IonQ, an American quantum computing company, launched a new paper In it, he proposes a complete architecture for building fault-tolerant quantum computers.
According to their paper, the new IonQ design achieves 110 logical qubits by performing approximately 1 million T-gates (units of quantum operations) per day. Uses only 2,514 physical qubits. The authors say the machine “can be built quickly” using “already experimentally proven hardware components.”
Physical qubits are fragile and will produce errors when manipulated. The solution is to group multiple physical qubits together so that they can mutually detect and correct these errors. The resulting set is a logical qubit, a truly useful unit for performing reliable calculations.
Previous industry standards assumed that every functional logical qubit required 100 to 1,000 physical qubits. According to paper IonQ’s new architecture That ratio decreases to about 23:1..
According to paper The system from IonQ relies on a code known as ‘qLDPC’, a quantum error correction approach, and a ‘cat state factory’, a quantum state that acts as a probe to detect errors without interrupting the main computation.
This architecture is modular and expands by adding specialized zones rather than adding connections. With 10,000 physical qubits and this architecture, IonQ Physical simulations that were previously impossible can be performed in one month.
Analysts read: paper like a turning point
The analyst known as Desmond at X explained what makes this design viable in the short term. According to their analysis, this type of quantum architecture relies on two fundamental technological capabilities.
The first is 2-qubit gate fidelitya measure of how accurately a machine performs operations on pairs of qubits without introducing errors. design walking cat Desmond points out that IonQ requires fidelity of 99.99% or higher.
The second is reliable ion transport, which allows qubits to be physically moved to specialized areas on the chip where operations are performed.
“Both of these capabilities are already enabled by commercial systems from IonQ,” said Desmond. In other words, according to analysts, paper Rather than describing a hypothetical machine that requires a pending invention; Designed to assemble parts that the company already operates in its current facilities.
What does this mean for Bitcoin?
Although IonQ’s paper does not explicitly mention Bitcoin or any specific cryptographic system or encryption as a target, external analysts have drawn a connection to the encryption securing the network created by Satoshi Nakamoto.
In that sense, Qtonic Quantum, an account specializing in quantum cybersecurity, has performed calculations that link IonQ’s Walking Cat architecture with the security of Bitcoin and Ethereum.
“Scaling the Walking Cat architecture proportionally would require 25,000 to 30,000 physical qubits.” They say from Qtonic that it runs the Shor algorithm (a mathematical procedure used by quantum computers to derive private keys) on the ECDSA curve used by Bitcoin and Ethereum.
The number of qubits required by Qtonic is significantly lower than what Google Quantum AI measured in a recent report. As a result of their experiments, the Google team concluded that: It would take about 500,000 physical qubits to beat Bitcoin..
“At the current pace of T-Door (manufacturing), that will take one to two years. “If we double the factory, we’ll cut it in half,” he said, adding that he also explained how long it would take to reach this “dangerous” threshold of qubits needed to break ECDSA. As reported by CriptoNoticias, IonQ’s public roadmap envisions reaching 10,000 physical qubits in 2027 and 200,000 by 2028.
However, the Qtonic team also acknowledges that code distance (a technical parameter that determines large-scale error suppression ability) needs to be improved. Before reaching the scale needed for cryptocurrencies.
Therefore, new paper The introduction of IonQ is part of a trend documented by CriptoNoticias about progress in shortening the theoretical deadline for the arrival of “Q-Day”, when quantum computers could compromise current cryptography. None of these developments indicate that Q-Day is imminent, but they do indicate that the rate of reduction is accelerating.
