- Criticize top journals. (21/ 8/6)

*(Q-1) Old vaccines, fantasy parallel-world * ↓

The current only mainstream atomic theory = quantum mechanics and quantum field theory are unrealistic and **useless** in all fields from modern computers to medicine, contrary to the media's **false** narrative of "enormously successful quantum mechanics".

The disastrous fact that scientists can**not** utilize such an useless fictional quantum mechanical atomic model for any practical purpose urged them to fabricate **imaginary** future technology = fantasy parallel-world quantum computers as the **only** hope of the current **deadend** fishy quantum technology which is actually nothing, with No progress for 100 years.

Even if the fishy quantum technology or quantum computer is an impractical pseudo-science based on fantasy parallel-worlds, the fact that such a pseudo-science is the **only hope** of the current "science" enables them to gather a large amount of money from the world, and they use those big money to control all the (social) media ( instead of developing truly useful technology ) by filling it with an incredible number of the misleading news almost every day.

The similar tendency is seen also in the current lucrative vaccine industry, despite its extremely old science (= vaccine technique is older than the ancient quantum mechanics, which means our medical technology has **stopped** progressing for an extremely long time ).

Medical researchers cannot use the impractical quantum mechanics to explain or study any biological and immunological reactions.

As a result, all the medical industry has to rely on very old technique = vaccines to tackle all diseases such as viruses, HIV and even cancers as the **only hope** of the current deadend medical "science".

Correctly, vaccines are Not treatments or drugs.

Humans are still unable to cure even the **simple** common cold despite extremely long-time researches across the world, let alone new viruses. ← Something **wrong** in the current basic "science" ?

Now, humans can **neither** design nor artificially create useful molecular devices as truly effective drugs to eliminate harmful viruses or cancers, because the unphysical basic theory = quantum mechanics **forbids** scientists from using real atomic interactions in practical fields such as medicine.

So instead of creating artificial useful molecular devices, almost all the medical industries pin their hopes only on unpredictable **natural** (= Not artificial, hence, its molecular mechanism is unclear ) immune responses allegedly producing **uncertain** antibodies by natural human's or animal's cells in old vaccines and dreamlike immunotherapies against viruses and cancers.

Blindly and **un**scientifically believing in **whimsical** natural immune responses **ignoring** the detailed atomic interactions is the reason why it is still extremely hard to predict side effects or usefulness of vaccines.

The miserable fact that the very old technique = vaccine blindly relying on **unpredictable** natural immune responses is the current human's **only hope** or choice for tackling viruses or cancers enables vaccine industries or big pharmaceutical companies to gather an enormous amount of research or "science" money from the world in such a fruitless, stalled technology.

Such a tremendous amount of "**science**" money prompted the pharmaceutical companies to have large political power and control almost all the world's media, social media, BigTechs and politicians to advertise and exaggerate vaccine's effectiveness despite increasing cases of vaccinated patients who got infection and hospitalized.

Similar phenomenon is seen in almost all the media (= controlled by lucrative fishy quantum technology industries ) exaggerating the **fictional** potential of parallel-world quantum computers which are unfortunately the only hope of the current impractical deadend basic science = quantum mechanics into which a lot of research and taxpayers' money is constantly poured like "(fake) science Ponzi scheme."

For example, "Japan's alleged 1st commercial-use quantum computers (by Tokyo university using IBM machine )" is one of a lot of **misleaing** news intentionally **exaggeraing** the pie-in-the-sky quantum computers which are still **Not** computers or calculators at all.

If you carefully read this fishy news, you will notice this kind of "Ponzi scheme" news talks only about "imaginary future" of as-yet-**unrealized** quantum computers, using the uncertain **future** words such as "will."

The 8-9th paragraphs of this same news just **vaguely** says

"It is very significant that a *base* (for a quantum computer) has been set up in Japan as it **will** help nurture personnel who **will** be adept at actually operating it.."

"..He noted many technical *challenges* **remain** for the full-fledged operation of quantum computers."

↑ So the careful reading will make you notice this "intentionally-exaggerated" news talks **only** about imaginary **future** (= as seen in their frequent use of the dubious future word "will" ), and the alleged 1st "commercial quantum computer" is still **useless**, can do No meaningful calculations now.

It seems the leading company IBM likes to use the **misleading** word "commercial (= sounding good )" to desperately try to make the still-**useless** quantum computer "**look**" practical or promising.

This latest IBM quantum computer sent into Japan still has an extremely **small** number of bits or qubits = only **27** qubits (= this small number of bits cannot do any meaningful calculations, this 3rd paragraph ) for its very big and bulky body, like the company's recent machine sent to Germany.

↑ This latest IBM bulky quantum computer containing only **27** quantum bits or qubits in its room-size large space is far more inefficient and **inferior** to the current widely-used practical classical computer packing more than billions of bits or transistors into a very compact smartphone's space.

Each bit or qubit can take only the simple binary number = 0 or 1 states when each bit or qubit state is measured.

So the 27-qubit quantum computer consists only of the simple 27-bitstring, which cannot do any computations.

The as-yet-unrealized dreamlike practical quantum computers are said to need at least 1 **million** qubits (= far more than 27 qubits ! this 3rd paragraph, this 3rd paragraph ).

These latest quantum computers (= still Not computers ) with less than 100 qubits are **far** from dreamlike practical computers or calculators.

The 3rd-4th paragraphs of this news say a little more honestly

"Today, Google, IBM and others have built the first wave of quantum computers, but these systems are still in the early stages and **aren’t** yet running any useful *commercial* applications.."

".. the technology faces a number of **challenges**, and many industry experts believe these systems are still a **decade** away from being practical."

↑ They admit there are still **No** commercial (= practical ) quantum computers ( this last paragraph ), hence the sensationally-exaggerated news such as "1st commercial quantum computer comes !" turned out to be a big **lie** (= or IBM's definition of "commercial" seems to have too **broad** meaning, they tend to use "commercial" even in still-impractical quantum computers ).

Another recent exaggerated news showed IBM desperately tries to advertise their still-impractical quantum computers with too small a number of qubits to be practical, even by relying on **fictional** intangible God particles inside colliders, colluding with the infamous taxpayers' money-wasting organization = CERN.

This 7th-last paragraph says even the latest IBM
quantum computer (= still Not a computer ) allegedly used for "estimating" imaginary Higgs (= detailed method is unclear ) had only **15** qubits (= too small number to compute any data ), which cannot do any meaningful calculations which need at least millions of qubits.

The practical large quantum computers with millions of qubits are impossible to realize because very **fragile** and unstable quantum bit or qubit state suffers many errors unlike the present practical classical computer which can manipulate billions of bits with almost No errors.

The 2nd paragraph of this news says

"But building a large quantum computer—one with thousands or millions of qubits is **hard** because qubits are very **fragile**. Small interactions with the environment can introduce **errors** and lead to **failures**. Detecting these errors is not straightforward.."

The 3rd paragraph of this latest news says

"The results arrived one week after Google published a paper in Nature Communications also showing logical qubits overpowering errors. Google's approach, however, **didn't** achieve full error correction: its method only could handle one of two error types at a time instead of both simultaneously, and it **couldn't** fix errors it detected. That's why Honeywell is claiming its full error correction achievement as a first."

↑ The current Google's 54 qubit quantum computer allegedly achieving controversial supremacy, which was denied by IBM, cannot do any precise calculations due to many fatal **errors** (= frequently occurring even in their very small number of qubits ) which cannot be fixed.

In the latest Nature paper, Google used only an extremely **small** number of bits = only **21** qubits out of 54 qubits (= because if they try to use all 54 qubits of their machine, much more irreparable errors would occur. this p.2 left ), and they could Not fix all errors occurring even in this very small 21 bitstring.

These frequently-occurring fatal errors are one of many reasons why all the present quantum computers including Google, IBM, China can**not** do any practical calculations except for outputting random meaningless numbers.

The 5-7th paragraphs of the same news say

"Honeywell's technique marks a significant step in the development of quantum computers, which have the **potential** (= this vague future word means they still have **Not** realized anything ) to leapfrog ordinary computers in areas like materials science ?"

"..The trouble is all qubits can be easily **perturbed**, and calculations are **derailed** when they are. That's why quantum computers typically run at extremely low temperatures in vibration-proof housings."

".. Honeywell demonstrated its technique on its **10**-qubit (= too **small** number of bits ! ) H1 quantum computer (= still Not a computer ). **Seven** of the qubits stored data while the remaining **three** "ancilla" qubits shepherded the error correction process."

↑ Honeywell's alleged quantum computer is still **Not** a computer or a calculator at all, because it just used only "**10** unstably-floating ions" loosely trapped in artificial external electromagnetic fields as "10 qubits or 10-bitstring" linearly. ← This type using fragile floating ions as qubits can **never** make the ordinary robust stable 3-dimensional practical computer.

Actually, this 10-qubit Honneywell's dubious quantum computer did **Not** perform any computation ( this 7th-last paragraph ).

When the media uses the cool-sounding names such as "quantum computer", "quantum processor" or "quantum simulator", they are **Not** actual computers, processors or simulators at all. ← The intentionally-**wrong** use of phrases is rampant in the quantum computer news.

All they could do was output random **meaningless** numbers as bitstrings (= using only less than 100 qubits suffering many irreparable errors ) as seen in the recent Chinese team's allegedly "most powerful quantum computer" ( this 2nd paragraph ), which is **useless** for any practical purposes, because it cannot calculate anything.

Their world's largest quantum computer with still 62 qubits, which fall far short of the current practical classical computer with billions of bits, could only **randomly** and aimlessly flip each qubit, which **meaningless** task is called "random quantum walk."

Last week, the eye-popping news came out, boldly claiming "Google's quantum computer builds first-ever **time crystal**: Are they now closer to building a **Time Machine** ?" ← Really ?

But the first paragraph of this news says a very **strange** and paradoxical thing

"Researchers from Google, Stanford, Princeton, and other universities **might** have made a computer discovery so big we **can’t** fully comprehend it yet. Even Google researchers **aren’t** entirely sure that their time crystal discovery is valid."

↑ It looks like researchers from Google and top universities tried to build the strange material called "**time crystal**" using their ( still-impractical ) quantum computer.

What the heck is this "time crystal" ? ← Is it really a time machine backing to the future !? Or is it just the "media-**hype**" like many other quantum computer's **fake** news ?

The first paragraph of this news says

"Is it possible that a moving object could have zero energy ? The common sense answer is no, since motion itself is kinetic energy, but this answer has been challenged recently by the concept of quantum time crystals. First proposed in 2012 by the Nobel Laureate Frank Wilczek at MIT, quantum time crystals are theoretical systems that exhibit periodic **oscillations** in their ground state, i.e., their state of **lowest** possible energy."

↑ So the time crystal just means the lowest-energy ground state where particles are **oscillating** periodically, without violating the law of conservation of energy ( this 6th paragraph ).

The time crystal is **Not** a fantasy time machine or a surprising quantum material, but just a boring **ordinary** material oscillating periodically conserving the energy, which is Not worth such an **exaggerated** news or Nobel prize.

Their "time crystal" is just an **ordinary** realistic state Not fantasy perpetual machine generating infinite energies, hence, realizing time crystal is Not surprising or a great achievement at all.

All **ordinary** atoms and molecules are stable in their lowest-energy ground state where their electrons with kinetic energies are always **oscillating** or moving around the nuclei periodically. ← Even this boring ordinary lowest-energy atomic state corresponds to one of their **meaningless** time crystal, if the upper definition is applied.

Actually, this scientifically-meaningless time crystal is **useless** with No practical application except for attracting people's attention by "exaggerated news" like other fake quantum computer news.

The 6th-last paragraph of this news about dubious Google quantum computer allegedly exploited as a meaningless time crystal just vaguely says

"It’s **unclear** whether a Floquet time crystal might have practical use." ← It means No clear practical use for this dubious time crystal now.

All they did was just **randomly** *oscillate* 20 qubits (= very small number of bits, hence, still Not a computer or a calculator ), and named it "time crystal (= sounding mysterious associated with fantasy time machine, but it's actually **nothing** with No practical application. this Fig.3, 4 )".

Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek seems to be bent on **wasting** his time in inventing only **fictional** meaningless concepts such as extra-dimensions and fractional-charge quasiparticles called "anyon" which are an useless junk "science" except for selling philosophical unscientific books or irrelevant political tools.

*(W-1) Unreal mainstream science proposed by * ↓

Nobel prize-winning physicist Steven Weinberg died last week.

I'd like to express my sympathy on his passing except for his "science."

The problem is his passing was really a "colossal loss" to our "science" ?

His imaginary theories such as Big Bang and multiverse really affected our daily life ? Or is it just religion ?

Strangely, most people do **Not** know "what science" such a great and famous Weinberg
had actually achieved in detail for the extensive media coverage. ← The media and academia are **hiding** *inconvenient* truth about "science" advocated by Weinberg ?

Weinberg has passed away, stubbornly keeping shutting his eyes to truth and serious problems underlying the present paradoxical mainstream physics called quantum mechanics.

The 2nd-3rd paragraphs of this news explain the outline of fictitious theory Weinberg proposed half a century ago, and amazingly his nonphysical ancient theory irrelevant to the real physical world is still unchanged and left as a pillar to the present mainstream physics with **No** progress.

"His work was foundational to the Standard Model, the overarching physics theory that describes how subatomic particles behave. .. he predicted how subatomic particles known as W, Z and the famous Higgs boson (= aka God particle ) should behave."

".. The paper also helped unify the electromagnetic force and the weak force.. ?"

Out of nowhere, Weinberg proposed the **unfounded** theoretical model allegedly unifying electromagnetic and weak forces using Higgs boson (= these pseudo-particles exist only in their armchair theory or theoretical physicists' heads Not in the real world ) together with Glashow and Salam.

First of all, what exactly is "weak force" suddenly proposed by Weinberg ?

In fact, this elusive esoteric weak force is just an **useless** unphysical concept Not worth thinking about, because the weak force is said to be involved only in some particle decay (= detailed mechanism of how weak force is involved in particle dacay is **unclear** ) **unlike** ordinary forces pushing or pulling particles.

The weak force or weak interaction is said to be extremely short-range force, and so we do Not experience or use it in every-day life. ← Such an **intangible** weak force **Not** affecting daily life is a **meaningless** force.

In beta decay, a neutron is said to split into a proton and an extremely heavy Weak (or W ) boson which further decays into an electron and a (anti-)neutrino. ← This ambiguous whole decay "process" is called "(unseen) weak force" which is directly unmeasurable and intangible unlike ordinary forces.

↑ Such an intangible Weinberg's weak force is a scientifically and practically meaningless concept which can**not** be utilized for daily life or useful technology.

This weak force is not only useless but also unrealistic and self-**contraditory**, which inconvenient fact shows the current particle physics based on standard model is **false**.

The hypothetical W or weak boson mediating the weak force or neutron beta decay is said to be extremely heavy = more than 80 times heavier than a proton or a neutron (= a neutron's mass is almost the same as a proton's mass ).

This neutron decay allegedly mediated by the speculative weak force is physically impossible, because a very lighter neutron can **Not** emit a much heavier weak boson (= 80 times heavier than a neutron ) in beta decay.

Weinberg's unrealistic beta decay = A less massive neutron emits a much more massive weak boson which is 80 times heavier than the original neutron.

↑ physically **impossible** because his theory makes a ridiculous claim that smaller energy (= a lighter neutron ) has to emit much higher energy (= a heavier weak boson ), which **violates** energy conservation law.

To hide this fatal defect in the current particle physics, physicists make a poor **excuse** that such an unrealistically heavy weak or W boson is **Not** a real particle but an **unreal** virtual particle with imaginary (= not real ) mass, which cannot exist in the real world ( this p.2 last ).

Such a **nonphysical** virtual W boson particle's mass is called off-mass shell, which means the virtual particle's fictitious mass, which can be imaginary, **disobeys** famous Einstein mc^{2} relation ( this p.3, this p.6 ).

The real weak or W boson, which is said to be 80~90 times heavier than a proton or a neutron, is too short-lived (= W boson's life time is only 10^{-25} s ) to directly observe, and such a ghost-like unstable real W boson is said to appear transiently only inside the virtual circumstances of high-energy colliders which have **No** connection with the outside real world.

The 5th-last paragraph of this site says

"In typical neutrino interactions, a “**virtual** (= unreal )” W/Z boson is produced, which means it can**not** be detected even in principle. However, in the case of the Glashow resonance, a real W– boson was produced. While charged, it’s lifetime is incredibly **short**, so we were only able to detect it through its decay products (= detecting an extremely short-lived W boson itself is impossible )."

They claim the real weak boson is **unobservable** due to its extremely short-lived and unstable property, hence, the dubious existence of such a ghost-like weak boson (= even if it really existed ) has to be speculated only from the irrelevant final-product particles (= electrons or lights ) into which a dubious weak boson is said to decay.

Of course, the unreal virtual weak boson, which is said to be involved in the ordinary neutron decay outside the collider, is also **undetectable**, ghost-like too.

A very heavy and short-lived real weak (or W ) boson, which allegedly appears for an extremely short time only inside the high-energy colliders has **nothing** to do with actual neutron beta decay outside the colliders where unreal virtual weak boson is said to appear (= only inside particle physicists' imagination or daydream ).

↑ It's impossible that the ghost-like, unstable real or unreal virtual weak bosons can be useful for our actual technology or innovation, hence, Weinberg's fictional virtual weak boson or force theory made **No** contribution to the world's practical science in the past and future.

Then, what does the Weinberg's unfounded claim of unifying such an unrealistic electro-weak force mean ?

He tried to theoretically "unify" electric and fictitious weak forces using purely-**non**physical concepts called "gauge or SU(2) symmetry".

The problem is these abstract concepts such as "gauge", "gauge symmetry" and "SU(2) symmetry"are completely unphysical, unobservable ( this p.7 ) with **No** relation to the real world's objects, hence they are scientifically **meaningless** concepts.

