Other

A computational phase transition in a classical or quantum system is a non-analytic change in behavior of an order parameter which can only be observed with the assistance of a nontrivial classical computation. Such phase transitions, and the computational observables which detect them, play a crucial role in the optimal decoding of quantum error-correcting codes and in the scalable detection of measurement-induced phenomena. We show that computational phase transitions and observables can also provide important physical insight on the phase diagram of a classical statistical physics system, specifically in the context of the dislocation-mediated melting of a two-dimensional antiferromagnetic (AF) crystal. In the solid phase, elementary dislocations disrupt the bipartiteness of the underlying square lattice, and as a result, pairs of dislocations are linearly confined by string-like AF domain walls. It has previously been argued that a novel AF tetratic phase can arise when double dislocations proliferate while elementary dislocations remain bound. We will argue that, although there is no thermodynamic phase transition separating the AF and paramagnetic (PM) tetratic phases, it is possible to algorithmically construct a nonlocal order parameter which distinguishes the AF and PM tetratic regimes and undergoes a continuous computational phase transition. We discuss both algorithm-dependent and "intrinsic" algorithm-independent computational phase transitions in this setting, the latter of which includes a transition in one's ability to consistently sort atoms into two sublattices to construct a well-defined staggered magnetization.

Why is the future different from the past? The most poignant property about the world around us is that time is always moving forward, yet, as odd as it may seem, our current theories of physics cannot account for this property. In all of fundamental physics, the future and the past are entirely similar. We select time increasing solutions by hand and call on extremely unlikely initial conditions at the big bang to justify this choice. I will address this question and describe attempts to restore the irreversibility of time as the building block of our understanding of nature.

This talk was delivered at ISSYP 2019, Perimeter's high school summer program.

Abstract: There is a strong correlation between the sun rising and the rooster crowing, but to say that the one causes the other is to say more. In particular, it says that making the rooster crow early will not precipitate an early dawn, whereas making the sun rise early (for instance, by moving the rooster eastward) can lead to some early crowing. Intervening upon the natural course of events in this manner is a good way of discovering causal relations. Sometimes, however, we can't intervene, or we'd prefer not to. For instance, in trying to determine whether smoking causes lung cancer, we'd prefer not to force any would-be nonsmokers to smoke. Fortunately, there are some clever tricks that allow us to extract information about what causes what entirely from features of the observed correlations. One of these tricks was discovered by the physicist John Bell in 1964. In a groundbreaking paper, he used it to demonstrate the seeming impossibility of providing a causal explanation of certain quantum correlations. This revealed a fundamental tension between quantum theory and Einstein's theory of relativity --the two central pillars of modern physics. It is a tension that is still with us today.