Quantum Bayesian Networks

March 5, 2015

“A Bound On Chaos” by Maldacena, Shenker and Stanford

Filed under: Uncategorized — rrtucci @ 7:40 pm

Check out this exciting new paper by some prestigious String Theorists:

“A bound on chaos” by Maldacena, Shenker and Stanford, http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.01409

Lubos Motl has a nice blog post entitled “Taming the Butterfly Effect” about the paper. However, Lubos seems unaware of the fact that quantum information theorists beat string theorists to the punch on this one. Our very own quantum information theorist Seth Lloyd came up with the same concept more than a year ago, except that he called it the “Twitter Rate Upper Bound”. Lloyd has provided an ironclad proof of the existence of such an upper bound for a Turing complete “inflationary quantum computer”. Seth Lloyd has also explained the source of Dark Energy much better than any string theorist ever has.


  1. It’s hard to tell sometimes when you are sarcastic – but there fortunately isn’t much stringyness in the paper which certainly makes it more accessible to your average physics garden gnome. Then again I don’t think any of the authors could possibly have children, otherwise they’d new intuitively that there can be no upper bound on chaos.

    Comment by Quax — March 5, 2015 @ 8:00 pm

  2. I assure you Quax that everything that I say in this blog is at least 50% true. It’s a Bayesian blog and I’m giving you the priors.

    At present, only 3 or 4 people read this blog. But I dream that 200 years from now, in a cave near the Dead Sea, some shepherd will find a badly corroded memory stick inside a clay jar, and this blog will be the only legible one in the stick, and everyone 200 years from now is going to believe everything I’ve ever said in this blog.

    Comment by rrtucci — March 5, 2015 @ 8:32 pm

  3. A question for the quantum software developer: Does this result limit (quantum) computations in any way?

    Comment by wolfgang — March 15, 2015 @ 4:20 pm

  4. Hi Wolfgang, a perfect question for our complexity theorist of choice, Scott Aaronson. I noticed that you asked him this question in his blog and he hasn’t answered it yet. I hope he is mulling it over. He is not known for being taciturn.

    Comment by rrtucci — March 15, 2015 @ 5:45 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: