"It's also a reasonable scientific program to look at the dynamics of the standard model and to try to prove from that dynamics that it is computationally capable"
About this Quote
Seth Lloyd treats computation as a property of nature, not just of abstract machines. He suggests that a legitimate scientific task is to take the Standard Model, with its quantum fields and interactions, and ask whether its dynamics can implement the primitives of computation. The question is whether the unitary, local time evolution prescribed by the theory can realize universal quantum computation given appropriate preparations, interactions, and measurements.
To call the dynamics computationally capable is to show that information can be encoded in physical degrees of freedom, manipulated through controllable interactions functioning as gates, and protected well enough to scale. There are strong precedents. Feynman proposed a Hamiltonian computer; Lloyd proved that generic local quantum systems can be efficiently simulated by a quantum computer; later work showed fixed local Hamiltonians whose ground-state or time evolution encodes arbitrary quantum circuits. These results suggest that the core features of the Standard Model — locality, unitarity, and rich interactions mediated by gauge fields — are exactly the ingredients needed for universality.
Pursuing this program grounds the Church-Turing-Deutsch principle in our best-tested physics and turns philosophical claims into testable, constructive theorems. Success would tie computational limits to physical limits: energy-time bounds on gate speeds, error-correction thresholds set by noise and locality, thermodynamic costs like Landauer’s principle, and resource scaling dictated by field dynamics. It would also clarify that exotic computational power beyond quantum computation would require new physics beyond the Standard Model.
Equally, the program keeps us honest about constraints. If unavoidable decoherence, superselection rules, or control-theoretic barriers within the Standard Model block scalable computation, that would reshape expectations for quantum technologies. Lloyd’s point is methodological and pragmatic: let the laws of physics themselves certify what can be computed and at what cost, by constructing the computer inside those laws rather than assuming it from the outside.
To call the dynamics computationally capable is to show that information can be encoded in physical degrees of freedom, manipulated through controllable interactions functioning as gates, and protected well enough to scale. There are strong precedents. Feynman proposed a Hamiltonian computer; Lloyd proved that generic local quantum systems can be efficiently simulated by a quantum computer; later work showed fixed local Hamiltonians whose ground-state or time evolution encodes arbitrary quantum circuits. These results suggest that the core features of the Standard Model — locality, unitarity, and rich interactions mediated by gauge fields — are exactly the ingredients needed for universality.
Pursuing this program grounds the Church-Turing-Deutsch principle in our best-tested physics and turns philosophical claims into testable, constructive theorems. Success would tie computational limits to physical limits: energy-time bounds on gate speeds, error-correction thresholds set by noise and locality, thermodynamic costs like Landauer’s principle, and resource scaling dictated by field dynamics. It would also clarify that exotic computational power beyond quantum computation would require new physics beyond the Standard Model.
Equally, the program keeps us honest about constraints. If unavoidable decoherence, superselection rules, or control-theoretic barriers within the Standard Model block scalable computation, that would reshape expectations for quantum technologies. Lloyd’s point is methodological and pragmatic: let the laws of physics themselves certify what can be computed and at what cost, by constructing the computer inside those laws rather than assuming it from the outside.
Quote Details
| Topic | Science |
|---|
More Quotes by Seth
Add to List
