Physics World

Computers give brains a boost

Dietrich Stauffer

Published Nov 1, 1995• 2 citations

Abstract

As computers become bigger and faster they are able to tackle ever-more realistic problems. However, is it possible to discover new physics with computers? While this question is open to debate, it certainly seems as if computer simulations have helped theorists to find analytic solutions to problems that had previously resisted human brain power alone. A recent example is the exact solution of a one-dimensional particle coagulation model by Bernard Derrida, Vincent Hakim and Vincent Pasquier of the Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris and the Service de Physique Theorique in Saclay (Phys. Rev. Lett. 1995 75 751). The effect studied by Derrida and co-workers had been discovered in computer simulations of that workhorse of statistical physics, the Ising model.

DOI: 10.1088/2058-7058/8/11/25

Related papers

Numerical simulations

James Jeffrey Binney, N J Dowrick, Andrew J. Fisher +1 more

Abstract We have now seen how powerful the tools of statistical mechanics can be in the study of complex systems in thermal equilibrium and how they can be used to determine exactly the behaviour of some simplified, but nevertheless interesting, models of phase transitions. However, these exact solutions are sometimes lengthy and difficult and there is no guarantee that any particular model will yield exact results. For example, we were able to solve the two-dimensional, but not the three-dimensional, Ising model, and that only in zero magnetic field. So, it is natural to consider whether we can use a computer to simulate these systems. In this chapter we shall see that this is indeed possible; a great deal of our understanding of critical phenomena is based wholly or partly on the results of such numerical work. However, as we shall also see, such simulations are not entirely straightforward and a number of tricks are needed to obtain accurate results. This is partly a consequence of the very physics that makes the phase transitions interesting to start with. One should probably think of numerical simulation as a whole subject, almost an art, of its own; we shall have time only to scratch at the surface and discuss a few of the most important ideas.

Jun 11, 19921 citation

The asymmetric exclusion model with sequential update

Nikolaus Rajewsky, Andreas Schadschneider, Michael Schreckenberg

We present a solution for the stationary state of an asymmetric exclusion model with sequential update and open boundary conditions. We solve the model exactly for random hopping in both directions by applying a matrix-product formalism which was recently used to solve the model with sublattice-parallel update (Hinrichsen H 1995 Weizmann Inst. Preprint cond-mat/9512172). It is shown that the matrix-algebra describing the sequential update and sublattice-parallel update are identical and can be mapped onto the random sequential case treated by Derrida et al (Derrida B, Evans M R, Hakim V and Pasquier V 1993 J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 26 1493).

arXiv:cond-mat/9603172Journal of Physics A Mathematical and GeneralJun 21, 199660 citations

Sense and Boundaries of Computer Simulations

Georgios Ouilson Papadopoulos, Apostolos Syropoulos

Computers are widely used in physics and other natural sciences to simulate physical phenomena. Thus, people routinely use computers to model many and different physical systems. In addition, computers have been used to solve difficult problems by simulating successful practices employed by living organism. However, it seems not everything can be simulated, that is, there are phenomena that are characterized as non-computable. Most of them can be simulated by quantum computers but for some even these computers are not adequate. The authors examine why this happens, how it can be solved, and whether the “ultimate” goal of simulating the whole universe is feasible.

Advances in information quality and managementAug 11, 20201 citation

Researchers Defy the Physical Limits to Computation

Faye Flam

Each year's new computing technology, it seems, leaves the last year's in the dust. But physicists are now beginning to tell computer scientists that it can't go on this way. Sooner or later, as computers get smaller, faster, and more complex, the laws of physics will throw up roadblocks to further progress. There's only one way out of this bind: radically new strategies. And some of those strategies are starting to emerge.

ScienceApr 16, 19934 citations

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS

Gordon Baym, Jean-Paul Blaizot, Markus Holzmann +2 more

D. S. Petrov,1,2 M. Holzmann,3,4 and G. V. Shlyapnikov1,2,4 1FOM Institute for Atomic and Molecular Physics, Kruislaan 407, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2Russian Research Center, Kurchatov Institute, Kurchatov Square, 123182 Moscow, Russia 3CNRS-Laboratoire de Physique Statistique, Ecole Normale Superieure, 24 rue Lhomond, F-75231 Paris Cedex 05, France 4Laboratoire Kastler-Brossel,* Ecole Normale Superieure, 24 rue Lhomond, F-75231 Paris Cedex 05, France (Received 27 September 1999)

Jan 1, 1999307 citations

If Many Physicists Are Right and No Physical Theory Is Perfect, Then the Use of Physical Observations Can Enhance Computations

Olga M. Kosheleva, Michael Zakharevich

Many real-life problems are, in general, NP-complete, i.e., informally speaking, are difficult to solve – at least on computers based on the usual physical techniques. A natural question is: can the use of non-standard physics speed up the solution of these problems? This question has been analyzed for several specific physical theories, e.g., for quantum field the-ory, for cosmological solutions with wormholes and/or casual anomalies, etc. However, many physicists believe that no physical theory is perfect, i.e., that no matter how many observations support a physical theory, inevitably, new observations will come which will require this theory to

Journal of Uncertain SystemsJan 1, 20144 citations