In 1928, Dirac introduced the completely **non**physical impractical equation and theory called quantum field theory or quantum electrodynamics (= QED ) which allegedly combined quantum mechanics and Einstein's special relativity.

In the quantum field theory or quantum electrodynamics, each electron is expressed as an abstract, unphysical math symbols called "field (= ψ )" which abstract meaningless symbols give **No** concrete physical picture of an electron and particles (= quantum field theory tells us **nothing** about detailed electron's behavior or underlying mechanism of what's going on ).

The 4th-6th paragraphs of this site says

"In modern physics, we **no** longer describe what is happening merely through the position of objects at a given time,.. we use **abstract** objects called **fields**."

".. The fields themselves are abstract mathematical (= unphysical ) entities that are introduced as convenient **mathematical** tools.. With these new mathematical entities comes a new kind of freedom."

".. The freedom to "shift" or "rotate" our fields is called **gauge** symmetry. It is important to note that this symmetry is completely independent from the rotational and translational symmetry of our coordinate systems. When we "shift" or "rotate" a field we do **not** refer to anything in spacetime."

↑ Physicists suddenly introduced unphysical **vague** concepts such as "phase (= θ )" or "gauge" **without** specifying what they actually mean, and tried to change or tweak the original nonphysical abstract "Dirac equation combining an electron and photon fields" by such a meaningless phase and gauge which are unmeasurable.

If the whole abstract quantum field theory's equation allegedly defining some unspecified law of physics is unchanged or invariant under this unphysical gauge or phase shift or transformation, this mathematical invariance is called "gauge symmetry", which has **nothing** to do with the real world's objects.

When this unphysical gauge symmetry was extended to the artificially-introduced math concept of 2 × 2 matrices allegedly incorporating unseen quarks or W bosons as unphysical math operators, it is called "SU(2) symmetry ( this p.3, this p.9-10 )"

According to this Weinberg's ad-hoc desk theory, when the whole abstract quantum field equations are unchaged under unphysical phase or gauge transformation (= called gauge invariance or symmetry ), all gauge bosons including photon and weak bosons must be massless, which disagreed with their massive weak boson model.

So in order to give "fictitious mass" to the heavy weak or W boson, another unphysical armchair theory called "Higgs mechanics" was invented.

This Higgs or Weinberg theory can give **No** detailed physical mechanism of how Higgs particle interacts with W bosons or other particles, instead, such an impractical theory just presents very abstract meaningless equations or diagrams ( this p.5, this p.4 ) without clarifying what those math symbols or paleography mean.

According to their desk theory, Higgs is said to give mass to weak boson by purely-nonphysical mechanism called "breaking electro-weak or gauge symmetry", which fictional mechanism has **No** physical meaning ( this p.2 ).

So in the present quantum field theory, all particles such as electrons and photons are expressed just as unphysical field operators with **No** concrete physical figures.

→ When transforming such an unphysical field (= allegedly representing particles ) by unphysical phase or gauge does not change the abstract quantum field equation, it is called "gauge or SU(2) symmetry" which requires the heavy weak or W boson to be massless.

→ In order for the weak boson to have fictitious mass, the unphysical symmetry must be broken by artificially adding ad-hoc Higgs field or mechanism to the original equation.

↑ All these armchair concepts such as abstract phase, gauge, SU(2) symmetry, Higgs mechanism of breaking symmetry or something have **nothing** to do with our real world objects, hence, theose symmetries, gauge and phase are completely unnecessary and **useless** concepts for us.

Actually, though 40 years or 10 years have already passed since Weinberg's elusive W boson or Higgs were said to be discovered (= Correctly, very unstable W and Higgs boson cannot be detected directly ), those unseen ghost-like W and Higgs are still **useless** except for getting Nobel prize or selling sci-fi books, just wasting taxpayers' money in gigantic colliders

The mathematical empty quantum field theory or quantum electrodynamics (= QED ) have been impractical, **losing** touch with reality, from the beginning.

Actually **nobody** around you uses this useless quantum field theory or QED in daily life.

There are serious problems in quantum field theory or QED which show the present mainstream theory, which has unreasonably dominated the academic world for a long time, is **wrong**.

According to the ridiculous QED, any real electrons cannot emit or absorb real photons, instead, electrons must always interact with unreal virtual photons descibed by unphysical abstract Feynman diagram which abstract model tells us **nothing** about detailed physical mechanism in particle physics.

The fantasy quantum field theory or QED claims the vaccum space must contain infinite numbers of unreal virtual particles with infinite kinds of energy and momentum (= virtual photons with infinite energies must unrealistically exist in the space ).

Due to these infinite unreal virtual particles with infinite fictitious energies, all calculations of quantum field theory or QED always diverge to infinity. ← Infinite values given by QED are physically-**meaningless** and cannot be used to describe actual finite physical values ( this p.4 ).

Eliminating such a ridiculous infinity by artificially restricting infinite virtual photons or particles allegedly popping up in space to finite energies is impossible. because virtual particles whose energies are restricted to finite values **violate** Einstein relativistic Lorentz symmetry ( this 14-15th paragraphs ).

According to ridiculous Einstein relativity, there is No absolute space or frames, all things and their motions must be relative ( the velocity or kinetic energy of each particle is Not an absolute value but a fictionally uncertain relative value changing seen by different observers moving at different speeds ).

In such a counter-intuitive Einstein relativistic world, the maximum energy or momentum of virtual particles must be always **infinite** (= virtual particles' energies must be from -∞ to +∞ ).

↑ If the maxium energy of virtual particles is a finite value instead of infinity, the particle's finite maximum energy or velocity would change in different frames seen by different observers moving at different speeds (= the particle's kinetic energy or velociy changes seen by different observers moving at different velocities in Einstein relativistic world ).

→ When the maximum energy or velocity of virtual particles is infinite, the maximum energy or velocity of virtual particles looks always **infinite** seen by any different observers moving at different finite velocities (= Infinite energy or velocity ± finite energy or velocity by observer's motion = Infinite energy or velocity = unchanged, = ∞ ± finite values remains ∞ ), which unchanged infinite property is called "relativistic Lorentz **symmetry**". ← again, stupid "symmetry" rule.

But infinite virtual particles' energies always give meaningless infinite physical values which are completely useless, so physicists had to eliminate such an annoying infinity even by relying on unrealistic dishonest methods.

To remove this unrealistic infinite energies of virtual particles, the current mainstream physics makes a ridiculous claim that the (unseen) bare charge and mass of an electron must be negatively-infinite so that the (unseen) negatively-infinite bare charge and mass of an electron could absorb infinite virtual particle's energies to give some finite observable values, which ad-hoc trick of artificially cancelling infinity is called "renormalization ( this p.14 )."

↑ There is a serious self-**contradiction** in this QED unrealistic trick of removing virtual particle's infinite energy by another artificially-introduced infinite bare charge or mass of an electron to obtain finite observed physical values by force. Hence, QED is wrong.

Because even after removing the vaccum infinity allegedly caused by infinite virtual photons by getting the negatively-infinite bare charge or mass of an electron to absorb the vacuum virtual particle's infinity, the vacuum must always contain other infinite virtual photons with infinite energies, which pop up one after another endlessly, as long as the vacuum contains electromagnetic fields or photons.

→ Accroding to QED, all observed values involving electromagnetic fields (= electromagnetic fields are allegedly caused by unreal virtual photons according to the current stupid quantum field theory ) must always be infinite !

This quantum field theory or QED ad-hoc trick of artificially removing and **hiding** infinite virtual particles under the rug was criticized by many great physicists including QED founders.

The current only unified theory allegedly incorporating general relativity and quantum field theory is the so-called fantasy 10-dimensional string theory.

The string theory or "theory or everything (= sounding good )" evolved from the previous ridiculous 26-dimensional string to the present 10-dimensional superstring (= still ridiculous ) incorporating another unphysical concept called "supersymmetry."

This supersymmetry is also an unrealistic meaningless concept based on unphysical artificial transformation between imaginary particles and supersymmetric particles which math objects have No relation to our real world ( this p.12 ), like Weinberg's meaingless gauge or phase symmetry concepts.

Math equations are invariant under unphysical gauge or phase transformation. ← It is called gauge or SU(2) symmetry ← electroweak force ?

Math equations are invariant under unphysical supersymmetric transformation (= particle ↔ supersymmetric particle or boson ↔ fermion ). ← It is called supersymmetry. ← fantasy 10-dimentional superstring unified theory ?

Why did the current mainstream physics go in such a wrong, unscientific and ridiculous direction ?

All these problems originate in the present unrealistic mainstream theory called quantum mechanics which has been useless in any modern technology, hence, physicsts were forced to make up new **imaginary** future technology = fantasy parallel world quantum computers.

Such an useless impractical basic physics = quantum mechanics clearly obstructs developing truly effective drugs or treatment in applied science or medicine due to its contradictory atomic model.

As a result, the very old technique = vaccine, which just relies on **unpredictable** whimsical natural immune system for generating uncertain antibodies, has been the only choice for tackling viruses for an exremely long time = more than 200 years. ← Amazingly, human's medical basic technology **stops** progressing for a long time due to fantasy quantum mechanics.

The useless basic quantum mechanics prevents developing any effective drugs, so all countries have to rely on such a very ancient uncertain vaccine technique.

↑ The miserable fact that such a very old technique vaccine is the current **only** choice for tackling viruses and even cancers ( due to the stalled basic physics ) enables vaccine industries
to easily gather a tremendous amount of research and "science" money from the world.

And thanks to these enormous amount of taxpayers' "science" money, the lucrative pharmaceutical, healthcare companies tend to have large political power controlling the world's media, social media and even the so-called "scientists" for pushing the world's politicians to impose vaccine mandate despite people's opposition and the dwindling effectiveness of vaccines.

Nobel prize winning Weinberg died **without** clarifying what the unphysical virtual particle, gauge symmetry mean, and his ad-hoc armchair electroweak unification theory **lacking** concrete physical picture still dominates the present mainstream science, and clearly **obstructing** our truly useful technological innovation and medicine.

Weinberg unphysical quantum field theory → Basic physical theory makes No progress stuck in unphysical concepts → Developing effective drugs using practical atomic model is impossible now. → Very old unpredictable vaccine is the only choice, so the pharmaceutical companies tend to spend the most of their money for promoting it and pressure politicians to impose its mandates which caused the fierce opposition and confusion across the world.

If the mask mandate has to be reintroduced to contain the mutant viruses sooner or later, what's the point of rushing to impose vaccine mandates ?

The so-called "science" is just a **political** tool which is *unreliably* and conveniently **changing**, repeating false predictions ? ← "Listen to ( fishy mainstream ) sceince" seems to be no longer valid.

*(N-1) Harvard's fake quantum simulator in * ↓

People tend to be **misled** by "fancy *scientific* words" such as
"computer", "programmable", "simulator" and blindly believe any objects with such fancy names may be the state-of-the-art technology, even when they are just a meaningless **crap**.

Vaccines are also less effective than general public expectation. ← Academia, the so-called "scientists" colluding with corporations are hiding truth ?

This bad tendency is most often seen in an incredibly number of **fake** news popping up almost everyday promoting **fantasy** parallel-world quantum computers as if they represented the (fake) state-of-the-art future technology.

Most people don't know the quantum computer is still Not a computer or calculator at all.

It is **impossible** for such a fake quantum computer with an extremely **small** number of bits or qubits to simulate any actual matter's phenomena by calculating complicated atomic interactions using computer *programming* which will need at least **billions** of bits or qubits, as seen in the current widely-used practical classical computers.

For example, the recent Chinese team's 62-qubit world's largest "quantum computer" or alleged "programmable processor" can do **No** meaningful calculations or programming ( only using such a very few 62-bitstring ) except for randomly flipping each bit or qubit, which meaningless **chaotic** task is called "random quantum walk."

Their 66-qubit allegedly-fastest "quantum processor" also cannot do any practical computations except for outputting random meaningless numbers in a similar way to Google's 53-qubit quantum computer's supremacy ( this 2-3 paragraphs. ), which quantum advantage was denied by IBM.

As you see, even the current largest quantum computers (= still Not a computer, though ) have only 50~60 bits or qubits which are far smaller and **inferior** to widely-used practical classical computers with more than billions of bits or transistors (= one bit or qubit is in the state 0 or 1 when observed ).

Such a **fake** computer with the fancy name "quantum computer" with only an impractically small number of quantum bits or qubits can **never** perform meaningful calculations, programming or simulation.

Despite these miserable facts of the completely **useless** quantum computers, a lot of misleading news such as scientific american (= one of Nature journal group ) tries to **exaggerate** the illusory quantum computer's potential to stimulate unnecessary competition among countries so that governments waste more taxpayers' money in fruitless fantasy science which prevents developing truly-effective drugs.

Does it have anything to do with all the current prestigious academic journals Nature and Lancet unreasonably rushing to deny Chinese-lab leak virus idea as 'conspiracy theory', while it still remains uncertain ?

Recently, Harvard and MIT made a **dubious** claim "Towards quantum computing: Physicists **surpass** (← ? ) current supercomputers with new *programmable simulator* ?", which was published in the latest top journal Nature.

↑ This eye-catching misleading title shows a typical example of the current exaggerated news **falsely** treating an still-impractical quantum computer, which can **neither** calculate, program nor simulate, as a "(fake) *programmable simulator*".

If you carefully read these exaggerated dubious news, you will notice their so-called quantum computers are still Not computers or calculators, and their researches still have **Not** achieved anything meaningful.

The 2nd paragraph of the same news says

"The experts also **hope** that quantum computers **will** be applied to material science studies, real-world communication engineering,.. Harvard-MIT experts are confident that the performance of the *programmable quantum simulator* will surpass the supercomputers present today ?"

↑ So the careful reading will make you notice this sensational-sounding news uses only "*uncertain* **future** words" such as "**will**" and "**hope**", which means their so-called quantum computers are still useless, achieving **No** meaningful programming or simulation now except in an **imaginary** future (= surpassing the present supercomputers is a **lie** ).

Then, what on earth has this Harvard's seeming quantum computer or simulator done in this Nature paper ?

The 8th-9th paragraphs of this news explains

"The project uses a significantly upgraded version of a platform the researchers developed in 2017, which was capable of reaching a size of **51** qubits (← a very **small** number of bits ! ). That older system allowed the researchers to capture ultra-cold **rubidium** atoms and arrange them in a specific order using a one-dimensional array of individually focused **laser** beams called *optical tweezers*."

".. This new system allows the **atoms** to be **assembled** in two-dimensional arrays of optical tweezers. This increases the achievable system size from 51 to **256** qubits (= still too **small** number to calculate anything ! ). Using the **tweezers**, researchers can **arrange** the **atoms** in defect-free patterns and create *programmable shapes* like square, honeycomb, or triangular lattices to engineer different interactions between the qubits." ← **No** mention of calculating any values.

↑ All they did was **arrange** only 256 cold neutral rubidium atoms using laser beams called optical tweezers which can push each atom by the pressure of laser light. ← **No** meaningful programming or computation contrary to their misleading narrative.

Arranging atoms in a certain pattern using laser light corresponds to their "(fake) programming" which have **nothing** to do with the ordinary computer programming for calculating something. ← This so-called 256-atomic qubit quantum computer has done **No** calculations or real programming, hence, completely **useless**.

Why did physicists falsely try to consider this arrangement of 256 atoms in a certain meaningless shape, which has **nothing** to do with actual computation or programming, as a (fake) quantum computer ?

Quantum mechanics tries to use each atom or ion as a quantum bit or qubit where the lowest-energy ground state is treated as "0" bit state and the excited state is treated as "1" state.

↑ But such very **fragile** atomic energy levels or states are too **unstable** and uncontrollable to use for actual practical computer's stable bits which require the precision with No errors.

This incredibly fragile property is one of many reasons why (fantasy) quantum computers will be impractical forever.

A rubidium atom is called "Rydberg atom" whose highly excited energy-state (= such a highly-excited electron's orbital radius can be very long ) is said to be used as one of (future) quantum bit or qubit states.

But such an excited atomic energy state is extremely **short-lived**, fragile and unstable (= the lifetime of this type of quantum computer or qubit is only 600 microseconds, easily broken and impractical ).

So this kind of quantum computer using **fragile** atomic energy excited states as a bit or qubit state will **never** be a practical stable computer, much less outperform the current widely-used practical classical computers which use stored electric charges as a stable bit state with almost-**infinite** lifetime.

This Harvard's alleged 256-qubit quantum computer is **Not** a robust ordinary solid computer but an **intangible** *gas*-like fake computer consisting of 256 fragile cold atoms loosely trapped in (fictitious) optical lattice made of unstable laser light (= unlike ordinary robust solid crystals ), which frail structure can **never** make a stable or practical computer.

Unlike robust solid materials, this fragile optical lattice made just by intangible laser light is too **unstable** to keep each atom as a quantum bit or qubit in the fixed position for a long time, hence their quantum computer consisting of fragile **floating** atoms unstably trapped in light is far more easily **broken** than the ordinary stable solid-type classical computer. ← Practical calculation is impossible to perform in such a fragile, easily-broken quantum computer.

The 2nd paragraph of this news says

"In order for Rydberg atoms to be effectively used in quantum technology, however, researchers first need to be able to **trap** them. While a number of studies have demonstrated the trapping of Rydberg atoms using magnetic, electric, or **laser** technology, the **trapping** times achieved so far have been relatively **short**, typically around **100μs**."

↑ Unlike the ordinary stable solid computer, it is impossible for the very fragile laser light to trap or hold multiple atoms for more than 100 microseconds, because atoms easily **slip** out of the fragile optical lattice and fly away somewhere else ( this 4th paragraph, this 2nd paragraph ).

The very unstable property of this type of quantum computer which just loosely traps 256 atoms in weak laser light, is the reason why many major companies such as IBM, Google and Intel aiming at robust solid-type quantum computers tend to **avoid** this fragile **gas**-like floating Rydberg atomic quantum computers which will **never** be put to practical use ( like other quantum computers ).

Using this very fragile impractical quantum computer (= still Not a computer, though ), what did Harvard's physicists claim to have performed ?

The 4th-last and 3rd-last paragraphs of this news **avoid** showing the **detailed** task of what this fishy quantum computer has actually done. ↓

".. The researchers are currently working to improve the system by improving **laser control** over qubits and making the system more *programmable* (← ? ). They are also actively **exploring** (= progressive form, so has Not acheived anything ) how the system can be used for new applications, ranging from probing exotic forms of *quantum matter* (= **vague** expression ! ) to solving challenging real-world problems that can be naturally encoded on the qubits ?"

".. This work enables a vast number of new scientific directions, Ebadi said. We are nowhere near the limits of what can be done with these systems."

↑ As you see, this research allegedly using 256-qubit quantum computer has just **moved** and arranged atoms in a certain meaningless pattern using laser light.

**No** mention of what their computation or programming means in detail.

In this still-**useless** research of fake quantum computer, what does their "vague simulation" or "probing *quantum matter*" mean ?

They try to rely on a meaningless **analogy** and **falsely** associate the real solid materials where many atoms and electrons tightly bound by Coulomb electric force with this **fictitious** optical lattice or artificial fake crystal which just unstably traps separate neutral atoms using intangible laser lights.

↑ Though these two things of actual robust solid materials and fragile separate atoms loosely trapped in laser light are completely different and **irrelevant** things using completely **different** mechanisms of binding atoms (= actual solid material uses strong Coulomb force for tightly binding atoms, while this fake quantum computer uses weak laser light for loosely trapping floating neutral atoms ).

**Separate** floating atoms unstably arranged and trapped in laser lights = a **fake** solid material consisting of atoms and electrons strongly bound by Coulomb electric forces ?

↑ This meaningless analogy is what they call "(fake) quantum *simulation* of imaginary (solid) quantum matter", though these two things are completely different and **irrelevant** things based on different mechanisms.

So their "quantum simulation or simulator" is just a meaningless concept unrealistically equating 256-neutral atoms loosely trapped in laser lights with completely different irrelevant robust solid materials or crystals where all atoms are tightly bound to each other.

This means their claim of "programmable quantum processor" based on **fake** *simulation* also has **nothing** to do with the actual programmable processor or computer as you imagine in the current practical classical computer.

The 2nd paragraph of this site says

"The team performed quantum logic operations on clusters of two or three closely spaced rubidium atoms held individually in optical tweezers. The atoms became entangled when one of them was excited by a laser into a Rydberg state—a state where the outermost electron is highly energized."

"..This transition also **prevented** the atom’s neighbors from being **excited** at the same time, a situation that is essential for creating **logic** gates (← ? ) comprising two and even three quantum bits (qubits)."

↑ When one rubidium atom is excited to higher-energy Rydberg state (= supposed to be 1-bit state ), this excited electron's Coulomb repulsion prevents the neighboring atoms from being excited to the same higher-energy state ( this 2nd paragraph ), instead, this neighboring atoms are forced to remain in the original lowest-energy ground state (= supposed to be 0-bit state ).

This simple electron-electron Coulomb repulsion blocking their neighboring atoms from being excited (= called Rydberg blockade ) is what they call "(**fake**) quantum computer", "processor" or "logic gate", which can do **No** meaningful calculations except for simply blocking neighboring atoms from being excited.

The 5th paragraph of this site explain why this meaningless fragile system can be used as a (fake) simulator of other irrelevant solid material.

"A recent development is the use of Rydberg atoms to realize and explore the physics of strongly correlated spin systems.. the electronic ground state (= 0 ) can be regarded as the down state and the Rydberg level (= excited state, 1 ) as the up state of a **pseudospin**.."

So they falsely try to consider the lowest-energy ground state of the rubidium atom as **pseudo**-spin-down state (= 0 ↔ ↓ ) and the excited Rydberg state as pseudo-spin-up state (= 1 ↔ ↑ ) of other irrelevant **imaginary** magnetic materials such as anti-ferromagnets ( this 4th paragraph ).

Due to Rydberg blockage or Coulomb repulsion between excited electrons, neighboring atoms close to the excited atoms (= 1 or ↑ ) remain in the ground state (= 0 or ↓ ), which can be associated with a fake anti-ferromagnetic material where (imaginary) spin-up and down atoms **alternate** like checkerboad ( this middle, this p.2 right, Fig.2, this Figure 1 ).

↑ This meaningless attempt to falsely treat the alternately-excited floating atoms loosely trapped in laser lights as irrelevant antiferromagnetic solid crystals consisting of pseudo-spins is what they call "(fake) quantum computer's **simulation**" which actually **neither** calculated nor simulated actual materials.

The point is all these Harvard paper's seeming computer-related words such as "quantum computer" and "programmable quantum sumulator" have **nothing** to do with actual practical computer's programming or simulation. ↓

256-**qubit** quantum computer ? = 256 floating **atoms** loosely trapped in laser light.

**Programmable** ? = Unstably-floating 256 atoms are **movable** by laser light.

*Simulation* ? = **false** *interpretation* of 256 atoms loosely trapped in light as a fictitious solid crystal such as anti-ferromagnet with pseudo-spins.

As I said, their "programmable" does Not mean typing some program language and executing its calculations in real computers, but their fake programming just means "moving and arranging 256 atoms pushed by laser light" **without** any computation.

This is why the 2nd paragraph of this news just vaguely says

"The system marks a major step toward building large-scale quantum machines that **could** be used to shed light on a host of complex quantum processes and eventually help bring about real-world breakthroughs in (**fake**) *material* science."

↑ They just used "uncertain **future** phrases" such as "**could**" and "a **step** toward (imaginary) large-scale quantum computers" **without** mentioning what this fake 256-qubit quantum computer has achieved in detail.

Because their *impractical* quantum computer (= still Not a computer ) with a very small number of fragile qubits has done **No** useful calculation, programming or simulation.

**Infinite** "steps" seem to be needed to realize their so-called (imaginary) large-scale quantum computers which require at least millions of qubits from the present miserably small number of qubits (= only 50 ~ 100 qubits ), which can actually do No practical computation.

The media and journals should **Not** use misleading phrases such as "scalable or large-scale quantum computers !" so easily, while the present useless quantum computers are still **far** from it (= or realization of practical large-scale quantum computers will be **impossible** forever ).

*(P-1) Quantum mechanics is useless as * ↓

Covid-19 mutated viruses are likely to make vaccines ineffective.

We are forced to get unpredictable vaccines every 6 months **forever** ?

Even the simple common cold is incurable despite very long time researches across the world.
New coronaviruses and cancers are much more **impossible** to cure in the current "mainstream science".

Why ? Is there anything **wrong** or contradiction in the current "mainstream science" ? Or we all are just brainwashed into believing "fake science" as "real science" under the name of education ?

It is surprising that the human's **only** choice for tackling viruses has remained a very **old** technique = vaccine for more than 200 years.

More surprisingly, we **give up** progressing and graduating from such an ancient vaccine even now.

The vaccine is **Not** a cure or drug, it is only expected to induce our body's *whimsical* **natural** immune response to produce unpredictable antibodies against viruses.

↑ What kind of antibody will be produced, whether it will be harmful or beneficial, is completely **uncertain** and unpredictable.

Even the current latest "mainstream science" can**not** predict how long the vaccine will be effective, whether booster shots will be necessary, or what kinds of side effects it will trigger before using human bodies as experiment.

In order to develop really effective drugs with no side effects or eradicate deadly diseases, it is essential to understand the precise mechanism of protein or enzymatic reactions at the **atomic** level, because all chemical and biological reactions are caused by atomic or molecular interactions.

But the current **only** atomic theory called quantum mechanics is just **fantasy** and completely **useless** for any practical industries including medicine and modern computers.

Now, the world's governments and physicists are **wasting** time and money in pursuing fantasy parallel-world quantum computers, which are impractical forever, misled by an incredibly number of (fake) news and greedy global corporations exaggerating (**illusory**) quantum computers.

The only quantum mechanical tool for seemingly calculating (fake) atomic energies is the infamous Schrödinger equation, which cannot solve any multi-electron atoms or molecules, so completely **useless**.

In such an unsolvable, useless quantum mechanical equation, physicists just artificially choose **fake** approximate solutions called trial functions or basis set, which artificial choice of fake solutions is just "art", Not science.

Even this choosing fake approximate solutions for unsolvable quantum mechanical Schrödinger equations out of infinite arbitrary candidates for seemingly estimating (fake) total energies takes an **enormous** amount of time, hence, even these meaningless quantum mechanical approximate calculations are limited to only small atoms or molecules ( this p.2-3, this p.11 ). ← Predicting protein behaviors using quantum mechanics is much more impossible.

No matter how powerful computers are used, the **defective** quantum mechanics is unable to calculate complicated molecular and protein interactions.

↑ So just developing or pursuing more efficient computers is meaningless unless we replace the current useless basic quantum mechanical theory by a practical atomic model.

Actually, almost all the present quantum chemistry and computational physics **give up** using quantum mechanics itself, and rely on *pseudo*-**classical** model called "force field" or empirical methods such as classical molecular mechanics and molecular dynamics, struggling to describe proteins.

The problem is these pseudo-classical methods such as molecular mechanics or molecular dynamics with *pseudo*-force fields are Not a real classical mechanical model, because they unrealistically ignore actual electrons and orbitals, hence they can**not** explain any chemical reactions involving bond formation, breaking or electron's tansfer. ← completely **useless**.

This **pseudo**-classical molecular mechanics has No physical meaning, because it ignores real electrons, and just replaces actual atoms by pseudo-classical balls-and-spring model with artificially-adjustable parameters which cannot predict new unknown molecular behaviors requiring new unknown parameters.

This introduction says

"Despite of the increasing computational capability now available, molecular modeling and simulation of large, complex systems at atomic level remains a **challenge** to computational chemists.."

"..Models based on classical mechanical constructs such as molecular mechanical (MM) force fields that are based on **empirical** potentials .. have been widely used in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of large and complex systems. However, the MM force fields are **unable** to describe the changes in the **electronic** structure of a system undergoing a chemical reaction."

In order to seemingly explain invisible electrons' behavior, physicists struggled to combine this pseudo-classical force fields with the old impractical quantum mechanics, and invented the new meaningless hybrid methods called "QM/MM".

As a quantum mechanical part, this fake hybrid method often uses the inaccurate, problematic approximation called density functional theory (= DFT ).

This most-widely used quantum approximate method DFT outrageously replaces the entire many-electron atoms or molecules by only one pseudo-electron model.

Of course, it is intrinsically **impossible** for such a one-pseudo-electron model to explain actual complicated many-electron behavior, hence, the most popular quantum mechanical DFT method fails in many cases such as intermolecular van-der Waals interactions ( this p.3, this p.31-32 ).

As a result, we can **never** clarify and utilize the mysterious atomic interactions for practical use such as developing drugs or curing diseases, as long as the current meaningless quantum mechanical atomic model blindly continues to be used, as Feynman said "Nobody understands (fantasy) quantum mechanics".

Why cannot the basic science break the deadlock, as long as quantum mechanics continues to be used as the only atomic theory ?

In fact, the quantum mechanics is intrinsically **unable** to handle any real basic atomic and molecular interactions such as van der Waals force, Coulomb attraction and Pauli repulsion, no matter how sophisticated computers are used for its calculations.

The main non-covalent bond interaction between two molecules or two proteins is van der Waals force, which energy form is known to often agree with the empirically-obtained formula called "Lennard-Jones potential".

For example, when the distance between two hydrogen molecules (= H2 ) is long, the weak attractive forces (= due to Coulomb dipole-dipole interaction between two neutral molecules ) tend to be dominant and stick two neutral molecules together.

Hydrogen bond, which is the most important interaction influencing protein conformation, is one of these weak non-covalent attractive force.

When the distance between two molecules is shorter, Pauli repulsion becomes stronger than attractive van-der Waals force, and two molecules cannot get closer to each other anymore.

↑ So the actual intermolecular interactions are caused by "two **mixed** opposite forces" of Coulomb **attraction** and Pauli **repulsions**. ← But the current quantum mechanics can describe **neither** Coulomb attraction nor Pauli repulsion as real forces.

First of all, if quantum mechanics is right, an unreal H4 (or H3 ) molecule consisting of four (or three ) hydrogen atoms is possible, though the actual hydrogen molecule consists only of **two** hydrogen atoms (= H2 ) ! ← Quantum mechanics is **false**.

For two H2 molecules to repel each other and prevent unreal H4 (or H3 ) molecules from being formed, Pauli repulsion must act between two hydrogen molecules of H2 molecule-1 and H2 molecule-2.

But according to quantum mechanical rule, Pauli repulsion occurs only between two electrons having the same spin and the same orbital.

When two electrons have the opposite spins up and down (= or anti-parallel ), these two electrons can allegedly enter the same orbital (= **without** repelling each other ) and form attractive molecular bonds without being prevented by Pauli repulsion.

So according to stupid quantum mechanics, the **unrealistic H4** (or H3 ) molecules are **possible**, when an spin-up electron of H2 molecule-1 and a spin-down electron of H2 molecule-2 approach each other and form attractive covalent bonds, as shown in the upper figure.

Because the attraction between two adjacent H atoms (= shorter distance apart ) is stronger than Pauli repulsion from the H atom which is two atoms away (= longer distance apart ), according to the quantum mechanical calculation of H2 molecular bond (= attraction ) and anti-bonding (= Pauli repulsion ) energies.

Short-distance molecular attraction > long-distance Pauli repulsion.

In other words, when two adjacent H atoms (= each H atom belongs to a different H2 molecule-1 or -2 ) have the same spin, Pauli repulsive energy is supposed to be dominant and act between these two electrons with the same spin of two different H2 molecules, because two electrons with the same spin cannot enter the same H2 molecuar bond orbital.

It means according to quantum mechanical unphysical spin's rule, only **one** force of attraction (= opposite spins ) or repulsion (= same spin ) happnes between two molecules, hence, actual intermolecular forces **mixing** attraction and repulsion is **impossible**.

Furthermore, in order to generate this Pauli repulsion, quantum mechanics needs **unrealistic** concepts, which proves quantum mechanics is *absolutely* **wrong**.

Quantum mechanics makes an unscientific claim that Pauli repulsive energy occurs between two atoms or molecules having the **same One** electron, which means a **single** same electron-1 must exist in these two **different** atoms or molecules *simultaneously* using fantasy parallel worlds, even when those two atoms or molecules are far **apart** from each other. ← Impossible !

According to the unphysical quantum mechanical rule, Pauli repulsion is said to occur when the total wavefunction is anti-symmetric where any two electrons inside molecules or proteins must exist in all atoms *simultaneously*, hence all electrons must be **inseparable** and indistinguishable with respect to spin and spatial orbital ( this p.11-12 ).

In this **unphysical**, abstract anti-symmetric wavefunction, which shows No real physical picture, when two electrons exchange their orbitals, the sign of the entire wavefunction should be the opposite.

This means when two electrons are in the same orbital, the entire wavefunction becomes zero. ← This abstract, unphysical anti-symmetric wavefunction is said to be the **only** reason for causing mysterious Pauli repulsion, quantum mechanics shows **No** more detailed physical mechanism of Pauli repulsion. → Science **stops** progressing now.

The most unrealistic and impossible thing is the quantum mechanical Pauli repulsion requires the same **single** electron-1 to exist in these two different separate distant atoms or molecules, which repel each other by Pauli repulsion, simultaneously from the beginning ! ← This is impossible.

Suppose an electron-1 of an atom-1 cannot approach another atom-2 due to Pauli repulsion. ← But to generate this Pauli repulsion, the same electron-1 must exist in both atom-1 and atom-2 simultaneously from the beginning, though the electron-1 has No chance to move into the distant atom-2 while the atom-1 and atom-2 are still far away from each other due to strong Pauli repulsion. ← self-**contradiction**.

When two H atoms or H2 molecules are very far **away** from each other, of course, an electron-1 exists **only** in H-1 atom ( or only in H2 molecule-1 ), and a different electron-2 exists only in H-2 atom ( or only in H2-molecule-2 ). ← An electron-1 of H-1 atom still can**not** jump into the distant H-2 atom or molecule.

When these two different distant H2 molecules approach each other (= but Not get closer to each other enough for the electron-1 to jump into the other H2 molecule by escaping from strong attraction from the original atom or molecule ), these two H2 molecules repel each other and prevent these two H2 molecules from approaching anymore using Pauli repulsion.

↑ This Pauli repulsion must start to occur even when the distance between two H2 molecules is still very long, and the electron-1 still exists **only** in the original H2 molecule-1, and the electron-2 exists only in H2-molecule-2.

But as I said, to generate strange quantum mechanical Pauli repulsion, the same **single** electron-1 must exist in two **different** distant H2 molecules simultaneously from the **beginning**, even when two H2 molecules are still very **distant** from each other, and the electron-1 still exists **only** in the original H2 molecule-1 !

↑ This quantum mechanical mechanism of generating its occult Pauli repulsion is physically **impossible** and contradictory, invalidating quantum mechanics.

The fact that the same single electron-1 must exist in two different atoms simultaneously for exerting Pauli repulsive forces between these two atoms while these two atoms are still far away from each other means these two atoms always **sharing** one single same electron are **inseparable**, no matter how far these two atoms are apart from each other, hence, considering real forces between two inseparable quantum mechanical atoms itself is impossible.

Because in order to calculate repulsive Coulomb force between two different H atom-1 and H atom-2, the first thing to do is **separate** and assign two different electron-1 and electron-2 to one of these two H atoms, and calculate Coulomb repulsion between these two different electron-1 of H atom-1 and electron-2 of H aomt-2.

