[…] whether scalable quantum computing is possible is a question about the laws of physics. It’s perfectly conceivable that future developments in physics would conflict with scalable quantum computing, in the same way that relativity conflicts with faster-than-light communication, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics conflicts with perpetuum mobiles. It’s for such a development in physics that I’m offering this prize.
For me, it recalled a long standing “COI” between Copenhagen view and quantum computation.
Really, until we do not ask about transition between quantum and classical worlds, all looks more or less nice. But what some apologist of Copenhagen view should say, if he also accepts a possibility of the scalable quantum computer?
Of course, the “Copenhagen view” is a bit vague definition, but I simply mean a person, who claims, that if in Stern-Gerlach experiment he sees a single spot on the screen, it is “really so” and refuses idea, that indeed there are two spots, but he may see only one because he himself is also in some superposition. Even more, such a person may claim, that definite outcome with probability described by Born rule is a necessary property of our world.
If for macroscopic objects the superposition is inevitably destroyed in such a kind of Copenhagen view, is it possible to talk about scalability of quantum computer? Yet, the “macroscopic level” may be quite bigger than number of qubits necessary for useful quantum computation (e.g. few millions qubits vs Avogadro number).