  • Another participant notes the difficulty of finding connections between the foundations of quantum mechanics and condensed matter theory, suggesting that they are very different fields.
  • A participant mentions the lack of interest in foundational questions within their academic environment in France, leading to cynicism from professors regarding the legitimacy of the field.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the scientific nature of foundational research, comparing it to philosophy, while acknowledging its potential for interesting discussions and insights.
  • There is a suggestion to reach out to researchers at the Perimeter Institute for guidance on potential overlaps between the fields.
  • One participant argues that the ongoing search for a quantum theory of gravitation and the exploration of quantum mechanics' structure are valid pursuits, despite the prevailing focus on string theory.
  • Another participant counters that both string theory and foundational research face challenges in making testable predictions, suggesting a shared skepticism about their scientific status.
  • One participant expresses support for studying both foundations and string theory for their intrinsic interest, reflecting a mathematical perspective on research pursuits.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express a lack of consensus on the viability of combining quantum information and condensed matter physics with foundational studies. There are competing views on the legitimacy and scientific status of foundational research compared to string theory, with some participants supporting the exploration of both fields while others remain skeptical.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their academic environments, including a lack of resources and support for foundational research, as well as differing opinions on the scientific nature of the fields discussed.

arpharazon
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Hi everybody,

I ve been thinking a lot lately about the thesis I am supposed to start next year. I will study the categoric formulation for quantum mechanics, polytope correlations and links with the complexity theory (post quantum models etc).

But on the other hand, I find my courses on quantum field theory in condensed matter physics passioning: hearing about an E8 symmetry group particles for quantum phase transitions gives me goose bumps...:biggrin:

I tried to find on the internet some articles or researchers who combine both subjects but I found nothing.. :(

So I am asking all the people in this forum for their help, whether it is a simple opinion or some interesting article they heard of concerning these two subjects...I get really depressed whenever I make up my mind for one of the two subjects, because i like the other a lot too!

Thanks for your help! :wink:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
no ideas? :frown:
 
Can you think of anywhere where foundations might be applicable to field theory or CMT, or vice-versa? They are very different fields, and I don't know anybody who specializes in both.

I guess we need to find something that would require knowledge of both, but certainly nothing comes to mind. However, maybe you should try spamming the people at the University of Waterloo, as they have both the http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/" which deals some of the foundations issues as they pertain to information theory.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
yes i agree with you, i think it's quite difficult (if not impossible) to mix up both. The thing is that I am studying in France, and here the foundations questions don't seem to interest a lot of people, in fact very few people here are good in this field. So even if I decide my self to study quantum foundations (my advisor i think is probably one of those talented researchers of the field in france), all my "orthodox" physics professors get very cynical about it, as if it were not a subject of physics on its own..:cry:
 
I know what you mean about the cynicism. In all honesty, I don't think much of it myself, though I try to keep an open mind. It really seems like philosophy rather than science, even though there are scientific things you can do with it. The conversations are always fun (I've had a few with Rob Spekken's who I think is big in the field), but I can't imagine doing research in it.

But really, send an email to some of the foundations guys at Perimeter and see if they know of any overlap. They are probably the guys who would know best.
 
I think you are right, I am going to send a few e mail to get some advice.

Thanks a lot for your answers, and one last point to share my point of view on the question: I think that since Von Neumann gave the 'standard' formulation of the foundations of QM, all we have been doing is developing theoretical tools to solve particular problems in different fields, however the "big task" of finding a quantum theory of gravitation still fails, and a lot of talents are still heading towards string theory though it might not be the theory we are looking for (it has been there for over 30 years now!), so from my point of view, trying to really analyse the structure of quantum mechanics and try to find out if there are no other formulations that fit with the typical quantum effects such as non locality etc is an interesting way of doing things, and generally a lot of researchers in foundations interact with those on quantum gravity (Rovelli etc.)...that s why I am so angry when I hear that it s not physics whereas string theory is..!
 
Haha...I don't think string theory can be called physics if foundations isn't. String theory has yet to make any testable predictions right? Foundations isn't too much better but I have it on confidence from members of my research group that there may be testable things shortly.

So don't worry, I bet there are tonnes of people who don't think either are science :-p
 
Oh, but don't think I don't support researching foundations and string. I was educated as a pure-mathematician, so I fully support Hardy's viewpoint that sometimes things should just be studied because they're interesting in their own right.
 

Similar threads

PhD in condensed matter theory or theoretical cosmology
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Moving from nursing to physics
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Learning about condensed matter physics as a particle physicist
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Studying Should I study relativistic QFT to get non-relativistic QFT?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Background: computational condensed matter physics
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Programs Apply for a PhD in theoretical condensed matter physics?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Other How do physicists practically switch fields to non-adjacent subfields?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Programs Condensed Matter PhD Program Choice - Advice Needed
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Programs Doing a PhD in both computational and experimental condensed matter physics?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Programs Potential for an Astro vs Condensed Matter PhD (UK)
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K