contextuality cohomology and paradox
play

Contextuality, Cohomology, and Paradox (arXiv:1502.03097) Samson A - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Feb 15, 2024 •135 likes •1.32k views

Contextuality, Cohomology, and Paradox (arXiv:1502.03097) Samson A bramsky , Rui Soares B arbosa , Kohei K ishida , Ray L al , and Shane M ansfield (speaking) QPL2015 17 July, 2015 Outline 1 Topological model for contextuality. 2 Cohomology:

  1. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 7

  2. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 7

  3. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 7

  4. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . 7

  5. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . 7

  6. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . 7

  7. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . 7

  8. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . 7

  9. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . 7

  10. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . 7

  11. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . 7

  12. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . 7

  13. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global ones. 7

  14. 0 • • 0 • • 0 Hardy model: • 1 • 00 01 10 11 • 1 a 0 b 0 1 1 1 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 0 1 1 1 b 1 a 1 b 0 0 1 1 1 • a 1 b 1 1 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Global section: λ ( a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 ) �→ (1 , 0 , 1 , 0) . Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global ones. Local consistency, global inconsistency 7

  15. Hardy: • • 0 • • 0 • 1 • • 1 • 1 b 1 • • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. 8

  16. PR box: 00 01 10 11 a 0 b 0 1 0 0 1 a 0 b 1 1 0 0 1 a 1 b 0 1 0 0 1 a 1 b 1 0 1 1 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. 8

  17. PR box: • • 0 • • 0 00 01 10 11 • 1 • • 1 a 0 b 0 1 0 0 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 1 0 0 1 a 1 b 0 1 0 0 1 b 1 • a 1 b 1 0 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. 8

  18. PR box: • • 0 • • 0 00 01 10 11 • 1 • • 1 a 0 b 0 1 0 0 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 1 0 0 1 a 1 b 0 1 0 0 1 b 1 • a 1 b 1 0 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. 8

  19. PR box: • • 0 • • 0 00 01 10 11 • 1 • • 1 a 0 b 0 1 0 0 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 1 0 0 1 a 1 b 0 1 0 0 1 b 1 • a 1 b 1 0 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. 8

  20. PR box: • • 0 • • 0 00 01 10 11 • 1 • • 1 a 0 b 0 1 0 0 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 1 0 0 1 a 1 b 0 1 0 0 1 b 1 • a 1 b 1 0 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. 8

  21. PR box: • • 0 • • 0 00 01 10 11 • 1 • • 1 a 0 b 0 1 0 0 1 • 1 a 0 b 1 1 0 0 1 a 1 b 0 1 0 0 1 b 1 • a 1 b 1 0 1 1 0 • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. 8

  22. Hardy: PR box: • • • 0 • 0 • • • • 0 0 • 1 • 1 • • • • 1 1 • 1 • 1 b 1 b 1 • • • a 1 • a 1 a 0 a 0 • • • b 0 • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. 8

  23. Hardy: PR box: • • • 0 • 0 • • • • 0 0 • 1 • 1 • • • • 1 1 • 1 • 1 b 1 b 1 • • • a 1 • a 1 a 0 a 0 • • • b 0 • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. 8

  24. Hardy: PR box: • • • 0 • 0 • • • • 0 0 • 1 • 1 • • • • 1 1 • 1 • 1 b 1 b 1 • • • a 1 • a 1 a 0 a 0 • • • b 0 • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. 8

  25. Hardy: PR box: • • • 0 • 0 • • • • 0 0 • 1 • 1 • • • • 1 1 • 1 • 1 b 1 b 1 • • • a 1 • a 1 a 0 a 0 • • • b 0 • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. Strong contextuality: No global section at all. 8

  26. Hardy: PR box: • • • 0 • 0 • • • • 0 0 • 1 • 1 • • • • 1 1 • 1 • 1 b 1 b 1 • • • a 1 • a 1 a 0 a 0 • • • b 0 • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. Strong contextuality: No global section at all. Hieararchy of contextuality: Probabilistic ⊋ Logical ⊋ Strong contextuality 8

  27. Hardy: • • • 0 • • • • 0 0 • • 1 0 • • • 1 1 • 1 • 1 b 1 c • • • a 1 a 0 • • b • a • b 0 Logical contextuality: Not all sections extend to global. Strong contextuality: No global section at all. Hieararchy of contextuality: Probabilistic ⊋ Logical ⊋ Strong contextuality 8

  28. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes x ∈ X F ( x ) → X in logic terms: Read bundles π : ∑ x ∈ X are sentences, t , ff ∈ F ( x ) are truth values. t 9

  29. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes x ∈ X F ( x ) → X in logic terms: Read bundles π : ∑ x ∈ X are sentences, t , ff ∈ F ( x ) are truth values. t “West is true” • • “North is false” • “South is true” • “East is true” 9

  30. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes x ∈ X F ( x ) → X in logic terms: Read bundles π : ∑ x ∈ X are sentences, t , ff ∈ F ( x ) are truth values. t “West is true” • • “North is false” • “South is true” • “East is true” 9

  31. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes t t • • t t • • t t • ff • • ff • ff “West is true” • • “North is false” • “South is true” • “East is true” 9

  32. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes t t • • t t • • t t • ff • • ff • ff “West is true” • • “North is false” • “South is true” • “East is true” 9

  33. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes t t • • t t • • t t • ff • • ff • ff “West is true” • • “North is false” • “South is true” • “East is true” 9

  34. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes t t • • t t • • t t • ff • • ff • ff “West is true” • • “North is false” • “South is true” • “East is true” 9

  35. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes t t • • t t • • t t • ff • • ff • ff “West is true” • • “North is false” • “South is true” • “East is true” 9

  36. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes t t • • t t • • t t • ff • • ff • ff “West is true” • • “North is false” • “South is true” • “East is true” 9

  37. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes t t • • t t • • t t • ff • • ff • ff “West is true” • • “North is false” • “South is true” • “East is true” 9

  38. Contextuality in Logical Paradoxes t t • • t t • • t t • ff • • ff • ff “West is true” • • “North is false” • “South is true” • “East is true” This type of logical paradoxes (incl. the Liar Paradox) have the same topology as “paradoxes” of (strong) contextuality. 9

  39. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. • • • • • • • • • • • • 10

  40. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: • • • • • • • • • • • • 10

  41. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ • • x ∈ X • • π • (With some axioms, • e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  42. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ • • x ∈ X • • π • (With some axioms, • e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  43. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ • • x ∈ X • • π • (With some axioms, • e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  44. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ • • x ∈ X • • π • (With some axioms, • e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  45. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ • • x ∈ X • • π • (With some axioms, • e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  46. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ Sets • • x ∈ X • 2 Presheaf • π F F : C ( X ) op → Sets . • (With some axioms, • C ( X ) op e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  47. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ Sets • • x ∈ X • 2 Presheaf • π F F : C ( X ) op → Sets . • (With some axioms, • C ( X ) op e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  48. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ Sets • • x ∈ X • 2 Presheaf • π F F : C ( X ) op → Sets . • (With some axioms, • C ( X ) op e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  49. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ Sets • • x ∈ X • 2 Presheaf • π F F : C ( X ) op → Sets . • (With some axioms, • C ( X ) op e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  50. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ Sets • • x ∈ X • 2 Presheaf • π F F : C ( X ) op → Sets . • (With some axioms, • C ( X ) op e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  51. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ Sets • • x ∈ X • 2 Presheaf • π F F : C ( X ) op → Sets . • (With some axioms, • C ( X ) op e.g. no-signalling.) X • • 10

  52. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ Sets • • x ∈ X • 2 Presheaf • π F F : C ( X ) op → Sets . • (With some axioms, • C ( X ) op e.g. no-signalling.) X • (Global sections can be • defined suitably.) 10

  53. How to Formally Define ... Bundles that correspond to no-signalling possibility tables. Two equivalent formulations: 1 Map of • simplicial complexes • • • ∑ π : F ( x ) → X . Σ Sets • • x ∈ X • 2 Presheaf • π F F : C ( X ) op → Sets . • (With some axioms, • C ( X ) op e.g. no-signalling.) X • (Global sections can be • defined suitably.) 2 makes it possible to apply cohomology. 10