↑ If a single same electron-1 (or electron-2 ) must exist in both two H-atom-1 and H-atom-2 simultaneously, as unphysical quantum mechanics insists, we cannot calculate even this basic Coulomb repulsion between different electrons belonging to different atoms !

Quantum mechanics **lacks** the concept of real forces due to their unrealistic inseparable atoms, as seen in the fact that even Pauli reulsion is Not admitted as a force.

When two electrons have the same spins, their spacial orbitals must be antisymmetric and its nonphysical exchange integral is supposed to generate Pauli repulsive exchange energy between atoms or molecules sharing the **single** same electron with the same spin. ← Two quantum mechanical atoms exerting any repulsive or attractive forces are **inseparable** due to the same single electron always existing in these two atoms.

When two electrons have the opposite spins (= spin-part is anti-symmetric ), their spacial orbitals must be symmetric (= hence, the total wavefunction combining spin and spacial parts is anti-symmetric ), which is supposed to generate (fake) molecular attractive exchange energy.

These strange exchange energies, which are thought to be the origin of quantum mechanical Pauli repulsion and fake molecular bond energy are **unrealistic**, because there is No exchange force or force carriers ( this p.10, this p.11 ). ← Quantum mechanics **gives up** exploring "what real objects" causes Pauli repulsion except for presenting abstract anti-symmetric wavefunctions. → Science **stops** progressing.

This quantum mechanical unphysical "exchange energy" cannot explain actual intermolecular energies consisting of mixed van der Waals attraction and Pauli repulsion.

Because Pauli repulsive energies (= anti-bonding state ) caused by quantum mechanical unphysical exchange integral of antisymmetric wavefunctions are so big that any attractions (including Coulomb or van der Waals attraction) are **excluded**, when Pauli exchange repulsion is acting as anti-bonding between two atoms.

On the other hand, when two H atoms or molecules have electrons with opposite spins, they can form unrealistic H4 (or H3 ) molecules, according to the quantum mechanical exchange energy rule. ← It means quantum mechanics, which is unable to explain actual molecular forces crucial for protein interaction, is wrong.

Actually the empirical van der Waals or Lennard-Jones potentials cannot be obtained from the original quantum mechanical theory or Schrödinger equation especially in its Pauli repulsive energy term (= proportional to r^{-12}, this p.3 left, this p.2 right-lower ).

In fact, there are other evidences that prove this quantum mechanical Pauli exchange energy is self-contradictory, hence **wrong**.

As you know, the total energy of all objects including atoms and molecules must be always conserved or constant in any electron's positions inside an atom and a molecule, if Schrödinger equation has the exact solution under the constant total energy E.

But if we try to apply this inviolable basic physical principle of energy conservation law to the quantum mechanical unphysical exchange energy, Pauli repulsion **disappears** !

Correctly, the energy difference between Pauli repulsive energy and (fake) molecular attractive exchange energy disappears. → **No** Pauli principle in quantum mechanics !

This quantum mechanical unphysical exchange energy is caused by integrating **unsolvable** Schrödinger equation (= hence, wrong ) instead of solving Schrödinger equations for multi-electron atoms or molecules satisfying energy conservation law where the total energy E should be constant.

This means quantum mechanical Pauli exchange energy violating the energy conservation law is **false**.

Actually, there are many cases where the calculations of unphysical exchange integrals give **wrong** energies different from actual experimental values ( this p.5 last, this p.7-8 ).

As I said, this unphysical exchange interaction requires all electrons to exist in all different atoms simultaneously due to quantum mechanical antisymmetric wavefunctions, and this is why one-pseudo-electron false approximation = DFT is almost the only choice for quantum mechanics to deal with multi-electron atoms, molecules and proteins now, miserably.

In this one-pseduo-electron approximation DFT, its pseudo-potential energy called "exchange-correlation functional" can be artificially manipulated and chosen freely. ← DFT is Not first-principle ( this p.23 ), so DFT cannot predict anything.

Choosing pseudo-potential energies means this DFT should be able to artificially add any forms of (fake) van der Waals potential energies to its original pseudo-potential part of exchange correlation functional.

But this artificial manipulation and change of the original Coulomb potential energy by adding other ad-hoc van der Waals pseudo-potential energy relations makes it impossible to explain the original atomic energies based on the original Coulomb potential energies which are destroyed by adding ad-hoc various pseudo-potential energies to DFT.

As a result, artificially changing and destroying the original simple Coulomb potential energy relation only for explaining one specific case of van der Waals intermolecular interaction (= mixing Coulomb dipole attraction and Pauli repulsion ) often gives false energy values in other atoms or molecules based on the original simple Coulomb potential energies.

The point is there is **No** such thing as an universal common right pseudo-potential or exchange-correlation energy form in quantum mechanical equation or its approximate DFT methods.

No matter what functional (= pseudo-potential energy of DFT ) is ‘invented’or chosen, someone will always find a case or a molecule
where it **fails** or the chosen pseudo-potential energy does Not work ( this p.17 ).

The current physics tries to find the impossible dreamlike universal pseudo-potential energy form which could be used in any cases or any complicated molecules for one-pseudo-electron quantum mechanical approximation DFT method in vain.

To explain actual intermolecular van der Waals forces **mixing** Coulomb attraction and Pauli repulsion, we need to admit Pauli repulsion as an independent real force, and add such an **independent** Pauli repulsive interaction form to the original electron's behavior without destroying or altering the original simple Coulomb potential energy relation.

Altering and destroying the original Coulomb potential energy relation, which was confirmed in many experiments, by adding various pseudo-potential or artificial van der Waals energies to it as seen in the current DFT's unknown exchange-correlation functionals is nonsense and will never succeed ( this p.2 ).

To explain actual complicated intermolecular interactions **mixing** repulsion and attraction, we must **give up** unphysical quantum mechanical exchange energies where Pauli repulsion and Coulomb attraction are **Not** independent from each other, they are closely connected by the "sign flip" of antisymmetric (= Pauli repulsion ) and symmetric (= Coulomb attraction ), and we must define real Pauli repulsion as an **independent** force or concept from Coulomb electric force.

Of course, Coulomb electric force or energy must be defined and described by normal electron or proton's charges, independent of Pauli repulsive force.

Pauli repulsion must be explained and defined by **different** objects from Coulomb electric charges, such as de Broglie wave destructive interference.

How far each electron's de Broglie wave influence reaches in (real) Pauli reulsion between molecules must be experimentally determined independently of ordinary Coulomb electric forces.

To admit Pauli repulsion as a "real force", we have to find a **real** tangible **object** or a force carrier as a source of Pauli repulsion.

This source of real Pauli repulsion caused by electron's de Broglie wave interference becomes the "medium" which Einstein's paradoxical relativity unreasonably hated.

The quantum mechanical Pauli repulstive exchange energy has prevented our real science from advancing for a long time, by ridiculously prohibitting separating any different electrons or atoms by forcing unphysical ad-hoc exchange energy magically **lacking** real exchange force.

This unphysical quantum mechanical Pauli repulsive energy cannot be separated or indenpendent from Coulomb interaction or fake molecular attractive exchange energy, because the opposite sign of the Pauli repulsive exchange energy is supposed to become the (fake) molecular bond attractive exchange energy in quantum mechanical rule.

↑ It cannot explain actual intermolecular van der Waals potentials containing **independent** Pauli repulsion and Coulomb attraction caused by "different independent sources of forces" simultaneously.

As I said, if Pauli repulsive exchange energy occurs between two atoms or molecules by quantum mechanical unphysical exchange energy rule, No attracive energy is allowed, which disagrees with actual van der Waals forces mixing Pauli repulsion and Coulomb attraction.

*(S-1) Unfair conditions cause fake quantum * ↓

Google claims to have achieved "quantum supremacy" where their quantum computer took only 200 seconds to solve a problem that would take the world's fastest supercomputer 10,000 years to figure out.

↑ But there remains a serious contradiction between their dubious claim and the obvious facts that their quantum computers are still impractical, useless, Not faster enough to replace ordinary classical computers. ← Why ?

This is strange, because if their quantum computers really outperformed or calculated much faster than the present widely-used (ordinary) classical computers (= quantum computer = 200s vs classical computer = 10000 years ! ), they could immediately replace the ordinary computers. ← But this does **Not** happen.

In fact, all their elusive quantum computer's supremacy or advantage is completely **misleading** and *illusion* caused by **unfair** comparisons between classical and quantum computers, which has **nothing** to do with a really-faster quantum computer.

The latest IBM's **false** claim of the first proof of quantum computer's advantage (← ? ) also has **nothing** to do with a faster quantum computer, so useless, as I explain later.

↑ This latest IBM quantum computer that has allegedly achieved the first quantum advantage uses only **3~6** quantum bits or qubits (= a very **small** number of bits ! this 6th-last paragraph ) which are far **inferior** to the ordinary practical classical computers equipped with billions of bits (= each bit is 0 or 1 ) or transistors.

Google's 53-qubit and the recent Chinese 56-qubit superconducting quantum computers, both of which boldly claim to have achieved quantum supremacy, are still **Not** computers or calculators, as seen in the miserable fact that they have No practical application.

Because all their seeming quantum computers can do is just output random meaningless bitstring numbers with **No** ability to perform any useful calculations ( this 2nd paragraph, this 3rd paragraph ).

The 8th paragraph of this site says the inconvenient truth of quantum computer's supremacy,

"What exactly is Google’s quantum supremacy program doing?

**Nothing** useful in any practical sense — in fact, it is **randomly** generated, a random quantum circuit, a random sequence of quantum logic gates.."

This site (p.2 middle~right ) explains the summary of what their elusive quantum supremacy has done,

"to describe the likelihood of different outcomes
from a quantum version of a **random**-number
generator. They do this by running a circuit that
passes 53 qubits through a series of **random**
operations. This generates a 53-digit string of
1s and 0s — with a total of **2 ^{53}** possible combinations.."

" The process is
so complex that the outcome is impossible to
calculate from first principles, and is therefore
effectively **random**. But owing to **interference**
between qubits, some strings of numbers are
more likely to occur than others. This is similar to *rolling a loaded die* (= hence, **No** meaningful calculation was done ! ) — it still produces a random number, even though some outcomes
are more likely than others.."

↑ Just "rolling a (loaded) die to generate random meaningless bitstring numbers" means their so-called quantum computers do **Not** calculate any useful values. → **No** practical application.

".. Sycamore (= Google 53-bit quantum computer ) calculated the probability
distribution by sampling the circuit — running it
one **million** times and measuring the observed
output strings. The method is similar to *rolling
the die* to reveal its bias.."

So Google's quantum computer just output one random meaningless 53-bitstring number at a time, and repeated outputting those meaningless different random bitstrings a **millions** times, like "rolling a die" a million times.

Each qubit can take two possible states of 0 or 1, so the total number of the 53-qubit different bitstring patterns is 2^{53} (= **10 ^{16}** ), which extremely large number is hard for a classical computer to simulate, they claim ( this 8th paragraph ).

Then, their dreamlike 53-bit quantum computers could output such an extremely large number of different random 53-bitstring patterns (= 2^{53} = 10^{16} ) in a shorter time than classical computers ? ← **No**.

The trick of these **illusory** quantum computer's supremacy is that they intentionally **reduced** the amount of work or the number of times of outputting random numbers **only** in quantum computers, while they forced ordinary classical computers to perform a unfairly **larger** number of calculations without reducing classical computer's tasks.

↑ This means instead of trully-faster quantum computers, the **unfair** comparison or conditions between quantum and classical computers caused the **illusory** quantum supremacy.

They allowed only the quantum computer to reduce its tasks and output random numbers just a **million** times (= **10 ^{6}** ), though in order to know 2

2^{53} = 10^{16} different random numbers must have been output originally. → But their quantum computer was allowed to do "cheating" of outputting random numbers only a million (= 10^{6} ) times ! ←A massive reduction of work only in a quantum computer to make a misleading claim of quantum supremacy or advantage ( this 3rd paragraph ).

So only the quantum computer was allowed to tremendously **reduce** their task and output random numbers only a **million** = **10 ^{6}** times (= which took about

And the ordinary classical computer was **unfairly** forced to compute all **2 ^{53}** (=

↑ This artificial **reduction** only of quantum computer's work is a trick of illusory quantum computer's supremacy ( this 2nd paragraph ).

This site (p.13 last ) mentions this trick,

"Indeed, a crucial aspect of this estimator and of Google’s statistical approach as a whole is that relatively **small** samples (of length m ∼ **10 ^{6}**
) allows powerful confirmation for the behavior of an unknown
distribution on a huge probability space (of size 2

Output different random bitstrings only a million times = 10^{6} (= 200 sec) vs. the original total number of different 53-bitstring patterns = 2^{53} = 10^{16} (= 10000 years ? ). ← this is the trick ( this p.5 ).

↑ So **neither** Google's nor latest Chinese quantum supremacy using the similar 53 or 56-qubit superconducting quantum computers is due to the (imaginary) quantum computer's faster calculating speed.

Their quantum advantage is just illusion caused by deliberately **reducing** tasks of only quantum computers.

This 14th paragraph of this site explains how the fishy "interference" was used as an "**excuse**" to reduce only the quantum computer's task, while the classical computer was unfairly forced to do the original large number of calculations.

"..Some strings enjoy constructive **interference** of amplitudes and therefore have larger probabilities, while others suffer destructive interference and have smaller probabilities. And even though we’ll only see a number of samples that’s **tiny** *compared to* **2 ^{n}** (or 2

↑ So the trick is their quantum computers exploited a "*convenient* **interference**" to unreasonably **reduce** the number of times of outputting bitstring numbers from the original 2^{53} = 10^{16} times to just a **million** times (= 10^{6} ) **only** in quantum computers.

This artificial reduction of outputting random numbers only in quantum computers means they told only quantum computers about what specific numbers or answers will be output more likely in advance, while they unfairly didn't tell classical computers about what bit numbers will be likely to be output. ← **Unfair** conditions between quantum and classical computers caused illusory quantum computer's supremacy or advantage.

Both Google's and Chinese superconducting-qubit quantum computers use ordinary microwave pulses (= one of classical light waves ) or classically oscillating electromagnetic fields as interactions between qubits ( this p.7 left ), so their interference between qubits is due to the ordinary **classical** wave interference phenomena, which have **nothing** to do with fantasy quantum mechanics.

So if this "interference" between qubits was the reason for reducing only quantum computers's tasks, this is Not by quantum computer's speed-up or supremacy, but by **classical** light wave phenomena.

↑ This is why all the current seeming quantum computers are still useless with No ability to carry out any meaningful calculations, **contrary** to the eye-catching quantum supremacy or advantage claims.

IBM's quantum computer's alleged first advantage was published in the latest Nature physics.

↑ Unfortunately, this **fishy** quantum advantage has **nothing** to do with a faster quantum computer than a classical computer, so a **meaningless** quantum advantage claim.

The trick is they compared their alleged quantum computer (= still Not a computer, though ) with "restricted (or limited ) classical computer", Not with normal classical computers.

Contrary to the eye-catching (fake) news, this latest IBM quantum computer used too **small** a number of qubits (= only **3~6** qubits, this 9th paragraph ) to execute calculations, making the company's bold plans of 1000 qubits by 2023 **unrealistic**.

What on earth has this latest IBM's quantum computer with only **3~6** quantum bits or qubits done as an evidence for dubious quantum advantage ?

The 4th paragraph of this news says

"Two **limited**-space circuits were built, one quantum and one classical, with only **one bit** or qubit **available** for computation and result storage. The task programmed into the circuits consisted of finding the **majority** out of **three** input **bits**, returning zero if more than half of the bits are zero, and one if more than half of the bits are one."

↑ In this very simple operation, IBM tried to find the majority within three input bits (= A, B, C ).

When more than one (or half ) bits of these three input bits are "1", it outputs "1", and when more than one bits of the three input bits is "0", it outputs "0".

( When two A,B input bits are "1", and the remaining C bit is "0", the output is "1" )

When there is only one output bit, the classical computer's bit cannot judge this majority.

Because in order to judge which bit state "1" or "0" holds the majority within three A,B,C bits, the output bit needs to distinguish three different states or numbers (= 0, 1, 2 ) which is impossible in the ordinary classical bit that can distinguish only two bit states (= 0 or 1 ).

When all three input A,B,C bits are "0", the output bit is supposed to be "0".

When one of three input bits is "1", the output bit is supposed to be "1".

When two (or three ) of three input bits are "1", the output bit is supposed to be "2"

Judging the majority out of three input bits needs at least three output classical computer's bits, as shown in this figure lower ( this p.13 ).

On the other hand, the current superconducting quantum computer's **bulky** and very big qubit can distinguish more than two different states not only 0 or 1 bit states.

Each superconducting qubit consists of a **big** (classical) circuit of ordinary capacitors and inductors where many electrons are flowing and unstably oscillating inside the circuit.

Microwave pulse is designed to distinguish not only the ordinary 0 or 1 qubit state but also its unstably-oscillating "phase" such as negative 1 (= -1 ).

It means one output qubit, which can distinguish more than two different bit states (= 0, 1, -1 ) including the unstably-oscillating "phase or electron's motions", is said to be able to judge which bit state 0 or 1 holds the majority within three input A,B,C qubits.

↑ This shows quantum computer's advantage or speed-up ? **No**.

Contrary to the IBM's claim, this comparison between quantum and classical computers is **Not** fair at all.

Because the size of one **bulky** superconducting qubit or artificial atom (= ~ 1 mm big ! ) is far **bigger** than one extremely-tiny and compact classical computer's bit (= only less than 50 nm ).

So the space of **one** big superconducting quantum bit or qubit can contain more than **1000000** tiny classical computer's bits.

Even IBM's latest 27-qubit quantum computer sent to Germany is as big as this, despite its very small number of qubits.

Even if each bulky IBM's quantum computer's bit can distinguish **3~4** different bit states including its subtle phase difference, more than **1000000** classical compact bits contained in the same space as one big qubit can distinguish more than 1000000 different states !

Distinguishing only 3~4 bit states of bulky quantum computers vs. distinguishing more than 1000000-bit states of compact classical computers.

↑ The current widely-used classical computer is far **better**, faster, more energy-efficient and stable than the unstable bulky **slower** quantum computer.

A lot of compact, tiny classical (output) bits contained in one bulky qubit's space can judge which number 0 or 1 state holds the majority within more than 1000000 input bits, Not only three A,B,C input bits. ← **No** quantum computer's advantage.

If we add some expensive special devices to the classical computer in order to distinguish the subtle difference in stored charges in each classical bit or capacitor, even the present tiny classical bit can distinguish more than two different states depending on the amount of stored charges, and judge the majority out of three input bits without problems.

But we do **Not** need to add such an expensive **unnecessary** equipment or devices to the current efficient, compact and stable classical computer's bit.

For the awkwardly big quantum computer's bit to distinguish the subtle phase difference of each qubit's state, the qubit becomes very unstable, fragile, and needs very large expensive equipments to distinguish such a fragile qubit's state.

As a result, the space occupied by one bulky quantum computer's bit needs to be far **larger** than that of a tiny compact classical computer's bit. ← This is the trick.

The latest IBM doubtful quantum computer's advantage unfaily **restricts** the output bit to only "one bit" both in a very big quantum bit and a very tiny classical bit. ← **Unfair** comparison, hence No quantum computer's speed-up or advantage. → **No** practical application.

IBM claims they have already realized 65-qubit quantum computer (= which bit number is still far smaller than the current practical classical computer with billions of bits ) a year ago.

But this latest (fake) quantum advantage research used only less than seven qubits (= when 2 or 3 qubits out of 3~6 input qubits were in the "1" state, IBM quantum computer output "1", as shown in this p.5 ).

↑ The fact that IBM stubbornly **avoids** using its allegedly-existing largest 65-qubit quantum computer even in the latest research makes us suspect their largest quantum computer is still useless, and its bold roadmap of increasing the number of qubit to 1000 by 2023 was just a lie or an **impossible** dream.

As shown here, all dubious quantum computer's supermacy or advantage is just a meaningless **illusion** caused by "**unfair** comparisons" assigning very easy tasks to quantum computers (= still Not computers, because they cannot do any meaningful calculations ), and forcing only classical computers to perform very time-consuming calculations.

Fake science such as fantasy parallel-world quantum computers ( which will help discover vaccines ?) and global warming is not only wasting taxpayers' money by preventing effective drug development, but also harmful as seen in the current landslide in Japan caused not by climate change itself but by "solar panels" which seemed to concentrate the rain flows onto one point and generate the mudslide.

*(Q-1) Electrons can't flow in quantum mechanical * ↓

In fact, "Quantum mechanics is a successful theory !" is a big lie, as seen in quantum mechanical claim of fantasy parallel worlds and a dead-and-alive unrealistic cat, **contrary** to the media's **baseless** praise of it.

Quantum mechanics has **never** been useful for any practical technologies such as computer **transistors** and smartphones, all of which technologies were invented by conventional "trial-and error approaches" with purely serendipitous, inadvertent discovery, Not helped by fantasy quantum mechanical theory.

The modern transistor's founders = Shockley did **Not** mention the (illusory) quantum mechanical contribution to the transistor's invention, instead, just saying

"A basic truth that the history of the creation of the transistor reveals is that the foundations of **transistor** electronics were created by making **errors** and following **hunches** that **failed** to give what was expected ( this 10th paragraph )"

It's basically **impossible** to apply unphysical, uncertain and unpredictable quantum mechanics to the modern computer technologies working by perfectly-physically-**controllable** realistic objects and transistors.

Quantum mechanics baselessly claims each electron exists in many **different** places **simultaneously** like a single cat can be dead and alive using fantasy parallel worlds or absurd superposition.

Of course, we cannot see this unrealistic quantum mechanical superposition or cat, hence each single particle can be observed to exist in only one place or state (= so, quantum superposition or parallel worlds have **No** evidences, contrary to the mainstream science interpretation ).

↑ These quantum mechanical unseen uncertain states or positions (= a particle being in multiple different places or states ot once !? ) of each electron or cat until we try to measure them shows such an uncertain and **unpredictable** quantum mechanical states can **Not** be used to build practical computers which need precise, deterministic (= **Not** uncertain ) **controllable** electrons and particles in each transistor switch 0 ↔ 1

Then, why are the media and academia trying to make us **falsely** believe that all modern computer transistors and smartphones may rely on (**unphysical**) quantum mechanics ? ← It's **impossible**.

Physicists blindly insist computer semiconductors and transistors could be explained by the quantum mechanical (**illusory**) model called band theory ( this p.2 ).

The problem is this quantum mechanical band pseudo-theory can Not treat real electrons inside semiconductors or transistors. ← Realistic explanation of computer transistors by quantum mechanics is **impossible**.

Quantum mechanical band theory ridiculously and forcibly **replaces** the whole **many**-electron materials by "one single **fictitious** quasi-electron (= each band ) or quasi-particles with **fake** artificially-changeable effective masses" (= which can even be unreal negative masses ) and pseudo-momentum ( this p.2-upper, this p.12-lower ).

Physicists have used this very old **fictitious** quantum mechanical band model (= which pseudo-model can **never** describe or clarify real physical mechanisms inside materials ) with fake electron with fake effective masses for 100 years with **No** progress, in vain.

These unreal effective masses of the unphysical band model's quasi-electrons of semiconductor transistors are just "freely-adjustable parameters" in different materials ( this p.1-left, this p.2, this p.5-right ), hence, quantum mechanics and its band model have **No** ability to predict any physical phenomena based on real electrons with real fixed masses.

As a result, the familiar **false** narrative which makes **useless** quantum mechanics **look** very "successful" with the magical power to predict any physical values was fabricated by the academia living on quantum mechanical **pseudo**-theory to protect their old vested interests ( such as selling seeming science books ) related to this dead-end mainstream science.

Actually, the quantum mechanical only calculation tool = Schrödinger equations are known to be unsolvable with **No** solutions except for the simplest one-electron hydrogen atom whose energy values just agreed with Bohr's realistic atomic model.

Quantum mechanics is completely **useless**
in any multi-electron atoms and molecules, because physicists cannot solve Schrödinger equations, instead, they have to artificially choose fake complicated approximate pseudo-solutions called trial wavefunctions or basis sets ( this 3rd-paragraph ), and **manipulating** freely-adjustable parameters, which quantum mechanical artificial methods are just "art" with No prediction of practical values, so **Not** science.

Even these quantum mechanical fake approximate methods of just choosing (complicated) fake wavefunctions and adjusting many free parameters for multi-electron Schrödinger equations are **impractical**, time-consuming and **unusable** in almost all molecules and materials ( this p.4 ).

So all quantum mechanical methods including original unsolvable Schrödinger equations and its approximations are **unable** to calculate or predict values of molecules and materials such as semiconductors ( this p.1-2nd paragraph, this p.3, this p.11 ).

Of course, there were No such things as convenient modern computers or calculators to conduct any complicated calculations for multi-electron atoms or materials **before** the first transistors (= necessary for building modern computers ) were discovered, hence, it is **impossible** to use such an impractical and time-consuming Schrödinger equations for discovery of practical computer transistors ( this introduction, this p.7 ).

Actually, a transistor inventor Shockley repeatedly failed to apply existing quantum mechanical theories to discovering transistors ( this 7-8th paragraphs, this p.2-right-last ).

Shockley did **Not** mention "quantum mechanics was useful for transistors" (= if the existing quantum mechanical theories really could give him useful advice, he would have Not taken so much time by repeating many failures due to **disagreement** between the theories and experimental results ).

Instead, he just mentioned "quantum mechanical (unreal) effective mass model disagreed with experimental results in semiconductors ( this p.14 )" ← That's all. **No** contribution of quantum mechanics to their invention of computer transistors !

Basically, if scientists could ( even luckily or accidentally ) find "good semiconductos" suitable for the transistor = the basic component of any computers by trial-and-error approaches, they could put together those transistors and make modern computers **without** relying on any theories such as useless quantum mechanics.

Modern computer CPU and memories are made of **simple** components called "transistors", and working based on the practical **classical** Maxwell's electromagnetism, Not a fantasy quantum mechanics.

Each transistor acts as a switch changing between 0 and 1 depending on the voltage applied on the base which triggers electric current flow and lets each transistor's capacitor store electric charges ( this middle ).

So in order to construct modern computers or smartphones, all scientists had to do was "try many candidate materials and find the good semiconductor materials (= relying on researchers' long **experiences** by trial and error approach or accidental discovery, **Not** relying on fantasy useless quantum mechanical theory )" usable for a transistor whose electric conductance or currents could be controlled by applied voltage (= changeable electric conductance of a semiconductor transistor acts as a switch 0 ↔ 1 of an ordinary computer bit ).

↑ Unphysical quantum mechanics really contributed to discovering these semiconductor materials usable for modern transistors ? ← **No**.

Scientists managed to discover these semiconductor materials suitable for transistors just by "old *classical* **trial and error** approaches ( this middle~lower, this 7th-paragraph )"

← It's like great inventors Edison and Wright brothers who did Not use fantasy quantum mechanical theory for inventing any useful devices (= ex. Edison's light bulb was invented long before quantum mechanics was born ).

The existence of semiconductors had been **alreadly** known long before quantum mechanics was born.

So quantum mechanics has **nothing** to do with the discovery of semiconductors and transistos.

↑ The classic "trial and error" approach is Not bad, rather, it is **indispensable** for all great inventions, regardless of the past or future.

Even all physical theories of Newton, Maxwell, Galileo, .. Einstein and quantum mechanics (= the last two theories include serious self-contradictions which **obstruct** the present scientific progress, though ) are based on actual obervation and experiments repeating "trials and errors."

All our scientific progress should be made by actual experiments, observations, trials and errors, Not obstructed by fictional, harmful theories.

The most serious problem of the present unrealistic quantum mechanics and Einstein is these fictional mainstream science prohibits us from seeking real deeper physical mechanisms or treating atomic behavior realistically by academia misleading us by using the **unfounded** cliche "(wrongly) successful quantum mechanics !"

Historically, there were **No** such things as "successful theories" predicting any physical values or phenomena **before** conducting experiments.

As seen in all useful physical theories such as Newton, Maxwell, Kepler.., physicists **first** conducted "**experiments**" and later introduced "theories" based on the experimental observations to decide the future direction ( of new experiemnts ), and then **continuing** experiments to clarify **deeper** mechanism (← contradictory quantum mechanics **blocks** this normal scientific process or progress using the *unscientific* **excuse** "Nobody would understand physics even if we try to clarify deeper mechanisms !" )

So the **misleading** phrase "quantum mechanics and Einstein relativity are the most successful ! They can magically predict any physical values !?" is just a total **lie** (= The only alleged-practical application of Einstein relativity = GPS needs almost real-time clock **error** correction due to frequent **discrepancy** between the theory and actual GPS time ).

The evidence that quantum mechanics is Not used in computer transistors is seen in the fact that all the present textbook explanations of atomic structures behind semiconductors or transistors use classical ( successful ) Bohr's atomic model with realistically moving electrons instead of unphysical quantum mechanical electron cloud or uncertainly spreading wave functions.

The 1st paragraph of this site explains "lucky **accidental** discovery" of transistors instead of relying on useless quantum mechanical prediction,

"The transistor was invented at Bell Laboratories in December 1947 by John Bardeen and Walter Brattain. '**Discovered**' would be a better word, for although they were seeking a solid-state equivalent to the vacuum tube, it was found **accidentally** during the investigation of the surface states around a diode point-contact."

The 4th paragraph of this site also mentions the classic trial-and-error approaches leading to the accidental discovery of transistors,

" Using **different** materials and different setups and different electrolytes in place of the water, the two men tried to get an even bigger increase in current.. Bardeen suggested they replace the silicon with germanium. They got a current jump, all right -- an amplification of some 330 times -- but in the exact **opposite** direction they'd **expected** !"

↑ Bardeen **accidentally** discovered the point-contact transistor without understanding how it functions, because there still is **No** really adequate quantitative
**theory** explaining the working of the point contact transistor.

This site ( p.16 upper ) says "Indeed, there still is **No** really adequate quantitative
theory explaining the working of the point contact transistor. But
what is important for us is that the experiments were conducted by
men who had amplification as their goal, who observed something that
they were **Not** looking for or expecting which indicated the possibility
of building an amplifier of a design very **different** from the one they
had in mind.."

Transistors **accidentally** discovered by researchers showed the completely **opposite** phenomena from what they expected ( this p.2 middle-upper ). ← The existing atomic theory = quantum mechanics was completely **useless** and contributing **nothing** to discovering transistors, computers, smartphones..

Other important inventors of transistors, Shockley also repeated many failures, because the useless existing quantum mechanical theory could Not give them the right instructions of what to do next before researchers repeated many failures ( this 4-6th paragraphs ).

In fact, such an unrealistic quantum mechanics intrinsically cannot even separate different electrons or atoms, much less describe multi-electron atomic behaviors of semiconductors, hence, it is **impossible** for the quantum mechanics to explain the actual transistor's electric current involving many electrons and atoms.

Semiconductors are mainly made of silicon atoms (= Si ) doped with a small number of impurity atoms.

Outer electrons (= ex. 3p orbital of Si ) of the semiconductor's atoms can flow as electric currents under applied voltage in transistors.

For electrons to keep moving as electric current between different atoms, repulsive forces of Pauli exclusion principle have to constantly keep such a flowing outer electron from being stuck or attracted by strong Coulomb attractive forces toward the inner lower-energy orbitals (= 1s, 2s, 2p ).

Without Pauli repulsive forces, any outer electrons of conducting atoms or silicons easily **fall** into the **inner** orbitals with far lower potential energies, and soon electric currents **stop** flowing with outer conducting electrons stuck in inner orbitals with much lower-energy levels.

Regardless of materials, **all** electrons have to **always** interact with each other by two major atomic forces of Pauli repulsion and Coulomb electric forces.

The serious problem is the contradictory quantum mechanics can Not treat this important Pauli repulsion as a real force ( this p.6 ), and the quantum mechanical electron cloud cannot generate even enough Coulomb forces between different atoms.

Quantum mechanics, which is **unable** to clarify true mechanism of Pauli repulsion, has to rely on unrealistic abstract concepts called "exchange energy" which **pseudo**-interaction magically lacks exchange force or force carriers, hence the exchange energy has **No** physical reality ( this p.11, this p.2-3rd paragraph = **pseudo**-force = Pauli ? ).

This Pauli exchange energy must be expressed as "antisymmetric wavefunctions" where all electrons must be unrealistically indistinguishable and **inseparable**, hence, every **single** electron
must exist in **all** different atoms simultaneously inside any materials and molecules due to quantum mechanical stupid rule.

For example, three-electron atoms or materials, each electron must always exist and be **trapped** in all different atomic orbitals **simultaneously** and unrealistically (= each electron can**not**
move from one orbital to another orbit as electric current according to this quantum mechanical stupid antisymmetric wavefunction or exchange energy rule ! )

Exchanging any two electrons must flip the sign of the entire wavefunctions (including spin and spatial parts ) of atoms or molecules, which means any two electrons must be antisymmetric and indistinguishable with respect to their positions and states.

Any different electrons must be identical by belonging to any different atoms inside any molecules and materials simultaneously ( this p.11-12 ).

In this unrealistic antisymmetric wavefunctions, if two electrons occupy the same state with respect to the spin and orbital, the total wavefunction becomes zero. ← This too unphysical abstract concept called "antisymmetric wavefunction" is the only quantum mechanical explanation of mysterious Pauli exclusion repulsive energy **without** giving any more detailed physical mechanism. ← Science **stops** progressing now, because physicists give up exploring deeper truth.

For outer electrons to keep flowing as electric current in semiconductors or transistors without falling or being trapped into lower-energy inner orbitals, outer electrons must keep being **repelled** by inner electrons of all different atoms by Pauli repulsive force.

→ To generate Pauli repulsive energies, all electrons of all different atoms inside semiconductors must be unrealistically indistinguishable ( in their positions ) and **inseparable** to make antisymmetric wavefunctions required by quantum mechanics.

→ Every **single** electron must always exist in **all** different (silicon) atoms inside semiconductors or transistors *simultaneously* from the beginning.

↑ It is **impossible** for such an unrealistic quantum mechanical electron, which exists in all different atoms from the beginning, to **move** from one atom to another atom as electric current, because each electron must **always** exist in all different atoms simultaneously **without** moving.

As a result, "quantum mechanics contributed to invention of modern computer transistor" is physically impossible, hence a total **lie** created later to make useless quantum mechanics "look" useful only for getting research funds using such a pseudo-science as the fishy quantum technology.

If quantum mechanics was right, any electrons inside transistors can **Not** move from one atom to other atoms as electric currents even when applying voltage. ← Modern transistors could **Not** be invented !

For example, outer 3p electrons of silicon atoms must be constantly **repelled** by Pauli repulsive energy from inner-orbital 2s ( or 1s or 2p ) electrons to keep flowing and moving to other atoms as electric current without falling or being trapped into much lower energy levels of inner 1s or 2s orbitals.

In order to make quantum mechanical anti-symmetric wave functions whose abstract forms are allegedly necessary for causing Pauli repulsive energies between electrons, the **same** single electron-1 must always exist both in outer 3p orbital and inner orbitals such as 2s, 2p, 1s.. *simultaneously* from the **beginning**, which resultantly causes "strange exchange integral" as the origin of Pauli repulsive energies.

↑ So if such a strange quantum mechanical Pauli exchange energy is right, a physically-impossible and **contradictory** thing would happen.

Before an electron-1 has moved from a silicon atom-1 to a silicon atom-2 (then, moves to atom-3, atom-4 .. ) in the electric current, the same single electron-1 must **already** exist in all different atoms including atom-1, atom-2, atom-3, atom-4 .. or all their inner or outer electrons's orbitals.

