Perhaps there IS some hope for mankind.

]]>Traveling slaesman is exactly the type of problem that only requires a 1% accuracy ot be successful. Only run 10,000 times on a quantum computer and pick out the best path it comes up with. With 10,000 answers from the quantum computer with a 1% chance any one of them is actually correct there is only a 2.24877E-44 probability you won’t have the absolute best answer contained within the answer set. Going up to 1,000,000 or so runs lower the probability so low that it basically can’t happen. This is close enough for the best solution from the data set to be used as the actual solution for these type of problems ]]>

Usually the number of possible solutions to an NP problem is very large and requires checking all of them to find the best.

Using a low reilability quantum computer to provide a set of possible answers to check can quickly reduce the size of the solution space.

]]>Why can’t these architectures simply be scaled up at the cost of reliability and have the program run multiple times. If it’s right ~1% of the time, then that should be plenty good enough to use classical computers to analyse thousands or millions of result states to see if they are any better than standard classical solutions.

Factoring large numbers for instance is easy to check potential answers. So if you get hundreds or thousands of potential answers they can all be quickly checked using classical architecture to identify the final correct solution. Many NP problems are like this.

]]>Apologies. For the correct link to a simulation theory piece: http://goo.gl/ZD9cJ ]]>

God, an intensely needy & cosmically powerful cat lady, is just playing the latest release of “Semi-Conscious Hairless Primates.”

Yep.

More: http://goo.gl/2wkcN

-Reno at Anthrobotic.com

]]>