Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-768ffcd9cc-5sfl8 Total loading time: 0.333 Render date: 2022-12-05T10:55:11.171Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

The impact of models of a physical oracle on computational power

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 September 2012

EDWIN J. BEGGS
Affiliation:
School of Physical Sciences, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, Wales, United Kingdom Email: E.J.Beggs@Swansea.ac.uk; J.V.Tucker@Swansea.ac.uk
JOSÉ FÉLIX COSTA
Affiliation:
Centro de Matemática e Aplicações Fundamentais, University of Lisbon, 1649-003 Lisboa, Portugal and Instituto Superior Técnico, Technical University of Lisbon, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal Email: jose.felix.costa@ist.utl.pt
JOHN V. TUCKER
Affiliation:
School of Physical Sciences, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, Wales, United Kingdom Email: E.J.Beggs@Swansea.ac.uk; J.V.Tucker@Swansea.ac.uk

Abstract

Using physical experiments as oracles for algorithms, we can characterise the computational power of classes of physical systems. Here we show that two different physical models of the apparatus for a single experiment can have different computational power. The experiment is the scatter machine experiment (SME), which was first presented in Beggs and Tucker (2007b). Our first physical model contained a wedge with a sharp vertex that made the experiment non-deterministic with constant runtime. We showed that Turing machines with polynomial time and an oracle based on a sharp wedge computed the non-uniform complexity class P/poly. Here we reconsider the experiment with a refined physical model where the sharp vertex of the wedge is replaced by any suitable smooth curve with vertex at the same point. These smooth models of the experimental apparatus are deterministic. We show that no matter what shape is chosen for the apparatus:

  1. (i) the time of detection of the scattered particles increases at least exponentially with the size of the query; and

  2. (ii) Turing machines with polynomial time and an oracle based on a smooth wedge compute the non-uniform complexity class P/log* ⫋ P/poly.

We discuss evidence that many experiments that measure quantities have exponential runtimes and a computational power of P/log*.

Type
Paper
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beggs, E. and Tucker, J. V. (2006) Embedding infinitely parallel computation in Newtonian kinematics. Applied Mathematics and Computation 178 (1)2543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beggs, E. and Tucker, J. V. (2007a) Can Newtonian systems, bounded in space, time, mass and energy compute all functions? Theoretical Computer Science 371 (1)419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beggs, E. and Tucker, J. V. (2007b) Experimental computation of real numbers by Newtonian machines. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series A (Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences) 463 (2082)15411561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Loff, B. and Tucker, J. V. (2008a) On the complexity of measurement in classical physics. In: Agrawal, M., Du, D., Duan, Z. and Li, A. (eds.) Theory and Applications of Models of Computation (TAMC 2008). Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4978 2030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Loff, B. and Tucker, J. V. (2008b) Computational complexity with experiments as oracles. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series A (Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences) 464 (2098)27772801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Loff, B. and Tucker, J. V. (2008c) Oracles and advice as measurements. In: Calude, C. S., Costa, J. F., Freund, R., Oswald, M. and Rozenberg, G. (eds.) Unconventional Computation (UC 2008). Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science 5204 3350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F. and Tucker, J. V. (2008d) Quanta in classical mechanics: uncertainty in space, time, energy. In Proceedings of the Studia Logica International Conference on Logic and the Foundations of Physics: space, time and quanta (Trends in Logic VI)), Belgium, Brussels, 11-12 December.Google Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Loff, B. and Tucker, J. V. (2008e) Computational complexity with experiments as oracles II. Upper bounds. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series A (Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences) 465 (2105)14531465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F. and Tucker, J. V. (2009a) Physical experiments as oracles. Bulletin of the European Association for Theoretical Computer Science 97 137151. (An invited paper for the ‘Natural Computing Column’.)Google Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F. and Tucker, J. V. (2009b) Physical oracles. Technical Report, Department of Computer Science, University of Swansea.Google Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F. and Tucker, J. V. (2009c) Computational Models of Measurement and Hempel's Axiomatization. In: Carsetti, A. (ed.) Causality, Meaningful Complexity and Knowledge Construction, Theory and Decision Library A 46, Springer-Verlag 155184.Google Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F. and Tucker, J. V. (2010a) Physical oracles: The Turing machine and the Wheatstone bridge. In: Aerts, D., Smets, S. and Van Bendegem, J. P. (eds.) Special issue: The contributions of Logic to the Foundations of Physics. Studia Logica 95 271292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F. and Tucker, J. V. (2010b) Comparing complexity classes relative to physical oracles. In: Ferreira, F., Guerra, H., Mayordomo, E. and Rasga, J. (eds.) Programs, Proofs, Processes, 6th Conference on Computability in Europe, CiE 2010, CMATI – Centre for Applied Mathematics and Information Technology, University of Azores 6272.Google Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F. and Tucker, J. V. (2010c) Limits to measurement in experiments governed by algorithms. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 20 10191050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F. and Tucker, J. V. (2012a) Axiomatising physical experiments as oracles to algorithms. (In preparation.)Google Scholar
Bournez, O. and Cosnard, M. (1996) On the computational power of dynamical systems and hybrid systems. Theoretical Computer Science 168 (2)417459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, N. R. (1928) An Account of the Principles of Measurement and Calculation, Longmans, Green and co.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1966) Philosophical Foundations of Physics, Basic Books.Google Scholar
Geroch, R. and Hartle, J. B. (1986) Computability and Physical Theories. Foundations of Physics 16 (6)533550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1952) Fundamentals of concept formation in empirical science. International Encyclopedia of Unified Science 2 (7).Google Scholar
Kreisel, G. (1974) A notion of mechanistic theory. Synthese 47 924.Google Scholar
Kreisel, G. (1982) Review of Pour-El and Richards. Journal of Symbolic Logic 47 (4)900902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, C. (1990) Unpredictability and undecidability in dynamical systems. Physical Review Letters 64 (20)23542357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Németi, I. and Dávid, G. (2006) Relativistic computers and the Turing barrier. Applied Mathematics and Computation 178 (1)118142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odifreddi, P. (1989) Classical Recursion Theory, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics 125, North Holland.Google Scholar
Penrose, R (1989) The Emperor's New Mind, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pour-El, M. and Richards, I. (1981) The wave equation with computable initial data such that its unique solution is not computable. Advances in Mathematics 39 (4)215239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegelmann, H. T. (1999) Neural Networks and Analog Computation: Beyond the Turing Limit, Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weihrauch, K. and Zhong, N. (2002) Is wave propagation computable or can wave computers beat the Turing machine? Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society 85 (2)312332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, A. C.-C. (2003) Classical physics and the Church–Turing thesis. Journal of the ACM 50 (1)100105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziegler, M. (2009) Physically-relativized Church–Turing hypotheses: Physical foundations of computing and complexity theory of computational physics. Applied Mathematics and Computation 215 (4)14311447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The impact of models of a physical oracle on computational power
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The impact of models of a physical oracle on computational power
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The impact of models of a physical oracle on computational power
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *