Useless quantum mechanics needs overhyped science news.

Unphysical quantum mechanics cannot explain chemistry behind cell energy molecule

Today's medicine and applied science stop progressing due to impractical molecular dynamics (= MD ) lacking real atomic shape.

The last paragraph of this hyped news (9/1/2024) say

"they were able to show that the changes in the angles were linked to larger changes in the enzyme's structure"  ← No mention of practical use, because this research clarified No real enzymatic behavior.

↑ This research paper ↓

p.4-right-2nd-paragraph says "instead of running microsecond-long MD simulations, we limited the simulations to 10 ns"  ← Only too-short molecular motion can be simulated by the too time-consuming MD.

↑ today's only molecular simulating method called molecular dynamics (= MD ) lacking real atomic shapes is too time-consuming to simulate the much longer (= seconds ~ hours ) biological or enzymatic reactions, which hampers science.

The 4th and 7th paragraphs of this hyped news (9/1/2024) say

"Researchers combined two approaches for screening potential new drugs. First, they used a database from the Library ... Then they combined the search with targeted docking simulations used to model the interaction between small molecules and their protein targets to find compounds of interest"

"And the accuracy will (= just speculation, still useless ) only improve, hopefully offering new hope to many people who have diseases with no known cure, including those with cancer"

↑ This research paper ↓

p.4-right-3rd-paragraph says "Note that the precision, or positive predictive value, defined as PPV = TP/(TP + FP), where TP denotes the number of true-positive predictions and FP denotes the number of false positive predictions, "

The recent video of meeting between China's Xi Jinping and US Sullivan seemed to use the artificial processing by "AI".

↑ Compare the contradiction between this (= 0:01~0:05, the US woman's hand did not move ) and this or this (= 0:01 ~ 0:05, the same woman's hand was moving, while Xi was speaking the same phrases in all those videos ).

↑ Whether "real" Xi Jinping was there or not is still unclear, but today's hyped useless AI is used only to restrict our freedom and make our life inconvenient (= instead of developing really-useful technology ) due to unphysical quantum mechanics.

The last paragraph of this hyped news (9/8/2024) says

"Phonon lasers (= sound wave ) could (= just speculation ) also have applications in material science, quantum computing"  ← hype, ← No progress from old Feynman's era.

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-abstract says nothing about 'quantum computing', contrary to the above hyped news.

p.6-left shows the fictional phonon quasiparticle is expressed just as nonphysical math symbol with No real particle's shape, contrary to the media's misleadingly-colorful particle picture.

Despite decades of researches, (fictional) quasiparticle phonon laser is impractical.

The 2nd, 4th, 7th paragraphs of this or this news about the same phonon-laser research say

"For several decades, researchers have been creating “phonon lasers"

"Any small vibration of this bead created phonons (= sound wave )"

"Phonon lasers may require years of research and engineering before they match the usefulness of their optical counterparts."

↑ Despite decades of research, phonon laser is still useless, due to quantum mechanical unphysical quasiparticle model that just hampers science.

The 4th and last paragraphs of this hyped news (9/8/2024) say

"The 300,000 Rubidium atoms were cooled down to 100 nanokelvin.. and loaded into the optical trap forming an optical lattice,.. the ground state with an electron in the 5s orbital and the Rydberg state with an electron in the giant 29s orbital was generated by irradiating an ultrashort pulse laser.."

"which represents important progress to improve the fidelity of the two-qubit gate operation and to realize socially useful quantum computers in the future (= uncertain future, so still useless )"

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-abstract says nothing about the (hyped) quantum computers nor any practical use, so this is useless research just about cold excited atoms trapped in laser.

The 5-6th paragraphs of this hyped news (9/8/2024) say

"Without the crystal,.. We expect to observe an intensity (inverted) image of the object on the camera. However, in the presence of the crystal (= NLC = nonlinear crystal ), SPDC occurs, producing pairs of entangled photons."  ← so even without crystal allegedly emitting entangled photons, they could get images.  quantum entanglement is unnecessary.

"If only these pairs (= photons or lights ) are selected by a spectral filter,. after accumulation of many photons (= taking much time ),... The image of the object reappears"

Quantum entanglement is unnecessary, just a (classical) cheaper camera is far better.

↑ This research paper ↓

p.3-right-2nd-paragraph says "However, one drawback is that the EMCCD camera used here require several hours to acquire the 10⁶−10⁷ frames needed to reconstruct the correlation images."  ← too time-consuming, useless camera (for capturing alleged entangled photons that just mean two correlated polarized lights irrelevant to superluminal action )

p.6-1st-paragraph mentions Its temperature is set to -60◦C.  ← cannot be used at room temperature (= useless 'fake entanglement' camera )

↑ Just taking a bad picture of a cat with low resolution needed expensive device (= needing cold temperature ) and extremely long time = several hours.

↑ We can take a far better picture of an object (= cat ) with a far cheaper ordinary camera far more quickly, so quantum entanglement is illusion, unnecessary, just hampering science.

(Fig.Q)  Google error-prone 105-qubit quantum computer can express only one (logical) qubit that can take only 0 or 1 with high error rate, which is Not a computer nor able to calculate anything. ↓

Google 105-qubit quantum computer could express one (logical) qubit with still impractically-high error rate, which is useless, unable to calculate anything.

The 7th paragraph of this hyped news (9/8/2024 Google quantum AI ) says

"The distance-7 code, which involves 101 physical qubits, achieved an error rate of 0.143% per cycle of error correction, "  ← this means the error rate increased by 0.143% in each error correction (= error-worsening ) operation (= quantum error correction is impossible ).

The 3-4th, 6th paragraphs of another site say

"Quantum computers are even more prone to errors"

"To solve this, quantum computers can be made to group a number of physical qubits to act as a single "logical" qubit,"

"with both a 72 qubit processor and a 105 qubit processor, each acting as a single logical qubit.."

"researchers claimed an error rate of just 0.143 per cent per cycle... still high enough to cause problems with large calculations"  ← Even this latest quantum error rate is far worse than the practically-required error rate of 10^-15 ( this 5th-paragraph )"

Even the world's best error correction quantum computer just increased errors by 0.143% per error correction operation that cannot decrease errors.  ← Quantum computer is dead, No progress.

↑ This Google research used the whole 101 (physical) qubits (out of 105-qubit quantum computer ) as one (fictitious) logical qubit (= when some qubits inside a logical qubit cause errors, these erroneous qubits can be corrected by compared with other intact qubits inside one logical qubit through majority vote, this p.4 ).

↑ Each logical qubit (= corresponding to classical computer's bit ) can take 0 or 1 state ( this 4th-paragraph ), so this research is just about only one qubit that cannot calculate anything.

This 3th and 6th paragraphs say
"using 101 physical (superconducting) qubits to encode 1 logical qubit. "
"Google is just scaling up a single logical qubit,"  ← Only this (fictitious) logical qubit consisting of multiple (superconducting) qubits can be used for calculation, so this Google research is about only one qubit that can take only 0 or 1 bit states with still high error rate, which is still Not a computer nor able to calculate anything.

↑ This research paper ↓

p.2-Fig.1a shows one logical qubit (= which can take only 0 or 1 ) consists of 105 (physical) qubits.

p.2-Fig.1c blue line shows conducting 250 error correction cycles increased errors to more than 20% error rate (= 0.2 ) instead of decreasing errors, so quantum error correction (= or decreasing quantum computer's errors ) is impossible.

p.6-right-2nd-paragraph says "Even so, many challenges remain ahead of us..., achieving a 10⁻⁶ error rate would require a distance-27 logical qubit using 1457 physical qubits."  ← To reduce error rate from this research's 0.143% to 10^-6, each logical qubit must consist of 1457 (physical) qubits (instead of 105 qubits ), which qubit number is still out of reach of today's (error-prone) quantum computer.

↑ Even one practical (logical) qubit cannot be realized (= even one bit 0 or 1 with no errors cannot be realized ), which means quantum computer research is already dead.

The 4th paragraph of this hyped news (9/8/2024) says

"This research.. helps us understand how to control the magnetic properties of materials.., which could (= just speculation ) lead to advancements in technology, such as more efficient electronics,.. data storage,.. computing devices that consume less energy."  ← hype.

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-abstract says nothing about any practical application such as energy-efficient data storage (= so useless research ), contrary to the above hyped news.

p.4-1st-paragraph-lower says "if present, is lower than 10K. Such a stronger contrast at lower temperatures of spin fluctuations between bulk and few layers is suggestive of different magnetic phases between 3D and 2D NiPS3. "

p.11 used NV-center in diamond and raman (= light ) measurement to vaguely estimate magnetic fluctuation (= not spin ) change

p.13~14 shows just nonphysical spin model (= No shape ) whose exchange coupling parameters J were artificially chosen to fit experiment with No quantum mechanical prediction ( this p.8-Table.2 ).  ← so No evidence of quantum spin nor (unphysical) exchange energy.

↑ They just vaguely estimated magnetic fluctuation change of the material (= using unphysical useless model ) at temperature lower than room temperature (= so Not energy-efficient at all ) with No practical use, which needs overhyped fake news such as "energy-efficient data storage device".

The 7th. 12th paragraphs of this hyped news (9/8/2024) say

"A warp drive is a hypothetical form of technology that compresses the space in front of a starship and expands it behind."

"While mathematically, one can describe material with negative energies, almost everything we know appears to have a positive energy"

↑ Today's mainstream physics pursues only fictional warp drive with paradoxical negative mass (= negative energy, this 7th-paragraph ).

The 1st, 5th paragraphs of this hyped news (9/8/2024) say

"researchers have documented for the first time the unique chemistry dynamics and structure of high-temperature liquid uranium trichloride (UCl3) salt, a potential (= still unrealized ) nuclear fuel source "

"The research,.. the University of South Carolina, used a combination of computational approaches and.. Neutron Source,.. to study the chemical bonding and atomic dynamics of UCl3.."

↑ This research paper's p.7-1st-paragraph used extremely time-consuming ab-initio molecular dynamics (= AIMD = only 100ps simulation ), one-pseudo-electron DFT model (= lacking real atomic picture ) with artificially-chosen pseudo-potential, Hubbard parameter U, empirical Grimme's D3 intermolecular energy functional.

↑ Free choice of various pseudo-potentials and parameters means No quantum mechanical prediction, and this unphysical shapeless quantum mechanism model just hampers technological development including nuclear energy.

The 1st and last paragraphs of this hyped news (9/8/2024) say

" A recent study,.. which proposes the use of molecular "cages" (made of pseudopeptides) to selectively eliminate cancer cells in acidic microenvironments."

"These results will (= uncertain future, still unrealized ) help to understand and improve the design of these ionophores with potential therapeutic applications in cancer treatment,"

↑ This research paper ↓

p.10-11 used extremely time-consuming molecular dynamics, which could simulate only ~ 150ns change of the above pseudo-peptide cage (= chrolide-complex ) penetrating the lipid-bilayer membrane.

↑ This extremely-time-consuming molecular dynamics due to lack of real atomic shapes in unphysical quantum mechanics cannot simulate much-longer (= seconds ~ hours ) important biological reaction, so hampers technological development for curing cancers and biology.

The 1st and 2nd paragraphs of this hyped news (9/15/2024) say

"the group used a linearly polarized laser pulse.. to create the spin currents"  ← An electron is Not spinning, so spin current is just a slight temporary (useless) magnetic fluctuation by electron's orbit.

"Theory has suggested (= just speculation, still useless ) they could lead to electronic devices that run faster—they are also expected to be more efficient, reducing energy costs (= hype )."

No practical use, contrary to overhyped fake news.

↑ This research paper ( this ↓ )

p.2-abstract says nothing about any practical application such as the dreamlike energy-efficient electronic device (= so useless spin research ), contrary to the above hyped news.

p.3-Fig.1 shows they excited the material with laser light, and created transient magnetic fluctuation detected by probe light change (= unreal electron spin itself is unmeasurable ).

p.3-right-middle says "In this 200fs-long trace"  ← This transient magnetic fluctuation (= fake spin current ) is too short-lived to use for practical application.

p.5-right-29th-sentence~ says "However, the calculation overestimates the change of Pt moment, compared to the experiment."  ← some quantum mechanical calculation disagreed with experiment.

The 2nd and last paragraphs of this hyped news (9/15/2024) say

"The emission direction of a photoelectron released by light relative to the remaining bound electron in the cleaved neutral hydrogen atom can be controlled by the time interval between two laser flashes"

"While it is too early to design a viable quantum computer based on this idea, it provides the fundamental physics insights for programming quantum information (= hype )"

↑ This research paper p.1-abstract says nothing about the hyped quantum computer nor information, so useless research that just excited hydrogen atoms by laser light.

The 3rd, 4th paragraphs of this hyped (9/15/2024) news say

"the group overlapped several laser beams to create a quasiperiodic pattern,.. When filling the resulting structure with ultracold atoms, cooled... to absolute zero, the atoms formed the Bose glass (= useless unphysical concept )."

"it can also help to advance quantum computing (= hype )," said Professor.. at the Cavendish Laboratory, "

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-abstract says nothing about practical use nor quantum computing, contrary to the above overhyped news (= so deadend quantum computer is used as a fake target for impractical quantum mechanical research like this ).

p.2-right-2nd-paragraph says this research just trapped cold potassium atoms by laser light whose some potential pattern was called (impractical) Bose glass (= p.3-Fig.2 )

(Fig.M)  Microsoft/Quantinuum 56 ion qubits divided into only 12 or 4 logical qubits are still error-prone, Not a computer. ↓

Microsoft error-prone qubits are useless, deadend, still Not a computer.

The 2nd paragraph of this hyped news (= apart from deceptive hybrid computer,  9/15/2024) says

"Quantinuum's H2 machine, which now has 56 (ion) qubits... all 12 logical qubits were.. a cat state, or Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state... error rate of 0.0011 (= 0.11%, this error rate is bad, still far higher than practically-required error rate of 10^-15, this p.1-abstract )"

↑ Today's quantum computer is useless, too error-prone to calculate anything, so they needed to prepare a (fictitious) logical qubit consisting of multiple physical qubits (= this research divided 56 ion qubits into 12 logical qubits ).

When a logical qubit is 0 bit state, all physical qubits composing one logical qubit also must take the same 0 state.  Errors of some physical qubits can be corrected by compared with other intact physical qubits inside a logical qubit based on majority vote ( this 5~6th-paragraphs ).

So this latest research's just 12 (logical) qubits (= each logical qubit can take only 0 or 1 state ) is useless, still Not a computer nor able to calculate anything.

They just tried to make all 12 qubits 0 or 1 state (= 000000000000 or 111111111111 ) without calculating anything, which useless simple qubit manipulation is called GHZ cat state.

They discarded erroneous results without error correction by illegitimate postselection.

Furthermore, there is a catch.  Even this Microsoft's latest 12 qubits could Not correct errors, instead, they just illegitimately discarded erroneous qubits postselectively ( this 5th-paragraph ).  ← Because operation of error correction itself increases errors, so all they could do was just discard (= ignore ) error results without error correction.

This 11th paragraph says "operations and calculations discarded due to errors that could not be corrected. This is still not low enough to enable the large number of operations needed for useful algorithms ( this 8th-paragraph )"  ← still useless, error-prone qubits.

Even just 4-qubit error correction was impossible.  Quantum computer was officially dead.

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-right-last-paragraph says "two faults may bring the system to an uncorrectable state. When an uncorrectable state is detected, our fault-tolerance procedure rejects (= discard ) the trial. This “postselection (= cheating, this 6th-paragraph )” means that more trials are needed.. The acceptance rates in our experiments are at least 50%"  ← about 50% results were discarded due to errors, so this research's actual error rates were about 50%, which was too bad, hopeless.

p.11-left-last-paragraph says "This is why we ran the four-qubit error correction experiment on H2. Early experiments with five rounds of error correction on 12 logical qubits.. have shown a potentially problematically high error rate 2%"  ← Error correction of just 12 qubits was impossible in this research.

p.11-Fig.13-(b) shows just 50 rounds of error correction operations on just 4 (logical) qubits (= p.8-Table-III) increased the error rate to more than 1%, even after they illegitimately discarded 80% of all results due to errors (= acceptance probability was only 0.2 or 20% ) without error correction.

As shown here, today's quantum error correction is completely useless, just increasing errors instead of decreasing errors even in very small numbers of qubits (= just 4 qubits ), even if they illegitimately discarded erroneous qubits postselectively without error correction.

Microsoft and many other media intentionally avoid mentioning "(illegitimate) postselection", because today's error-prone quantum computer can never reach final correct answers, if they discard erroneous results postselectively in large calculation.

This 19~20th-paragraphs say a future practical quantum computer will need 1000 ~ 100000 logical qubits consisting of more than millions of physical qubits, which is impossible to realize forever.

The 4-5th paragraphs of this hyped news say (9/15/2024)

"Osaka University and Fujitsu say their new calculation method will (= just speculation, still useless ) enable quantum computers to perform calculations more quickly than supercomputers without having to significantly upscale their qubits.

