Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1005.3776

Flux-qubit and the law of angular momentum conservation

А. В. Никулов

Published May 19, 2010• 3 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The confidence of many authors in the possibility to use superconducting loop interrupted by Josephson junctions as a basis for quantum bit, flux qubit, presumes the assumption on superposition of two macroscopically distinct quantum states with macroscopically different angular momentum. The contradiction of this assumption with macroscopic realism and the conservation law must call the numerous publications about flux qubit in question. These publications uncover misunderstanding by many modern physicists of the essence of the superposition principle. The Einstein - Podolsky - Rosen (EPR) correlation or entanglement, introduced in 1935 by opponents of the Copenhagen interpretation in order to reveal the contradiction of this principle with realism, has provided a basis of the idea of quantum computation. The problem of the EPR correlation has emerged thanks to philosophical controversy between the creators of the quantum theory about the subject of its description. Therefore it is impossible to solve correctly the problem of quantum computer creation without the insight into the essence of this philosophical controversy. The total neglect of the philosophical problems of quantum foundation results to concrete mistakes, the example of which are the publications about flux qubit. In order to prevent such mistakes in the future the philosophical questions about the essence of superposition and entanglement and about the subject of quantum description are considered.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1005.3776

Related papers

Contradiction between assumption on superposition of flux-qubit states and the law of angular momentum conservation

А. В. Никулов

Superconducting loop interrupted by one or three Josephson junctions is considered in many publications as a possible quantum bit, flux qubit, which can be used for creation of quantum computer. But the assumption on superposition of two macroscopically distinct quantum states of superconducting loop contradict to the fundamental law of angular momentum conservation and the universally recognized quantum formalism. Numerous publications devoted to the flux qubit testify to an inadequate interpretation by many authors of paradoxical nature of superposition principle and the subject of quantum description.

arXiv:0912.0230•Dec 1, 2009•1 citation

Comment on "Probing Noise in Flux Qubits via Macroscopic Resonant Tunneling" (arXiv:0712.0838)

А. В. Никулов

Expert attention is attracted to the obvious contradiction of the assumption on macroscopic quantum tunnelling and on superposition of two macroscopically distinct quantum states of superconducting loop, considered as flux qubit, with the law of angular momentum conservation and the universally recognized quantum formalism.

arXiv:0903.3575•Mar 20, 2009•2 citations

Electronic structure of superposition states in flux qubits

Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Frank K. Wilhelm, K Birgitta Whaley

Flux qubits, small superconducting loops interrupted by Josephson junctions, are successful realizations of quantum coherence for macroscopic variables. Superconductivity in these loops is carried by $\sim 10^6$ -- $10^{10}$ electrons, which has been interpreted as suggesting that coherent superpositions of such current states are macroscopic superpositions analogous to Schrödinger's cat. We provide a full microscopic analysis of such qubits, from which the macroscopic quantum description can be derived. This reveals that the number of microscopic constituents participating in superposition states for experimentally accessible flux qubits is surprisingly but not trivially small. The combination of this relatively small size with large differences between macroscopic observables in the two branches is seen to result from the Fermi statistics of the electrons and the large disparity between the values of superfluid and Fermi velocity in these systems.

arXiv:0910.3622•Physica Scripta•Dec 1, 2009•19 citations

Research on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox

Oreste Piccioni, Werner A. W. Mehlhop, Brian C. Wright

This report discusses the following: The analysis of the singlet state of separate fermions proves that the EPR contradicts QM. The violation of special relativity. The Schroedinger equation and the EPR. The conservation of angular momentum. The proposal of collapse. The factorization of the spin states. The superposition principle. No paradox exists within the theory. The original state of Einstein et al is not a valid example of the EPR, and it seems impossible to construct a valid linear momentum example. This is another indication that the EPR contradicts QM. Actions at a distance, the model of Einstein et al for particles with mass, and Bell's inequalities and their physical meaning.

•Jun 1, 1989•0 citations

Chain of superconducting loops as a possible quantum register

V. V. Aristov, А. В. Никулов

The idea of the quantum computation is based on paradoxical principles of quantum physics superposition and entanglement of quantum states. This idea looks well-founded on the microscopic level in spite of the absence of an universally recognized interpretation of these paradoxical principles since they were corroborated over and over again by reliable experiments on the microscopic level. But the technology can not be able in the near future to work on the microscopic level. Therefore macroscopic quantum phenomenon-superconductivity is very attractive for the realization of the idea of quantum computer. It is shown in the present paper that a chain of superconducting loops can be only possible quantum register. The proposals by some authors to provide the EPR correlation with help of a classical interaction witness the misunderstanding of the entanglement essence. The problem of the possibility of superposition of macroscopically distinct states is considered.

arXiv:cond-mat/0412573•Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE•Jun 1, 2005•5 citations

Research on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. Final report

Oreste Piccioni, Werner A. W. Mehlhop, Brian C. Wright

This report discusses the following: The analysis of the singlet state of separate fermions proves that the EPR contradicts QM. The violation of special relativity. The Schroedinger equation and the EPR. The conservation of angular momentum. The proposal of collapse. The factorization of the spin states. The superposition principle. No paradox exists within the theory. The original state of Einstein et al is not a valid example of the EPR, and it seems impossible to construct a valid linear momentum example. This is another indication that the EPR contradicts QM. Actions at a distance, the model of Einstein et al for particles with mass, and Bell`s inequalities and their physical meaning.

•Jun 1, 1989•0 citations
The confidence of many authors in the possibility to use superconducting loop interrupted by Josephson junctions as a basis for quantum bit, flux qubit, presumes the assumption on superposition of two macroscopically distinct quantum states with macroscopically different angular momentum. The contradiction of this assumption with macroscopic realism and the conservation law must call the numerous publications about flux qubit in question. These publications uncover misunderstanding by many modern physicists of the essence of the superposition principle. The Einstein - Podolsky - Rosen (EPR) correlation or entanglement, introduced in 1935 by opponents of the Copenhagen interpretation in order to reveal the contradiction of this principle with realism, has provided a basis of the idea of quantum computation. The problem of the EPR correlation has emerged thanks to philosophical controversy between the creators of the quantum theory about the subject of its description. Therefore it is impossible to solve correctly the problem of quantum computer creation without the insight into the essence of this philosophical controversy. The total neglect of the philosophical problems of quantum foundation results to concrete mistakes, the example of which are the publications about flux qubit. In order to prevent such mistakes in the future the philosophical questions about the essence of superposition and entanglement and about the subject of quantum description are considered.
Superconducting loop interrupted by one or three Josephson junctions is considered in many publications as a possible quantum bit, flux qubit, which can be used for creation of quantum computer. But the assumption on superposition of two macroscopically distinct quantum states of superconducting loop contradict to the fundamental law of angular momentum conservation and the universally recognized quantum formalism. Numerous publications devoted to the flux qubit testify to an inadequate interpretation by many authors of paradoxical nature of superposition principle and the subject of quantum description.
Flux qubits, small superconducting loops interrupted by Josephson junctions, are successful realizations of quantum coherence for macroscopic variables. Superconductivity in these loops is carried by ∼106\sim 10^6∼106 -- 101010^{10}1010 electrons, which has been interpreted as suggesting that coherent superpositions of such current states are macroscopic superpositions analogous to Schrödinger's cat. We provide a full microscopic analysis of such qubits, from which the macroscopic quantum description can be derived. This reveals that the number of microscopic constituents participating in superposition states for experimentally accessible flux qubits is surprisingly but not trivially small. The combination of this relatively small size with large differences between macroscopic observables in the two branches is seen to result from the Fermi statistics of the electrons and the large disparity between the values of superfluid and Fermi velocity in these systems.
This report discusses the following: The analysis of the singlet state of separate fermions proves that the EPR contradicts QM. The violation of special relativity. The Schroedinger equation and the EPR. The conservation of angular momentum. The proposal of collapse. The factorization of the spin states. The superposition principle. No paradox exists within the theory. The original state of Einstein et al is not a valid example of the EPR, and it seems impossible to construct a valid linear momentum example. This is another indication that the EPR contradicts QM. Actions at a distance, the model of Einstein et al for particles with mass, and Bell's inequalities and their physical meaning.
The idea of the quantum computation is based on paradoxical principles of quantum physics superposition and entanglement of quantum states. This idea looks well-founded on the microscopic level in spite of the absence of an universally recognized interpretation of these paradoxical principles since they were corroborated over and over again by reliable experiments on the microscopic level. But the technology can not be able in the near future to work on the microscopic level. Therefore macroscopic quantum phenomenon-superconductivity is very attractive for the realization of the idea of quantum computer. It is shown in the present paper that a chain of superconducting loops can be only possible quantum register. The proposals by some authors to provide the EPR correlation with help of a classical interaction witness the misunderstanding of the entanglement essence. The problem of the possibility of superposition of macroscopically distinct states is considered.
This report discusses the following: The analysis of the singlet state of separate fermions proves that the EPR contradicts QM. The violation of special relativity. The Schroedinger equation and the EPR. The conservation of angular momentum. The proposal of collapse. The factorization of the spin states. The superposition principle. No paradox exists within the theory. The original state of Einstein et al is not a valid example of the EPR, and it seems impossible to construct a valid linear momentum example. This is another indication that the EPR contradicts QM. Actions at a distance, the model of Einstein et al for particles with mass, and Bell`s inequalities and their physical meaning.