  54. Cohomology of Contextuality Local consistency, global inconsistency.. . Penrose 1991, “On the Cohomology of Impossible Figures”. 11

  55. Cohomological test for contextuality: “ ˇ Cech cohomology” gives a group homomorphism γ that assigns to each section s an “obstruction” γ s s.th. • • 0 • • 0 • 1 • • 1 • 1 b 1 • • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 12

  56. Cohomological test for contextuality: “ ˇ Cech cohomology” gives a group homomorphism γ that assigns to each section s an “obstruction” γ s s.th. s extends to a “cocycle” ⇐⇒ γ s = 0. • • 0 • • 0 • 1 • • 1 • 1 b 1 • • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 12

  57. Cohomological test for contextuality: “ ˇ Cech cohomology” gives a group homomorphism γ that assigns to each section s an “obstruction” γ s s.th. s extends to a “cocycle” ⇐⇒ γ s = 0. • • 0 • • 0 • 1 • • 1 • 1 b 1 • • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 12

  58. Cohomological test for contextuality: “ ˇ Cech cohomology” gives a group homomorphism γ that assigns to each section s an “obstruction” γ s s.th. s extends to a “cocycle” ⇐⇒ γ s = 0. • • 0 • • 0 • 1 • • 1 • 1 b 1 • • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 12

  59. Cohomological test for contextuality: “ ˇ Cech cohomology” gives a group homomorphism γ that assigns to each section s an “obstruction” γ s s.th. s extends to a “cocycle” ⇐⇒ γ s = 0. ⇒ • s extends to global • 0 • • 0 • 1 • • 1 • 1 b 1 • • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 12

  60. Cohomological test for contextuality: “ ˇ Cech cohomology” gives a group homomorphism γ that assigns to each section s an “obstruction” γ s s.th. s extends to a “cocycle” ⇐⇒ γ s = 0. ⇒ ⇍ • s extends to global • 0 • • 0 • 1 • • 1 • 1 b 1 • • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 12

  61. Cohomological test for contextuality: “ ˇ Cech cohomology” gives a group homomorphism γ that assigns to each section s an “obstruction” γ s s.th. s extends to a “cocycle” ⇐⇒ γ s = 0. ⇒ ⇍ • s extends to global • 0 • • 0 • False positives, • 1 • e.g. in Hardy model: • 1 • 1 b 1 • • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 12

  62. Cohomological test for contextuality: “ ˇ Cech cohomology” gives a group homomorphism γ that assigns to each section s an “obstruction” γ s s.th. s extends to a “cocycle” ⇐⇒ γ s = 0. ⇒ ⇍ • s extends to global • 0 • • 0 • False positives, • 1 • e.g. in Hardy model. • 1 • Works for many cases; • 1 e.g. PR box: b 1 • • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 12

  63. “All vs Nothing” Argument 13

  64. “All vs Nothing” Argument Joint outcomes may / may not • satisfy parity equations: • 0 • • (0 , 0) � x ⊕ � = 0 0 • 1 (0 , 1) � x ⊕ � = 1 • 0 • 1 (1 , 0) � x ⊕ � = 1 • 1 (1 , 1) � x ⊕ � = 0 b 1 • • a 1 a 0 • • b 0 13

  65. “All vs Nothing” Argument Joint outcomes may / may not • satisfy parity equations: • 0 • • (0 , 0) � x ⊕ � = 0 0 • 1 (0 , 1) � x ⊕ � = 1 • • 1 (1 , 0) � x ⊕ � = 1 • 1 (1 , 1) � x ⊕ � = 0 b 1 a 0 ⊕ b 0 = 0 • a 0 ⊕ b 1 = 0 • a 1 a 1 ⊕ b 0 = 0 a 0 • a 1 ⊕ b 1 = 1 • b 0 13

  66. “All vs Nothing” Argument Joint outcomes may / may not • satisfy parity equations: • 0 • • (0 , 0) � x ⊕ � = 0 0 • 1 (0 , 1) � x ⊕ � = 1 • • 1 (1 , 0) � x ⊕ � = 1 • 1 (1 , 1) � x ⊕ � = 0 b 1 a 0 ⊕ b 0 = 0 • a 0 ⊕ b 1 = 0 • a 1 a 1 ⊕ b 0 = 0 a 0 • a 1 ⊕ b 1 = 1 • b 0 ⊕ ⊕ LHS’s = RHS’s 13

  67. “All vs Nothing” Argument Joint outcomes may / may not • satisfy parity equations: • 0 • • (0 , 0) � x ⊕ � = 0 0 • 1 (0 , 1) � x ⊕ � = 1 • • 1 (1 , 0) � x ⊕ � = 1 • 1 (1 , 1) � x ⊕ � = 0 b 1 a 0 ⊕ b 0 = 0 • a 0 ⊕ b 1 = 0 • a 1 a 1 ⊕ b 0 = 0 a 0 • a 1 ⊕ b 1 = 1 • b 0 ⊕ ⊕ LHS’s � RHS’s The equations are inconsistent, 13

  68. “All vs Nothing” Argument Joint outcomes may / may not • satisfy parity equations: • 0 • • (0 , 0) � x ⊕ � = 0 0 • 1 (0 , 1) � x ⊕ � = 1 • • 1 (1 , 0) � x ⊕ � = 1 • 1 (1 , 1) � x ⊕ � = 0 b 1 a 0 ⊕ b 0 = 0 • a 0 ⊕ b 1 = 0 • a 1 a 1 ⊕ b 0 = 0 a 0 • a 1 ⊕ b 1 = 1 • b 0 ⊕ ⊕ LHS’s � RHS’s The equations are inconsistent, i.e. no global assignment to a 0 , a 1 , b 0 , b 1 , i.e. strongly contextual! 13

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend

Contextuality of Reason, Contextuality of Reality, and the Nature of Probabilities Involved

Contextuality of Reason, Contextuality of Reality, and the Nature of Probabilities Involved

Contextuality of Reason, Contextuality of Reality, and the Nature of Probabilities Involved Yoshihiro Maruyama Kyoto University PWML, 11 Nov 2018 1 The Global Order in Danger Another conference held in this building A Crisis in the Global

834 views • 35 slides
The sheaf-theoretic description of contextuality Part II: contextuality and valuation algebras

The sheaf-theoretic description of contextuality Part II: contextuality and valuation algebras

The sheaf-theoretic description of contextuality Part II: contextuality and valuation algebras Samson Abramsky & Giovanni Car` u Quantum Group Department of Computer Science University of Oxford Winer Memorial Lectures Purdue University,

2.12k views • 193 slides
Contextuality and Noncommutative Geometry Nadish de Silva Department of Computer Science

Contextuality and Noncommutative Geometry Nadish de Silva Department of Computer Science

Contextuality and Noncommutative Geometry Contextuality and Noncommutative Geometry Nadish de Silva Department of Computer Science University of Oxford Quantum Physics and Logic 2014, Kyoto University Contextuality and Noncommutative Geometry

373 views • 34 slides
Cohomology in the service of AQFT John E. Roberts Universit di Roma II 1 / 19 Cohomology

Cohomology in the service of AQFT John E. Roberts Universit di Roma II 1 / 19 Cohomology

Cohomology in the service of AQFT John E. Roberts Universit di Roma II 1 / 19 Cohomology Cohomology is an important part of mathematics and so ubiquitous as to form part of essentially any mathematical theory. It comes in many varieties but

616 views • 19 slides
Chapter 3: Cohomology Felix Schremmer Technical University of Munich Different notions of

Chapter 3: Cohomology Felix Schremmer Technical University of Munich Different notions of

Chapter 3: Cohomology Felix Schremmer Technical University of Munich Different notions of cohomology Cohomology with integral coefficients Cohomology with real coefficients Different notions of cohomology 1 Cohomology from topology

508 views • 37 slides
University Politics in an Age of Paradox: The Question of Internationalization An Age of Paradox

University Politics in an Age of Paradox: The Question of Internationalization An Age of Paradox

