Quantum Computation: An Analytical Rebuttal

Abstract

Quantum computing is widely portrayed as a revolutionary technological paradigm, promising exponential speedups and unprecedented computational capabilities through the manipulation of quantum superposition, entanglement, and interference. This paper presents a comprehensive and interdisciplinary refutation of such claims, demonstrating that the prevailing narrative is mathematically incoherent, physically implausible, economically irrational, and politically constructed. Beginning with a rigorous critique of the misinterpretation of quantum states as parallel classical processes, we show that superposition and entanglement do not provide the kind of computational multiplicity often claimed. We examine the hard limits imposed by decoherence, error correction overhead, and thermodynamic constraints, revealing that scalable, fault-tolerant quantum computation remains physically infeasible under any realistic engineering regime. We further demonstrate that quantum computing introduces no new class of computable functions and remains firmly within the boundaries of the Church–Turing thesis. Economically, we analyse the high costs and narrow applicability of proposed quantum advantages, concluding that even where theoretical speedups exist, the resource overhead renders them impractical. Finally, we dissect the political economy of quantum computing as a form of security theatre, wherein opaque scientific discourse is exploited to secure funding, generate institutional rents, and sustain a techno-political myth. This paper reasserts the necessity of epistemic rigour, economic rationality, and physical realism in evaluating emerging technologies, and argues that the current trajectory of quantum computing investment constitutes a paradigmatic case of institutionalised overpromise.