"They say calculations would be possible using only 60,000 qubits (= still far from reality ) -- substantially less than the 1 million qubits that are believed to be required. They say it is theoretically (= just pie-in-the-sky theory with No experimental realization ) possible for a quantum computer to analyze superconducting materials in only about 10 hours compared to around five years for a supercomputer."

Just pie-in-the-sky theory with No experimental verification.

↑ This (= p.29-last ) research paper ( this ↓ )

p.3-right-2nd-paragraph says "we focus on the scheme of the Adiabatic State Preparation (ASP) as a deterministic method to prepare the ground state"  ← This finding the lowest-energy ground state by adiabatic method as shown in D-Wave proved to be fake quantum computer (= there is a much faster classical computer's method ).

p.7-left-2nd-paragraph says " expanding the scope of runtime analysis to encompass a wider variety of classical methods is imperative. In this study, we concentrated on the DMRG and variational PEPS algorithms due to their simplicity in runtime analysis"  ← Only two (slower) classical methods such as DMRG (= p.6-left-3rd-paragraph ) and PEPS were considered in this research.

↑ There are much faster classical computer's methods for finding ground-state adiabatically, so this research did Not prove (future) quantum computer's advantage at all.

The 1st and 3rd paragraphs of this hyped news (9/15/2024) say

"group has designed a new complex material with emerging properties in the field of spintronics. This discovery, published in the journal Nature Materials, opens up a range of fresh possibilities (= still unrealized ) for the development of novel, more efficient and more advanced electronic devices, such as those that integrate magnetic memories into processors (= hype )."

"we studied the stacking of two layers of graphene and tungsten selenide (WSe2)... If the two layers are placed one on top of the other and rotated at a precise angle, a spin current (= just magnetic fluctuation ) is generated in a desired specific direction"

↑ This research paper ( this ↓ )

p.1-abstract says nothing about the efficient magnetic memories or anything, contrary to the above hyped news.

p.4-Fig.2 conducted experiment at very low temperature of 100K (= cannot be used at room temperature, so this is a useless, energy-inefficient device )

p.10-16th-17th sentences say "the estimated values of ψ are about three times larger than the prediction."  ← Theoretical prediction disagreed with experimental results.

The 1st-paragraph of this hyped news (9/15/2024) says

"(impractical) theory to shed light on the intricate processes involved in converting carbon dioxide (CO2) into valuable chemicals like ethylene and ethanol. This research holds significant promise (= still useless )"

↑ This research paper ↓

p.9-DFT details tried to treat the whole molecules as one-pseudo-electron DFT model with artificially-chosen pseudo-potential and empirical DFT-D2 intermolecular energy functional.  ← No quantum mechanical prediction.

p.9-right-1st-paragraph used impractically-time-consuming ab-initio molecular dynamics (= MD ) that just simulated only 10ps motion of a small molecule, which cannot simulate much-longer (= seconds ~ hours ) important chemical or biological reactions.

So today's science stops progressing by impractical quantum mechanical DFT and MD.

Building (just) 32 qubits is still impossible,  a practical computer is far from reality.

The 2nd paragraph of this hyped news (9/22/2024,  or this 7~9th-sentences ) says

"MinIon, the first mobile variant of Oxford Ionics’ quantum computers,.. The first generation of the system will (= still unrealized now ) have (just) 32 high-fidelity qubits (= each qubit can take only 0 or 1 state, which is still Not a computer )"

Mobile quantum computer for cybersecurity is far from reality, which is just overhyped fake news.

The 2nd paragraph of this hyped news (9/22/2024) says

"QPerfect’s advanced MIMIQ virtual quantum computer ( this 3rd-paragraph )"  ← virtual quantum computer is Not a real quantum computer but a classical computer's simulation.

The 9th paragraph of this hyped news (9/22/2024) says

"Using physical approximations, the study theoretically demonstrated that ~"  ← This research ( this abstract ) just showed the (pie-in-the-sky) theory with No experimental realization.

(Fig.T)   Fault-tolerant topological quantum computer based on non-existent quasiparticle is a fake target created for today's deadend physics.

Just pie-in-the-sky theory with No experimental realization

The 1st, 9-10th paragraphs of this hyped news (9/22/2024) say

"The topological quantum computer still exists only in theory (= just pie-in-the-sky theory ) but, if possible, would be (= just speculation) ..
However, it requires a special type of qubit (quantum bit) that has yet to be realized and manipulated."  ← even one qubit has Not been realized ( due to lack of reality ).

"Even though the only fundamental particles in the circuit are electrons, collectively they can behave as if the electron has been split in two"  ← impossible !

"The result is a so-called "Majorana fermion (= just fictional quasiparticle with fractional charge )".. but as yet not isolated experimentally. The finding is potentially important for.. (= just speculation, still useless )"

↑ This research ( p.9~ ) is just about unphysical impractical theory without conducting experiments.

The 1st paragraph of this hyped news (9/22/2024) says

"scientists have made a breakthrough in understanding the "pseudogap,".. The discovery, presented in Science, will (= still useless ) help scientists in their quest for room-temperature superconductivity, a holy grail of condensed matter physics that would (= speculation ) enable lossless power transmission, faster MRI machines (= hype )"

↑ This research paper ( this ↓ )

p.1-abstract talks only about fictional quasiparticle model in superconductor's energy pseudo-gap ( this middle ), and says nothing about practical use (= so useless research ), contrary to the above hyped news.

↑ This research is just an imaginary theory (= No experiment was conducted ) about unphysical model lacking real particle picture.

The 5th, 9th paragraphs of this hyped news (9/22/2024) say

"chromium oxide with a dash of boron—could help herald the emergence of digital memory and processors that consume far less power, while potentially (= just speculation ) running even faster, than their modern-day counterparts"

"With NV microscopy, researchers can directly image the boundary magnetization (= detect just magnetization, Not unphysical spin ) and see the effects of the B-doping"

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-abstract says nothing about practical use (= so the so-called spintronics is useless ), contrary to the above hyped news.

↑ This research just tried to measure very small magnetization change in doped antiferromagnets by measuring the energy levels of nitrogen-vacancy (= NV ) center in diamond (= very old technique just measuring vague magnetic field, Not a fictional spin ) with No practical use.

The 5-7th, 11th paragraphs of this hyped news (9/22/2024 ) say

"they always have some energy because of those tiny flickers of quantum field (= Not zero energy, so the phrase of empty space in the headline is untrue )"

"When Alice makes a measurement on her qubit, it both reveals information about the qubit’s fluctuations and slightly increases its energy ( this 10th-paragraph )."  ← The act of measurement increased (= injected ) energy (= No more zero energy )

"Then Alice calls Bob and communicates the details of the measurement (= ordinary classical communication was needed in meaningless teleportation )
Bob harvest the extra energy from his half of the qubit pair. Crucially, he then transfers that energy to a third qubit (= Not by quantum teleportation ) "

"that was more akin to a simulation rather than an experiment (= this research is just a mere simulation rather than experimental realization )"

↑ This research just injected, extracted and transferred real energy that was Not extracted from 'empty space (= contrary to the headline )', so Not a magical research. They used only 3 impractical IBM qubits (= one qubit can take only 0 or 1 state, this is Not a computer at all, this p.4-Fig.3 )

(Fig.H)   Hybrid quantum-classical computer for simulating fluid dynamics was just a classical computer, and the error-prone useless quantum computer was Not used.

Hybrid computer is just a classical computer.  Quantum computer is useless, unable to calculate anything.

The 1st, 2nd, 6th, 8th paragraphs of this hyped news (9/22/2024) say

"BQP, a startup.., today announced.. simulating Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). The milestone was achieved using a hybrid quantum-classical solver"  ← this (deceptive) hybrid computer is Not a quantum computer but an ordinary classical computer.

"they estimated (= just guessed, No realization ) that large-scale CFD simulation of a jet engine can be achieved with only 30 logical qubits (= which mean the ideal non-existent errorless 30 qubits ) on a quantum computer, leading to better accuracy,"

"by simulating a non-linear time-dependent Partial Differential Equation (PDE) from 4 to all the way to 11 qubits"  ← this research used only 4 ~ 11 (ideal) qubits (= one qubit can take only 0 or 1 state ) that is still Not a quantum computer.

"BQP believes that BQPhy’s solver will (= just speculation, still unrealized ) allow CFD engineers to simulate a full aircraft (= hype )"

They ended up using classical computer's simulator of the ideal (= non-existent ) errorless 4 ~ 11 qubits.   Quantum computer was Not used after all, contrary to the headline.