Dr. Michael Woolf: Presentation Transcript University Politics in an Age of Paradox: The Question of Internationalization An Age of Paradox I will start with an assertion that you may well want to challenge. We live in an age of paradox where

445 views • 18 slides
Contextuality and Wigner negativity in Quantum Computation on rebits Nicolas Delfosse, Philippe

Contextuality and Wigner negativity in Quantum Computation on rebits Nicolas Delfosse, Philippe

Contextuality and Wigner negativity in Quantum Computation on rebits Nicolas Delfosse, Philippe Allard, Jake Bian and Robert Raussendorf QIP Sydney, January 2015 What makes quantum computing work? Contextuality Entanglement Superposition

574 views • 36 slides
Multiplication in differential cohomology and cohomology operation Kiyonori GOMI Kyoto

Multiplication in differential cohomology and cohomology operation Kiyonori GOMI Kyoto

Introduction Definition and Property Physics ordinary cohomology K -cohomology Multiplication in differential cohomology and cohomology operation Kiyonori GOMI Kyoto University Feb 17, 2009 Introduction Definition and Property Physics

965 views • 49 slides
Hypergraph framework for Spekkens contextuality applied to Kochen-Specker scenarios Ravi Kunjwal,

Hypergraph framework for Spekkens contextuality applied to Kochen-Specker scenarios Ravi Kunjwal,

Hypergraph framework for Spekkens contextuality applied to Kochen-Specker scenarios Ravi Kunjwal, Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Canada (Purdue Winer Memorial Lectures 2018) November 10, 2018 Outline Contextuality ` a la

445 views • 41 slides
Cohomology of algebraic structures: from Lie algebra to vertex algebra cohomology Victor Kac MIT

Cohomology of algebraic structures: from Lie algebra to vertex algebra cohomology Victor Kac MIT

Cohomology of algebraic structures: from Lie algebra to vertex algebra cohomology Victor Kac MIT 1 / 37 In any cohomology theory the notion of a vector superspace and a superalgebra are indispensable. A vector superspace is a vector space V

1.06k views • 37 slides
The Barber Paradox: on its Paradoxicality and its Relationship to Russells Paradox Logika:

The Barber Paradox: on its Paradoxicality and its Relationship to Russells Paradox Logika:

The Barber Paradox: on its Paradoxicality and its Relationship to Russells Paradox Logika: systmov rmec rozvoje oboru v R a koncepce logickch propedeutik pro mezioborov studia (reg. . CZ.1.07/2.2.00/28.0216, OPVK) doc. PhDr.

480 views • 22 slides
Asymptotic Freedom: From Paradox to Paradigm Paradox 1: Quarks are Born Free, But Everywhere

Asymptotic Freedom: From Paradox to Paradigm Paradox 1: Quarks are Born Free, But Everywhere

Asymptotic Freedom: From Paradox to Paradigm Paradox 1: Quarks are Born Free, But Everywhere They are in Chains The quark model works ... ... but its rules are very strange. Quarks behave independently when theyre close, but they

734 views • 27 slides
The Promise of Paradox Gods Word is loaded with the language of paradox. Even more, Gods

The Promise of Paradox Gods Word is loaded with the language of paradox. Even more, Gods

The Promise of Paradox Gods Word is loaded with the language of paradox. Even more, Gods Word is laced with lavish promises of grace. We will look at biblical evidence of how the Holy Spirit works for the good of humans. Especially in the

637 views • 62 slides
The Jersey Accommodation and Activity Centre (JAAC) Paradox Ltd A brief History Paradox Ltd

The Jersey Accommodation and Activity Centre (JAAC) Paradox Ltd A brief History Paradox Ltd

) The Jersey Accommodation and Activity Centre (JAAC) Paradox Ltd A brief History Paradox Ltd was set up in 2007 by Petula Skinner and John Fox as an agency to organise bespoke holidays in Jersey. It was soon evident that the next stage would

794 views • 7 slides
Macroscopic non-contextuality as a principle for Almost Quantum Correlations Joe Henson and Ana

Macroscopic non-contextuality as a principle for Almost Quantum Correlations Joe Henson and Ana

