hiro/Rerervoir-Engineering
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/vale981/Rerervoir-Engineering synced 2025-03-04 17:21:44 -05:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

update my essay

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Valentin Boettcher 2023-03-14 16:23:05 -04:00
parent e06c3e3f1f
commit 2aea305e8c
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: E034E12B7AF56ACE
1 changed files with 39 additions and 35 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

74
papers/Report/index.tex
View file

@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ Hi Bill,
The last few months have been a complicated time for me and
sometimes it seems to me, that all I've done is complaining. This is
an effort to try to explain my troubles and to be constructive about
taking steps twoards resolving them. I want to do this in text form,
taking steps towards resolving them. I want to do this in text form,
as it is sometimes hard for me to stay focussed in dialog and I wan't
to do it now, as I'm getting increasingly angry withmyself about my
dissatisfaction (however unjustified it may be).
@ -487,14 +487,14 @@ form as the scope of the project was limited and I had the great
fortune to make a great deal of progress right at the
beginning.
The notes I'm currently preparing include a section called
\cref{sec:an-attempt-formulate}. There, I have tried to explain my
worries about the project. I understand that my perspective is very
limited and I may just be missunderstanding something.
In \cref{sec:an-attempt-formulate}, I have tried to explain my worries
about the project. I understand that my perspective is very limited
and I may just be missunderstanding something. Some of it may also
simply boil down to subjectivity.
The main takeaway is, that I'm very afraid of working on something
that I don't believe in. I have a hard time sharing your and
Philippe's enthusiasm about it.
that I don't believe in. I have a hard time sharing the enthusiasm of
you and Philippe.
The way forward after reaching the immediate goal of realizing the
model in \refcite{Ricottone2020} is to the clear up my doubts by
@ -520,7 +520,7 @@ I've designed myself a daily schedule that allocates time to the
Dresden Project (which is nearing completion), literature research,
writing this email and general work on the project and on
coursework. This has helped me in the last week, at least on the days
I stuck to the plan ^^.
I stuck to the plan.
Talking to others also helped, as they've told me about their
experiences and troubles. At the same time, most seem enthusiastic
@ -528,17 +528,17 @@ about their research and which gives me hope. The grass looking
greener on the other side seems to be a common theme. Nevertheless, my
lack of enthusiasm seems to be a little outside of the norm.
Originally I got into the quantum information / open systems world,
because exploring the more intricate implications of quantum theory
excited me. The quantum thermodynamics angle of my master's work was
somewhat aligned with that. Things like the analysis of the
non-Markovian quantum walk I think are interesing. Although I don't
know much about the field of topological physics, the connection to
differential geometry (quantum metric tensor) and group theory appeals
to me. However, I don't know how much this topic fits into the scope
the group and what specifically to work on. Realizing those models
does not appeal to me very much, but maybe that could change. I don't
know how feasible, interesting and well studied the extension of
Originally I got into quantum information / open systems, because
exploring the more intricate implications of quantum theory excited
me. The quantum thermodynamics angle of my master's work was somewhat
aligned with that. Things like the analysis of the non-Markovian
quantum walk I think are interesing. Although I don't know much about
the field of topological physics, the connection to differential
geometry (quantum metric tensor) and group theory appeals to
me. However, I don't know how much this topic fits into the scope the
group and what specifically to work on. Realizing those models does
not appeal to me very much, but maybe that could change. I don't know
how feasible, interesting and well studied the extension of
topological systems to open systems is.
I also like the interface of GR and QM, although my very limited
@ -559,9 +559,12 @@ I find my vision.
Other things that sounded cool are non abelian statistics and quantum
information processing, or also continous measurement.
\section{An Attempt to Formulate my Worries About the Project}
\label{sec:an-attempt-formulate}
On the numerical side I'm interested in tensor network and physically
informed neural networks. Maybe the latter is an interesting direction
to look into.
\subsection{An Attempt to Formulate my Worries About the Project}
\label{sec:an-attempt-formulate}
Along with the issue concerning arbitrary unitary transformations on
the amplitudes mentioned in \cref{sec:notat-prel}, I also wonder how
@ -581,7 +584,7 @@ physics taking place are quantum mechanical in nature. Each
realization of a model in such a system would constitute a test of
quantum mechanics and thus be of interest from a physical
standpoint. It would also constitute a physical implementation of some
(hopefully) interesting behavior, for example Mojorana modes, or
(hopefully) interesting behavior, for example Majorana modes, or
super-conductivity, or some topological effects.
One can of course interject now that light, or any physical system, is
@ -590,26 +593,27 @@ of the resonator modes, we also perform a quantum measurement albeit
neglecting the fluctuations. In that sense however, a numerical simulation
would then also constitute an equally valid ``realization''.
The one merit of the fiber loop setup (or any similar setup) that I
can think of is then to solve problems that are not tractable
analytically or numerically and that are nevertheless of practical
interest. The main goal of this project in the short term should then
be to identify such problems and asses them with respect to their
eligibility for treatment using the analog computer.
One merit of the fiber loop setup (or any similar setup) that I can
think of\footnote{And that got mentioned in our discussions.} is then
to solve problems that are not tractable analytically or numerically
and that are nevertheless of practical interest. If this is indeed the
big picture, then the main goal of this project in the medium term
should then be to identify such problems and asses them with respect
to their eligibility for treatment using the analog computer.
I must admit that this prospect seems daunting to me, as I'm lacking
the experience in the field. This of-course is no reason to throw the
towel. It just puts me off.
Working on something that has some chance of turning out to be of no
immediate practical use is also nothing that should frighten a
physicist. The development of quantum mechanics itself answered an
interesting physical questions and much later paid off by giving us
the technology that enables the information age.
immediate practical may doesn't have to be frighten a physicist. The
development of quantum mechanics itself answered an interesting
physical questions and much later paid off by giving us the technology
that enables the information age.
Odd enough, the question ``Can we coax the fiber loop setup into
simulating the Hamiltonian \(H\)?'' is not that interesting in
itself. This is a subjective phenomenon, but how can't it be?
The question ``Can we coax the fiber loop setup into simulating the
Hamiltonian \(H\)?'' is not that interesting in itself for me. This
is a subjective assessment.
I may also just be overlooking something that alleviates the issue
discussed at the beginning, which would be the optimal situation.