amplituhedron

The amplituhedron is not built out of space-time and probabilities; these properties merely arise as consequences of the jewel’s geometry.

On the other hand these amplituhedron idea seems to be 'just' a different idea to calculate usual qft calculations easier.

Has there been any progress in the last 10 years since the discovery of amplituhedron?

Don't get me wrong, it would be fantastic if the amplituhedron revolutionizes quantum theory.

This is the reason why he considers amplituhedron to be a good research path.

I don't think the amplituhedron should be given so much substance as a real structure beyond spacetime.

There is something similar Nima Arkani-Hamed talks about Feynman equations during his amplituhedron lecture, pages and pages of equations being reduced to simple representation.

I was actually wondering whether the amplituhedron might possibly have some impact on quantum computing...

Now that a true professional has responded, is Scott here simply mocking at the marketting success of the Amplituhedron or is actually making a point about the existence of such mechanics prior to the discovery of Amplituhedron?

Is there a geometric analogue to this, too; like the amplituhedron?

A sketch of the amplituhedron representing an 8-gluon particle interaction.

And amplituhedron also gives rise to those same representation.

The methods now called "amplituhedron" have been under continuous development for the past ten years or so.

Interesting thing that he mentions in the beginning something like "Amplituhedron is so simple I could explain it to high-school students".

What I had taken away as the big impact of the original "amplituhedron" article was that the researchers had found a way to replace long calculations with a shorter, geometrical calculation.

BQP is not a tongue-in-cheek thing; it's also not a well-understood thing -- just "anything which quantum computers can do in this way quickly with bounded errors" -- but it's certainly better understood than this amplituhedron is.

A classical universal function approximator is probably not sufficient to approximate quantum systems (unless there is IDK a geometric breakthrough in classical-quantum correspondence similar to the Amplituhedron).

After looking at the linked to papers, I'm assuming this is not a joke, and he is not putting down (making fun) of the Amplituhedron, nor making up the Unitarihedron (just abstracting his work with a media-friendly name to itit).