<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Memory cost of quantum contextuality · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1007.3650/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1007.3650/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Memory cost of quantum contextuality — mentioned by xyience</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12018181</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1007.3650:12018181</guid><pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2016 17:48:42 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Skimmed the PDF, it seems like the point of this paper is just to show that yes, classical systems can (with memory, e.g. the reference https://arxiv.org/abs/1007.3650) simulate quantum ones, and thus finding &amp;quot;characteristic quantum numbers&amp;quot; shouldn&amp;#x27;t make one immediately suspect something quantum is going on. In the discussion it&amp;#x27;s like the ultimate nitpick: &amp;quot;The characteristic trait of QT rely on the fact that the quantum bounds are achieved without employing extra resources such as memory. Therefore, the principles needed to fully derive QT (in the spirit of Refs. [33–37]) should account…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1007.3650/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
