Minimum Viable Quantum Computational Whole — IV (Conclusion)
The double-slit experiment has been instrumental in the birth and development of quantum mechanics. In this mini-series, I revisit it as a basis to review different quantum computational paradigms. This is possible because the dynamics of quantum objects participating in the experiment can be perceived as providing the backbone for different computational possibilities.
In the first common interpretation, photons (as quantum objects) can be imagined to display superposition as they take on a large set of possible values from source to screen while also being entangled with all other photons even across time, hence allowing for the wave-like interference patterns to be seen when photons are projected individually through one or the other slit. In a second interpretation, the experiment can be seen as displaying a quantum computational whole, with individual strands of the interference pattern revealing different properties or ‘functions’ of light. This is explored in more detail in the first piece of the mini-series, which also poses the question of the minimum viable quantum computation whole required for successful quantum computation.
The point made that the act of measurement of a quantum object causes the focus to shift to something other than the whole is explored further in the second piece. This is done by exploring the nature of the quantum computational whole. Such a nature is imagined by taking the double-slit experiment as the first layer in a world that becomes progressively more complete as subsequent layers are built from the properties embedded in the individual strands in the interference pattern of the first layer.
The dichotomy between an approach that focuses on measured quantum objects and the quantum computational whole is further elaborated in the third piece that introduces the notion of ‘observer’ and observation in the double-slit experiment. Four different types of observations are identified, suggesting the corresponding superposition and entanglement that results from each and the subsequent species of quantum computing that would be the outcome of such superposition and entanglement.
- Scenario 1 is the commonly accepted quantum computing species in which measured quantum objects subject to statistics and probability are imagined to represent the quantum computational whole. But the other three scenarios suggest different quantum computing approaches and architectures, and in this concluding piece, I share some beginning work along these separate developmental lines.
- In Scenario 2, the observer is a measuring device placed close to the double-slit. However, the measurement itself may allow something of the computational whole to be measured rather than the reduced quantum object. Measuring the whole, though, requires a different measurement paradigm than the one in practice now. In a patent I filed in 2022, I suggest a flexible, scalable quantum computing architecture based on gates organized to propagate property or function derived from the quantum computational whole and unique mathematics — Fourfold Function-Based Mathematics of Light (F3MOL) — to manipulate such function. I will refer to this as a QIQuantum-type computer (re: QIQuantum). This computer looks at the quantum level differently, and different combinations of gates can be combined to create higher levels of computing sophistication, as suggested in scenarios 3 and 4. To address Scenario 2, however, just the measuring has to be different, resulting in a simpler quantum computer. I emphasize that the mathematics of combining what is perceived is not based on probability and statistics, as is the case in scenario 1, but on F3MOL.
- Scenario 3 is based on perceiving more of the wholeness (using the strands of the interference pattern on the screen as the basis/metaphor) and also uses a QIQuantum-type computer. The arbitration of the higher level of wholeness that has implicit in it a larger range of functions becomes the basis of a more sophisticated quantum computing possibility. I have written IEEE papers that reinterpret the notion of quanta and enhance and reinterpret fundamental quantum computational anchors established by Feynman, Euler, Schrodinger, and Heisenberg, that begin to shed light on F3MOL and the possibilities of quantum computational wholeness.
- Scenario 4, where two wholenesses are made to interact, also requires a QIQuantum-type computer. In this scenario, human beings can be a part of the quantum computational architecture. More insight into the QIQuantum-type computer architecture is provided by the IEEE nano-cyborg paper, and more insight into human-in-the-loop quantum computing is provided by the IEEE paper that views the universe as a complex adaptive system (CAS).
Depending on the appetite of the reader, two additional sources delve into the notion of the quantum computational whole. First, a non-technical series of Forbes articles goes over aspects of the alternative quantum computing vision explored in this mini-series. Second, for a deeper philosophical-mathematical dive, refer to three series of books: the 6-book Cosmology of Light series for a step-by-step development of the underlying mathematics that has been used as an artistic medium to express the power of light; the 4-book Applications in Cosmology of Light series, for an application of the developed mathematics, and some further development of the mathematics, in areas of quantum computation, AI, genetics, and transhumanism; & the 7-book on-going Artistic Interpretation of Cosmology of Light series, that complements the mathematics with art to give a more visceral feel for the underlying concepts.