→ Every **single** electron must exist in **all** *different* silicon or doped atoms from the beginning **simultaneously** to use Pauli principle. ← It is impossible for such an unrealistic electron always existing in all atoms to move from one atom to another atom as a real electric current. = Modern transistor's electric current can **Not** be described by fantasy quantum mechanics !

This is why all the current textbooks explaining the modern computer's transistors use realistic successful Bohr's atomic model with real **separable** and movable electrons instead of unrealistic inseperable unmovable electron clouds of quantum mechanics.

Another myth = Modern computers are said to use one of mysterious quantum mechanical effects called quantum tunneling.

The point is quantum tunneling is Not a ghost-like phenomenon but a natural classically-**possible** (= realistic ) phenomenon where electrons can **naturally** jump between two atoms, only when those two atoms are separated by a very short distance less than a few nm under applied voltage through the air or vacuum with **empty** space (= No real barriers or walls in tunneling, this 2nd-paragraph this p.3-last ).

Those **empty** spaces such as **vacuum** and air (= through which electrons can tunnel and pass, only when the distance is *extremely* **short** = ~nm ) are wrongly treated like "rigid imaginary walls" or insulator (= such imaginary potential walls are often given to the tunnel explanation, though the precise potential energies between atoms separated by extremely short distance is **unknown** ) by irrational quantum mechanics.

Quantum mechanics just imagines "illusory potential energy wall", and makes an unscientific claim that each electron can penetrate such an **invisible** potential barrier by having unrealistic negative kinetic energies (= kinetic energy = 1/2mv^{2} = negative !? ← impossible ! ) **without** deeper explanations.

↑ Delving into deeper true physical mechanism is forbidden by the unrealistic quantum mechanical model such as "negative-kinetic-energy tunneling", it just reluctantly says Nobody understands mysterious (= unreal ) quantum mechanics including parallel-world superposition and negative-kinetic-energy tunnel ( this 3rd-paragraph ) !

↑ Our science **stops** progressing, because physicists don't want to expose quantum mechanical self-**contradictions**.

In the **normal** scientific process and progress, if we have to rely on **unreal** negative kinetic energy of electrons to explain quantum tunnel, we have to **replace** such a contradictory quantum mechanics by other **realistic** atomic theories **without** relying on negative kinetic energies.

Quantum mechanics outrageously allows even unreal quasiparticles with fake effective masses to cause tunnel and negative kinetic energies, and **stops** exploring deeper mechanisms of such a contradictory tunnel. ← nonsense.

You can understand the quantum mechanics has **never** been useful for any applied science such as computer transistors and smartphones, when you see the most widely used quantum mechanical approximate calculation method called density functional theory (= DFT or Kohn-Sham equation ) which illogically replaces the whole many-electron material or transistor by only one-single-pseudo-electron model, because the original many-electron Schrödinger equations are completely **impractical** and meaningless (= due to indistinguishable and exchangeable electrons ) in large molecules and materials ( this p.3, this p.2 ).

Almost all quantum mechanical calculations in condensed matter, semiconductors, band theoy and computer transistors rely on this unphysical one-pseudo-electron approximation DFT ( this p.6, this Fig.2 ), though this one-pseudo-electron model is inherently **unable** to explain actual separable multi-electron or multi-atomic materials.

This one-pseudo-electron DFT approximation has to artificially choose fake effective potential energies called exchange-correlation functionals which exact form is unknown.

Choosing arbitrary **pseudo**-potential-energy functionals and adjusting free **parameters** for its caclulation means all these quantum mechanical methods are unable to predict any physical values, hence, completely useless ( this p.23-last ).

Furthermore, no matter what pseudo-potential energies or functionals physicists choose, they always encounter cases where those chosen functionals miserably fail to explain experimental values such as semiconductor's band gaps ( this p.17 ).

In conclusion, the hackneyed phrases "quantum mechanics contributed to discovery of computer transistors and smartphones" or "quantum mechanics is a successful theory magically predicting all experimental results" are completely **false** and fake.

We have to discard such an unrealistic and contradictory quantum mechanics which forbids us from delving into deeper true physical mechanisms, and replace it by more realistic atomic models with No contradictions for applying basic atomic interactions to practical science.

*(Q-1) ↓ Useless and impossible * *dream*

Despite an incredibly number of hypes and hoopla, fictional dream-like faster quantum computers will be unrealistic and useless, forever.

**Fake** news promoting such a fishy (illusory) quantum computer pops up almost every day, falsely claiming "a step closer to quantum computing which will one day be reality ?" to **mislead** laypersons.

↑ All these hyped news talks **only** about "imaginary rosy future", **hiding** the fact that the pie-in-the-sky quantum computer technology is already deadend, will **never** be useful.

Google plans to build a practical quantum computer by 2029 ? ← It means all the current alleged quantum computers (before 2029) are still **impractical**, useless, can do **No** meaningful calculations.

The media and physicists have repeated an "**empty** promise" like "a practical quantum computer is now less than 10 years away !" for a long time to keep getting taxpayers' money, exploiting fictional future quantum technology, which will never be reality.

Google quantum computer with only **53** bits actually showed No "quantum supremacy", hence, Not faster than ordinary classical computers, because all the current dubious quantum computer can do is output random meaningless numbers **without** performing any meaningful calculations ( this 2nd paragraph, this 5th paragraph ).

↑ Google quantum computer's dubious supremacy claim finally proved to be false.

Classical (super-)computer could obtain random (meaningless) numbers (which Google supremacy quantum computer allegedly got in 200 seconds with **more errors** ) within 304 seconds (= almost same time ) with less errors instead of 10000 years (= the original supremacy claim that classical computer would take **10000 years** to get random meaningless numbers **decreases** to **304 seconds** ! ← Google deliberately and unfairly **chose** very time-consuming methods only for classical computers, this last, this 3rd-paragraph, this p.2, this 3rd-paragraph ).

Chinese alleged quantum computer advantage beating Google is also an useless task just outputting random meaningless numbers with a lot of errors ( this 2nd paragraph, this 3rd paragraph ).

Another Chinese largest **62**-qubit quantum computer also can do **No** meaningful calculations, except for showing some "**meaningless** random bit change" called "**random** quantum walk ( this 6th paragraph )" which just randomly and aimlessly flips each bit 0 ↔ 1 with No practical application ( this last paragraph ).

This is why the last paragraph of this news just *vaguely* says "The two-dimensional programmable quantum walks primarily based on quantum computing have **potential** functions in quantum search algorithms .." **without** mentioning any **detailed** methods of how to apply such a meaningless random quantum walk to practical use.

IBM is said to already have the largest 65-qubit quantum computer, and planning to build a 1000-qubit computer by 2023 (← really ? ).

Even the latest quantum computer that IBM sent to Germany recently still has only a very small number of qubits = **27** bits and suffers too high **error** rates ( this 10th paragraph ). ← Practical calculation is **impossible**.

IBM tends to "exaggerate" only the number of qubits (= their latest alleged largest quantum computer's qubit number is 127 qubits ) **without** showing what kind of calculation their dubious quantum computer can perform ( this 6th paragraph, this 3rd paragraph ). ← This means their largest quantum computer is still **useless**, Not a calculator or computer at all ( this 3rd paragraph ).

Even this latest fishy IBM's allegedly world-largest quantum computer has only a very small number of 127 qubits which number is far smaller than the present practical classical computer with more than billions of bits.

For these fictional quantum computers to be useful, each quantum computer has to have more than 1 **million** qubits ( this 3rd paragraph, this 14th paragraph ) which are far larger than the current 127 qubits, which means dream-like quantum computers will be unrealized forever, end up being Ponzi scheme.

The 8th-last and 7th-last paragraphs of this site say

"At IBM, we have a prototype quantum computer that works with **65** qubits, kept in superposition for just a **few** fractions of a **second** before they decohere (= easily **broken** fragile quantum computer ).

Later this year, we aim to have one with **127** qubits. That’s **Not** enough to reach a quantum advantage."

".. To maintain superposition for longer, we need to ensure that our qubits are very low noise. Then we’ll be able to correct any remaining **errors** using classical computers. But this approach of error correction is still **theory** (= still *impractical* )."

Quantum computer (= still Not a computer ) is too **impractical**, fragile and short-lived, though it is bulkier, more inefficient inconvenient than our useful ordinary classical computers ( this 1st, 3rd paragraphs ).

The lifetime of still-impractical quantum computers or qubits are defined by how long each qubit maintains the occult quantum superposition (= called coherence, this 3rd paragraph ) = an imaginary dead and alive cat state in parallel worlds.

But of course, it's impossible to observe such an unrealistic cat in parallel-world superposition state. = Quantum mechanics **baselessly** claims each cat, each particle or each qubit can be in **imaginary** superposition states **until** we try to measure them, meaning each cat ( each qubit ) is observed as dead or alive ( 0 **or** 1 ) contrary to their **unfounded** claim that each quantum computer's qubit can be 0 and 1 at once while we don't see it.

Hence, physicists are usually "**cheating**" by just measuring how long each qubit can **oscillate** between two bit state 0 ↔ 1 with each qubit being observed as 0 **or** 1 with some probabilities (= instead of a qubit being two different imaginary superposition states 0 and 1 at once ) and treating this qubit's oscillating time (= called Rabi or Ramsey oscillation ) as the qubit's superposition lifetime instead of actually "seeing" a dead and alive cat state ( this 3rd paragraph, this Fig.4 ).

↑ So the hackneyed phrase (= or **impossible** dream ) "quantum computer may have the potential to calculate faster by simultaneous calculations using quantum superposition or a dead-alive cate state (= allegedly utilizing **fantasy** quantum mechanical parallel worlds ) !" is a **baseless** lie, because such an illusory quantum superposition (= parallel worlds ) can **Not** be observed or utilized due to fatal flaws underlying **illusory** quantum parallel computing mechanism.

The lifetime of the most popular superconduncting-qubit quantum computers used by IBM, Google, China.. is still less than 1 second ( this p.3, this p.11 ) with a lot of errors which fragile unstable quantum computer cannot calculate any meaningful values, while the current classical useful computer has almost infinite lifetime with No errors, as you know.

The current quantum computer with less than 100 bits (or qubits ) is far **inferior** to the already-widely-used classical (= ordinary ) computer that can do many useful complicated calculations manipulating billions of bits or transistors (= a bit 0 or 1 × **billions** = a practical classical computer or PC ) with **No** errors.

The 3rd paragrah of this news mentions the current miserable situation of the useless quantum computer which needs at least a **million** qubits for performing some meaningful calculations, but even the latest cryostat technology can**not** maintain even *thousands* of qubit state at the extremely low temperature which is required for maintaining **fragile** quantum computers.

So such a fragile and very **short**-lived quantum computer with high error rate can **Not** do any meaningful calculations, much less perform molecular energy calculation (= in fact, quantum mechanics itself can**not** calculate any meaningful molecular energies, no matter how excellent computers are used, because the basic physical theory is **wrong** ).

"Molecular energies were calculated by (still-impractical) quantum computers ?" recently published in Nature using Google 53-bit Sycamore is a typical example of the **misleading** and exaggerated news to **falsely** excite laypersons.

↑ The trick is that they used **ordinary** classical computers in **most** of the complicated molecular energy calculations (= they named it "**hybrid** classical quantum calculation") **without** showing any quantum computer's advantage ( this 8th paragraph, this 8th-paragraph ).

Google quantum computer originally should have been able to use 53 qubits, but even in this latest research, they used only a very small number of bits = **16** qubits ( this 2nd paragraph ), which small number of qubits is **unable** to calculate any physical values, much less complicated molecular energies without the help of the ordinary powerful classical computers ( this p.2-3 ).

Unlike the ordinary practical classical computers with billions of bits with No errors ( which we use everyday ), the present quantum computers can**not** correct fatal **errors** of even less than 50 quantum bits or qubits ( this 3rd paragraph ), though hypothetical future practical quantum computers (= to caluculate molecular energies without the help of classical computers ) will need at least millions of qubits ( this 11th paragraph, this 6th-paragraph ), which is far larger than this present latest research's 16 qubits.

Quantum mechanical calculation method for molecular energies is inherently useless, regardless of what computers are used, because it cannot solve or obtain any exact energies of multi-electron atoms and molecules, instead, physicists just guess and **choose** fake arbitrary solutions called trial wavefunctions through variational approximate methods (= just "choosing" arbitrary freely-adjustable parameters and fake solutions means quantum mechanics can**not** predict any new molecular energy values, so **useless** ).

↑ One approximate method of random guess and choice of **fake** solutions using quantum mechanical variational method is Monte Carlo, and their quantum computer's extremely **tiny** number of 16 qubits (= useless, still **Not** a computer or calculator at all ) might contribute to only a **small** part of this calculation process, they claim ( this 4th-paragraph, this p.2-right ). ← Quantum computers with still-too small number of fragile qubits are **meaningless** and unnecessary for any practical calculations.

Contrary to the recent IBM overblown claim of 127-qubit quantum computer (= still too small number of qubits with No detailed performance ), even the latest IBM research used only less than **30**-qubit quantum computer (= still **Not** a computer ! this p.6 ) with the help of an ordinary **classical** computer ( = it's **impossible** for the current useless quantum computer alone to calculate any molecular energies without using classical computers as seen in this 6-7th paragraphs ).

All other kinds of quantum computers (= still **Not** a computer or calculator which will need at least **millions** of qubits, which is **impossible** ) such as ion qubits are also **unable** to have more than **50** bits ( this lower, this 2nd-last paragraph ). = completely **useless**.

Silicon-type quantum computer is the most **unstable** and impractical with still only a few qubits. It is known to be extremely difficult for such a fragile semiconductor or silicon-type quantum computer to even have more than two qubits despite decades of intense researches all over the world ( this 3rd paragraph, this 4th-last-2nd-last paragraphs ).

Harvard's alleged 256-qubit quantum simulator is Not a quantum computer ( this 7th paragraph, this 2nd paragraph ), it cannot perform any calculations, so **useless**.

It just used neutral cold atoms unstably trapped in laser light pretending to be a (fake) simulator of irrelevant artificial solid crystals, which can **never** be a stable robust quantum computer or true programmable simulator, because they are easily **broken** without any meaningful calculations.

A photon quantum computer, which consists only of **classical** old-type polarizers, beam splitters and classical light wave detectors is **Not** a computer or calculator, suffering frequent fragile photon loss, hence, they have **No** practical application ( this last paragraph, this 4th paragraph ), just outputting random meaningless numbers by randomaly detecting lights or photons ( this 6th-last paragraph, this 7th-paragraph ).

Physicists just sent random **classical** weak **lights** (= waves called "*photons*" for formality's sake ) into multiple beam splitters and detected the light distribution in different detectors ( this 3rd paragraph ) with **No** meaningful calculations.

↑ So the recent (fake) quantum computer's advantage experiments using photons (= just classical lights ) do Not mean quantum computer's speed-up, because physicsts made the photon's quantum computer (= still Not computers or calculators ) do much simpler things = send photons or lights through multiple beam splitters and just detect the random output distribution of those lights with No calculation of their probabilities which complicated probabilitiy calculations were unfairly forced only on classical computers.

This photon's quantum computer's (fake) advantage (= just randomly detecting output photons with No calculations ) called boson sampling, which did Not prove faster quantum computers, is completely useless ( this p.2-right-2nd paragraph, this p.17 ).

This is what the current (illusory) photon's quantum computer is.

In the (useless) photon's quantum computer fake supremacy or advantage experiment called "boson sampling (= sampling does **Not** mean calculating anything )", all physicists did was just send multiple photons (= just weak classical light ) and **randomly** detect those photons at output detectors with **No** calculations (= because the current quantum computers can Not conduct any meaningful calculations ).

↑ If we try to calculate the rigorous probabilities of all the randomly-detected photons (= instead of just sampling photons ), this calculation of many output random photon's probabilities (= calculating "permanent" ) takes too much time, so almost impossible **both** in classical and quantum computers ( this p.3, this p.6 ).

This paper (= p.3-left-2nd-paragraph ) says "The ability to (boson) sample from (photon) distribution need Not imply the ability to calculate the permanent (= photon probabilities ) that gave rise to it." ← Boson sampling does **Not** prove true supremacy of universal quantum computers or its (as-yet-unseen) ability to calculate anything ( this p.1-right-upper, this 3rd-last-paragraph ).

↑ The fact that quantum computers cannot calculate the exact photon's distribution probabilities (= instead, the alleged quantum computers just randomly measured or sampled some output photons ) means there is No proof that this random boson sampling gave the right or desired answer ( this p.5 ).

So all these dubious quantum computer supremacy or advantage claims are based on **unfair** conditions where only quantum computers (= still with **No** ability to caluculate anything ) were given very **easy** tasks (= just randomly measuring photons or meaningless output numbers ), and classical computers were unreasonably forced to choose the unrealistically time-consuming calculation methods, so **No** quantum computer supremacy or speed-up has been proven.

The media is flooded with misleading news trying to wrongly associate fictional quantum computers and AI or machine learning which quantum calculation is still only a **theoretical** illusion **Not** realized by any (useless) quantum computers as seen in the recent IBM researchers ( this p.7 2nd-paragraph ).

↑ All of these "actual" AI or machine learning calculations could be done only using "classical ordinary computers" (= hence, **No** quantum computer's speed-up )

Microsoft's **hypothetical** "topological quantum computer (= once retracted as a **fake** theory )" is ridiculous and **useless** forever, because it tries to use unreal quasiparticles such as the **impossible** *fractional-charge* anyons and Majorana as **fictional** future quantum bits or qubits in vain. ← Microsoft still has **Not** realized even a single working qubit based on fictitious quasiparticles which cannot even be isolated as real particles.

