Theoretical analysis reveals fundamental mathematical obstructions to simulating relativistic dispersion in quantum cellular automata, highlighting bounds on operational process reconstruction.
We study an inverse problem for quantum cellular automata (QCA) and strictly locality-preserving discrete quantum dynamics: what can an observer infer about a finite local update from physical data, and which inferences remain impossible even with exact observations? We separate general interacting locality-preserving automorphisms from homogeneous finite-dimensional linear excitation sectors. In the latter, finite range implies a matrix Laurent-polynomial update and algebraic quasienergy branches. We derive a reciprocal-lattice monodromy obstruction: if repeated Brillouin windings generate infinitely many distinct analytic germs of a target quasienergy phase, the target cannot be an exact band of any finite-Laurent update; moreover, M distinct continuations require internal block dimension q ≥ M. Massive relativistic dispersion violates this criterion, and generic transverse slicing extends the obstruction to isotropic massive and massless dispersion in d ≥ 2. Independently, positive minimum site separation, exact finite-speed causality, and arbitrarily divisible microscopic time imply ultralocal dynamics. We then formulate the inverse direction. In an independently specified operational locality basis, finite full-matrix Fourier support plus pointwise unitarity is constructively equivalent to a homogeneous finite-range update, whereas spectra alone are insufficient. Exact reconstruction generally fixes only a blocking/refinement equivalence class. Conditional on such reconstruction, reachability is a compact-group control problem. Counterexamples accompany each nontrivial converse, and a complexity-controlled evidence hierarchy separates weak spectral consistency from process-level reconstruction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sthefan Ferrari Negraes Consorte (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: