Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

THREE FORMS OF PHYSICAL MEASUREMENT AND THEIR COMPUTABILITY

  • EDWIN BEGGS (a1), JOSÉ FÉLIX COSTA (a2) and JOHN V TUCKER (a3)
Abstract

We have begun a theory of measurement in which an experimenter and his or her experimental procedure are modeled by algorithms that interact with physical equipment through a simple abstract interface. The theory is based upon using models of physical equipment as oracles to Turing machines. This allows us to investigate the computability and computational complexity of measurement processes. We examine eight different experiments that make measurements and, by introducing the idea of an observable indicator, we identify three distinct forms of measurement process and three types of measurement algorithm. We give axiomatic specifications of three forms of interfaces that enable the three types of experiment to be used as oracles to Turing machines, and lemmas that help certify an experiment satisfies the axiomatic specifications. For experiments that satisfy our axiomatic specifications, we give lower bounds on the computational power of Turing machines in polynomial time using nonuniform complexity classes. These lower bounds break the barrier defined by the Church-Turing Thesis.

Copyright
Corresponding author
*DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, COLLEGE OF SCIENCE SWANSEA UNIVERSITY, SINGLETON PARK, SWANSEA, SA2 8PP WALES, U.K. E-mail: e.j.beggs@swansea.ac.uk
INSTITUTO SUPERIOR TÉCNICO UNIVERSIDADE DE LISBOA PORTUGAL and CENTRO DE MATEMÁTICA E APLICAÇÕES FUNDAMENTAIS UNIVERSIDADE DE LISBOA PORTUGAL3 E-mail: fgc@math.tecnico.ulisboa.pt
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE, COLLEGE OF SCIENCE SWANSEA UNIVERSITY, SINGLETON PARK, SWANSEA, SA2 8PP WALES, U.K. E-mail: j.v.tucker@swansea.ac.uk
References
Hide All
Balcázar, J. L., Días, J., & Gabarró, J. (1995). Structural complexity I (second edition). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Balcázar, J. L., Días, J., & Gabarró, J. (1990). Structural complexity II. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Balcázar, J. L., & Hermo, M. (1998). The structure of logarithmic advice complexity classes. Theoretical Computer Science, 207(1), 217244.
Basilevsky, A., Anderson, A. B., & Hum, D. P. J. (1983). Measurement: Theory and techniques. In Rossi, P. H., Wright, J.D., and Anderson, A. B., editors. Handbook of survey research. New York: Academic Press, pp. 231287.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Loff, B., & Tucker, J. V. (2008a). Computational complexity with experiments as oracles. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series A (Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences), 464(2098), 27772801.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Loff, B., & Tucker, J. V. (2008b). On the complexity of measurement in classical physics. In Agrawal, M., Du, D., Duan, Z., & Li, A., editors. Theory and applications of models of computation (TAMC 2008), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 4978 , Berlin: Springer, pp. 2030.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Loff, B., & Tucker, J. V. (2008c). Oracles and advice as measurements. In Calude, C. S., Costa, J. F., Freund, R., Oswald, M., & Rozenberg, G., editors. Unconventional computation (UC 2008), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 5204 , Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 3350.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Loff, B., & Tucker, J. V. (2009). Computational complexity with experiments as oracles II. Upper bounds. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series A (Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences), 465(2105), 14531465.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Poças, D., & Tucker, J. V. (2013a). On the power of threshold measurements as oracles. In Mauri, G., Dennunzio, A., Manzoni, L., & Porreca, A. E., editors. Unconventional computation and natural computation (UCNC 2013), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7956 , Berlin: Springer, pp. 618.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Poças, D., & Tucker, J. V. (2013b). Oracles that measure thresholds: The Turing machine and the broken balance. Journal of Logic and Computation, 23(6), 11551181.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., Poças, D., & Tucker, J. V. (2014). Computations with oracles that measure vanishing quantities, Submitted.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., & Tucker, J. V. (2010a). Computational models of measurement and Hempel’s axiomatization. In Carsetti, A., editor. Causality, meaningful complexity and knowledge construction, Theory and Decision Library A, Vol. 46 , Berlin: Springer, pp. 155184.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., & Tucker, J. V. (2010b). Limits to measurement in experiments governed by algorithms. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science (Special issue on Quantum Algorithms, ed. Salvador Elías Venegas-Andraca), 20(06), 10191050.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., & Tucker, J. V. (2010c). Physical oracles: The Turing machine and the Wheatstone bridge Studia Logica (Special issue on Contributions of Logic to the Foundations of Physics, eds. Aerts, D., Smets, S., & Van Bendegem, J. P.), 95( 1–2), 279–300.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., & Tucker, J. V. (2010d). The Turing machine and the uncertainty in the measurement process. In Guerra, H., editor. Physics and computation, P&C 2010, CMATI – Centre for Applied Mathematics and Information Technology, University of Azores, Ponta Delgada, pp. 6272.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., & Tucker, J. V. (2012a). Axiomatising physical experiments as oracles to algorithms. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series A (Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences), 370(12), 33593384.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., & Tucker, J. V. (2012b). The impact of models of a physical oracle on computational power. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science (Special issue on Computability of the Physical, eds. Calude, C. S. & Cooper, S. B.), 22(5), 853879.
Beggs, E., Costa, J. F., & Tucker, J. V. (2012c). Unifying science through computation: Reflections on computability and physics. In Pombo, O., Manuel Torres, J., Symons, J., & Rahman, S., editors. New approaches to the unity of science, Vol. II: Special sciences and the unity of science, Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science, vol. 24, Berlin: Springer, pp. 5380.
Beggs, E. & Tucker, J. V. (2007). Experimental computation of real numbers by Newtonian machines. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series A (Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences), 463(2082), 15411561.
Bohm, D. (1951, 1979, 1989). Quantum theory, New York: Dover.
Born, M. & Wolf, E. (1964). Principles of optics: electromagnetic theory of propagation, interference and diffraction of light (second (revised) edition), Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Bournez, O. & Cosnard, M. (1996). On the computational power of dynamical systems and hybrid systems. Theoretical Computer Science, 168(2), 417459.
Campbell, N. R. (1957). Foundations of science, the philosophy of theory and experiment, New York: Dover.
Carnap, R. (1966). Philosophical foundations of physics, New York: Basic Books.
Geroch, R. & Hartle, J. B. (1986). Computability and physical theories. Foundations of Physics, 16(6), 533550.
Hempel, C. G. (1952). Fundamentals of concept formation in empirical science. International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, 2(7).
Jain, S., Osherson, D. N., Royer, J. S., & Sharma, A. (1999). Systems That Learn. An Introduction to Learning Theory (second edition), Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Krantz, D. H., Luce, D. R., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (2007a). Foundations of Measurement. Vol. I: Additive and polynomial representations, New York: Dover.
Krantz, D. H., Suppes, P., Luce, D. R., & Tversky, A. (2007b). Foundations of Measurement. Vol. III: Representation, axiomatization and invariance, New York: Dover.
Siegelmann, H. T. (1999). Neural networks and analog computation: Beyond the Turing limit, Switzerland: Birkhäuser.
Suppes, P. (1951). A set of independent axioms for extensive quantities. Portugaliæ Mathematica, 10(2), 163172.
Suppes, P., Krantz, D. H., Luce, D. R., & Tversky, A. (2007). Foundations of Measurement. Vol. II: Geometric, threshold and probabilistic representations, New York: Dover.
Turing, A. (1936). On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 42, 230265.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The Review of Symbolic Logic
  • ISSN: 1755-0203
  • EISSN: 1755-0211
  • URL: /core/journals/review-of-symbolic-logic
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed