Topological quantum computer is fiction relying on unreal anyon, Majorana quasiparticles.

Top

Quantum computers based on unfounded assumption of fictional non-abelian anyon, Majorana quasiparticles and magical braids are unrealized, error-prone forever.

[ Mainstream quantum mechanics makes a ridiculous, baseless assumption that each ion or superconducting bit may split into multiple unreal unobservable anyon quasiparticles with fractional charges allegedly producing fictional braids and knots that may make robust topological quantum computer.  ← pseudo-science with No evidence ! ]

(Fig.1) The present useless mainstream physics relies on illusory particles and braids.

Quantum computer's error-prone problem can Not be solved even by illusory topological quasiparticles called non-abelian anyons.

This week, many media outlets simultaneously reported that the UK-based company Quantinuum and Harvard, Caltech team might have finally created (fictional) quasiparticles called non-abelian anyon with (unreal) fractional-charges that could remember their pasts and potentially enable fault-tolerant robust quantum computer.

↑ Unfortunately, None of these claims are real.
All the dubiously-optimistic news about already-deadend quantum computers is just hype misleading laypersons.

First of all, this allegedly-created dubious particle called anyon or Majorana is Not a real fundamental particles but a fictitious quasi-particles with non-existent fractional-charges ( this 2nd-last paragraphs,  this p.29,  this 12th-paragraph ), so topological quantum computers allegedly based on this non-existent quasiparticles are meaningless and useless from the beginning.

↑ The dreamlike quantum computers with less errors are impossible forever (= the fictitious topological quantum computers with unreal quasiparticles are still far from practical use, Not achieving even a single qubit yet, this 2nd-last~last paragraphs ).

The media should stop reporting this kind of meaningless fictional science based on "non-existent" pseudo-particles and focus more on real problems such as "actually-happening" election frauds and how to replace the current contradictory science with practical one.

This 9-12th paragraphs expose the inconvenient fact of this news,
"Quantinuum has Not actually created non-Abelian anyons (= quasiparticles ). They argue that the firm has instead merely simulated them... A counterintuitive property of these anyons is that they are Not really physical.. ( this 2nd-last paragraph )"

This 5-last ~ last paragraphs say
"Quantinuum's machine didn't truly create nonabelions; rather, it simulated their properties.. there are still questions on whether the "credible path to fault tolerant quantum computing" was unlocked with yesterday's pre-print publication or not."  ← still Not a fault-tolerant quantum computer or real nonabelion anyon quasiparticle at all.

This or this 11th and last paragraphs say
"Quantinuum machine does Not truly create nonabelions (= anyon quasiparticle ), but merely simulates some of their properties."

"..but that it remains to be seen whether it will be more efficient than other error-correction schemes.. it is still unclear how efficient his team’s nonabelions will turn out to be."

↑ So this latest eye-catching research has Not created (fictional) anyon quasiparticle contrary to the media-hype, and their so-called topological quantum computers are still useless with No evidence of robust or reducing errors ( this 11th-paragraph ).   Only the misleading fake information has dominated quantum computer news.

It's impossible to actually detect or utilize the fictitious anyon or Majorana quasiparticle, because it does Not exist.  Forget dreamlike topological quantum computers with less errors.

Though the media and academia have repeatedly and ridiculously claimed they might have detected the sign of the (fictitious) quasiparticles with fractional-charge such as anyon and Majorana (= one of anyon quasiparticles,  this 3rd-paragraph ) for a long time, it is intrinsically impossible to really detect such illusory quasiparticles.

How can you "find" or "create" non-existent particles ?  It's impossible.

So far, topological quantum computer based on this fictitious anyon or Majorana quasiparticle qubit could Not realize even a single bit or qubit, in contrast to (still-useless) quantum computers with conventional ion and superconducting qubits ( this 6th-paragraph ).

Fictitious Majorana quasiparticle means just some electric conductance in zero energy, Not real particle.