Summary of References Across Series
[1] Jay Bennet. https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a22094/video-explainer-double-slit-experiment/. Popular Mechanics, The Double Slit Experiment That Blew Upon Quantum Mechanics. July 28, 2016.
[2] Jan Faye. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-copenhagen/. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). “Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics,” URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/qm-copenhagen/>.
[3] Pravir Malik. https://pravirmalik.medium.com/a-probabilistic-quantum-computer-surely-youre-joking-dr-feynman-3dbde5a71804
[4] Russ Fein. https://quantumtech.blog/2023/06/23/the-quantum-leaps-beginner-guide-to-qubits/
[5] Massimiliano Proietti, Alexander Pickston, Francesco Graffitti, Peter Barrow, Dmytro Kundys, Cyril Branciard, Martin Ringbauer, Alessandro Fedrizzi. https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/03/12/136684/a-quantum-experiment-suggests-theres-no-such-thing-as-objective-reality/. MIT Technology Review. March 12, 2019. [Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1902.05080 : Experimental Rejection of Observer-Independence in the Quantum World]
[6] John Loeffler. https://interestingengineering.com/science/what-is-the-double-slit-experiment-and-why-is-it-so-important. Feb 10, 2022. Interesting Engineering
[7] Pravir Malik. https://pravirmalik.medium.com/minimum-viable-quantum-computational-whole-i-179a4b3e52f
[8] Pravir Malik. https://pravirmalik.medium.com/minimum-viable-quantum-computational-whole-ii-40ed54637398
[9] Pravir Malik. https://pravirmalik.medium.com/minimum-viable-quantum-computational-whole-iii-2a1763197d78
[10] QIQuantum. https://qiquantum.com/
[11] Pravir Malik. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9031279. “Light-Based Interpretation of Quanta and its Implications on Quantum Computing,” 2020 10th Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and Conference (CCWC), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2020, pp. 0719–0726, doi: 10.1109/CCWC47524.2020.9031279.
[12] Pravir Malik. “Enhancing Feynman’s Quantum Computational Positioning to Inject New Possibility into the Foundations of the Quantum Computing Industry,” 2022 IEEE 13th Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (IEMCON), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2022, pp. 0546–0553, doi: 10.1109/IEMCON56893.2022.9946451. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9946451
[13] Pravir. Malik. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9623157. “A Light-based Interpretation of Euler’s Identity with Implications on Quantum Computation,” 2021 IEEE 12th Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (IEMCON), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2021, pp. 0908–0914, doi: 10.1109/IEMCON53756.2021.9623157.
[14] Pravir Malik. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9422517. “A Light-based Interpretation of Schrodinger’s Wave Equation and Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle with Implications on Quantum Computation,” 2021 IEEE International IOT, Electronics and Mechatronics Conference (IEMTRONICS), Toronto, ON, Canada, 2021, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/IEMTRONICS52119.2021.9422517.
[15] Pravir Malik. “Envisioning A Light-Based Quantum-Computational Nano-Cyborg,” 2022 IEEE International IOT, Electronics and Mechatronics Conference (IEMTRONICS), Toronto, ON, Canada, 2022, pp. 1–8, doi: 10.1109/IEMTRONICS55184.2022.9795762. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9795762
[16] Pravir Malik. “The Role of a Light-Based Quantum Computational Model in the Creation of an Oscillating Universe,” 2022 IEEE 12th Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and Conference (CCWC), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2022, pp. 0953–0959, doi: 10.1109/CCWC54503.2022.9720904. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9720904
[17] Pravir Malik. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/people/pravirmalik1/
[18] Pravir Malik. https://pravirmalik.medium.com/cosmology-of-light-5b2346db55b0
[19] Pravir Malik. https://pravirmalik.medium.com/applications-in-cosmology-of-light-50e9bebe3937
[20] Pravir Malik. https://pravirmalik.medium.com/artistic-interpretation-of-cosmology-of-light-68e47c1d2ce3
(Concluded)