↑ This research paper ↓

p.2-right-4th-paragraph says "combines strengths of Variational Quantum Algorithm (VQA) and classical linear algebra."  ← This hybrid VQA is useless, depending on artificially-chosen input data.

p.4-Fig.3 shows almost all calculations must be performed by an ordinary classical computer, so quantum computer with a tiny number of qubits was useless (= they had to take extra trouble to change some process into one usable for the impractical quantum computer, which took more unnecessary time ).

p.4-right-2nd-paragraph about the process says "We have utilized IBM Qiskit AerSimulator (GPU-enabled)"  This research just conducted classical computer's (= GPU ) simulation of qubits instead of using real (impractical) quantum computers.  ← So No quantum computer was used after all even in quantum computer's PDE solver (= p.4-left.B ).

p.6-right-2nd-paragraph says "When the HQCFM presented in this research is run on an ideal quantum computer, this same problem could be tackled using only 30 qubits"  ← 'Ideal' means errorless 30 (logical) qubits (= like a classical computer's simulator ) that are impossible to achieve ( this p.3-1st~3rd-paragraphs ).

p.7-Fig.6 shows this research used only 4 ~ 11 (ideal, non-existent ) qubits on classical computer's simulator.

↑ It is impossible to achieve quantum computer's advantage by using hybrid quantum-classical computers, because the hybrid computer's calculation of data heavily relies on the classical computer ( this p.15-1st-paragraph ).

↑ If the ideal errorless quantum computer (= unrealized forever ) is available, the hybrid computer is unnecessary. so the quantum advantage by the hybrid computer is contradictory.

The 7-8th paragraphs of this hyped news (9/22/2024) say

"they recorded simple hand gestures such a swipe left or right with Range-Doppler radar, employing two .. radar sensors. The radar data is then converted into corresponding voltages to be fed into the reservoir.."

"Two of the contacts supply the voltage, which causes the skyrmion (= fictional useless quasiparticle representing magnetic swirling ) to move within the triangle... These movements of the skyrmion enable us to deduce the movements that the radar system has recorded."

↑ This research paper ↓

p.2-Fig.1 detected just magnetic fluctuation change (= fictional skyrmion quasiparticle itself was undetectable ) induced by input voltage through detecting light polarization change (= classical magneto-optical Kerr effect was used )

p.3-Fig.3 shows the error rates of about 20% (= accuracy is about 0.8 ) for distinguishing just four hand gesture patterns by two radar sensors and (fictional) skyrmion magnetic detection, data-trained (still-impractical) neural network system.  ← 20% error rate is too bad to be a practical hand gesture recognition system.

p.4-right-1st-paragraph says "the (fictional skyrmion) reservoir is competitive and can even exhibit superior performance compared to state-of-the-art software-based classification methods"  ← which means these software-based methods were bad, and does Not mean the fictional skyrmion quasiparticle (= just magnetic fluctuation ) may be useful for practical purpose.

↑ We can easily distinguish 4 different gestures by using 2 radar sensors (= 1 = one sensor detects,  2 = the other sensor detects,  3 = both sensors detect,  4 = neither sensors detects. ) with 100% accuracy, even without the expensive complicated magnetic (= skyrmion ) detecting system nor the error-prone (neural network) software.

So the (fictional) skyrmion quasiparticle is useless.

(Fig.D)  Today's science stops progressing by unphysical quantum mechanical DFT (= density functional theory expressing material as one-pseudo-electron with No real atomic shapes ) and extremely-time-consuming molecular dynamics (= MD ) methods

The last paragraph of this hyped news (9/22/2024) says

"EnT photocatalysis has a lot of potential and is attracting more attention, but EnT events still remain a largely unexplored area for computational chemistry"  ← mechanism is still Not clarified by (useless) quantum mechanics.

↑ This research paper (p.9-left) used the unphysical one-pseudo-electron DFT with empirically-determined B3LYP-D3BJ exchange-correlation energy functional ( this p.2-4th-paragraph ) and artificially-chosen pseudo-potential.

↑ No quantum mechanical prediction, and this unphysical quantum mechanical DFT model lacking real atomic shapes prevents clarifying real atomic mechanism forever.

The last paragraph of this hyped news (9/22/2024) says

"The results show that graphene-based heterostructures have great potential (= just speculation, still useless ) for the next generation of spintronic devices"

↑ This research paper this ↓

p.3-Fig.1 used ARPES (= old instrument with No practical use ) that just measured scattered direction of electrons excited by light.  ← fictional spin itself is undetectable.

p.9-right-theoretical calculation used one-pseudo-electron DFT model with unphysical plane wave (= lacking real atomic shape, hampering science ).

↑ This DFT used full-potential (= instead of pseudo-potential ) that must also artificially choose various free parameters such as atomic (Muffin-tin) radius and energy parameters ( this p.6-right-1st-paragraph chose muffin-tin radius, p.13-right-appendix-1st-paragraph chose energy parameters )  ← No quantum mechanical prediction.

The last paragraph of this hyped news (9/22/2024) says

"This study represents the first step in controlled silk layering on functional electronic components. Key areas of future (= still useless now ) research..."

↑ This research paper (p.8) conducted the extremely time-consuming molecular dynamical (= MD ) simulation of just 500ns motion of some silk molecules (this p.26 ) that is useless, unable to simulate much-longer important reaction, so hampering science.

The 1st, 3rd paragraphs of this hyped news (9/22/2024) say

"Researchers.. have developed an artificial motor at the supramolecular level that can develop impressive power. This wind-up motor is a tiny ribbon made of special molecules"

"In the future (= still useless ), the new development could be used in nanorobots (= hype )"

Extremely-slow, easily-broken useless mini-motor, which cannot be simulated even by today's fastest molecular simulating method or molecular dynamics (= MD ).

↑ This research paper ↓

p.3-Scheme 1 shows some peptide ribons and chemical reaction used.

p.6-Figure.2G shows this peptide's spinning speed (= extremely-slow, only one rotation per 16 minutes, p.9-Fig.3C ) decreases just after several rotations (= 25 minutes, rpm = revolution per minute is almost zero ), which is useless.

p.50-2nd-last paragraph says the extremely-time-consuming MD (= molecular dynamics ) simulated only 5ns, which could Not simulate even one rotation (= taking more than 10 minutes ) of this mini-motor, so completely useless MD simulation in this research.

(Fig.I)  Just 36 qubits or 36 bitstring with a lot of errors is still Not a computer.   No practical application. ↓

Insider brief of this hyped news (9/29/2024) says

"IonQ has signed a $54.5 million contract with the U.S. Air Force Research Lab..... will focus on scaling, networking... contracts with Amazon web service."

↑ This IonQ has made only impractical error-prone 36 ion qubits (= each qubit can take only 0 or 1 states, so 36 qubits is still Not a quantum computer that will need at least millions of qubits (= quantum bits ),  this-lower-About ionQ,  this p.4-3.2,  this-summary ).

These trapped ion type qubits can never be scaled up to the level of quantum advantage ( this or this summary ).

Actually IonQ itself admits the hype, as shown in the last of site saying
"IonQ does Not give any assurance that it will achieve its expectations".

The 2nd and 2nd-last paragraphs of this hyped news (9/29/2024) say

"one of the most popular hybrid algorithms (= hybrid algorithm is just an ordinary classical computer ): the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA). QAOA is considered a variational algorithm and is used to find solutions to optimization problems. A Variational Quantum Algorithm (VQA).. refined by classical optimizers"

"it will also take time to be fully applicable... The transition to quantum computing can be a challenge"  ← quantum computer is still useless.

The 3rd paragraph of this recent news (2024) admits
"Quantum computing today provides No tangible advantage over classical computing in either commercial or scientific applications"

Contrary to hypes, not only quantum computer but also the hybrid computer is also useless with No practical use due to the quantum computer's errors ( this-lower What are the challenges ).

This p.2-left-3rd-paragraph says "QAOA (= hybrid algorithm ) remains impractical when a full optimization outer loop is required"

The last paragraph of this hyped news (9/29/2024) says

"I am looking forward to seeing how the protocol behaves under experimental imperfections and its practical realization,"  ← this means this research just proposed a (impractical) theory without conducting any experiments.

↑ It seems both corporations and academia feel No guilt about spreading overhyped fake news to hinder today's science forever.

(Fig.E)  Quantum mechanics has to rely on fictional exciton quasiparticle model to explain electrons transiently excited by light, which is useless.

