Talk:Observable (quantum computation): Difference between revisions
imported>Greg Woodhouse (Quantum mechanics or quantum computation?) |
imported>Boris Tsirelson |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{subpages}} | ||
}} | |||
== Ambiguous language == | == Ambiguous language == | ||
| Line 17: | Line 7: | ||
== Quantum mechanics or quantum computation? == | == Quantum mechanics or quantum computation? == | ||
A more basic issue is that this entire article is framed in terms of quantum computation (for example, noting that David Deutsch uses the MWI, but failing to it was introduced | A more basic issue is that this entire article is framed in terms of quantum computation (for example, noting that David Deutsch uses the MWI, but failing to it was introduced by Everett). The article may be intended to provide background material for quantum computation, but is of more general significance, and should be written in the wider context of quantum theory. [[User:Greg Woodhouse|Greg Woodhouse]] 10:35, 30 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
I still maintain that this article should not be specific to quantum computation but focus on quantum theory more generally. Try this: An observable is an operator that projects (orthogonally) onto the space spanned by the pure states corresponding possible observed values. That's just a shot in the dark, though. I'm still trying to come up with a definition that doesn't sound like "wave function collapse". [[User:Greg Woodhouse|Greg Woodhouse]] 21:34, 14 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
:I also wonder, why "quantum computation" rather than "quantum theory"? [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 11:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 05:47, 28 July 2009
Ambiguous language
In the section titled Algebra, we find the following: "A physical system is described by its static constitution, dynamics and expectation function. These three ... may be used to calculate the outcome of particular experiments or computations." This language can at least be interpreted as implying the experiments and computations are the same thing. Is that intended? Greg Woodhouse 10:26, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
Quantum mechanics or quantum computation?
A more basic issue is that this entire article is framed in terms of quantum computation (for example, noting that David Deutsch uses the MWI, but failing to it was introduced by Everett). The article may be intended to provide background material for quantum computation, but is of more general significance, and should be written in the wider context of quantum theory. Greg Woodhouse 10:35, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
I still maintain that this article should not be specific to quantum computation but focus on quantum theory more generally. Try this: An observable is an operator that projects (orthogonally) onto the space spanned by the pure states corresponding possible observed values. That's just a shot in the dark, though. I'm still trying to come up with a definition that doesn't sound like "wave function collapse". Greg Woodhouse 21:34, 14 June 2007 (CDT)
- I also wonder, why "quantum computation" rather than "quantum theory"? Boris Tsirelson 11:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- Article with Definition
- Developing Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Physics Developing Articles
- Physics Nonstub Articles
- Physics Internal Articles
- Mathematics Developing Articles
- Mathematics Nonstub Articles
- Mathematics Internal Articles
- Physics Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Mathematics Underlinked Articles