Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

145 submissions , 122 unreviewed
3,930 questions , 1,398 unanswered
4,853 answers , 20,624 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
501 active unimported users
More ...

Are there any applications of quantum information theory to physics?

+ 6 like - 0 dislike
57 views

Are there any applications of quantum information theory to physics?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 04:18 (UCT), posted by SE-user user2172
asked Feb 23, 2011 in Theoretical Physics by anonymous [ no revision ]
Most voted comments show all comments
I guess they have similar mathematical structures. That's all. But let's see what the experts say about this.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 04:18 (UCT), posted by SE-user user1355
Only that information underlies all of physics, including that of black holes ;)

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 04:18 (UCT), posted by SE-user user346
@Deepak: I thought physics underlies all of information. So there, we have a proof of equivalence :)

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 04:18 (UCT), posted by SE-user Marek
The "What do you think" part of your question was just an invitation to discussion, not an actual question, so I removed it. You can re-edit if you can make a more specific phrasing: ask a specific question that can be answered, don't just solicit people's opinions.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 04:18 (UCT), posted by SE-user David Z
Try this article by david deutsch...

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 04:18 (UCT), posted by SE-user Abdullah Khalid
Most recent comments show all comments
I think you need to be careful of the context as he says:"There are branches of science — in fact most of them are branches of physics — that we expect, by their nature, to have philosophical implications.An obvious example is cosmology. There are other sciences, such as, say, aerodynamics, in which, no matter how startling or important our discoveries may become, we do not expect fundamental philosophical implications." I think the chart is then rating things by their potential for philosophical implications. My guess is that zoology is rated higher due to a an 'evolution' implication.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 04:18 (UCT), posted by SE-user TCTopCat
While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 04:18 (UCT), posted by SE-user EnergyNumbers

1 Answer

+ 5 like - 0 dislike

There's a huge body of literature in applying ideas from quantum information to the study of strongly interacting many body systems. If I have time I'll edit this answer with my own personal review (primarily all of the lovely simulation techniques that QIT has given a solid physical and conceptual foundation to) but as a jumping off point, there is a set of lecture notes with excellent references here.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 04:18 (UCT), posted by SE-user wsc
answered Feb 23, 2011 by wsc (290 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysi$\varnothing$sOverflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...