The 4th, 7th, 12th paragraphs of this hyped news (9/29/2024) say

"Electrons and holes attract each other and form.. an exciton,... If another electron is nearby, it is pulled towards it to form a three-particle state—known as a trion (= both exciton and trion are fictional quasiparticles )"

"The researchers first illuminated.. molybdenum diselenide at cryogenic temperatures (= Not room temperature, so impractical switch ) with short laser pulses, generating the excitons"

"The results could also become useful for future (= imaginary future, so still useless exciton ) applications, for example in sensor technology or optical data processing (= hype )."

↑ This research paper's abstract says nothing about the detailed practical application such as sensors and data processing, so useless quasiparticle research contrary to the above hyped news.

↑ This research's supplementary information ↓

p.3(p.2) Fig.S1 temperature was impractically low = 5K (= cannot be used at room temperature )

p.9(p.8) shows this research just measured light transiently interacting with material where the fictional unseen quasiparticles such as exciton and trion were too short-lived (= lifetime is only pico-second,  this p.2-left-1st-paragraph ) to be any practical application such as switch.

The 1st, 2nd paragraph of this hyped news (9/29/2024) say

"A research group.. has observed the cooperative behavior of polaron quasiparticles (= unreal ) formed by the collective interaction of electrons and lattice vibrations around color centers in diamond crystals."

"The discovery was achieved by irradiating diamond crystals containing color centers with ultrashort laser pulses and precisely analyzing the resulting reflectance changes."  ← this research just measured laser light reflectance change, Not fictional quasiparticles.

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-abstract says nothing about practical use, so useless quasiparticle research.

p.6-right used one-pseudo-electron DFT model with artificially-chosen pseudo-potential lacking real atomic shapes = No quantum mechanical prediction

The 9-10th last paragraphs of this hyped news (9/29/2024) say

"Using our.. X-ray microscope, we were even able to observe the predicted spin waves (= they just measured X-ray affected by material's magnetization, Not fictional spin )"

"we have demonstrated that the direction of these spin waves can be dynamically steered by simply adjusting the magnitude of the applied current (= electric current was used to excite the transient magnetic fluctuation or fictitious spin wave )."

"opens up new possibilities (= just possibilities, still unrealized ) for creating reprogrammable magnonic (= fictional quasiparticle representing the useless magnetic fluctuation or spin wave ) circuits, which could lead to more adaptable and energy-efficient computing systems (= hype )"

Spin wave (= magnetic fluctuation ) losing energy too easily is too short-lived to be practical, contrary to hypes.

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-abstract says nothing about the detailed practical use such as energy-efficient computers (= so useless quasiparticle research ) contrary to the above overhyped news.

p.9-right~p.10-left used fictitious spin wave model whose parameters were artificially-chosen without quantum mechanical prediction (= so No evidence of quantum spin ).

↑ The lifetime of the spin wave (= just transient unstable magnetic fluctuation ) is only nanoseconds, and spin wave can propagate only micrometers (= spin wave loses energy too easily, meaning very energy-inefficient, contrary to hyped narrative ), which too short-lived spin wave cannot be used for any practical application.

(Fig.E)  Just measuring orbiting electrons → fictional magnetic monopole ?  ← quantum mechanical interpretation lacks reality.

The 3rd, 8th, 11th paragraph of this hyped news (9/29/2024) say

"the orbital angular momentum (OAM) of electrons orbiting their atomic nucleus:... a large magnetization could potentially (= just speculation, still useless ) be.. leading to energy-efficient devices (= hype )"

"Why these monopoles are so tantalizing is that OAM is uniform in all directions:"  ← This monopole is fictional quasiparticle consisting of electron's orbits in various directions.

"In ARPES, light shines on a material, ejecting electrons. The angles and energies of these ejected electrons reveal information on the electronic structure of the material..."  ← So they just measured electrons ejected by incident light to imagine fictional monopoles.

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-abstract makes No mention of the detailed practical application such as energy-efficient devices (= so useless fictional monopole research ), contrary to the above hyped news.

p.10-left-last says "the sample held around 20K"  ← needing extremely-low temperature, very energy-inefficient and impractical.

The 1st paragraphs of this hyped news (9/29/2024) says

"A new technology to continuously place individual atoms exactly where they are needed could (= just speculation ) lead to.. quantum computing and communication"

↑ This research paper's abstract says nothing about any practical application including quantum computing, contrary to the above hyped news.

We already have the excellent technology of manipulating individual atoms, but the unphysical quantum mechanical (quasiparticle) model spoils it, and leads researchers toward fictional deadend quantum computer research.

The 1st and last paragraphs of this hyped news (9/29/2024) say

"However, topological insulators fail to maintain this lossless 'magic' at room temperature."  ← Topological insulator is useless, far from lossless energy (= cannot be used at room temperature, this 1st, 7-8th paragraphs = wasting a lot of energy)

"A clear understanding of electron-phonon (= fictional quasiparticle ) interactions..., which would potentially (= just speculation, still unrealized ) enhance the stability and scalability of quantum computers (= hype. The fictional topological quantum computer still has not realized even one qubit )"

(Fig.I)  IBM's latest Heron with only 156 qubits is deademd, useless, error-prone, far from millions of qubits required for a practical quantum computer.

The 4-5th-paragraphs of this hyped news (10/6/2024) say

"IBM’s Heron quantum processors offer (only) 156 qubits...
discovering the vast potential (= still unrealized ) of quantum computers across materials design, sustainability, life sciences, finance (= hype )"

↑ Even this IBM latest Heron quantum computer still has only 156 useless qubits (= each qubit can take only 0 or 1 state, so just 156-bitstring is still Not a computer at all ).

Practical quantum computer is said to need more than millions of qubits ( this 4th-paragraph ), which shows the present quantum computer research (= still only 156 qubits, IBM's hyped 1000-qubit machine is an impractical dummy, this 3rd-paragraph ) is already deadend, hopeless.

Furthermore, this latest Heron qubit error rate is still much higher (= each qubit error rate is 1.2 × 10^-3 = No progress from the older 127-qubit error-prone eagle,  this-p.5-Fig.2-lower ) than practically-required error rate of 10^-15 ( this 5th-paragraph ).

This recent site's middle~ "How far are quantum computers from other applications ?" shows a pessimistic view on (hopeless) quantum computer;

" PsiQuantum's proposed computer will be too small to run most quantum applications."

"Other applications, such as factoring for code-breaking, require at least "20 million physical qubits (= today's impractical quantum computer has only 100 qubits )"

"That's what people mean by utility scale. We have a high bar to jump"

"There is Not yet consensus around what the first quantum computing use case will be or when it will arrive"

↑ No hope of a real quantum computer that will need millions of qubits (= impossible to achieve forever )

(Fig.D)  Quantum simulator is Not a quantum computer but an ordinary classical computer.

The 1st and 3rd paragraph of this site (10/6/2024) say

"DOOM has been ported to quantum computers,... However, the coder behind this feat admits that there is currently No quantum computer capable of executing (playing) this code right now.... as Quandoom can run on a classical computer, even a modest laptop, using a lightweight QASM simulator."

"Quandoom's quantum computer minimum specs are quite steep.. the QASM code requires 72,376 qubits and 80 million gates.... as there is No such quantum computer available with that kind of spec. Thankfully DOOM fans can sidestep the physical hardware requirements on their home PCs (= classical computer ) by running the code in a QASM simulator."

↑ So today's quantum computers are still far from practical computers executing some programs or game.
There are only classical computer simulators (= QASM simulator ) of (still-non-existent) errorless qubits.

The 7th paragraphs of this hyped news (10/6/2024) say

"The new BlueQubit plugin for Pennylane supports large-scale quantum simulations, allowing users to simulate systems with up to 33 qubits"

↑ Just 33 qubits are still Not a computer nor large-scale at all (= each qubit can take only 0 or 1 bit state, and more than millions of qubits are necessary for practical application. this-5th-paragraph, which is impossible to achieve forever ).

Furthermore, this is Not a quantum computer but a quantum simulator run on an ordinary classical computer CPU or GPU ( this-middle ).  ← even just 33 error-corrected qubits are impossible to build now.  Quantum computer is deadend.

(Fig.A)  Quantum computer's AI is overhyped useless science unable to discover drugs.  D-Wave is a fake quantum computer with No quantum speed-up.

Quantum computer can never discover drugs.

