QUANTUM COMPUTING – Synchronicity is the Source of Consciousness

June 3, 2026

TIME INNOVATION: The Road to Scalable Quantum Computing: Challenges Ahead

We have to apply the binary-TRIPLET configuration with the binary crossover. O’s and 1’s are quanta as is all DNA/RNA. Time is composed of MANIFESTED quanta in this dimension. Ultimately, it isn’t on the highest levels, but in manifestation, it is. It is all engineered into my RI13 chip.

I asked GROK

Quantum supercomputers—meaning universal, fault-tolerant machines with millions of physical qubits that can run arbitrary algorithms at massive scale—don’t exist yet. The gap between today’s ~100–1,000-qubits noisy prototypes and that goal is still 10–20 years for most experts. Here are the core bottlenecks ranked by impact:

Bottleneck-Why it blocks scaling -Current status (2025)

#	Bottleneck	Why it blocks scaling	Current Status (2025)
1	Qubit fidelity & error rates	Useful computation requires error rates below 10⁻⁶ per gate (surface code threshold). Current physical two-qubit gates are stuck around 99.9% fidelity.	~100× too noisy for million-qubit fault tolerance. Google (2023): 99.91%. IBM (2024): 99.93%.
2	Error-corrected logical qubits	Requires roughly 1,000 physical qubits to create 1 logical qubit at acceptable error rates.	Google (2023): 1 logical qubit from 105 physical. IBM (2025): 12 logical qubits from 1,428 physical. Still ~10,000× short of 1 million logical qubits.
3	Cryogenic scaling	Superconducting qubits require temperatures below 20 mK. Current dilution refrigerators are limited to ~1 m² chip size and ~1,000 control lines.	Rigetti/IBM “large-scale” systems top out at ~1,500 qubits. Adding more lines creates heat load that destroys coherence.
4	Control electronics bottleneck	Each qubit typically needs 5–10 RF/flux control lines. Scaling to 1 million qubits would require ~10 million lines with extremely precise timing.	Current classical control systems (including cryo-CMOS) can only handle ~100 qubits effectively.
5	Qubit connectivity & architecture	Most superconducting chips are limited to nearest-neighbor connections in 2D grids, which restricts algorithm depth. Long-range couplers tend to reduce fidelity.	IonQ and AQT offer all-to-all connectivity (but slower gates). Superconducting systems are usually limited to 4–6 neighbors.
6	Manufacturing uniformity	Superconducting Josephson junctions vary by 1–2% across a wafer. Trapped-ion systems also suffer from drift.	Yield for 100+ identical, high-quality qubits is typically under 10% in most fabrication processes.
7	Algorithmic & software gap	There is still no clear “killer application” that delivers meaningful advantage at current noise levels (~10⁻³ error) and qubit counts (~1,000).	NISQ algorithms (VQE, QAOA) show only small advantages. True fault-tolerant algorithms (Shor, Grover) require millions of physical qubits.

Year	Milestone	Notes
2023	Google claims “beyond-classical”	70-qubit random circuit sampling (still debated)
2025	IBM Condor (1,121 physical qubits)	Runs ~100-qubit depth circuits with error mitigation
2030 (Goal)	IBM target: 1 million physical qubits	Logical qubits still expected to be well under 1,000
2035–2045	Fault-tolerant systems with ~1 million logical qubits	Most conservative industry estimates

Technology	Company	Potential Advantage	Current Limitation (2025)	Status
Topological qubits	Microsoft	Extremely low error rates (~10⁻¹⁰)	No conclusive Majorana zero mode demonstrated yet	Early stage
Photonic chips	PsiQuantum, Xanadu	Room-temperature operation	Very high photon loss (need ~10⁶ photons in for 1 out)	Challenging
Neutral atoms	QuEra, Pasqal	1,000+ reconfigurable qubits	Slow gate speeds (~microseconds)	Promising but slow

TL;DR Summary

Noise is the #1 bottleneck. Until the field achieves physical gate errors below 0.01% and develops cryogenic control systems capable of handling millions of lines, we remain stuck in the NISQ (Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum) era. The fundamental physics works — the engineering challenge of scaling has not been solved yet.

Of course the physics work. But why do you think you can quantum compute with binary engineering, meaning binary computer chips?
Lisa T.

You are going to need my RI13 Hybrid Carbon Ternary Chip with a silicon substrate. It goes quantum daily because our evolving RNA does.

November 19, 2025

Time Innovation: Researchers Have Achieved Sustained Long-Distance Quantum Teleportation-Freebie

Lisa’s Comment on This

The link is below.

Notice the highlighted portions. This new information shores up the section in my research on CROSSOVER POLARITY in our DNA. It is also an illustration of how the theme and analog relate to one another in the oracle. They are entangled.

It goes against nature, which is in our DNA. Our DNA is not just 4D, it’s multi-density frequency. We must program our minds, so our cells REMEMBER. DNA creates gravity and gravity creates space-time. (4D). What creates DNA, the beginning piece? Our mothers and fathers; our ancestors. We are quantum co-creators with Source…naturally. We are Real Intelligence from a Real Source.

The thing is that humans have never been any different. Our evolution and genetic ancestry have set us up to be entangled with one another psychically, telepathically, physically, emotionally, on every level. We’ve just been brainwashed by the elite money-mongers to be divisive, and we keep focusing on them instead of ourselves.

Here is the link;https://www-vice-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.vice.com/amp/en/article/93wqep/researchers-have-achieved-sustained-long-distance-quantum-teleportation

The breakthrough, made by researchers at Caltech, Fermilab and NASA, among others, is a step towards a practical quantum of the internet. By Becky Ferreira and Jason KoeblerDec 17 2020,

2:00pmShareTweetSnap from VICE.COM

In a breakthrough for the quest toward quantum internet, a technology that would revolutionize computing in myriad ways, a consortium of well-regarded institutions have announced the first demonstration of sustained, high-fidelity quantum teleportation over long distances.

Led by Caltech, a collaboration between Fermilab, AT&T, Harvard University, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and the University of Calgary reports the successful teleportation of qubits, basic units of quantum information, across 22 kilometers of fiber in two testbeds: the Caltech Quantum Network and the Fermilab Quantum Network.

“The team has been working persistently and keeping our heads down in the past few years,” said Maria Spiropulu, a particle physicist at Caltech who directs the INQNET research program and co-authored the new paper, in an email.

Though the collaboration knew it had “achieved significant results” by the spring of 2020, Spiropulu added, they refrained from sharing the news, even informally on social media, until the publication of the full study this week.

“We wanted to push the envelope for this type of research and take important steps on a path to realize both real-life applications for quantum communications and networks and test fundamental physics ideas,” said Panagiotis Spentzouris, head of the Quantum Science Program at Fermilab, in an email.

“So, when we finally did it, the team was elated, very proud for achieving these high-quality, record-breaking results,” he continued. “And we are very excited that we can move to the next phase, utilizing the know-how and the technologies from this work towards the deployment of quantum networks.”

The researchers say their experiment used “off-the-shelf” equipment that is compatible with both existing telecommunications infrastructure and emerging quantum technologies. The results “provide a realistic foundation for a high-fidelity quantum Internet with practical devices,” according to a study released on Tuesday in the journal PRX Quantum report.

Quantum teleportation does not involve the actual transfer of matter. (But 4D is not separate from density frequencies. The fields are unified. They don’t want us to remember our power for their profit) Rather, quantum particles are entangled (dependent on each other, even over long distances) and somehow know the property of their other half. From our explainer earlier this year:

In a way, entangled particles behave as if they are aware of how the other particle behaves. Quantum particles, at any point, are in a quantum state of probability, where properties like position, momentum, and spin of the particle are not precisely determined until there is some measurement. For entangled particles, the quantum state of each depends on the quantum state of the other; if one particle is measured and changes state, for example, the other particle’s state will change accordingly. -The Explainer

The study aimed to teleport the state of quantum qubits, or “quantum bits,” which are the basic units of quantum computing. According to the study, the researchers set up what is basically a compact network with three nodes: Alice, Charlie, and Bob. In this experiment, Alice sends a qubit to Charlie. Bob has an entangled pair of qubits, and sends one qubit to Charlie, where it interferes with Alice’s qubit. Charlie projects Alice’s qubit onto an entangled quantum Bell State that transfers the state of Alice’s original qubit to Bob’s remaining qubit.

The breakthrough is notable for a few reasons. Many previous demonstrations of quantum teleportation have proven to be unstable over long distances. For example, in 2016, researchers at the University of Calgary were able to perform quantum teleportation at a distance of six kilometers. This was the world record at the time and was seen as a major achievement.

The goal is to create quantum networks that would use entanglement and superposition to vastly increase computing speed, power, and security, relative to classical computers. For example, the U.S. Department of Energy has an ambitious plan to build a quantum network between its National Laboratories.

