Semiclassical Expansions, the Strong Quantum Limit, and Duality

We show how to complement Feynman's exponential of the action so that it exhibits a Z_2 duality symmetry. The latter illustrates a relativity principle for the notion of quantum versus classical.Comment: 5 pages, references adde

On the Quantum Complexity of Closest Pair and Related Problems

The closest pair problem is a fundamental problem of computational geometry: given a set of $n$ points in a $d$-dimensional space, find a pair with the smallest distance. A classical algorithm taught in introductory courses solves this problem in $O(n\log n)$ time in constant dimensions (i.e., when $d=O(1)$). This paper asks and answers the question of the problem's quantum time complexity. Specifically, we give an $\tilde{O}(n^{2/3})$ algorithm in constant dimensions, which is optimal up to a polylogarithmic factor by the lower bound on the quantum query complexity of element distinctness. The key to our algorithm is an efficient history-independent data structure that supports quantum interference. In $\mathrm{polylog}(n)$ dimensions, no known quantum algorithms perform better than brute force search, with a quadratic speedup provided by Grover's algorithm. To give evidence that the quadratic speedup is nearly optimal, we initiate the study of quantum fine-grained complexity and introduce the Quantum Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (QSETH), which is based on the assumption that Grover's algorithm is optimal for CNF-SAT when the clause width is large. We show that the na\"{i}ve Grover approach to closest pair in higher dimensions is optimal up to an $n^{o(1)}$ factor unless QSETH is false. We also study the bichromatic closest pair problem and the orthogonal vectors problem, with broadly similar results.Comment: 46 pages, 3 figures, presentation improve

Why Philosophers Should Care About Computational Complexity

One might think that, once we know something is computable, how efficiently it can be computed is a practical question with little further philosophical importance. In this essay, I offer a detailed case that one would be wrong. In particular, I argue that computational complexity theory---the field that studies the resources (such as time, space, and randomness) needed to solve computational problems---leads to new perspectives on the nature of mathematical knowledge, the strong AI debate, computationalism, the problem of logical omniscience, Hume's problem of induction, Goodman's grue riddle, the foundations of quantum mechanics, economic rationality, closed timelike curves, and several other topics of philosophical interest. I end by discussing aspects of complexity theory itself that could benefit from philosophical analysis.Comment: 58 pages, to appear in "Computability: G\"odel, Turing, Church, and beyond," MIT Press, 2012. Some minor clarifications and corrections; new references adde