The 2nd paragraph of this hyped news (10/6/2024) says

"the AI team in JT's pharmaceutical division will (= still unrealized ) utilize D-Wave's annealing quantum computing solutions... aiming to extend the applicable range.. in the drug discovery field (AI-driven Drug Design)"  ← hype

This site's 10th paragraph says
"quantum computing technology cannot be immediately applied to pharmaceutical companies for related production and research due to yet uncorrected loss and errors (= cannot be corrected )"

This-current challenges and limitations says
"Current quantum computers have limited qubits (= only 100 qubits ), and these qubits are prone to errors..
developing quantum algorithms that can outperform classical algorithms for practical drug discovery problems remains a significant challenge"

D-Wave quantum annealing is useless, error-prone, slower than classical computer.

Furthermore, quantum annealing (= QA ) like D-Wave (= just finding equilibrium state from input parameters without computation ), which is proven to be fake quantum computer slower than classical computer's best algorithm, can never discover drugs, contrary to hypes.

This-p.2-4th-paragraph says
"the current implementations of quantum annealing in optimisation are limited in size and Not yet upscaled to real-world situations"

This 10th-paragraph says
"It used an approach known as quantum annealing.. there was little evidence it provided any speed boost compared to classical approaches."

This p.3-2nd-paragraph says
"it (= quantum annealing ) does Not provide evidence of a fundamental or irrefutable performance benefit for this technology"

There is No such thing as artificial intelligence or AI (= today's useless AI falls far short of real human brain ).
So any (fake) AI regulations just add to unnecessary vested interests of the so-called 'expert' or academia by increasing burdens on other people.

The last paragraph of this hyped news (10/6/2024) says

"The next step will be to test the mathematical recipe on quantum hardware"  ← This hyped research is just about pie-in-the-sky theory without conducting any (hype) quantum computer experiments

(Fig.T)  Even Quantinuum (= world's best errorless) quantum computer has only 30 impractical error-prone qubits with 40% error rate.  ← Quantum computer is officially dead.

Just 3 error prone bits or qubits = Not a computer

The first and last paragraphs of this hyped news (10/6/2024) say

"A team of engineers and physicists at quantum computing company Quantinuum has conducted the first-ever teleportation (= just ordinary classical communication, this 1st-paragraph ) of a logical qubit using fault-tolerant methods (= hype )"

"The work by the team at Quantinuum represents yet another important step toward the development of a true quantum computer (= never happen )"

Even after 40% results were illegitimately discarded, the error rate was still impractically-high.

↑ This research paper ( this ↓ )

p.1-abstract-lower says logical process fidelity was 0.85, which means its error rate (= 1 - fidelity ) was impractically high = 15%.

p.1-left-2nd-paragraph says (only) 30 trapped ion qubits were used in this research.  ← far from the practically-required millions of qubits.

p.2-Fig.2~p.3-Fig.3 used only 3 logical qubits (= 010 ) consisting of 30 ion physical qubits ( each logical qubit can take only 0 or 1 state, which just 3 qubits is still Not a computer )

p.3-left-3rd-paragraph says "In this work, well-prepared Bell states are post-selected (= only good results luckily avoiding errors were post-selected without legitimate error correction )"

p.10 shows the discard fraction (in the illegitimate post-selection ) was 0.34 ~ 0.53 (= about 34% ~ 53% of results were discarded due to irreparable errors, so this latest Quantinuum's machine's actual error rate with only 3 qubits was about 40%, far from practical  ← drug discovery is hype, impossible )

The 2nd and last paragraphs of this hyped news (10/6/2024) say

"One of the possible realizations of such neural networks is through an artificial spin ice (ASI) lattice"

"The results bring us closer (= still unrealized ) to realization of energy-efficient neuromorphic computing (= hype )"

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-abstract made No mention of realizing "energy-efficient" device nor neuromorphic computing (= so useless research ), contrary to the above hyped news.

p.4-Fig.3 just measured vague magnetic field (= not spin ) of the hexagonal piece (= each piece is 1 micrometer, far bigger and bulkier than today's hard disc drive's compact bit of only 50nm, so Not energy-efficient at all ) by using magnetic force microscope with No computation nor utility.

The 5-7th, 10th paragraphs of this hyped news (10/6/2024) say

"Aptamers are short strands of nucleic acids (DNA or RNA) that bind specifically and strongly to target molecules"

"When an aptamer binds to its target, it triggers a structural change in the aptamer sensor such as folding or unwinding... regulates gene expression"

"the team successfully developed sensors capable of detecting drugs and antibiotics like theophylline and tetracycline as well as specific proteins such as MS2 produced by bacteria."

"This study opens up new possibilities (= still unrealized ) for the development of synthetic biosensors (= hype )"

↑ This research paper ↓

p.2-Figure.1 & p.13-5.Expreimental section used No (useless) quantum mechanical methods (= No Schrodinger equation, DFT nor MD was used in this research ), and just used ordinary macroscopic biological experimental methods without manipulating individual atoms (= without considering atomic interaction ) due to useless quantum mechanics.

↑ This research just prepared some RNA strands encoded into viral plasmid DNA. Some molecules bound to the RNA strands changed the RNA's structure and allowed ribosomes to produce jellyfish GFP protein from the RNA, which was detected by antibodies by flow cytometry in bacteria (= E.coli ).

↑ This method of using RNA as "sensor" of some molecules (= based on experience, Not by the useless quantum mechanical prediction ) can be applied only to isolated cells (= like bacterial cell ), which cannot be applied to human body, so useless.

(Fig.S)   Google's just 67 qubits output random meaningless numbers with error rate 99.9% = No quantum supremacy nor advantage ↓

Google quantum computers cannot correct errors, so quantum supremacy is impossible.

The 8-10th paragraphs of this hyped news (10/13/2024) say

"This high error rate means that to achieve quantum supremacy, you would need extremely proficient error-correction technologies — which do Not yet exist — or a quantum computer with millions of qubits"  ← today's (fake) quantum computer with far less than millions of qubits (= just 67 qubits ) can Not achieve quantum supremacy.

"However, error correction may still be required when machines scale up."  ← Today's quantum computer cannot correct errors, so No quantum supremacy.

"The scientists used a method known as random circuit sampling (RCS)"  ← just outputting random meaningless numbers with No practical use ( this-5th-paragraph,  this 3rd-paragraph ).

Google 67-qubit quantum computer just output random useless numbers with 99.9% error rates, which cannot prove quantum suprepmacy.

↑ The present quantum computers are too error-prone to give right answers (= meaning No quantum supremacy, No evidence of quantum superposition ), so the present fake quantum supremacy researches try to hide these errors into random meaningless numbers based on unfounded idea that the quantum computer may output random (meaningless) numbers through many simultaneous superposition or parallel-world states that cannot be emulated by classical computer with a single world ( this 6-7th-paragraphs ).

Actually, this research paper ( this p.5-right-1st-paragraph ) estimated (= didn't confirm ) that Google's 67-qubits' error rate outputting random numbers (= after 32 cycle random bit flip ) was about 99.9% (= fidelity was only 1.5 × 10^-3,  this 6~10th paragraphs ).

↑ Quantum computer's inability to get right answers with 99.9% error rates (= this error rate was also just an optimistic guess, because they cannot know true error rate from random numbers ) means it is impossible to prove quantum supremacy, because ordinary (practical) classical computers can always give right answers with No errors.

Actually, this 4th-paragraph says
"Google’s latest paper, published today in Nature, doesn't claim to demonstrate Quantum Supremacy"

So this kind of hyped site is fake news, except its last paragraph saying "However, random circuit sampling does Not have a real-world application".

This p.1-referee #1's 3rd-paragraph says
"the current form of the paper does not look suitable for Nature."  ← This negative response wouldn't have happened, if Google quantum computer 'really' achieved quantum supremacy or utility.

Insider brief of this hyped news (10/13/2024) says

"the development of the 72-qubit Wukong chip ( this 4th-paragraph )..
aiming (= still unrealized ) to enhance China’s capabilities in quantum computing applications across industries like logistics, pharmaceuticals (= hype )"

A (still-non-existent) practical quantum computer is said to need more than millions of qubits ( this 2nd-paragraph,  this 4th-paragraph ), so just 72 qubits (= one qubit can take only 0 or 1 state ) is useless for any application.

(Fig.N)  More Nobel prizes → university's tuition ↑  Tax, unnecessary regulations ↑  ← real science ?

The number of nobel prizes is proportional to skyrocketing tuition of ( American ) universities ?

This year's Nobel prizes in physics and chemistry were awarded to neural networks, machine-learning or AI.

But today's neural network or artificial intelligence (= AI ) is impractical, still far from actual human brain ( this 5th-paragraph ).
Drug discovery by AI is just baseless hype.

