text stringlengths 0 8.13M |
|---|
putation |
The paradigm of computation is capable of encompassing widely different sys- |
tems. Onacertainlevelofabstraction,thedescriptionofaphysicalsystemand |
a computing machine is very similar, not to say identical. Almost everything |
conceivable can be described by an input function output model. A |
→ → |
physical system is defined as some well defined portion of space and time with |
a well defined interface and interaction with the environment. Then specifying |
theinputusingsomelabeling,theoutputcan,inprincipleatleast,becomputed |
using the dynamical laws. |
In computer science, we always know the dynamics of the system, because |
this is the program, and we set up the system in order for it to compute previ- |
ously unknown outputs from given inputs. Furthermore, essentially due to the |
discrete finite nature of input and output, there is a well agreed on paradigm |
for this input-processing-output model. As soon as the labeling (the alphabet) |
of the input/output states are defined, the computation is just a syntactically |
ruled shuffling of the labels. |
Inphysicsthefocusisdifferent. First,wesometimesdon’tknowthedynam- |
icallaws. Theveryobjectoffundamentalphysicsistoinvestigatethedynamics |
through theory, experiments and observations. |
Is there a difference in the computational strength of different physical sys- |
tems? What algorithms can be performed with what physical systems? These |
arequestionsnotnormallyposedintheoreticalcomputersciencewherethe dis- |
cussionisfromthe outsetframedwithin theclassicalcomputationalmodels,all |
of which are basically notational systems. |
However, it is generally believed that any physical system constrained to |
work in a discrete stepwise fashion, working to precisely and finitely stated |
rules according to the logical description of a Turing Machine or an electronic |
computer, or even a human computer as envisioned by Turing, are equivalent. |
TheChurch-Turingthesisidentifiesthesetofeffectivelyorintuitivelycalcu- |
lable functions with the set of functions computable within any of the classical |
computational models. In a historical context, effective computability meant |
9 |
computability by an abstract human being working to precise rules. |
Thethesishashoweveracquiredconnotationsconnectingittomachinecom- |
putation, in particular electronic digital computing machines. In this latter |
sense the thesis is true; what can be computed by a general purpose digital |
computer can be computed by a Turing machine. This is due to the fact that |
a digital computer can be modeled as an abstract RAM machine. Whether |
any conceivable physical computing machine is constrained by the thesis is not |
known(butsee[52]). Thisisaquestionaboutallofphysics,andwedon’tknow |
all of physics yet. |
Ontheotherhand,theprecisemappingbetweenmodelsofcomputationand |
humananddigitalmachinecomputationandtheconsequentpossibilitytostudy |
computationintheabstracthasleadtotheviewthatthelimitsofcomputation |
are set by mathematics and logic. The development of quantum computation |
has, to a degree, challenged this view of computation. Since computations are |
basically physical processes when actually carried out, it can be argued that |
what can be computed is a question of physics, not a question of mathematics |
or logic [7]. |
1.3 Classical physics and the computer |
The CPU of a digital electronic computer as well as the main memory used for |
intermediate storage consist of huge amounts of transistors and other semicon- |
ducting devices working in an on/off fashion corresponding to distinct voltage |
levels. These voltage levels constitutes a concrete realization of the abstract |
bit of information. The semiconductors in their turn are arranged into circuits |
implementinglogicalgates. Theprecisemappingbetweenabstractlogicalgates |
working on bits and circuits working with voltage levels are the basis for the |
success of the electronic digital computer. But without the extreme fastness |
with which the switching between on and off can be performed (on the order |
of nanoseconds) the computer would not be so powerful. There is also an en- |
gineering aspect of this. The transistors must work in parallel, and in practice |
the CPU clock controls the working of the computer so that at each time tick, |
bit flips are performed in parallel. |
The electronic digital computer can therefore be seen as a special physical |
systemconstrainedorengineeredto workin a discrete way. All operationsper- |
formed by the computer are discrete, but the underlying physical processes are |
continuous,or at leastthe descriptionof these physicalprocessesis continuous. |
The actually bit flips between zero and one, when studied at the physical level |
take a certain amount of time and the transition between voltage levels can |
actually be studied by employing a good enough oscilloscope. But once one |
has abstracted away from these physical considerations, the operations of the |
electronic computer could as well be performed by other physical systems, for |
exampleelectriccircuitsworkingwithmagneticrelays. The performancewould |
be much slower and other engineering problems would ensue.2 |
2Actuallysuchcomputers,andcomputersbasedonvacuumtubes,precededthesolidstate |
10 |
The workings of a transistor, as far as electronics goes, can be described |
by classical electrodynamics. But electronics is not far from quantum physics. |
Transistors are quantum mechanical devices that could not possibly be under- |
stood or built without a knowledge of quantum physics. However these tran- |
sistors are wired to work in a discrete fashion as switches. Logically there is |
no difference between a transistor switch, a mechanicalswitch or an electrome- |
chanical switch. The only difference lies in performance measures like speed, |
reliability and energy consumption. The underlying physics of the transistor |
must be understood in terms of quantum mechanics, but once that is done, |
the transistor as a circuit element can be understood in classical terms. And |
furthermore, as pointed out above, these circuit elements can be abstractly |
modeled and reliably worked with without at every step consulting the under- |
lying physics. When implementing the circuit, design issues like power supply, |
switching times, delays et cetera must of course be faced, but this does not, in |
principle, influence the logical design of the circuit. |
Intheenditallcomesdowntothefactthatwecanbuildfastelectroniccom- |
puters that can effectively carryout algorithms. These computers are basedon |
quantummechanicalphysicalsystemsconstrainedtoworkinadiscrete,classical |
fashion. Furthermore, miniaturization notwithstanding, these systems involve |
the collective behavior of large numbers of particles (electrons), thus relying on |
statistical properties of the systems. |
Incontrast,inthewouldbequantumcomputers,itistheindividualbehavior |
of the particles we have to rely on. This is at the same time the source of the |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.