I tried going through the institutional path.
I got gatekept—hard. No endorsement, no reply, no welcome at the table. So I brought my own.
Zadbit 2.1 is the result: 72-hour quantum coherence, 100,000 simulated qubits, no cryogenics, no QEC. Built on reinforcement learning, dimensional resonance, entropy modeling, and neural phase feedback.
I released it in the wild because innovation shouldn’t have to wait for permission.
Full report’s open access. The metrics are real. The system works. Now let’s see who’s ready to talk about it.
"dimensional resonance" is not anything. That phrase does not mean anything. It's like a fake science phrase you'd see in Star Trek or something. Same with "neural phase feedback" and "entropy modeling". You just made these things up, they are not concepts that exist in the world.
"72-hour quantum coherence, 100,000 simulated qubits" -- a couple responses here. (1) I can simulate ANY number of qubits doing a trivial operation, that is not interesting (and I feel pretty sure you do not understand the situations under which a collection of qubits is computationally difficult to simulate). I have 24 GB of ram in my laptop, I can simulate an X^{\otimes 2^24} |0> operation! That's 2^24 qubits! (2) I can simulate a qubit with ANY amount of coherence, it's not real! Why is your fake simulated qubit limited to 72 hours of coherence? Just change the simulation so it's infinite. The hard part of decoherence is that it's difficult to control IN THE REAL WORLD. Simulating it as being small is totally irrelevant.
Finally, and I say this as if you didn't already know it: this entire thing was written by chatgpt or some other AI service. The metrics are not "real", they are hallucinations from chatgpt. Your "system" does not even exist. This entire document is fan-fiction.
I highly advise you to do something else with your life.
Every particle in existence has a unique vibrational frequency,like a fingerprint or radio signal of sorts.
Dimensional resonance refers to the ability to detect and interpret that frequency.
Neural phase feedback is the use of artificial neural systems (AI) to monitor and respond to changes in phase.
Information from the system is fed back into itself, allowing it to recognize instability and drift before it becomes destructive.
Entropy modeling is the creation of a simulated environment where the potential disorder of a particle’s state is projected forward in time for prediction modeling.
I understand that these explanations are somewhat vuege, but I can't go around explaining every detail as it will be leaking proprietary methods, but I do hope that explanation helped and thank you for asking the questions. Without someone asking the questions, then I don't know what needs explaining.
"Every particle in existence has a unique vibrational frequency,like a fingerprint or radio signal of sorts." This is explicitly not true. Particles of a given type are fundamentally identical. If they weren't, quantum statistics would be radically different, which would have consequences for the way electrons fill atomic orbitals, the way laser work... everything! I would LOVE to hear how your theory explains the HOM effect, for example.
You are correct that particles of the same type are fundamentally identical in ideal quantum theory.
My use of “unique signatures” refers to the distinct quantum state or measurable properties a particle (such as a qubit) exhibits in an open, realworld environment that is shaped by fields, noise, and context, while the particle itself remains fundamentally indistinguishable from others of its type.
The HOM effect is fully valid in idealized systems; my work addresses the complexities found in practical, noisy environments.
If conditions were truly ideal, decoherence wouldn’t be an issue now would it?
Listen, I understand that what I'm claiming may seem way out there. I understand that, while I genuinely want questions and I want genuine feedback. Please remain professional.
Consider the trivial example of a coherent state in a single mode optical cavity. You’re telling me every photon in there has a “unique signature”, if I understand you right. Please explain with mathematics.
Also could you please explain how decoherence affects photons? I am learning so much from you!
“Zadbit” brand new, three hours old. Welcome to the conversation.
Let’s keep things transparent: I’m happy to answer real questions, which you have asked a real question but let’s not play games please.
It won't let me reply to your last comment, so I'm writing here. I have read your work already, that's why I'm asking. I was just hoping to get some clarification on the situation I mentioned before, where we have a coherent state in an optical cavity. I see in your report that you're using a dimensional tesseract vector. I was just curious how we use that to assign a unique vibrational frequency to the context of each photon in an optical coherent state. Thanks!
I Appreciate that, but I encourage you to read the full report and public document, there’s plenty there to start with and I would Happy to answer questions. And I don't intend to debate hypotheticals outside real-world context.
My work is open for anyone to review and is results driven. If you have specific questions after reviewing the paper, I’m all ears.
Zadbit 2.1 is the result: 72-hour quantum coherence, 100,000 simulated qubits, no cryogenics, no QEC. Built on reinforcement learning, dimensional resonance, entropy modeling, and neural phase feedback.
I released it in the wild because innovation shouldn’t have to wait for permission.
Full report’s open access. The metrics are real. The system works. Now let’s see who’s ready to talk about it.
—John W.