The fictitious fractional-charge quasiparticles such as anyon and Majorana were said to indirectly appear in some special composite materials as the form of characteristic electric conductance ( this middle = so illusory Majorana quasiparticle means just some electric conductance with zero energy, No real particle, this p.1-intro ) or quantum Hall effect under some electromagnetic fields.

↑ So physicists just observed some special electric conductance (= anyon quasiparticle itself is unobservable ) and falsely claimed they might have detected the sign of (non-existent) fractional-charge anyon quasiparticles, which is Not a legitimate science.

This 12th-paragraph says
"When the scientists varied the voltage to their devices, they detected a sudden peak in their electrical conductance . They claimed this electrical signal (= Not fictitious quasiparticle itself ) was evidence of discrete, quantized levels of conductance, a hallmark of Majorana (quasi-)particles"

Actually, Nature journal retracted the dubious research paper of the alleged first discovery of anyon or Majorana quasiparticle by Microsoft.

↑ The fact that the current researchers are forced to depend on these fictional meaningless quasiparticles in basic physics shows the reason why applied science such as AI technology is also fake and useless forever, except for the media-hype and physicists' indulgence in blogs.

Topological quantum computer tries to use unreal quasiparticles allegedly producing non-existent braids for their illusory robustness in vain.

Fictional quasiparticles could produce fictional braids and knots which are hard to untie ?  Hence, it can make robust fault-tolerant quantum computer ?  ← Baseless pseudo-science dominating academia for half a century.

The media and academia are repeatedly making a unfounded claim that topological quantum computers may have the potential to be robust and fault-tolerant by reducing errors using the magical quasiparticle's power.

But this topological computer's pie-in-the-sky mechanism of reducing errors is completely unrealistic and baseless, hence, quantum computers are useless and unable to reduce errors forever.

Physicists just blindly and unscientifically insist that (fictitious) non-abelian anyon quasiparticles could produce (fictitious) braids that are magically intertwined and entangled with each other by the ordinary qubit operation 0 ↔ 1, and those (fictitious) "braid knots" might be hard to untie, which is why the dreamlike topological quantum computer could be resistant to disturbance, errors, and become fault-tolerant ( this 1-2nd paragraphs,  this 4th-paragraph ).

"..just as touching knotted shoelaces won’t untie them, random environmental perturbations won’t unravel the braids of topological qubits. If non-abelian anyons exist and can be braided, they can theoretically form the building blocks of a robust, scalable quantum computer."

Unreal anyon, Majorana quasiparticle with fractional charge.

This 7~8th paragraphs say
"the motion of electrons and holes can synchronize to behave as a single quasiparticle, in which fragments of the electron appear as if they are physically separated. These (fictitious) quasiparticles are sometimes dubbed anyons (= unreal fractional-charge )"

"Split an electron into two virtual pieces (= which is against the fact of an indivisible electron, this p.2-2nd-paragraph ) and swap their places, and you’ll subtly change their identities. When brought back together, the fragments might merge into a single electron—or they might disappear into the vacuum... In this sense, twirling these particles leaves a trail of their past movements, much like braiding hair"

↑ To justify the meaningless quantum mechanical quasiparticle research, physicists had to find some illusory effectiveness by artificially and unscientifically associating this fictional tied braid knots of fictitious quasiparticles with the (illusory) robust quantum computer's qubit that could allegedly remember the past as the different patterns of the fictional tied braids.

Braids allegedly created by fictitious anyon quasiparticle are illusion.  → No topological quantum computer robustness.

The point is these fictitious anyon quasiparticles and their magical braids are all non-existent pseudo-objects that cannot do any work or reduce errors, hence, fault-tolerant topological quantum computer is a total lie just fabricated to justify the current meaningless quantum mechanical research based on non-existent quasiparticles.

