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

WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooks

The Argument Against Quantum Computers, the Quantum Laws of Nature, and Google’s Supremacy Claims

Gil Kalai

Published Sep 18, 2024• 0 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1142/9789811292316_0006

Related papers

Ordinary computer matches Google’s quantum computer

Adrian Y. Cho

High-profile claim of "quantum supremacy" fades.

Science•Aug 4, 2022•4 citations

IBM casts doubt on Google’s claims of quantum supremacy

Adrian Y. Cho

Science•Sep 24, 2019•2 citations

Daily briefing: Google’s quantum-supremacy paper is here

Flora Graham

Nature•Oct 23, 2019•0 citations

What Have Google’s Random Quantum Circuit Simulation Experiments Demonstrated About Quantum Supremacy?

Jack K. Horner, John Symons

arXiv:2009.07359•Transactions on computational science and computational intelligence•Jan 1, 2021•5 citations

The Argument against Quantum Computers, the Quantum Laws of Nature, and Google's Supremacy Claims

Gil Kalai

My 2018 lecture at the ICA workshop in Singapore dealt with quantum computation as a meeting point of the laws of computation and the laws of quantum mechanics. We described a computational complexity argument against the feasibility of quantum computers: we identified a very low-level complexity class of probability distributions described by noisy intermediate-scale quantum computers, and explained why it would allow neither good-quality quantum error-correction nor a demonstration of "quantum supremacy," namely, the ability of quantum computers to make computations that are impossible or extremely hard for classical computers. We went on to describe general predictions arising from the argument and proposed general laws that manifest the failure of quantum computers. In October 2019, "Nature" published a paper describing an experimental work that took place at Google. The paper claims to demonstrate quantum (computational) supremacy on a 53-qubit quantum computer, thus clearly challenging my theory. In this paper, I will explain and discuss my work in the perspective of Google's supremacy claims.

arXiv:2008.05188•Aug 12, 2020•4 citations

The Argument Against Quantum Computers

Gil Kalai

Jerusalem studies in philosophy and history of science•Jan 1, 2020•15 citations
My 2018 lecture at the ICA workshop in Singapore dealt with quantum computation as a meeting point of the laws of computation and the laws of quantum mechanics. We described a computational complexity argument against the feasibility of quantum computers: we identified a very low-level complexity class of probability distributions described by noisy intermediate-scale quantum computers, and explained why it would allow neither good-quality quantum error-correction nor a demonstration of "quantum supremacy," namely, the ability of quantum computers to make computations that are impossible or extremely hard for classical computers. We went on to describe general predictions arising from the argument and proposed general laws that manifest the failure of quantum computers. In October 2019, "Nature" published a paper describing an experimental work that took place at Google. The paper claims to demonstrate quantum (computational) supremacy on a 53-qubit quantum computer, thus clearly challenging my theory. In this paper, I will explain and discuss my work in the perspective of Google's supremacy claims.