The Computational Complexity of Decoding Hawking Radiation

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
How Much Information Is In Entangled Quantum States? Scott Aaronson MIT |
Advertisements

Quantum Versus Classical Proofs and Advice Scott Aaronson Waterloo MIT Greg Kuperberg UC Davis | x {0,1} n ?
Quantum Software Copy-Protection Scott Aaronson (MIT) |
Multilinear Formulas and Skepticism of Quantum Computing Scott Aaronson UC Berkeley IAS.
Limitations of Quantum Advice and One-Way Communication Scott Aaronson UC Berkeley IAS Useful?
Quantum Search of Spatial Regions Scott Aaronson (UC Berkeley) Joint work with Andris Ambainis (U. Latvia)
How Much Information Is In A Quantum State? Scott Aaronson MIT |
Quantum Double Feature Scott Aaronson (MIT) The Learnability of Quantum States Quantum Software Copy-Protection.
An Invitation to Quantum Complexity Theory The Study of What We Cant Do With Computers We Dont Have Scott Aaronson (MIT) QIP08, New Delhi BQP NP- complete.
Advice Coins Scott Aaronson. PSPACE/coin: Class of problems solvable by a PSPACE machine that can flip an advice coin (heads with probability p, tails.
New Evidence That Quantum Mechanics Is Hard to Simulate on Classical Computers Scott Aaronson Parts based on joint work with Alex Arkhipov.
Scott Aaronson Institut pour l'Étude Avançée Le Principe de la Postselection.
QMA/qpoly PSPACE/poly: De-Merlinizing Quantum Protocols Scott Aaronson University of Waterloo.
Computational Complexity and Physics Scott Aaronson (MIT) New Insights Into Computational Intractability Oxford University, October 3, 2013.
The Collision Lower Bound After 12 Years Scott Aaronson (MIT) Lower bound for a collision problem.
Scott Aaronson (MIT) The Limits of Computation: Quantum Computers and Beyond.
University of Queensland
Quantum Money from Hidden Subspaces Scott Aaronson and Paul Christiano.
The Cryptographic Hardness of Decoding Hawking Radiation Scott Aaronson (MIT)
Black Hole Evaporation, Unitarity, and Final State Projection Daniel Gottesman Perimeter Institute.
Scott Aaronson (MIT) Forrelation A problem admitting enormous quantum speedup, which I and others have studied under various names over the years, which.
When Exactly Do Quantum Computers Provide A Speedup? Scott Aaronson (MIT) Papers & slides at
Computational Phenomena in Physics Scott Aaronson MIT.
Exploring the Limits of the Efficiently Computable Scott Aaronson (MIT) Papers & slides at
Quantum Error Correction SOURCES: Michele Mosca Daniel Gottesman Richard Spillman Andrew Landahl.
Quantum Computing and the Limits of the Efficiently Computable Scott Aaronson MIT.
Quantum Communication, Quantum Entanglement and All That Jazz Mark M. Wilde Communication Sciences Institute, Ming Hsieh Department of Electrical Engineering,
Quantum Error Correction Jian-Wei Pan Lecture Note 9.
Entropy localization and distribution in the Hawking radiation Horacio Casini CONICET-Intituto Balseiro – Centro Atómico Bariloche.
Exploring the Limits of the Efficiently Computable (Or: Assorted things I’ve worked on, prioritizing variety over intellectual coherence) Scott Aaronson.
Qing-Guo Huang based on arXiv: (to appear in PLB) done with F.L.Lin Institute of High Energy Physics, CAS State Key Laboratory of Theoretical.
Exploring the Limits of the Efficiently Computable Research Directions in Computational Complexity and Physics That I Find Exciting Scott Aaronson (MIT)
Quantum Computing and the Limits of the Efficiently Computable Scott Aaronson MIT.
Black Holes, Firewalls, and the Complexity of States and Unitaries Scott Aaronson (MIT) Papers and slides at
CS555Topic 251 Cryptography CS 555 Topic 25: Quantum Crpytography.
Quantum Computing and the Limits of the Efficiently Computable Scott Aaronson MIT.
Wednesday, October 31 Ford Final Chapter (10). Agenda Announce: –Test Wednesday –Office Hours probably busy…better book appt. –Read Chs. 1-3 of Vilekin.
Can computer science help physicists resolve the firewall paradox?
Quantum Convolutional Coding Techniques Mark M. Wilde Communication Sciences Institute, Ming Hsieh Department of Electrical Engineering, University of.
The Kind of Stuff I Think About Scott Aaronson (MIT) LIDS Lunch, October 29, 2013 Abridged version of plenary talk at NIPS’2012.
Black Holes, Firewalls, and the Complexity of States and Unitaries Scott Aaronson (MIT) Papers and slides at
Non-Locality Swapping and emergence of quantum correlations Nicolas Brunner Paul Skrzypczyk, Sandu Popescu University of Bristol.
Cosmological Computation Computers in a weird universe Patrick Rall Ph70 May 10, 2016.
Simulation and Design of Stabilizer Quantum Circuits Scott Aaronson and Boriska Toth CS252 Project December 10, X X +Z Z +ZI +IX
Quantum Computing and the Limits of the Efficiently Computable Scott Aaronson (MIT  UT Austin) NYSC, West Virginia, June 24, 2016.
Quantum is Different, Part 1. Richard Feynman Caltech Course : Potentialities and Limitations of Computing Machines “Nature isn't classical, dammit,
Random Access Codes and a Hypercontractive Inequality for
Complexity-Theoretic Foundations of Quantum Supremacy Experiments
Scott Aaronson Computer Science, UT Austin AAAS Meeting, Feb. 19, 2017
Quantum Computing and the Limits of the Efficiently Computable
Scott Aaronson Associate Professor, EECS
A low cost quantum factoring algorithm
Scott Aaronson (Computer Science) Explore UT Day March 4, 2017
Firewalls, AdS/CFT, and Computational Complexity
More about Parallels.
Shadow Tomography of Quantum States
Black Holes, Firewalls, and the Limits of Quantum Computers
Black Holes, Firewalls, and the Complexity of States and Unitaries
Three Questions About Quantum Computing
Scott Aaronson (UT Austin) MIT, November 20, 2018
Black Holes, Firewalls, and the Limits of Quantum Computers
Three Questions About Quantum Computing
Computational Complexity and Fundamental Physics
Quantum Computing and the Quest for Quantum Computational Supremacy
Gentle Measurement of Quantum States and Differential Privacy
Classical Algorithms from Quantum and Arthur-Merlin Communication Protocols Lijie Chen MIT Ruosong Wang CMU.
Scott Aaronson (UT Austin) Bazaarvoice May 24, 2017
Spin Many quantum experiments are done with photon polarization instead of electron spin Here is the correspondence between the two And the measurement.
Scott Aaronson (UT Austin) Papers and slides at
Scott Aaronson (UT Austin) UNM, Albuquerque, October 18, 2018
Presentation transcript:

The Computational Complexity of Decoding Hawking Radiation Scott Aaronson

Hawking 1970s: What happens to quantum information dropped into a black hole? | Stays in black hole forever  Violates unitarity of QM Comes out in Hawking radiation  if there’s also a copy inside the black hole, violates the No-Cloning Theorem Complementarity (modern view): Inside is just a “re-encoding” of exterior, so no cloning is needed to have | in both places

The Firewall Paradox (Almheiri et al The Firewall Paradox (Almheiri et al. 2012): Refinement of Hawking’s information paradox that challenges complementarity If the black hole interior is “built” out of the same qubits coming out as Hawking radiation, then why can’t we do something to those Hawking qubits, then dive into the black hole, and see that we’ve completely destroyed the spacetime geometry in the interior? Entanglement among Hawking photons detected!

Harlow-Hayden 2013: To create the firewall, you’d need to process the Hawking radiation in a way that probably requires exponential computation time! MODEL SITUATION: R: “Old” Hawking photons B: Hawking photon just now coming out H: Degrees of freedom still inside black hole f,g: Two functions such that it’s hard to tell whether their ranges are equal or disjoint [A. 2002: quantum lower bound for this problem] Idea: If Range(f)=Range(g), then R and B are entangled, but acting on R to reveal the entanglement (as in AMPS experiment) requires proving that Range(f)=Range(g), hence solving the hard problem

MODEL SITUATION (given a one-way function f): My result: Harlow-Hayden decoding is as hard as inverting an arbitrary one-way function MODEL SITUATION (given a one-way function f): B is maximally entangled with the last qubit of R. But in order to see that B and R are even classically correlated, one would need to learn xs (a “hardcore bit” of f), and therefore invert f With realistic dynamics, the decoding task seems like it should only be “harder” than in this model case (though unclear how to formalize that) Is the geometry of spacetime protected by an armor of computational complexity?