Essay Abstract

I think that quantum computers could solve Gödel's incompleteness theorems

Author Bio

graduation: mechanical engineering degree: physics thesis: deterministic neural network and fuzzy neural netwoek master: advanced technology in communication and information research: -Genova,fractal dimensionality and experimental discrete equation -Marina di Ravenna, fluid dynamic and bacteria grow equation -Vietri sul mare, fluido dynamic model applied to soil pollution and associate bioremediation -Manchester (interrupted), Natural Gradient Descent and Indipendent Component Analysis

Download Essay PDF File

I wanted to withdraw the essay: I thought that Kurt had joked with me.

But, in a profound sense, any quantum calculation involving the negation of a claim, in the form that Kurt presented me, give quantum contradiction in amplitude, and sometime in probability.

I am thinking that this contradiction is true for each quantum calculus, with feedbacks, or loops.

So it is possible that there is some truth in the claims.

Each quantum eigenstate of the unitary matrix, that give the dynamic of the quantum computer, has eigenvalue with modulus one. So that there is often a amplitude dynamic for the quantum computer. Each complex linear combintation of eigenstates give a unitary dynamic that is a complex linear combination with the same eigenstates that rotate in a complex plane (like a Fourier series).

8 days later

Dear Dominico Oricchio

Dominico hairdresser

Dominiko is not a hairdresser - he wrote an essay on the FQXi contest

We leave the hairdresser and look for a hairdresser in her neighborhood

We find a hairdresser and return him to the hairdresser.

Nature is afraid of emptiness, claimed the ancient philosophers.

Nature is not afraid of emptiness, Newton said and placed bodies in emptiness.

I see further, because I stand on the shoulders of a giant, he said about Descartes, who claimed that nature is afraid of emptiness.

Newton said space is a container of bodies.

No, Descartes said, space is matter that instantly fills the voids that can be formed in it by the will of God.

Now they say that in the world there is no movement speed greater than the speed of light, which means that the void does not disappear instantly, i.e. there is a void, but at the same time it is not. There is no instantaneous speed, but there is the speed of light. It follows from this that space moves at a speed no greater than the speed of light, since it is matter.

聽Dear Dominico Oricchio, I invite you to discuss some aspects

The neo-Cartesian generalization of modern physics, which I set out in my essay: "The transformation of uncertainty into certainty. The relationship of the Lorentz factor with the probability density of states. And more from a new Cartesian generalization of modern physics. by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich ". By the way, the probability density of the states of matter in it depends on the speed of its motion.

Sincerely, Boris Dzhechko.

    8 days later

    Dear Dominico Oricchio, a hairdresser, is it not enough for you that a neocartesian generalization of modern physics has revealed a connection between the Lorentz factor and the probability density of atomic states, and also explained the formula of masses - energy of equivalence by the existence of pressure of the Universe on a corpuscle? Already these two facts are the greatest achievements of neocartesian physics, based on the identity of space and matter of Descartes. In order to continue to talk with you, you must show that you have acquired this identity and realized that space is matter, and it moves, since it is matter. And then we'll talk about the Dirac and Klein - Gordon equations. I think that this will not be soon. All the best to you!

    Boris Dizhechko

    5 days later

    A bit of comedy perhaps?

    That is not so bad. But it was too brief or inconclusive. Your essay is at least thought-provoking. You seem to be hinting at what Paola Zizzi calls para-consistent logic, and her research explains the emergence of spacetime in terms of logic gates, in a recent paper. You might want to check her work out. I will come back later, if I have something constructive to say.

    Best,

    Jonathan

      Thank your for your comment, and constructive criticism: I will report to Kurt.

      I am reading the Paola Zizzi - Computability at the Plank scale; it is interesting , from the abstract, the idea of computability but not decidable.

      Domenico

      Zizzi write a standard article, with many interesting consideration.

      The absence of biunivocity between quantum calculus and real quantum system.

      The idea of a fuzzyness of the space-time.

      The inner observer has a paraconsisten logic, a logic without contradictions.

      That the quantum calculus to the Plank scale lie a quantum algorithm.

      The Deutsch idea that the physical law are quantum Turing machine in the space-time.

      The quantum system use physical law for the evolution, so that each program is computable.

      Here I read the interesting idea, that in the first Godel's incompleteness theorem is different in Plank scale: the theorems are proven but not observable as true, due to the internal non-observability of the truth value.

      Results almost similar to mine, but with a superior quality of writing and depth.

      Thanks for the reading suggestion

      Domenico

      I have found Paola's work inspirational...

      I think she is under-appreciated, but has been a beacon of light for the quantum age. According to Seth Lloyd; it was she who first coined the term "It from qubit" that is now very popular, but the field has left her behind. Perhaps a few years from now, once they catch up, folks will learn she started out 25 years ahead of her time.

      Not all of her work is spot-on, but there is great value in reading what she has set out, and using it as the basis for further reasoning. It makes me wish I knew more category theory, for one. But I think her 'sequent calculus' is a very apt way to describe quantum-mechanical interactions. One almost has to assume reality is inside-out, to get QM right, but using the right logic also works.

      All the Best,

      Jonathan

      2 months later

      Dear Domenico,

      I uploaded a new version of my essay, however, the title remained.

      Wilhelmus de Wilde re-uploaded the file Wilde_THE_COMPLETELY_UNKNOW.pdf for the essay entitled "THE COMPLETELY UNKNOWN" on 2020-03-25 10:48:58 UTC.

      IN MY ESSAY I argue that it will not only be Godel's Completeness Theorems that will be solved but also maybe the creation of Artificial Consciousness.

      Thank you

      Wilhelmus

      25 days later

      Domenico,

      A great bit of light relief, thanks, but an interesting point, nice to see expressed. Of course I posit the exact opposite! That Aristotle needs updating now we know atoms ARE divisible, and quantum computers then won't prove Kurt wrong! I j hope you'll read & comment.

      Thanks for yours, I think it deserves a rather higher score, but it's probably been hit with 1's as mine has. At least they can only do HALF the Boolean pair!

      very best

      Peter

        6 days later

        hello there thanks for the dialogue. nice work there.i presume that's a new way of discourse.. wonderful old see and rate how anthropic bias ate into physics in my essay -https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3525.thanks

          Thank you for reading my essay.

          I am busy in these days, I will take - in the future - a day to read, vote and eventually comment every essay (if the essays are interesting).

          Domenico

          8 days later

          I am back to say thank you...

          Your essay was enjoyable. I can't give you full credit because your English is too poor and your writing fragmented. But you get high marks for getting the right answer. Indeed; assigning probabilities in truth tables for all premises would allow a truer representation of reality. So you told the simple truth simply.

          Quantum computing can or could do this. I am exploring a similar angle to develop subjective search and sort algorithms using the octonions. I'd rather meet R2-D2 and C3P0 one day, than have strong AI develop into strong arm robots like the Terminators. Avoiding that outcome calls for more subtlety of judgment I think, on the part of the machines we build.

          Best,

          Jonathan

            Thank you for reading my essay, and for constructive criticism.

            I was trying to play in language to solve the self-reference problem using quantum logic, quantum computer, but it seems that this is impossible with quantum logic; unless building particular logic gates.

            Saluti

            Domenico