Tim,
I believe that we do so except that it is invisible. I base this belief on my experience, and the experience of others reported in the biographical literature, that sometimes you encounter a problem that is too difficult to solve by reasoning. So you give up. But later on the entire solution flashes into your head.
There are two possible explanations of this phenomena.
1. The quantum waves in your head are an invisible quantum computer. Quantum waves are invisible and what you see in your brain is the collapse of the waves into the particles of your imagination. That requires the wave-collapse-particle interpretation of quantum mechanics.
Bohm theory would not work unless the axion condensate were a thinking medium. That may be as the mind condensate according to Father Jerome(see Dark Matter paper) is a dipole-like Cooper-pair condensate in which plus and minus charges are coupled. These axions have spin and when two are coupled, their spins can add up or subtract resulting in spin one Cooper-pairs or spin zero Cooper-pairs. This allows for binary computing, however, rather than quantum computing.
2.The solution to the problem came from some sort of higher order being that exists in the axion condensate or some connected axion condensate (there may be many condensates). However, I suspect that flashes of inspiration come from such sources, but perhaps not solutions to problems already thought of.
The question your question raises for me is whether Bohmian quantum mechanics (BQM) allows for quantum computing. In BQM it seems that only particles exist, no waves. The electrons are particles and never waves. The waves or the implicate order, which in my model are the landscape of axions, are still just particles even though it is like a fluid as their are so many of them- very high number density but each very lightweight so that the mass density is extremely low.
Wave functions are in tthe BQM interpretation just waves in the axion fluid. Collapse is not necessary. BTW, there is no theory for the collapse of wave functions in the wave-collapse-particle interpretation.
For quantum computing you need for the superposition of several possibilities at once. I wonder then if building an elementary quantum computer is then proof that BQM is incorrect?
Thank you very much for that question. Had you already thought of that paradox?
Regards,
yanniru |