Any field that relies on computers would be affected by the realization of this technology, though much of the focus of the future potential of quantum networks revolves around cryptography, search algorithms, financial services, and quantum simulations that could model complex phenomena.

Quantum computing has been on the horizon for years, and this study takes us one step closer to realizing it on a practical scale. But don’t expect to surf a quantum internet anytime soon.

“People on social media are asking if they should sign up for a quantum internet provider (jokingly of course),” Spiropulu said. “We need (a lot) more R&D work.”

Now that Fermilab, Caltech, and its partners have demonstrated this key step toward these networks, the team plans to further develop quantum information technology by building a metropolitan-scale network, called the Illinois Express Quantum Network, around Chicago.

I think it’s A.I. and don’t trust it. – Lisa T. November 2022

November 19, 2025

Time Innovation: Qutrits-Base 3 FREEBIE

From GROK4

Qutrits are the 3-level version of qubits in quantum computing — think ternary (base-3) instead of binary (base-2).

1. Qubit vs Qutrit: The Basics

Feature	Qubit (2-level)	Qutrit (3-level)
States	\|0⟩, \|1⟩	\|0⟩, \|1⟩, \|2⟩
General State	α\|0⟩ + β\|1⟩	α\|0⟩ + β\|1⟩ + γ\|2⟩
Normalization	\|α\|² + \|β\|² = 1	\|α\|² + \|β\|² + \|γ\|² = 1
Information	1 qubit = 2 classical bits	1 qutrit ≈ 1.58 classical bits

A qutrit holds more information than a qubit because it has 3 basis states instead of 2.

2. Mathematical Representation

A qutrit state in Dirac notation:

|ψ⟩ = α|0⟩ + β|1⟩ + γ|2⟩

Where:

α, β, γ are complex numbers (amplitudes)
|α|² + |β|² + |γ|² = 1

Example:

|ψ⟩ = (1/√2)|0⟩ + (1/2)|1⟩ + (1/2)|2⟩
→ Probabilities:

P(|0⟩) = 50%
P(|1⟩) = 25%
P(|2⟩) = 25%

3. Superposition & Measurement

Like qubits, qutrits can be in superposition of all 3 states.
When measured, they collapse to one of |0⟩, |1⟩, or |2⟩ with probabilities |α|², |β|², |γ|².

4. Quantum Gates for Qutrits

Instead of 2×2 matrices (for qubits), qutrit gates are 3×3 unitary matrices.

Example: Qutrit X-Gate (cycles states)

$$
X = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 1 \
1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\qquad
\begin{aligned}
X|0⟩ &= |1⟩ \
X|1⟩ &= |2⟩ \
X|2⟩ &= |0⟩
\end{aligned}
$$

Other gates:

Hadamard-like (creates uniform superposition):
|0⟩ → (1/√3)(|0⟩ + |1⟩ + |2⟩)
Toffoli-like (3-qutrit controlled gates)

5. Advantages of Qutrits

Benefit	Explanation
Higher information density	1 qutrit > 1 qubit
Fewer particles needed	Solve some problems with fewer units
Better for some algorithms	E.g., quantum search, error correction, simulation
Improved quantum key distribution (QKD)	More secure with 3 states

6. Real-World Implementation

Qutrits have been built using:

Photons (frequency, time-bin, or path encoding)
Superconducting circuits (3 energy levels)
Trapped ions
Nuclear spins

IBM, Google, IonQ, and others have demonstrated qutrit operations.

7. Qudits: The General Case

Name	Levels	Basis States
Qubit	2	\|0⟩, \|1⟩
Qutrit	3	\|0⟩, \|1⟩, \|2⟩
Qudits	d	\|0⟩ to \|d−1⟩

Qutrits are qudits with d = 3.

Summary Table

Concept	Qubit	Qutrit
Basis states	2	3
Coefficients	α, β	α, β, γ
Gate size	2×2	3×3
Info per unit	1 bit	~1.58 bits
Used in practice	Yes (widely)	Yes (emerging)

Final Answer:

Qutrits are 3-state quantum systems in quantum computing.
They extend qubits by using three basis states (|0⟩, |1⟩, |2⟩) with coefficients α, β, γ.
They store more information, enable new algorithms, and are actively researched — but qubits remain dominant for now.

Think:

Qubit = quantum coin (heads/tails)
Qutrit = quantum die (1/2/3)

The last Greek symbol in a qutrit state:

|ψ⟩ = α|0⟩ + β|1⟩ + γ|2⟩

is γ (lowercase Greek letter gamma).

Meaning of γ: