This often gets posted on HN but I am yet to see anything new or that deep. Their original paper is very light on detail [0]. Whatever objects you are working with in physics, is there some internal language or type theory that lets you describe physics? Seems like they want to take that kind of angle but haven't realised it. Until they have the machinery to do something kind of concrete, or at least produce some mathematics, seems like its just hand waving. [0] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.5563.pdf
Constructor Theory of Information
David Deutsch, Chiara Marletto
2014 · arXiv
- HN score
- 0
- Mentions
- 4
- Readers
- 4
- Months
- 3
From the abstract
We present a theory of information expressed solely in terms of which transformations of physical systems are possible and which are impossible - i.e. in constructor-theoretic terms. Although it includes conjectured laws of physics that are directly about information, independently of the details of particular physical instantiations, it does not regard information as an a priori mathematical or logical concept, but as something whose nature and properties are determined by the laws of physics alone. It does not suffer from the circularity at the foundations of existing information theory (namely that information and distinguishability are each defined in terms of the other). It explains the relationship between classical and quantum information, and reveals the single, constructor-theoretic property underlying the most distinctive phenomena associated with the latter, including the lack of in-principle distinguishability of some states, the impossibility of cloning, the existence of pairs of variables that cannot simultaneously have sharp values, the fact that measurement processes can be both deterministic and unpredictable, the irreducible perturbation caused by measurement, and entanglement (locally inaccessible information).
Metadata: arXiv. Abstracts retain their original authors’ rights.
In the conversation
Original HN comments, with labels from simple text rules. A label describes the whole comment and may miss context or irony. Read the discussion to make up your own mind. About the labels
4 selected excerpts · 4 total mentions
Take a look at David Deutsch's work on quantum mechanics, information theory, quantum computing, etc. I especially like http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5563 Cool stuff. (Related, possibly, is the concept that QM is simply probability with ranges from [-1,1] instead of the traditional [0,1]: Negative probabilities imply things that happen that we cannot measure. Or something like that, it's been a while.) (Now if only I could find that wicked cool graphic showing the hierarchy of mathematics (ZFC or something near the bottom) and physics (QM and GR, sitting atop currently irreconcilable branches of math)....)
David Deutsch, coauthor of the paper, is not without credibility in the field of quantum computing, to say the least. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Deutsch It's obviously a speculative theory, but it's a welcomed endeavor, since the field is sorely lacking conceptual frameworks to make sense of scientific advances. Link to the paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5563
Per `dang's suggestion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7803158, here's the link to the paper so that we may consolidate the threads: http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5563 Edited to steal more screenspace/add context: Authors: https://web.archive.org/web/20120402224250/http://193.189.74... http://edge.org/memberbio/chiara_marletto You may also be interested in this paper: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~christos/classics/Deutsch_quantu... Also, http://edge.org/conversation/constructor-theory
Keep following the thread.
More in PhysicsMore from the same topics.
On proof and progress in mathematics
William P. Thurston
In response to Jaffe and Quinn [math.HO/9307227], the author discusses forms of progress in mathematics that are not captured by formal proofs of theorems, especially in his own work in the theory of foliations and geometrization of 3-manifolds and dynamical systems.
Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4
Sébastien Bubeck, Varun Chandrasekaran, Ronen Eldan +11
Artificial intelligence (AI) researchers have been developing and refining large language models (LLMs) that exhibit remarkable capabilities across a variety of domains and tasks, challenging our understanding of learning and cognition.
A Critique of the CAP Theorem
Martin Kleppmann
The CAP Theorem is a frequently cited impossibility result in distributed systems, especially among NoSQL distributed databases.
Dissolving the Fermi Paradox
Anders Sandberg, Eric Drexler, Toby Ord
The Fermi paradox is the conflict between an expectation of a high {\em ex ante} probability of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe and the apparently lifeless universe we in fact observe.