Macroscopic non-contextuality as a principle for Almost Quantum Correlations Joe Henson and Ana Bel en Sainz University of Bristol Characterising correlations Nonlocality: nontrivial communication complexity 1 , no advantage for nonlocal

444 views • 26 slides
Poisson cohomology of multidimensional Dubrovin-Novikov Poisson structures and their normal

Poisson cohomology of multidimensional Dubrovin-Novikov Poisson structures and their normal

Poisson cohomology of multidimensional Dubrovin-Novikov Poisson structures and their normal forms. Guido Carlet KdV Instituut voor Wiskunde, Amsterdam Trieste 6/2017 with H. Posthuma, S. Shadrin: 1. Bihamiltonian cohomology of the KdV

700 views • 42 slides
The Collaboration for Astronomy Signal Processing and Electronics Research in 2017 Jack Hickish

The Collaboration for Astronomy Signal Processing and Electronics Research in 2017 Jack Hickish

The Collaboration for Astronomy Signal Processing and Electronics Research in 2017 Jack Hickish Radio Astronomy Lab, UC Berkeley jackh@berkeley.edu September 7, 2016 Outline Acknowledgements The Age of Digital Radio Astronomy Building DSP

689 views • 52 slides
On the convergence of rational Ritz values Applications to rational interpolation of rational

On the convergence of rational Ritz values Applications to rational interpolation of rational

Problem Applications Lemma Results Examples On the convergence of rational Ritz values Applications to rational interpolation of rational functions Bernhard Beckermann Laboratoire Painlev e Universit e de Lille 1 France AECDSS

677 views • 38 slides
Bulk-edge corresponding revisited Yasuhiro Hatsugai Department of physics Univ. Tsukuba Sep.3,

Bulk-edge corresponding revisited Yasuhiro Hatsugai Department of physics Univ. Tsukuba Sep.3,

Workshop, ETH Zrich, 3rd-6th September 2018 Bulk-edge corresponding revisited Yasuhiro Hatsugai Department of physics Univ. Tsukuba Sep.3, 2018 Workshop, ETH Zrich, 3rd-6th September 2018 Plan Topological phases and bulk-edge

738 views • 63 slides
Using Contextual Word Clusters and AutomaGc Word Alignments

Using Contextual Word Clusters and AutomaGc Word Alignments

Unsupervised False Friend DisambiguaGon Using Contextual Word Clusters and AutomaGc Word Alignments Maryam Aminian , Mahmoud Ghoneim, Mona Diab

625 views • 45 slides
Revelation Series Lesson #005 June 6, 2004 Dean Bible Ministries www.deanbibleministries.org

Revelation Series Lesson #005 June 6, 2004 Dean Bible Ministries www.deanbibleministries.org

Revelation Series Lesson #005 June 6, 2004 Dean Bible Ministries www.deanbibleministries.org Dr. Robert L. Dean, Jr. Revelation 1:1, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must

547 views • 20 slides
Location: Clough 144 DISCLAIMER: Everything I say about the final today is advice, it does not

Location: Clough 144 DISCLAIMER: Everything I say about the final today is advice, it does not

Announcements Monday, April 22 Please fill out your CIOS survey! If 85% of the class completes the survey by April 25th , then we will drop two quizzes instead of one. My office hours are this week Monday - Wednesday 10 am and next week

1.12k views • 55 slides
MSc in Computer Engineering, Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence Course FDE , a.a.

MSc in Computer Engineering, Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence Course FDE , a.a.

MSc in Computer Engineering, Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence Course FDE , a.a. 2019/2020, Lecture 4 Review of matrix algebra and state-space transformations Prof. Mauro Franceschelli Dept. of Electrical and Electronic Engineering

883 views • 50 slides
[12] The Eigenvector Two interest-bearing accounts Suppose Account 1 yields 5% interest and

[12] The Eigenvector Two interest-bearing accounts Suppose Account 1 yields 5% interest and

The Eigenvector [12] The Eigenvector Two interest-bearing accounts Suppose Account 1 yields 5% interest and Account 2 yields 3% interest. amount in Account 1 Represent balances in the two accounts by a 2-vector x ( t ) = . amount in

629 views • 41 slides

More recommend