Would a real Quantum Computer falsify de Broglie/Bohm model?

[danR]

[I've searched for posts on this issue, but haven't found anything quite specific.]

By 'real' I mean something you might actually buy in, say, 2015 and actually performs those pesky problems that involve an infinity of potential solutions.

If a quantum entity actually does have definite (if indeterminable) state, then quantum computers wouldn't go on sale. They just wouldn't work.

If they do work, then the Copenhagen interpretation would be strengthened.

It's my own suspicion that they will never come up with a working model.

Or would a Bohm computer somehow work anyway?

 

[The_Duck]

The de Broglie-Bohm interpretation and the Copenhagen interpretation do not affect any of the predictions of quantum mechanics, only the language you use to talk about them. You cannot falsify one without falsifying the other; the underlying theory is exactly the same

 

[camboy]

http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.4843" is a paper explaining how quantum computers work in deBB theory.

 

[danR]

The de Broglie-Bohm interpretation and the Copenhagen interpretation do not affect any of the predictions of quantum mechanics, only the language you use to talk about them. You cannot falsify one without falsifying the other; the underlying theory is exactly the same

So a QC does not depend on an inherently indeterminate quantum state (Copenhagen interpretation) to derive single (correct) solutions out of an infinity of possible ones?

While both make the same predictions, there does seem to be a diversified running debate around here whether or not tests can be, or have been, devised that support one or the other at least 'better', if not falsify one or the other. Would real QC not split the hair finely enough to serve as one such test?

Finally, from what I've understood as the classical meaning of a quantum computer, quantum computing has not actually been achieved, though there was one commercial claim here in Vancouver a few years ago.

 

[danR]

http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.4843" is a paper explaining how quantum computers work in deBB theory.

Mine is a layman's question. Anyway, having skimmed the paper, I would want them to define clearly what sort of quantum computer they are talking about. Perhaps you can help me out. Much of PP's program is explaining things (if possible) to people who aren't able to follow the literature.

My recollection over the decades, and reading about this quantum computer, and that (claimed) quantum computer, and the coffee-cup QC, is that the classical QC's ability to handle problems that are theoretically (not practically) intractable has not been achieved. That they are all lab curiosities that do interesting computing using quantum effects and systems.

 

[danR]

Having looked at the dissertation, and reviewed quantum computing itself, I appear to have misunderstood what quantum computing actually can accomplish, and apparently nothing that would significantly require a difference between CI and de Broglie/Bohm models.