This 3rd-paragraph says
"The anyons the researchers believe they have created are Not true particles.. Instead anyons are (fictitious) quasiparticles that exist only inside a material."

This 10th-paragraph says
"To be clear, No one is tying physical knots in a nanowire—but you can mathematically visualize the timeline of these (unreal) quasiparticles as you swap their positions as knots or braids. These knots are known as topologically protected states; hence, the proposed quantum computers built with Majorana fermions are known as topological quantum computers."

This p.3-middle-lower says
"a topological quantum computer does not seem much like a computer at all. It works its calculations on braided strings—but Not physical strings in the conventional sense."

This 3rd-last paragraph says
"The word entanglement suggests that the states of the particles are physically interwoven, braided, or overlapped,.. In actuality, the particles have No physical connection or communication line."

This p.1-left says
"Braiding two anyons (= fictitious fractional-charge quasiparticle ) physically by moving one around the other in real space is theoretically straightforward but challenging to implement experimentally."

↑ This unrealistic nature is why almost No researchers or companies try to make (fictitious) topological quantum computers allegedly using fictitious quasiparticles and braids in spite of the (hyped) robust quantum computer's possibility.

Harvard, Google's latest researches published in Nature are fake, error-prone topological quantum computers without true anyon quasiparticles, so useless, Not robust, not worth the media's attention.

Physicists try to falsely treat each ordinary ion or superconducting bit as a collection of multiple fictitious quasiparticles and unseen fictional braids, which artificial model based on imaginary objects contributes nothing to real computer technology.

The (pie-in-the-sky) toopological quantum computers are said to have the potential to be more robust and less error-prone due to their (fictitious) non-abelian anyon quasiparticles producing (fictional) tied braids than other conventional types of quantum computers using ions and superconducting circuits as quantum bits or qubits.

But the latest research by Quantinuum, Harvard, Caltech used conventional 27~32 trapped ions (= each ion's two energy levels are treated as a qubit's state 0 and 1 which state can be changed by laser light ) as 32 ion qubits, and paradoxically tried to treat these ordinary 32 ions as a collection of fictitious (unseen) anyon quasiparticles ( this 3-5th-paragraph ).

↑ This is why their research just disguising ordinary ions (= ion qubits ) as fictitious quasiparticles did Not really create the true non-abelion anyon quasiparticle or fault-tolerant quantum computer ( this 8th, last paragraphs ).

In the same way, the latest research by Google team published in Nature also used the conventional superconducting circuits (= superconducting qubits,  this 2nd-last paragraph ) as a collection of fictitious anyon quasiparticles, which is Not a real new topological quantum compuer with less errors.

↑ They used the conventional ions or superconducting qubits disguised as (fictitious) anyon quasiparticles, which means their error rates still remain as high as the conventional quantum computers with ion and superconducting qubits.  ← No advancement or improvement, still No dreamlike fault-tolerant topological quantum computer.

↑ Harvard term used only 32 ion qubits, and Google team used only 25 superconducting qubits (= out of their conventional Sycamore quantum computer's 53 superconducting transmon qubits,  this p.7-left-first-paragraph ), which qubit numbers fall far short of a million qubits required for (imaginary) practical quantum computers ( this 11th-paragraph ).

Fake topological quantum computer (= still No a computer ) is still error-prone, Not robust at all.

Actually, these fake topological quantum computers in the latest researches are Not robust, which means their alleged topological quantum computers' error rates are still impractically high, defeating the purpose of (falsely) creating fault-tolerant topological quantum computers.

"..But the new studies create non-abelian states within qubits inside a quantum computer, which is fundamentally different, Barkeshli says. “You’re kind of synthetically creating the state for a fleeting moment.” That means it doesn’t have all the properties that anyons within a solid material would have.. (= these latest researches' anyons are Not real anyons but just simulation )"

".. In both cases, much more work must be done before the anyons could create powerful, error-resistant quantum computers. Google’s study, in particular, produces an anyon that’s akin to a fish out of water. It’s a non-abelian within a more commonplace abelian framework. That means those anyons may Not be as powerful for quantum computing (= still No error-correction at all)."

This or this ( or this ) 6th-last ~4th-last paragraphs say
"it it is too early to say exactly how they will impact the respective developments.. It is Not clear yet how this can be moved to fault tolerance.."

"What is more, because these anyon states are made from conventional, error-prone qubits, No-one yet knows whether they can be made stable enough to truly act as topologically protected qubits."

Error rates of these (unreal) topological quantum computers disguising conventional ordinary ions (= error rate is still too high = 1.6% this abstract in Harvard case = fidelity is 98.4% = error rate = 100-98.4 = 1.6%, which is impractically high ) and Google superconducting qubits (= error rate is still high = 7.3 × 10^-3, this p.7-left ) as anyon quasiparticles are still impractically high and Not better than the ordinary (useless) quantum computer's error rates of 1/100 ~ 1/1000 (= 1 % ~ 0.1%,  this 7th-paragraph,  this 2nd-paragraph ), which quantum computer's error rates are far worse than practical classical computers with almost No errors ( this p.4 ).

Imaginary anyon quasiparticles with unseen braids are meaningless.

To pretend that (fake) topological quantum computers based on unreal anyon quasiparticles were created, physicists had to artificially treat a single ion or superconducting qubit (= each qubit takes 0 or 1 values ) as one consisting of 3~4 fictitious anyon quasiparticles ( this p.2-Fig.1 ) and unseen fictional braiding, which baseless bogus assumption is called "encoding anyon quasiparticles into a qubit"

For example, Google team tried to express fictitious particles called "Ising anyon quasiparticles" ( this abstract ) using their ordinary Sycamore's superconducting machines of only 25 (physical) qubits (= treated as 3 logical qubits with 8 fictitious anyon quasiparticles ).  ← Far less than a million qubits required for useful quantum computers.

In this ad-hoc Ising anyon quasiparticle model, each conventional ion or superconducting qubit must be falsely treated as a cluster of four fictional anyon quasiparticles or quasiholes .

And when they apply ordinary laser or microwave pulses to each qubit and change their qubit states 0 ↔ 1 ( this p.4,  this p.2 ), they artificially treat this ordinary single or two qubit state change (= called logic gate ) as the fictitious quasiparticles' braiding in spite of No scientific evidence of the existence of (fictional) quasiparticles or braids ( this p.2-3,  this p.21,24-26 ).

This p.3 last-paragraph says
"This rule only applies to the qubit encoding scheme where each qubit is encoded in 4 Ising anyons (= fictitious quasiparticles ). Entangled quantum gates, such as controlled-Z and controlled-NOT (CNOT), can be realized purely by (fictitious) braiding 6 Ising anyons with definite topological charge"

Also in another ad-hoc quasiparticle model called "Fibonacci" anyons, physicists have to artificially treat each ordinary ion and superconducting qubit as one consisting of 3~4 fictional anyon quasiparticles allegedly connected with each other by unseen fictional braids ( this p.12-20,  this p.5-13,  this p.3-5 ), creating artificial baseless quasiparticle rules ( this p.5-8 ).

Physicists never "created" (fictional) braids or anyon quasiparticles. Instead, they just conducted the conventional qubit manipulation (= 0 ↔ 1 ) called logic gate by applying ordinary laser light or microwave pulses both in Harvard's 30 trapped ions ( this p.16-17 ) and Google's 25 superconducting qubits ( this p.14 ).

As a result, the fault-tolerant topological quantum computer is just illusion caused by physicists' artificial, baseless assumption that each real bit may consist of multiple fictional unseen anyon quasiparticles and tied braids, hence, their quantum computers just imaging non-existent quasiparticles are useless and Not robust at all.

2023/5/14 updated. Feel free to link to this site.