Phase Changes, Complexity, and Change

Amol Kapila — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:40:54 +0000

Joel has a couple of interesting posts, one on incremental change that leads to a phase change, and another entitled “Complexity and Collapse“. In the former, he worries that a marginal change in the state of affairs may lead to a phase change. As an example of this, think of how Lehman’s bankruptcy is what arguable set off the financial crisis last September (even though Bear Stearns’ failure had no such effect). Such changes can be chaotic, non-linear, and difficult or impossible to predict.

In “Complexity and Collapse”, he notes that complex systems can lead to their own demise.

However, he misses the flip side: An incremental change can be what triggers a garden of good things. The interesting question is, “Under what conditions or structure might incremental changes be channelled so that the changes leading to bad phase changes are avoided (or at least their effects minimized or contained) and the good phase changes increase in probability?” Similarly, I think what is interesting to think about under what conditions may complexity be a good thing? What makes some complex systems desirable, fruitful, and not so dangerous, whereas others are undesirable and dangerous?

These thoughts may sound a little muddled. I intend to develop my ideas on this in further posts over the coming weeks.

Some quantum computers are no better than classical computers

Amol Kapila — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 19:12:58 +0000

See here. I wonder what this means for the future of quantum computing. As the article indicates, probably not a whole lot. Proposed adiabatic quantum computers do not fall under the class of quantum computers the research addresses.

Amol Kapila » Physics

Phase Changes, Complexity, and Change

Some quantum computers are no better than classical computers