meta user
network profile
| bio | website | jfitzsimons.org |
|---|---|---|
| location | Singapore, Singapore | |
| age | 31 | |
| visits | member for | 2 years, 6 months |
| seen | 2 days ago | |
| stats | profile views | 453 |
I have just moved to the Center for Quantum Technologies in Singapore, after spending the last 3 years as a Merton College JRF in Theoretical Physics and a Senior Research Fellow in Oxford University Department of Materials. My research focuses largely on theoretical aspects of quantum information processing. In particular I am interested in spin networks, measurement based computation, cryptography and computational complexity.
|
Nov 8 |
comment |
Physics and Computer Science Physicists usually use mathematical equations to model the world, not algorithms. This is not the same thing as algorithms, and indeed the existence of an algorithm to solve these systems of equations is not a prerequisite. |
|
Nov 8 |
awarded | Commentator |
|
Nov 8 |
comment |
The Many Body problem @Tobias: Simulation of either is at least BQP-complete, so it makes little difference which you use. |
|
Nov 8 |
comment |
Velocity of Object from electromagnetic field I believe the fastest rail gun speed achieved is about 10 km/s. I don't, however, understand why you have given a magnetic field strength as an EMF. The units simply don't make sense. Even if they did, this is simply not enough information. Is the projectile charged, magnetic, etc? The maximum velocity will be limited by conservation of energy as already pointed out, but without knowing how the system you have in mind works, we have no way to calculate the initial potential energy and any driving force etc. |
|
Nov 8 |
comment |
Physics and Computer Science So, why are people voting to close without leaving a comment? |
|
Nov 8 |
comment |
Physics and Computer Science Actually, the courses you end up teaching are often not entirely dependent on your expertise. More often it is a case of what courses need teaching when you join the department. |
|
Nov 8 |
answered | Physics and Computer Science |
|
Nov 7 |
comment |
Why can't the outcome of a QM measurement be calculated a-priori? There have been a lot of papers written on this, but they are philosophy not physics. The practical answer is that there are multiple possibilities, and by the pigeon hole principle you must get one of them. For the probabilities, etc., see Everett's thesis or more recent review papers. |
|
Nov 7 |
comment |
Why can't the outcome of a QM measurement be calculated a-priori? @Sklivvz Well, this all depends on interpretations, but sticking with the Everett interpretation it is that we perceive both in different branches of the wave function but each branch is unaware of the other. |
|
Nov 7 |
awarded | Critic |
|
Nov 7 |
answered | Why can't the outcome of a QM measurement be calculated a-priori? |
|
Nov 5 |
comment |
The Many Body problem Yes, that is true. Calculating ground states seems to be beyond their reach though. |
|
Nov 5 |
comment |
The Many Body problem It definitely can only make things harder as you can encode a discrete system in the CV but not necessarily the other way around. |
|
Nov 5 |
comment |
The Many Body problem By which I mean the problem with simulating the system, not a problem with your answer. |
|
Nov 5 |
comment |
The Many Body problem The problem here, of course, is that the field modes are continuous variables. |
|
Nov 5 |
awarded | Teacher |
|
Nov 5 |
awarded | Editor |
|
Nov 5 |
revised |
The Many Body problem added 10 characters in body |
|
Nov 5 |
answered | How should a physics student study mathematics? |
|
Nov 5 |
answered | The Many Body problem |