Some people may not know about AI or machine-learning in physics where researches on fictional extra-dimensional string theory, illusory short-lived particles in wasteful colliders, deadend-fusion try to use AI or machine learning in vain.
The hopeless quantum computer is still Not a computer or calculator, so it is irrelevant to AI, contrary to hypes.

Nobel prize in medicine went to microRNA.
This microRNA, which was found in natural organisms (= Not created by quantum mechanics ), still has no practical application ( this 2nd-paragraph ).

These Nobel prizes were often awarded to American "expensive" universities.  ← The more Nobel prizes were awarded to universities' professors, the higher those universities' tuition becomes, the unhappier the students and taxpayers get ? (= the number of Nobel prizes is proportional to the rising tuition or student loan debt ? )

The still-impractical hyped AI tends to be used only as an excuse to increase unnecessary regulations or vested interests of some academic organization (= prestigious prizes and journals are exploited for this purpose ? ), which just make our life inconvenient and unhappy, contrary to the real science seen in industrial revolution that made our life convenient.

Today's AI, Alphafold giving just useless static protein structures cannot explain any dynamical mechanisms of proteins, enzymes, drugs.

(Fig.A)  Today's AI, Alphafold cannot simulate any protein conformational change, interaction, enzymatic reactions.  ← Finding drugs for cancers is impossible forever.

Curing cancers needs precise simulation of biological reactions or proteins' conformational change, which is impossible in today's hyped AI or Alphafold.

To cure cancers, researchers must find drugs that bind to only cancer cells, and destroy them by causing the target proteins' conformational change or artificial apoptosis.

Cells of cancers, Alzheimer, auto-immune diseases using ordinary humans' enzymes cannot be treated like HIV drugs targeting enzymes specific to the exogenous viruses.

So to treat cancers and Alzheimer, just finding some molecules binding to cancer cells (= which is possible in ordinary experiments that don't need AI or Alphafold ) does Not lead to finding effective treatments.  ← Cancer cells must be destroyed by artificial biological reactions (= motions ) based on precisely-designed proteins' conformational change.

↑ This simulation of proteins' conformational change or enzymatic reactions (= drug interaction ) is impossible for today's hyped AI or Alphafold that can give only useless static protein structures ( this 2nd-paragraph,  this-alphafold3-model-limitations ) similar to already-known protein structure data ( this p.2-right,  this 7th-paragraph ).

Protein structures inside bodies, which are always changing, are often different from ones registered in PDB database ( this 29~35th-paragraphs ), which is why it is extremely hard for Alphafold and all other AI methods (= unable to simulate proteins' change ) to find molecules binding (= docking ) to target proteins ( this 5~6th-paragraphs ).

Actually, this 8th-paragraph says "it (= Alphafold ) can't develop drugs or make anything new."

RoseTTafold also cannot predict protein structures precisely enough to discover effective drugs ( this 1.RoseTTAfold-cons ).

Today's AI, Alphafold have to rely on very old, impractically-time-consuming molecular dynamics (= MD ) to simulate molecular motion or biological reactions, which hampers science.

↑ Even the latest AI and Alphafold(2,3), which cannot deal with any molecular motion, have to rely on very old impractically-time-consuming molecular dynamics (= MD,  this p.1-left ) for simulating protein conformational change, biological reactions and drug interactions (= which often involve molecular motion ), which hampers science.

For example, in this recent research using Alphafold2 only for vaguely estimating some static proteins (= without modification or tail ) had to rely on the impractically-time-consuming MD to explain some membrane proteins' motion of only 500ns ( this p.6-MD-simulation ).

↑ Today's only molecular (or protein ) motional simulating method (= MD ) takes more than days to simulate just micro-second molecular motion ( this 3~5th-paragraphs ), which is too time-consuming to explain various important biological reaction of seconds ~ hours time scale ( this p.14-left-2nd-paragraph ).  ← No drug discovery

Today's biological or medical researches do Not use (useless) Alphafold or AI, contrary to hypes.

Another recent protein research used only very old MD ( and conventional macroscopic biological method without looking into detailed atomic interaction ), and did Not use (ueless) Alphafold or AI at all ( this p.10-only 500ns-MD simulation was conducted ).

To kill cancer cells, researchers have to simulate at least second~minute protein reactional (= conformation ) change, which is out of reach of today's impractical molecular dynamics (= MD ) and Alphafold-AI giving only static proteins.

Actually, another recent biological research did Not use any of (useless) quantum mechanics, MD nor Alphafold-AI ( this p.8-Method~p.11 used only conventional macroscopic biological tools such as immunochemistry, RNA sequencing without looking into detailed atomic interaction due to useless quantum mechanics ).

AI, Alphafold is just a 'cover' for protecting old impractical obsolete quantum mechanics, MD hampering technological development.

So today's overhyped AI, machine-learning, Alphafold, which look state-of-the-art, are just a cover for the old impractical quantum mechanics, extremely-time-consuming MD (= today's impractical mainstream science is the vested interest of academia ) hampering development of useful science (= today's AI or Alphafold does Not dare to invade the old sanctuary of MD, deadend molecular motion simulation area ).

The 3rd-last paragraph of this hyped news (10/13/2024) says

"He and his colleagues still have a lot of work to do. For a start, the researchers can only run their clock effectively for about 3 milliseconds. Longer than that, and the entanglement between atoms starts to slip, causing the atomic ticking to become chaotic."  ← too-easily broken,  completely useless entanglement

↑ This research paper ( this ).

p.1-abstract mentions GHZ state of only 4 ~ 9 qubits (= just 4 ~ 9 Sr atoms trapped in laser or optical lattice, p.2-Fig.1 )  ← Just making all 4 ~ 9 atoms the same energy state (= 0000 or 1111 = GHZ state ) by laser light has nothing to do with quantum entanglement

p.6-Fig.4c shows fidelity of 8 atoms or 8 qubits (= N = 8) is very bad = only 0.75, which means error rate is 25% far from precise atomic clock.

(Fig.C)  China's D-Wave with only 16 error-prone qubits could break 22 ~ 50-bit encryption key ?  ← this is overblown, far from today's encryption key of 2048 ~ 4096-bits.

Quantum computer is useless, deadend, far inferior to classical computer.

A recent Chinese paper claimed they could break military-grade encryption by using D-Wave annealing machine.

↑ This is untrue and just hype.

They just factored 22-bit ~ 50-bit numbers (= key ), which is far from the currently-used encryption key of 2024-bit ~ 4096-bit numbers ( this 3rd-paragraph,  this 2nd-last ~ last paragraphs ).

This 8~9th-paragraphs ( or this 6th~paragraphs ) say

"the attack was executed on a 22-bit key -- far shorter than the 2048- or 4096-bit keys commonly used in practice today. The suggestion that this poses an imminent risk to widely used encryption standards is misleading."

"quantum computing has Not reached a point where it can break current encryption."

Furthermore, D-Wave annealing machine, which is not a true quantum computer nor superior to classical computer, is too error-prone to factor such numbers.

So this Chinese research used only 16 (physical) qubits (= just 16 bitstring, one qubit can take only 0 or 1 state, which cannot factor any numbers ) of D-Wave annealer combined with classical computer as "hybrid ( this 3rd-paragraph,  this-lower,  this p.14-table-right-use translation )".  ← The error-prone D-Wave alone cannot factor any numbers without the help of classical computer.

Today's classical computer can factor 829-bit number key, which is far superior to today's useless quantum computers ( this p.2-right-lower ).

See also twin paradox is true.

The 1st, 4th paragraphs of this hyped news (10/20/2024) say

"Researchers have made a discovery that could make quantum computing more compact, potentially (= still unrealized ) shrinking essential components (= hype )"

"Our novel method to create entangled photon pairs.."

↑ This research paper's abstract says nothing about quantum computers, contrary to hypes.  ← This research has No practical use.

This research just created a pair of polarized weak light (= or photons  ← No superluminal entanglement ) with high error rate of 14% (= fidelity is 86% ) even after more than 99% photons were lost (= each photon detection efficiency is just 1.6%, this p.7 )  ← Photon quantum computer can never be realized due to the easily-lost photons (= very low detection efficiency ) and highest error rate.

(Fig.V)  Useless error-prone quantum computer makes physicists rely on (deceptive) 'hybrid' computer that is just a classical computer.

The 2nd, last paragraphs of this hyped news (or this 2nd,last-paragraphs, 10/20/2024) say

"Qunova Computing demonstrated chemical accuracy using a 20-qubit IQM machine"  ← Just 20 qubits (= one qubit can take only 0 or 1 ), which is far from practically-required millions of qubits, can Not conduct any practical calculation

"standard VQE algorithm, simplifying the problem and capturing only the essential data related to the molecular orbitals. These results were then processed on classical computers to quickly compute the lowest energy outcomes,"

↑ So they used an ordinary classical computer (+ error-prone useless 20 qubits ), which is Not a quantum computer but a classical computer.

