Graduate Student Solves Quantum Verification Problem

Well written, even cavemen like me can get something out of it.

6 Likes

May I suggest you this video to complement that article:

It’s the same stuff, presented by Ms. Mahadev herself, but with the additional benefit that you won’t understand a thing :rofl: Half the talk is audience members, who understand the field, trying to wrap their head around how this thing works.

2 Likes

Don’t trust someone who says he understands quantum:
Reimagining of Schrödinger’s cat breaks quantum mechanics — and stumps physicists.
On the other hand, the thought experiment described in the link also contains Alice, Bob and a coin toss… :wink:
Ps at 3:51: ‘…the classical verifier is allowed to interact with 2 provers instead of 1 so he can test them against each other.’ I was also thinking if something like that could be possible in a proof of space for the Safe Network.

Bro’s, I admit I barely understand how SAFE works lol

No, but in all weird seriousness… there are levels of “computing” power to the brain, obviously we had some first level hard wired reptilian functions, then we’d have bodily sensory which is primarily biochemical central nervous system like, then you’d have the electrical computation of the brain this would be the bioelectric part of it. Something like that right.

But then I think it gets to a weird level of woo woo where we start to look at intuition and the like. And on a first level basis i’d say we have a basic, what one could call “psychic” sensory (as much as I hate that word) like a sixth sense. And I’m of the opinion that this was an actual sense that WE ALL had some time ago… I could get into it but rather not other than to say that if you look at a humans and compare us to all animals past and present we are not the biggest, not the strongest, faster and certainly historically we were not that much smarter, today maybe yes as humans but our prehuman ancestors where not and so I think we had a type of sensory that helped us out in the wild and over time that sensory has become less and less of a requirement… theres simply too much literature, evidence and personal experiences to dismiss this.

Well I think like our day to day sensory being on a level 1, our psychic sensory would be a level 1, kind of like how if your standing in a room and you get the sense that someone is looking at you, you turn around and well whataya know someone is looking at you, well I think that is a 1st level type sense of this woo woo type sensory. But I think there are levels above this, think other types of ESP, think lucid dreaming, astral projection, remote viewing, remote influence and we start to delve under the surface…

I think when discussing these really full on in depth topics AKA quantum, I really do believe there is a level of human computation that perhaps does come from another type of sensory or through a level of computation we simply have no real understanding about or maybe we do its just not discussed in the open. There are many stories about brilliant people receiving downloads of information through dreams or subconscious where they have come up with brilliant things such as the shape of DNA or the periodic table of elements, these things came to people in states that are not what we would describe as normal.

And we have all heard of “THE ZONE” and if you’ve ever been in the zone, you’ll know it is in fact a different awareness and type or style of thinking that is simply not normal, its almost alien like to the human body from our day to day perspective.

We I pose that there are ways of thinking, computing, acting and doing that go beyond just nuts and bolts mathematics and although I am going off on a bit of a non-directly-related tangent here, it is interesting to discuss and is somewhat related to all that we are doing with this project.

I have a feeling @dirvine will know what I mean :sunglasses::wink:

I think there will be a time in the future we will be teaching our kids how to think and operate from these levels and I think we will soon start seeking persons out who can operate from these levels more naturally.

The organisations that do this and begin to employ systems that cater to these behaviors I think will get the jump on their competitors…

Honestly though, intuition is most likely about ‘connecting the dots’ between a number of factors that, while rather insignificant when looked at by themselves, add up to a picture when appear together.

When that happens, you won’t necessarily be able to pinpoint the reason because there is no single reason that can be pinpointed: the picture as a whole has a meaning, not its separate pieces.

However, most of the world operates on the assumption that it is not only desirable (or even necessary) but also possible to always give a simple step by step explanation for decisions. How foolishly ignorant! Anyway, I don’t believe we don’t have this (not at all magical) sense anymore, I believe we are just conditioned to suppress it. As for myself, I got burnt a few times because I did exactly that, so I learned to listen to my hunches, no questions asked. If I feel off about something, I will avoid it even if I can’t explain why because I trust my intuition more than my ability to understand it.

Related to the subject is that we don’t work like classical computer programs, with black and white ones and zeros, but with much more refined probabilistic models. It’s no coincidence that now we can solve problems easily with artificial neural networks that used to be deemed “unsolvable” just a decade and some change ago. One complaint about them is that they are “black boxes” and we can’t actually understand how they come up with the answer. Quite true! We can’t fully grasp it exactly because it’s so detailed. Corollary to that, if they were simple enough to understand, they wouldn’t be able to perform so well. We want control and understanding together with performance, and we don’t like that we can’t have both.

TL;DR When you have a hunch, that’s not necessarily anything mystical, just the result of a computing model that is more sophisticated (implies harder to explain) than the simplistic decision trees we’re expected to follow.

So, the supposed weirdness comes from that sometimes the two cats can come to certainty about the state, but their conclusions are different? I’m not even sure that counts as too peculiar because literally nothing about quantum theory is intuitive.

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with you disagreeing. There is more to this, some people get it easily while for others it is difficult and there is a reason for that too. Although I am not so sure you are really disagreeing.

Lets just say that i have had vivid and real experiences that hard science cannot and will not be able to explain :slight_smile: although they are getting slowly better at it. There are many people with the same. And I am not a general believer in all WOO. Anything and everything that has ever happened to me or that I have experienced which i would suggest is not exactly normal but perhaps instead para-normal or not easily explainable by modern day science I will always try to do just that, find a scientific explanation and that is not to say that what is happening is as you suggested “Mystical”…because it’s all just magic and mystery until it becomes hard science :slight_smile:

I’ll be the last to deny that the supernatural does exists. My simple everyday experience of being self-conscious is enough proof for me. I know many argue it can sure be explained by material processes; I’ll just let them play.

I was just trying to point out that everyday experiences of intuition don’t necessarily require anything more than what we already possess as tools for being really really good at surviving this mess called the world outside.

What I get from that article (here a second one) is the ‘polarising experts’, ‘colleagues reacted very emotionally to his findings’. This indicates to me that the specialists don’t agree, because maybe the also don’t understand it enough? Of course Quantum is weird/not intuitive. But another question is: is the theory mathematically correct/consistent/understandable? That is important for the experts…

I only meant I don’t know enough to even know what I’m supposed to be surprised at :rofl:

1 Like