↑ Their topological quantum computers are based on **unfounded** hypothesis that fictional fractional-charge quasiparticles may produce other fictional strings or "**unseen** braids" and entangle those fictional braids, which may realize robust future quantum computer, though physicists **avoid** showing what those illusory unseen topological braids are made of ( this 4th-paragraph ) except for showing only **non**physical abstract math hypothesis ( this p.13 ). ← nonsense.

Physicists just measured some classical electromagnetic fields and electrical **conductance**, and **baselessly** claimed these measured conductance might indicate (fictional) Majorana quasiparticles ( this 6th-paragraph, this p.2-4th-paragraph, this 9th-paragraph ) instead of directly detecting such an illusory quasiparticle ( this p.2-left-5th-paragraph, this p.2-middle-last-paragraph ).

Actually all these fictional quantum computers such as topological ones are still useless, just exaggerating **imaginary** future unwarranted words ( this last paragraph )

"the next **step** is a topological qubit. We **hypothesize** that the topological qubit **will** have a favorable combination of speed, size, and stability compared to other qubits. We **believe** ultimately it will power a fully scalable quantum machine in the **future**.. ?" ← **unrealized** and useless now and forever ( this last ).

Controversial D-Wave machine is Not a real quantum computer, hence, Not faster than ordinary classical computers, contrary to the company's claim ( this 3rd paragraph ).

Actually, D-Wave machine is Not even a computer or calculator.

It is called a "quantum annealer" where D-Wave machine just *gradually* changes and settles down to the **lowest** (= equilibrium ground-state ) energy state (= this artificially-set lowest energy state is the D-Wave version of solution ) without any meaningful calculation ( this 3rd paragraph ).

While many leading quantum computer companies such as IBM still have **Not** realized quantum computers with even 100 qubits, only D-Wave could magically achieve **2000** qubits 5 years ago ?

This weird **contradiction** reveals the controversial D-Wave machine does **Not** use the very fragile quantum mechanical superposition where each qubit allegedly can be 0 and 1 simultaneously like a dead and alive cat using parallel worlds, hence, D-Wave can**not** utilize the real quantum computer's powerful faster parallel-world calculations ( this 12th paragraph ).

↑ No speed-up ( this p.8-lower ~ p.9-upper ).

As some car makers promote, D-Wave machine is said to be able to find the **shortest** route in the so-called "optimization problems".

But **contrary** to such a potential, D-Wave is the **only** major company using the annealing quantum computers which attract attention from only a **few** car companies ( this 5th paragraph ), because D-Wave machines are actually **useless** for any practical purposes except for attracting attention and investment money using "exaggerated news".

In the optimization problem, for example, a traveling salesman is supposed to find the shortest possible route between a given list of cities, with the constraint that all cities must be visited exactly once.

When he has to visit 20 different cities, there are an extremely large number = 20×19×18× .. = 2 × 10^{28} of possible different routes ( this 3rd paragraph ) connecting all 20 cities.

Finding the **shortest** route out of such a huge number of all possible routes will take an enormous amount of time.

D-Wave tries to map such a problem of finding the shortest route into a search for the lowest energy state.

So in D-Wave machine, the **lowest**-*energy* (= equilibrium ) state is supposed to be the "right **solution** (ex. = the shortest route which a traveling salesman tries to find )".

In order to carry out this D-Wave machine, the first thing to do is to **determine** the *lowest energy state* representing the right **solution**. ← This is the trick.

↑ If the lowest-energy state of D-Wave machine allegedly representing the right **solution** must be **determined** in *advance*, it means users must **already** know what the right solution is in the process of artificially determining and setting the lowest-energy state even **before** the D-Wave machine is used.

↑ D-Wave machines or annealing quantum computers are **meaningless** and unnecessary.

Users have to artificially determine parameters so that the lowest energy state becomes their solution (= ex. shortest route ).

After setting those parameters, users just wait for D-Wave machine to gradually change and settle down to the lowest equilibrium energy state (= solution ? ) with performing **No** calculations.

D-Wave quantum annealing is still very much in its infancy, and can only handle very small and impractical optimization problems ( this 4th-last-3rd-last paragraphs. )

And D-Wave is **Not** a real quantum computer based on the orthodox quantum superposition or parallel-world calculations, so we can easily construct similar "classical annealing machines" which can also gradually change and settle down to their lowest energy state as the final solution like D-Wave. But we didn't need to construct such a machine.

Because we do **Not** need such a very expensive bulky D-Wave annealing machine to just find the shortest route for salesman who can just choose one of the proper routes considering various other factors such as transportation and costs using his "**brain**" or ordinary classical computers.

When we can choose and determine the lowest energy state as the right solution ( and set various parameters in D-Wave beforehand ) so that the whole system can *automatically* and **smoothly** move into the **lowest** energy or artificially-prepared right solution without being stuck in many other wrong solutions or local energy minima, we must *already* **know** the true **solution** even **before** running D-Wave machine ( this 6th paragraph ). ← This is the trick of the fake quantum speed-up.

Setting the lowest energy as the right solution = That solution has been already found before D-Wave is used. ← An expensive, bulky D-Wave machine is unnecessary.

Various dubious news such as "D-Wave might calculate faster than classical computers" is **false** based on an unfair comparisons by deliberately picking **different** methods for quantum computers (= for which, very easy method is chosen ) and classical computers (= for which, very time-consuming difficult method is chosen, this 18th paragraph ).

D-Wave deliberately replaced "finding the shortest route" by an easy method of letting the system gradually change into the lowest-energy equilibrium state, while they made only classical computers perform a very-time consuming method of randomly flipping one bit at a time, calculating and comparing energies before and after the bit-flip, deciding whether the bit is returned or not calculating the probability,.. repeatedly until they luckily find the lowest-energy state.

**Regardless** of whether classical or quantum objects, **all** things tend to gradually change and settle down to their **lowest**-energy or **equilibrium** states.

So the annealing machines such as D-Wave, which just wait for the whole system to gradually change into its lowest-energy state **without** executing any calculations, do **Not** represent quantum mechanical effect, hence, the D-Wave quantum computer's speed-up is just **fake** news ( this 5th-last paragraph ).

For example, in the recent (illusory) D-Wave quantum advantage news, physicists unreasonably chose a very time-consuming and inefficient method called "Monte-Carlo" only for classical computers ( this 8th paragraph ).

↑ D-Wave machine, which cannot do any calculations, is **unable** to carry out even this Monte-Carlo method chosen for classical computers. ← "D-Wave is superior to classical computer ?" is **illusion**.

In this very time-consuming Monte-Carlo method, when many particles gradually mix and settle down to their equilibrium state, physicists deliberately and randomly choose only one particle at a time, calculate its transition probability, and determine in which direction the randomly-chosen particle will move repeatedly, until all particles can **luckily** reach the lowest energy state ( this p.3, this p.15 ).

↑ Any classical objects in the nature do Not take such a time-consuming Monte-Carlo method artificially created by humans to find their lowest-energy states spontaneously.

So the outrageous idea that the very time-consuming, artificially-created Monte-Carlo may represent the natural classical phenomena is just **false** and inconsistent with reality.

In this unrealistically time-consuming Monte-Carlo method artificially chosen by quantum computer's companies as a (fake) classical method, they just randomly and **blindly** flip one qubit at a time (= without predicting energy change or "force direction" beforehand ), and only after that, they calculate the energy difference before and after the random qubit's flip, and determine whether they return the qubit to the original state or not, repeatedly, until they luckily reach the lowest energy state.

On the other hand, all the natural and real classical particles tend to be automatically (= not randomly ) attracted by "force", smoothly and swiftly changes into the lowest energy state *simultaneously* instead of the upper fake classical method = Monte-Carlo which just randomly and blindly moves one particle at a time without even pre-estimating the force direction in which each particle will be naturally attracted.

So all the fishy speed-up or advantage of the annealing (fake) quantum computers such as D-Wave is just **illusion** and unreal, caused by "**unfair** choices" of unrealistic time-consuming methods as (fake) classical methods.

Actually, this D-Wave machine is still useless, as seen in the 5th-last paragraph of this news *vaguely* saying

"Volkswagen **believes** quantum computing has the **potential** to revolutionize how we use and learn from data in the real world. Even though the technology is still in its **early** stages.."

↑ Just using multiple **vague** future words such as "believe", "potential" and "early states" means D-Wave machines is still **useless** for us.

Actually **nobody** around you uses this D-Wave bulky expensive and impractical machines, and now D-Wave seems to try to **give up** this still-impractical quantum annealing machine ( this 7-8th paragraphs )

When the system gradually changes into the lowest-energy (= solution ) state, D-Wave is said to rely on fishy quantum tunneling besides normal thermal fluctuation.

But this quantum tunneling is **Not** specific to quantum computers. Ordinary classical computers also use this quantum tunnel, so the quantum tunneling can**not** be used as the reason for (falsely) claiming D-Wave machine can be faster than the ordinary classical computer.

The quantum tunnel is just a **classical** (= realistic ) phenomenon, Not a quantum mechanical occult phenomenon where an electron seemingly penetrates even the rigid wall by unphysical negative kinetic energy.

When the conductor tip becomes very close (= ~nm ) to the target conductor and some voltage is applied, it is natural that electrons can get through the very "narrow **empty** space" such as air and vacuum (= the air or vaccum's **empty** space is falsely treated as rigid-wall like "insulator barrier" by unscientific quantum mechanics which loves unreal negative kinetic energies ).

Aside from fake quantum computer D-Wave, a real quantum computer or its speed-up is also *inherently* **impossible**.

Unlike the ordinary (= classical ) computer's bit, each quantum bit or qubit is said to be 0 and 1 states *simultaneously* like a fictional cat can be dead and alive using unscientific quantum superpositon or fantasy parallel worlds ( this last paragraph ).

Of course, it is impossible for us to observe such a **grotesque** dead and alive cat unrealistically splitting into different quantum mechanical parallel worlds in this real world.

So quantum mechanics makes a poor **excuse** that when we try to observe each qubit (or cat ), it suddenly and conveniently chooses only one state 0 or 1 ( dead or alive ) picking only one parallel world out of infinite different parallel worlds as a single real world. ← nonsense.

No direct observation or proof of such a mythical quantum superpostion state means there is No quantum mechanical superposition or parallel worlds, hence the quantum computer's speed-up allegedly taking advantage of such a fantasy parallel-world calculation is **illusion**, too.

In fact, the fraudulent quantum mechanics just calls some **classical** states "superposition" or "parallel worlds", though there are No such things as quantum superposition or (unobservable) parallel worlds in this real world.

Quantum computer's physicists often treat an atom's (or ion's ) lowest ground state as "0" and the first excited state as "1" of a quantum bit or qubit.

When illuminating each qubit or ion by some classical laser light, the qubit's state changes and oscillates between the lowest-energy state (= 0 ) and the excited state (= 1 ) **alternately** (= instead of simultaneously using fantasy superposition or parallel worlds ), which "classical motion" is called Rabi oscillation.

When such an oscillating qubit's state is just between the lowest-energy state (= 0 or ↓ or S ) and excited state (= 1 or ↑ or D ) in this classical Rabi oscillation, quantum mechanics outrageously claims the qubit is in two states 0 (= lowest-energy state ) and 1 (= excited state ) simultaneously using fantasy superposition or parallel worlds ( this p.25-26 ).

The most popular quantum computers studied by Google and IBM use a bulky and big superconducting circuit as a single qubit or a single artificial atom with two artificial energy levels 0 and 1.

In the space occupied by such a very big artificial atom or superconducting qubit (= one qubit is as big as ~1 mm ! ), more than 10000 classical computer's **compact** bits (= each bit is only ~50 nm ) can be packed.

So even if such a very big quantum bit or artificial atom can take **two** different states 0 and 1 simultaneously, the more than 10000 classical computer's very small bits packed in a single big qubit can take more than 10000 different states simultaneously, hence, classical computers can calculate much faster than quantum computers, even if quantum superposition, or a dead-and-alive cat is real.

A superconducting qubit's artificial two-energy state is said to be determined by the number of **fictitious** quasiparticles called "*Cooper pairs* ( this p.2, this p.12 )"

Each fictitious Cooper pair consists of **two** electrons separated by a long distance ( this 2nd paragraph ).

So when each superconducting qubit is allegedly in the (fantasy) quantum superposition between 0 (= 0 Cooper pair = 0 electron ) and 1 (= 1 Cooper pair = two electrons ), such a superposition qubit just includes the odd number of electrons ( 0.5 Cooper pair = 1 electron ) which has **nothing** to do with fantasy quantum superposition or parallel worlds.

A qubit is in two different superposition states of 0 Cooper pair and 1 Cooper piar. → A qubit is just between 0 Cooper pair and 1 Cooper pair. → A qubit is in one **single** state of including 1 electron (= 0.5 Cooper pair ). ← This is what dubious quantum superposition or parallel worlds is.

The photon's quantum computer uses the light polarizations (= ex. horizontal = 0 and vertical = 1 ) as a qubit's state, hence, its fishy quantum superposition state is just a **classical** state where two classical light waves with different polarizations (= 0 and 1 ) **overlap** each other, which has **nothing** to do with (fantasy) quantum computers or parallel worlds ( this p.9 ).

Or just when the very weak classical light beam (= called "photon" whose light intensity just exceeds some detection threshold of the photodetector ) realistically splits into two weaker lights in two paths at a beam splitter, physicists irrationally call the split lights "quantum superposition" where a single fictitious photon particle is supposed to unrealistically split into two paths in two fantasy parallel worlds ( this 6th paragraph, this lower ).

↑ Actually, only **classical** light wave is related to these phenomena.

The fantasy quantum mechanical photon and parallel worlds are **irrelevant** to this.

Quantum computer is said to perform parallel calculations of multiple **different** values *simultaneously* using **fantasy** different parallel worlds, which pseudo-concepts should be the driving force of (imaginary) quantum computer's speed-up.

But just calculating multiple different values using (unphysical) quantum mechanical superpositon, a dead-alive cat or parallel worlds does Not lead to faster calculations.

Because when the calculated values are observed, they suddenly **choose** only one value or state belonging to only one parallel world, and all other calculated values in all other parallel worlds miserably **vanish** ( this 18-19th paragraphs ) according to the stupid quantum computer's rule.

So in order to take advantage of (fictional) quantum parallel-world calculations, all calculated values in different parallel worlds have to conveniently interfere with each other and magically leave only desirable right values when they are observed. ← Too good and unrealistic !

The 26-29th paragraphs of this site explains

"A quantum computer can be in a quantum combination of all of those states, called superposition. This allows it to perform one billion or more **copies** of a computation at the **same** time. In a way, this is similar to a parallel computer with one billion processors performing different computations at the same time.."

".. In a quantum computer, all one billion computations will be running on the **same** hardware.. If we measured this quantum state, we would get just one of the results. All of the other 999,999,999 results would **disappear**.
To solve this problem, one uses the second effect, quantum **interference** ?"

↑ In fact, this fictional quantum computer's too-good speed-up mechanism is physically **impossible**, so faster quantum computers will **never** be realized.

Quantum computer tries to make the same hardware or a **single** qubit perform **multiple** different parallel calculations using **independent** (= non-interacting ) parallel worlds at first.

Because if all quantum parallel worlds can influence and interact with other parallel worlds, the simultaneous independent multiple calculations of different values using different parallel worlds are impossible.

↑ If different parallel worlds can influence and change other parallel worlds constantly from the beginning, it means all parallel worlds exist in **One** *single interacting world* (= hence, calculating only **one** single value is possible at once ← No quantum computer's speed-up ). ← Multiple different quantum superposition states or parallel worlds do Not exist from the beginning.

But after those independent **parallel**-world calculations of multiple different values, quantum mechanics outrageously demands all those different calculated values **interfere** with (= influence ) each other like combining all different quantum parallel worlds in one **single** world !

If different parallel worlds can interfere with each other from the beginning, the parallel worlds are meaningless, and it means there is only **one** single world from the beginning, hence, faster parallel calculations of different values using independent parallel worlds or superposition is **impossible**.

Furthermore, quantum computers unrealistically require bulky solid qubits or ions to interfere with each other like liquids or water waves, which is physically **impossible**.

According to the unrealistic quantum computer's rule, when two solid qubits in different parallel worlds meet each other, they can interfere destructively (= two solid qubits collide and magically disappear !? ) or constructively (= two solid qubits or ions overlap and merge into one bigger solid qubit or a bigger new ion !? ) ← Impossible !

So both quantum mechanical parallel-world calculations and interference, which are thought to be the reason for (illusory) quantum computer's speed-up, are based on contradicting and impossible idea. ← Faster quantum computers will **never** happen.

If the quantum comptuer and its each single qubit could really perform parallel calculations of different values simultaneously using fantasy parallel worlds, physicists could have alreadly achieved Shor's algorithm which is supposed to factor any numbers by calculating different values simultaneously using parallel worlds ( this 6th-last to 3rd-last paragraphs, this middle ) faster than the classical computer. ← But this faster factoring has **Not** been achieved yet.

The **largest** integer the current quantum computers using Shor's algorithm have factored is only very **small** numbers = **21** or **15** ( this 6th paragraph, this 3-5th paragraphs ). ← Too small number, hence this alleged quantum computer's factoring is **Not** faster than classical computers at all ( this 18th paragraph ).

Even factoring meaninglessly **small** numbers such as 21 = 7 × 3 or 15 = 5 × 3 did **Not** use quantum superposition or parallel-world calculations. ← This fact is enough to prove the faster quantum computer using parallel calculations or quantum mechanical superposition is **impossible** forever.

Instead of performing parallel-world calculations of different values simultaneously, the current quantum computers can only calculate "**one** single value" at a time using a **single** world and **fake** Shor's algorithm of resetting and recycling each same qubit ( this, this p.2-left, Fig.1, this p.1 ).

When the answer of factored numbers is already **known** (= so useless for factoring unknown new numbers ), physicists can set those already-known factoring solution as the lowest-energy state of D-Wave annealing machine and get those values using annealing **without** any calculations or factoring, which fake method cannot factor any numbers faster than classical computers using the original Shor's algorithm ( this 3rd paragraph ).

As a result, the quantum computer speed-up by dream-like simultaneous parallel calculations (using quantum superposition or fantasy parallel worlds ) is **unrealized** despite longtime researches across the world, hence, proved to be impossible forever.

Physicists just "**imagine**" (illusory) quantum superposition state just by illuminating each qubit by classical laser light **without** directly observing such an illusory superposition state.

You might often hear the **unscientific** hypothesis that each quantum bit can take two states 0 and 1 simultaneously, hence the quantum computer with N qubits can *theoretically* take 2^{N} different states ( using fantasy parallel worlds ). ← This is a **lie**.

For example, if the quantum computer has three qubits, it should take as many as 8 different states (= 8 = 2 × 2 × 2 ) simultaneously, if their unrealistic idea is right.

But so far, experiments showed qubits can **Not** take different quantum superposition states or parallel worlds, instead, three qubits can only classically oscillate between only two states (= 000 ↔ 111 = called GHZ state ) or between only **three** states (= 100 ↔ 010 ↔ 001 = called W state, this p.1-right 2nd paragraph, this p.3 ).

→ Faster quantum computers relying on fictional quantum mechanical superposition states or parallel worlds are baseless and impossible forever.

Google quantum computer showed No supremacy or quantum speed-up, because it just output random **meaningless** numbers with **No** practical use ( this 8th- paragraphs, this 8th-last paragraph ).

They **unfairly** made only the classical computer perform unrealistically time-consuming calculations of all different probabilities of all possible random output 53-qubit bitstring patterns (= 2^{53} possible states, this 8th paragraph, this p.1 last ).

And they made the quantum computer do very **easy** task (= different from methods chosen for the classical computer ) of just outputting random numbers **without** any meaningful calculations (= No calculation was done, so No much time was taken only for the quantum computer's task ).

In order for the quantum computer to estimate the probability of outputting different 53-bit bitstring patterns **without** directly calculating probabilities which time-consuming calculations were imposed only on classical computers, it has to repeat outputting random different bitstring numbers many times.

To deliberately **reduce** the number of times and the task of outputting random numbers, they seemed to use the "convenient **interference**" that could output only desirable specific values, avoiding outputting other unnecessary bitstring patterns by destructive interference ( this p.2 left last paragraph, this p.1 right ).

This 14th paragraph explains the **trick** of *illusory* quantum computer's speed-up

" A crucial point, though, is that the distribution DC (= probabilities of outputting each n- or 53-qubit bitstring pattern ) is **not** uniform. Some strings enjoy constructive **interference** of amplitudes and therefore have **larger** probabilities, while others suffer destructive interference and have **smaller** probabilities..

"..And even though we’ll only see a number of samples that’s **tiny** compared to 2^{n}, we can check whether the samples preferentially cluster among the strings that are predicted to be likelier, and thereby build up our confidence that something classically intractable is being done ?"

Actually, the Google 53-qubit quantum computer just repeated outputting random numbers only a million times (= 10^{6}, this 8-9th pararaphs ), though they originally had to output and check more than 2^{53} (= 10^{15} ) different output bitstring pattern probabilities, repeating it more than 2^{53} times.

↑ This means they *deliberately* **reduced** the number of times and task only of quantum computer which should have output random bitstring numbers more than 10^{15} (= 2^{53} ) times to only 10^{6} times ( this p.13-last ) using the convenient "**interference**" between qubits.

The point is this convenient "interference" behind their quantum supremacy claim is just "**classical** light interference", Not quantum mechanical effect, hence, their supremacy did Not mean faster quantum computer.

Superconducting qubits use **classical** microwave pulses (= one of classical light waves ) communicating between different qubits, so if such a classical microwave interference contributed to reducing the number of times of outputting random numbers and the speed-up, this is **Not** by quantum mechanical effect but by ordinary classical phenomena. → Google quantum computer's supremacy was **illusion**.

This Google 53-qubit quantum computer did **Not** carry out any parallel-world **calculations** (= instead, it just output **random** numbers ), hence this interference between **different** qubits has nothing to do with (illusory) interference between the same single qubit's different superposition values calculated using different parallel worlds.

↑ The authentic quantum computer theory claims the 53-qubit quantum computer should always maintain 2^{53} different superposition states, but Google researchers deliberately reduced the number of these states or bitstring patterns to only a million using **classical** light interference against the original quantum computer's rule. ← **No** quantum computer's speed-up.

Another quantum advantge claimed by Chinese researchers using a photon quantum computer is also **illusion**, Not faster than ordinary classical computers at all.

First of all, the photon's quantum copumputer is **Not** a real computer or calculator, hence, it can**not** perform any meaningful calculations.

The so-called photon quantum computer consists only of **classical** old-fashioned beam splitters and multiple light (= or photon ) detectors with No modern transistors or any other calculating devices.

The 4th paragraph of this site says

"Juizhang (= Chinese photon quantum computer ) is **far** from a general-purpose computer. It is a specific design, which can execute only one computation, known as Boson Sampling (= **useless** task, with No computation ). You can picture it as a pinball machine, but without the flippers. You drop the ball from the top of the machine. It dribbles down towards the bottom, bouncing on the various bumpers, to finally arrive in one of several slots.."

"Replace the *balls* by **photons**, the bumpers by prisms and mirrors, add **detectors** in each of the bottom *slots* to **monitor** the number of photons (= just classical light ).. Simulating the classical system (with the real balls) is relatively easy with a classical computer. However, the bar is higher when we deal with **quantum** objects. This is due to the **interference** between various possible paths ?"

↑ They **falsely** consider the "ordinary **classical** light's interference" as some "magical quantum effect" or something, and claimed this (light) interference couldn't be simulated by pinball-like "**classical** photon **particles**" which classical pinball-like pseudo-photon particles lost the ability to interfere.

But there is **No** such thing as a pinball-like "classical photon particle" **losing** the ability to interfere in this real world where all **classical** light wave can always **interfere** unlike fictitious pinball-like photon particles.

The 7-9th paragraphs of this site says

" Photons (= just classical light ) are first sent into a network of channels. There, each photon encounters a series of beam splitters, each of which sends the photon down two paths simultaneously (= just classical light splits at a beam splitter ), in what’s called a quantum superposition. Paths also merge together, and the repeated splitting and merging causes the photons to **interfere** with one another according to **quantum** rules (← **Wrong**. Interference is originally the **classical** light wave's phenomenon, while a quantum photon particle can**not** interfere ).."

"..Finally, the number of photons in each of the network’s output channels is measured at the end (= photodetector ). When **repeated** many times, this process produces a **distribution** of numbers based on how many photons were found in each output.."

".. If operated with large numbers of photons and many channels, the quantum computer will produce a distribution of numbers that is too complex for a classical computer to **calculate** ?"

↑ This alleged quantum computer advantage using useless boson sampling is **illusion**, because they just sent many lights (= called photons for formality's sake ) into many beam splitters, detected them at many detectors, and saw their detection distribution at final photodetctors **without** any meaningful calculations performed by this so-called photon's quantum computer ( this 5th-paragraph, this 2nd-paragarph, this p.2, this 3rd-paragraph ).

And they **unfairly** forced only the ordinary classical computer to perform very time-consuming calculations (= this calculation can**not** be carried out by their useless quantum computers ) of all probabilities of all paths through which lights or photons passed, one calculation of one path at a time ( this-middle;Boson sampling, this p.15, this p.6, this p.3-left-2nd-paragraph ).

So this quantum advantage by the photon quantum computer is unreal, caused by "**unfair** comparisons" (= the quantum computer did very **easy** task of just randomly sending many lights and detecting their distribution, and only the classical computer was forced to perform very time-consuming calculations of probabilities of all different paths through which lights passed ).

This is why this photon's quantum computer's advantage caused by unfair comparisons is meaningless and **useless** for any practical purposes ( this last paragraph ).

The light **interference** is just ordinary **classical** light wave's phenomenon.

Then, why did they **falsely** claim the light interference belongs to (fake) quantum phenomena, though a quantum (rigid) photon **particle** cannot interfere ?

The 16th paragraph of this site claims

"because of **quantum** effects, if two **photons** of identical properties (position and polarisation) hit the splitter at the same time, they **stuck** together and both travelled in the **same** direction ( this middle ) .."

But it is known that any two photons or lights can Not **stick** together (= lights or photons just **pass** through each other when they overlap other lights without sticking together ! )

This strange phenomenon where two lights (or photons ) **appear** to stick together at a beam splitter is called "Hong-Ou-Mandel effect" which is the basis for the **false** claim of photon's quantum computer speed-up ( this p.4 last ).

In fact, this strange Hong-Ou-Mandel effect of seemingly **sticking** two lights or photons together at a beam splitter is just a "**classical** light wave phonomenon" of light destructive and constructive interference (+ energy conservation law ).

When the **classical** light wave reflects off the higher (or lower ) index *mediums*, its light wave phase shifts (or doesn't shift ), and two lights interfere with each other destructively (= light disappear ) at one side and constructively (= two lights appear to stick together ) at the other side of a beam splitter ( this p.6 ).

In the original Hong-Ou-Mandel experiment, they used two weak incident lights (= or photons ) with arbitray phases ( this p.6 right-upper ) where two incident lights *classically* **interfered** with each other **partially** constructively (= resultant light intensity exceeds the detection threshold of light detector, hence, is detected as a (fictitious) photon ) at one side, and destructively (= resultant light intensity is wearker than detection threshold of light detector = No photon detected ) at the other side of a beam splitter. ← Two photons stick at a beam splitter ? ← **No**.

As a result, all phenomena using fictitious photons and their magical **interference** are caused by ordinary **classical** light wave and its classical interference, hence, the faster photon's quantum computer is **baseless**, and will **never** be realized.

"Calculating molecular energy on quantum computer ?" is completely **false** news.

First of all, the current quantum mechanical theory cannot calculate or predict any multi-electron atomic or molecular energies, so useless no matter how powerful computers are used.

Useless quantum mechanics has to artificially choose **fake** approximate solution, insert such a fake solution into Schrödinger equation, and integrate it (= instead of solving Schrödinger equations which are unsolvable ) for obtaining fake molecular energies using **variational** methods.

Physicists try to use this **fake** useless approximate method called "variational quantum eigensolver" to seemingly "calculate" (fake) molecular energies on quantum computers (= still Not computers, so calculating something is impossible, though ).

In fact, this variational quantum eigensolver, which is a hybrid of classical and quantum computer's calculations, relies on ordinary classical computers for performing almost all calculations.

The 5-6th paragraphs of this site say

"Last year, researchers at Google’s quantum computing lab .. used **three** *qubits* (= very small number ! ) to calculate the lowest energy electron arrangement of the simplest possible **molecule**, molecular hydrogen..

".. IBM’s quantum computing researchers have now raised the bar. The scientists used up to **six** *qubits* (= still too **small** a number of qubits to calculate any meaningful values ! ) made of specialized metals called superconductors, which can carry different levels of electric current simultaneously, to analyze **hydrogen**, lithium hydride, and beryllium hydride (BeH2) molecule ?"

↑ Thinking commonsensically, it is **impossible** to calculate any complicated molecular energy values using only three (= 001 ) or six qubits (= 001001, this 2nd paragraph ).

It means their quantum computers with only a **few** qubits did **Not** perform any meaningful calculations of molecular energies, and ordinary **classical** computers with **billions** of bits did almost **all** complicated calculations in the name of "hybrid." ← This is the trick.

For example, when physicists try to calculate (fake) energy of a two-atomic hydrogen molecule (= H2 ), they use only **two** qubits (= 01 ) as a (useless) quantum computer (= hence, still Not a computer, this p.3 this p.4 ).

For these only-**two** qubit quantum computers (= **Not** a computer or calculator ! ) to seemingly calculate (fake) molecular energy, they artificially changed the original complicated molecular energy equation or Hamiltonian into a very **simple** form of **fake** meaningless Hamiltonian for two qubits ( this 3rd-last paragraph ), which too simple pseudo-equations have **nothing** to do with any actual complicated molecular calculations.

This is why (fictional) quantum computers are still useless (forever) for any purposes including (pseudo-)molecular energy calculations ( this 2nd-last paragraph ), because their quantum computers are still **Not** computers or calculators at all. + Quantum parallel worlds are illusion.

*(B-1) ↓ Real force, force carriers are necessary in *

Unrealistic quantum mechanics can **never** treat actual molecular or chemical bonds in the realistic way.

Hence, quantum mechanics has **never** been useful in any applied science such as computer transistors, smartphones, biology, medicine and still-impractical parallel-world quantum computers, contrary to the media-hype.

Why is the quantum mechanical atomic world **useless forever** in actual science and technology ?

Quantum mechanics intrinsically can **neither** treat actual multiple electrons (or atoms ) as they are, nor distinguish (= separate ) different electrons (or different atoms ). Why ?

In quantum mechanical rules, any atomic or electronic wavefunctions must take the nonphysical antisymmetric form generating **fictional** exchange energies to describe Pauli exclusion principle and (pseudo-)molecular bond energies.

In this nonphysical quantum mechanical antisymmetric wavefunctions, even when we exchange any two electrons' **positions** or wavefunctions belonging to **different** atoms and orbitals (= 1 ↔ 2 ), the entire wavefunction's forms remain unchanged except the opposite sign is added to it ( this p.8-9, this 5-6th paragraphs ).

↑ It means each single electron must unrealistically exist in any different positions, atoms, wavefunctions **simultaneously**.

If an electron-1 exists only in the atom-A's wavefunction and an electron-2 exists only in the atom-B's wavefunction like the entire wavefunction = [ *φ _{A}* (

If each **single** electrons-1 (or 2 ) unrealistically exists in **both** different atoms-A and B **simultaneously**, the entire antisymmetric wavefunction is **unchanged** except for the sign like [ *φ _{A}* (

So in this antisymmetric wavefunctions, if two electrons share the same state (= same orbital, wavefunction and spin ), the entire wavefunctions become zero. ← Pauli principle mechanism ? ← quantum mechanics gives **No** more detailed mechanism of Pauli principle than this nonphysical abstract antisymmetric wavefunctions ( this p.7-8 ) ! ← **No** scientific progress in the current atomic physics !

Due to this **unrealistic** quantum mechanical interpretation of Pauli principle using unphysical exchange energies caused by antisymmetric wavefunctions, any different electrons allegedly existing in all different atoms simultaneously in molecules and materials become indistinguishable and **inseparable** from other electrons or atoms, as if all different electrons form a single giant pseudo-electron.

Because this quantum mechanical Pauli antisymmetric wavefunction rule requires every single electron to exist everywhere in any different orbitals and atoms simultaneously, as if each electron exists in any different places using **fantasy** quantum mechanical parallel worlds or superposition.

In the fictitious quantum mechanical molecular bonds between two atoms, a single electron-1 must exist in two different atoms (or nuclei, protons ) A and B simultaneously (= *φ _{A}* (

So each single electron must exist in any different atoms and molecules simultaneously from the beginning to cause **fictitious** exchange energies which are thought to generate quantum mechanical fictitious molecular bonds ( this p.11 ) and Pauli repulsions between different atoms.

↑ The problem is when we consider forces between two separate atoms A and B, every single electron must exist in (= bridge ) both separate atoms A and B from the beginning. → Atoms A and B are **inseparable** from each other by sharing the same single **unbreakable** electron obeying this stupid quantum mechanical exchange rule !

As a result, we can**not** consider real forces between quantum mechanical magical atoms which are unrealistically **inseparable** from other different atoms due to sharing the same single electron under the nonphysical antisymmetric wavefunction rule allegedly causing nonphysical exchange energies.

So the exchange energies between quantum mechanical atoms lack real ( exchange ) forces ( this p.5 ), hence, the quantum mechanical molecular bond and Pauli repulsive exchange energies cannot be explained by real things or forces ( this p.8-lower, this p.6, this p.11 ).

Unphysical quantum mechanical wavefunctions or electron clouds where each single electron must thinly spread all over the place cannot generate strong Coulomb attractive energies or Coulomb forces between neutral atoms to form real molecular bonds ( → instead, rely on unphysical exchange energy, this p.4-5, this p.3-4 ), unlike realistic atomic models separating de Broglie wave from a real movable electron which can naturally cause real Coulomb forces and energies in molecular bonds.

In this **paradoxical** quantum mechanical world, though physicists can actually measure real attractions and Pauli repulsive forces between separate atoms, they can**not** use the concepts of real forces to explain it ! ← Quantum mechanical molecular model is useless due to its **inability** to use real forces.

Quantum mechanics makes a paradoxical claim that any fictitious exchange energues such as molecular bond attractions and Pauli repulsions between atoms are caused by the decrease and increase in the (pseudo-)electron's kinetic energy ( this p.9-10 ) **without** using real forces or the change of any potential energies such as Coulomb electric or magnetic energies.

↑ This quantum mechanical pseudo-mechanism causing strange exchange energies is **impossible**. Kinetic energies (of electrons ) themselves can Not be the source of forces. Only potential energies such as electromagnetic and gravitational energies can be the source of real forces such as electromagnetic force and gravity.

Actually, these unrealistic quantum mechanical molecular bonds violate total energy conservation law, so false (= a single quantum mechanical molecule contains many **different** total energies in different electrons' **positions**, unlike the only solvable one-electron hydrogen atom which can conserve the constant total energy in any electron's position )

As a result, quantum mechanics started to say more ridiculous things "we can Not touch objects or feel real forces, even when we **can** actually touch them and feel real contact forces (= caused by Pauli repulsion )."

This is why quantum mechanics can never be useful in any applied science. Quantum mechanical Schrödinger equations are unable to give true solutions or wavefunctions of any multi-electron atoms and molecules ( this p.5 ).

See previous version of criticizing top journals.

2021/6/18 updated. Feel free to link to this site.