↑ These (deceptive) hybrid computers such as VQE using very small numbers of error-prone qubits called NISQ can never outperform the ordinary classical computer, because the hybrid computer heavily relies on classical computer for almost all calculations and choosing better parameters (called ansatz ) that determine the hybrid computer's results ( this 11~13th paragraphs ).

↑ Dealing with calculations that cannot be executed by a classical computer is impossible in the hybrid computer using a classical computer for almost all calculations, so quantum advantage will never happen.

This p.2-left-1st-paragraph says
"We conclude that substantial quantum advantage in VQE-based quantum chemistry is unlikely, unless gate-errors are significantly reduced, or error-corrected hardware is realized (= never happen )"

The 7~8th paragraphs of this hyped news (10/20/2024) say

"By modulating the concentration of the neodymium to the concentration of the excitons (= fictional quasiparticle model ), we can end up using the neodymium as a kind of probe for the spins in the exciton"

"This is the same concept used in quantum computing..."

↑ This research paper ↓

p.1-abstract says nothing about practical use nor quantum computer (= so this research about fictional quasiparticle is irrelevant to quantum computers ), contrary to the above hyped news.

p.8-method used No quantum mechanical calculation.  ← No evidence of spin that whose unphysical model just hampers science.

(Fig.A)  Reason why all AI and Alphafold can never develop effective drugs.

The present AI, Alphafold looking only at the final whole protein structure without understanding individual atomic interaction and shapes can never predict protein conformational change.

Overhyped AI, machine-learning, Alphafold can never discover drugs.

Because all AI and Alphafold(-3, -2 ) just giving only (useless) static protein structures ( this 2nd-paragraph ) similar to experimentally-obtained protein database (= PDB ) on which they were trained are unable to explain protein conformational change, interaction and biological (= enzymatic) reactions ( this 7th-paragraph,  this p.6 ), because today's AI, Alphafold do Not understand or clarify true individual atomic mechanism ( due to unphysical quantum mechanics ).

When proteins interact with each other in protein docking, those proteins often need to change their conformations ( to fit ligands ) that often disagreed with protein structures registered in PDB database, which is why AI, Alphafold often failed to predict protein interactions ( this Synopsis,  this 5-6th-paragraphs,  this-Touching proteins-6th-paragraph ).

Even the latest Alphafold3's (= AF3's ) failure rate for predicting antibody docking is more than 60%, which is useless ( this p.1-abstract-lower, ).

Even the latest AI, Alphafold have to rely on very old impractical molecular dynamics (= MD ) for molecular dynamical simulation that hampers nano-technology.

To discover effective drugs or cure diseases such as cancers, precise design of protein conformational change and biological reactions (like selectively inducing artificial apoptosis of target cancer cells ) is indispensable, which simulation of dynamical motion is out of reach of today's AI and Alphafold-3 that can give only useless static protein structures.

Even in today's fashionable AI era, researchers have to rely on very old impractical molecular dynamics (= MD, 1950s~ ) lacking real atomic shapes to simulate protein conformational change by updating individual atomic positions by differentiating pseudo-potential called force field at short-time intervals, many, many times, which is too time-consuming to explain actual biological reactions ( this DiffDock-2nd-paragraph ).

So all of today's (hyped) AI, Alphafold and very old impractical MD are unable to develop effective drugs or cure cancers due to unphysical quantum mechanical model lacking real atomic shapes.

AI, machine-learning cannot explain new phenomena different from training data.  ← Finding new miracle drugs (= not existing now ) for curing cancers is impossible.

(Fig.D)  All AI, machine-learning Alphafold tools relying only on experimental data of the whole protein static structures cannot clarify true atomic interaction nor predict dynamical protein conformational change.  → Old time-consuming molecular dynamics (= MD ) hampers medical researches.

AI, Alphafold cannot explain dynamical protein motion.

This recent paper ↓

p.1-left says "AlphaFold,... typically generates only a few conformations for each protein sequence, despite the fact that proteins are inherently dynamic"  ← Alphafold AI cannot explain protein dynamical change.

p.1-right~p.2-left says "traditional docking methods often treat proteins as rigid (= Not considering molecular dynamical motion ).... As a result, AlphaFold predicted structures... do not align well with the ligand bound co-crystallized holo-structures"  ← Alphafold prediction often failed.

p.2-left-2nd-paragraph says "a challenge that has been formidable for other methods, such as molecular dynamics (MD) simulations (= today's only molecular simulating method MD is impractical )"

p.11-left-Dataset construction says "Our training and test dataset was built upon the PDBbind2020 database, which includes a curated collection of 19,443 crystal structures of protein–ligand complexes, each paired with an experimentally measured binding affinity"

↑ Unlike most AI methods such as Alphafold-3 that just give useless static protein structures, there are (only) 2 machine-learning methods called DynamicBind and NeuralPlexer2 which can slightly change protein conformations by obeying experimentally-obtained ( static ) protein-ligand complex database, Not by considering real atomic interaction.

So these DynamicBind and NeuralPlexer gave very worse prediction (= success rate is only 15% ) of protein-ligand structure against the newer experimentally-observed protein-ligand structure benchmark set ( this p.7-Fig.2 percentage of prediction is worse in new PoseBusters protein-ligand benchmark set,  this p.5-right ).

↑ The present AI, Alphafold (= just looking at the final whole protein structures as training sets ) without understanding individual atomic interaction or shapes can never clarify protein conformational change nor discover effective cure for cancers.

Al, machine-learning is deadend, wasting too much time in meaningless unphysical model.

This-recent paper's abstract concluded "We show that.. No deep learning-based method yet outperforms classical docking tools."

↑ It means the present AI, machine-learning, Alphafold have No advantage over the old (classical) protein docking tools.

↑ Nobel committee probably knew these negative results showing AI or machine-leaning are useless (= newest Alphafold3 also cannot deal with protein conformational change nor discover drugs, and its availability is limited ), but they awarded prizes to AI only for increasing unnecessary AI regulations and vested interests of some organization ?

The last paragraph of this hyped news (10/20/2024) says
"We will (= still unrealized ) now use the methods we have developed to produce molecules"

↑ This research paper's p.11 just used impractically-time-consuming old molecular dynamical simulation (= Not using Alphafold or AI giving only static proteins ) of very short 1 μs time scale that cannot simulate longer important biological reaction.

The 11th-paragraph of another hyped news (10/20/2024) says
"this breakthrough will (= just speculation, still unrealized ) further help accelerate"

↑ This research paper's p.11-right also used only impractically-time-consuming old MD (+ macroscopic biological method without looking into detailed atomic interaction ) without using (useless) alphafold nor AI.

The 1st and last paragraphs of this hyped news (10/20/2024) say

"A team of researchers.. has made a significant breakthrough in the fight against cancer by developing a highly selective inhibitor for an enzyme called Matrix Metallopeptidase 7 (MMP7). This enzyme plays a crucial role in cancer progression"  ← but this MMP7 enzyme dealing with (important) wound healing should Not be inhibited blindly.

"This research not only offers new hope (= just hope, still useless research ) for targeting MMP7.."

↑ This research paper's p.4~p.8 used only macroscopic chemical and biological methods without using any (useless) quantum mechanics, time-consuming MD nor AI-Alphafold.

The 1st paragraph of this hyped news (10/20/2024) says

"Oak Ridge National Laboratory have taken a major step forward in using quantum mechanics to enhance sensing devices, a new advancement that could (= just speculation, still useless ) be used in a wide range of areas"

↑ This research paper ↓

p.2-Fig.1 used just 2 weak lights (= 2 correlated photons ? ) emitted from excited Rb atoms going down two paths to image something (by comparing them ).  ← No quantum mechanics.

p.7-1st-paragraph says "the optimal classical measurement is one in which only a single beam coherent state is used to probe the system and no reference beam is used"  ← According to their definition, the use of a "single beam" seems to be "classical measurement", and the use of two weak lights emitted from Rb atoms was treated as "quantum".  ← this is just their artificial definition irrelevant to quantum mechanics or quantum advantage.

↑ There is No quantum mechanical advantage (= the use of two beams or two lights was treated as "quantum" that can be explained also as classical phenomena ) nor practical use in the so-called quantum sensing relying on very expensive photodetectors.

Feel free to link to this site.