Supreme Idiocy: Claiming “Quantum Supremacy” Is A Racist Concept

Leonie Mueck, Carmen Palacios-Berraquero, Divya M Persaud wrote:

“In 2012 the theoretical physicist John Preskill from the California Institute of Technology coined the term “quantum supremacy”. It was introduced to represent the ability of quantum computers to solve problems faster than conventional supercomputers. The term quickly caught on and, after years of research in the field by scientists at universities and companies, Google in October 2019 announced it had achieved the breakthrough. The result sparked optimism about the future of quantum computing, but something was missing in the debate that followed, namely the uncomfortable association of the term with “white supremacy.”

su·prem·a·cy: “the state or condition of being superior to all others in authority, power, or status.”

The white race obsessed (thus racist) authors instead propose to use “Quantum Advantage“. This is a mistake as far as physics is concerned: the Quantum is not just “advantageous”. It is a misunderstanding of physics to think so. Quantum Physics is not just advantageous relative to Classical mechanics, it thoroughly EXTINGUISHES it. Quantum Physics is the final solution of the problem of localization in classical mechanics. The joke is on us, the hilarious woman below, Divya Persaud “the third”, a doctoral student, claims a supremacy she does not have in science, because she obviously does not understand Quantum Physics:

Divya M. Persaud

Divya M. Persaud is a planetary scientist, writer, and composer. She is obviously NOT a physicist specializing in the foundation of physics. She is not afraid to leverage her brown skin by claiming Quantum Supremacy has to do with the white race. Reciprocated racism is still racism…

Refuting Quantum Supremacy on purely semantic grounds, because one does not like the notion of “supreme”, and call it racist is supremely stupid, indeed.

And idiotic, because those condemning “supremacy” do so by alleging their own supremacy. I recognize just one race: that of imbeciles.Tends to be hereditary too. It’s culturally, and epigenetically inherited.

I got some taste of this when some “moderators” complained  to Facebook that I was full of “Hate” because I reported (as an anti-Nazi) some well-known Nazi ideology. I got suspended for 30 days (!) as a result… Untill, several pages of complaints on my part later, Facebook recognized that reported Nazi ideology was not reason enough for suspension…

Superior and inferior simply mean one is in the presence of an ordered set, in the mathematical meaning of the term. Such sets are all over, and even bacteria recognize them as useful, when they swim up a food gradient.

But the supremos of muddled, dark thinking don’t recognize any order which they do not themselves rule…

The correctors of semantics want to achieve their own supremacy, through intellectual fascism, as the Nazis and Soviets wanted to do. Please read the excellent:

“Quantum Physics” is not just advantageous. It is true, and classical physics is not. In some situations, say Quantum Entanglement, Quantum Physics CANNOT be replicated by classical effects: this is the essence of the Einstein-Podolski-Rosen (“EPR”) effect and the the John Bell theorem. And it has been experimentally demonstrated in thousands of experiments. Nor can the Casimir Effect, or the Bohm-Aharonov effects be duplicated by classical mechanics. There, in those various effects, which all involve forms of mysterious local-time flaunting nonlocality, Quantum Physics rule supreme.

In nonlocal matters, Quantum Physics rule not just supremely, but absolutely. Let’s then introduce the concept of QUANTUN ABSOLUTISM! (This way the silly ones will call me a monarchist!)

It is supremely fascist, idiotic and ignorant to try to cancel the purely physical concept of “Quantum Supremacy”, but I expect no less of those so inferior that they need to leverage their skin color to gain advantage in society.

Patrice Ayme


P/S: John Preskill, professor of theoretical physics at the California Institute of Technology who coined “Quantum Supremacy”, proposed it to describe when a quantum computer performs a task that a classical computer never could. Preskill rejected the term ‘quantum advantage’: the word ‘advantage’ implies that a computer with quantum supremacy would have only an edge over a classical computer while the word ‘supremacy’ better conveys complete ascendancy over any classical computer. As I said, it’s not just ascendency, but also Quantum Computation which can’t exist classically.

Tags: , ,

16 Responses to “Supreme Idiocy: Claiming “Quantum Supremacy” Is A Racist Concept”

  1. Gmax Says:

    Are these people for real? The word supremacy is racist? What about those using it in sociological context as they do?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      These people are out to make a career whatever way it takes. The girl I put the picture of is all over the Internet, and got (her idiocy) published in Nature. For most scientists, getting published in Nature is an unachievable aspiration. It’s all about greed, not creed. They don’t care whether what they are saying is grotesque or not, they just want fame. The fact she puts a “third” next to her name is pretty telling…


  2. Eleanor Brockman Moderator Says:

    Eleanor Brockman
    Patrice Ayme Do not direct your vile aspersions at me, nor imply that disagreement with your melodramatic phillipics is an indicator lack of wit. You know nothing of the conversation of moderators before action is taken, or how we reach consensus, nor can you hope to realize the amount of effort taken to give you leeway before speaking to you.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      “Vile”? “To you”? Where did I mention YOU, Ms Brockman? I am barely aware of your existence, as I am noticing it presently. Thus I had no idea someone thought so lowly of me to call me “vile” in public. I guess that’s a compliment: vile creature denounced by the righteous! Facebook told me I was suspended for 30 days for “Hate” reported at III (Facebook was specific about “repeated violations” at III; and quoted one explicitly referring to the policy of the Nazis regarding Japan).

      I had to send Facebook pages on the Nazi policy regarding Japan. They then recognized their mistake, recognized I had the right to inform the public about racism, and apologized to me, reinstating me immediately… after their apology.

      In the preceding context, it is fascinating that you refer to “philippics” as Demosthene, who uttered them, is a philosopher whom I admire, and whom all genuine democrats should admire (and that the Macedonian fascist plutocratic Aristotle hated, naturally).

      Fascinating as in fasces, of course. Democrat Demosthenes, an Athenian patriot and industrialist, was killed by the vile Macedonian fascists of the generalissimo Antipater, the senior general of king Phillipe of Macedonia (in a refinement of cruelty, they actually sent an old friend of his to arrest him; so Demosthenes, expecting torture to death, committed suicide with the poison he carried).

      Funny how some people get enraged… even when talked to kindly and reasonably, stooping down to lift the crushing ignorance under which they crawl.

      Here is a melodramatic example for you, full of blood and gore.

      Once I knew some racist fascists on another continent… I talked to them reasonably, several times, and they tolerated me: my arguments were powerful and their minds weaker. Ultimately, then, as the good Nazis they were, they resolved to use violence, the final solution. Moderated into oblivion, such is the way of the fasces.

      In an academic setting (!), according to generally accepted classification, the world’s top college prep (8 Nobel Prize laureates), the Neo-Nazis threw a homemade bomb on me, and it was quite powerful. I lost my hearing for days. Very eerie. There were pieces of human flesh everywhere. From the guy who stepped in the way of the bomb. And that was not even the worst, which came later. So here you have it: supreme viciousness, and supreme goodness, entangled. Relativize, but don’t compromise on the basics, that’s my way (and Demosthenes’).


  3. Ian Miller Says:

    Ian Miller:
    Interestingly, I think what you see with the Casimir effect can be explained by something other than the usual QFT explanation, and the Bohm-Aharanov effect was arrived at by a quantum interpretation that most physicists refuse to accept.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Could you please elaborate both points, Ian? I would say that both points, both experiments, philosophically speaking, and at first sight, assume what they turn out to prove, namely nonlocality. Indeed the easiest interpretation is that “particles” are, somehow waves: they extent, making them intrinsically nonlocal: point-waves can’t exist. Thus the waves penetrate all the regions concerned (Bohm-Aharonov) and do what waves do (Casimir), namely extinguish themselves on the boundaries.


      • Ian Miller Says:

        Ian Miller
        The Bohm-Aharonov effect actually arose from Bohm’s pilot wave interpretation, and in a poll of physicists, the pilot wave scored no votes.

        The Casimir effect needs a little more than a comment here – must do that some time.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Ian Miller: Seems to me that, since the potential energy is on the right side of the equation, everybody should have seen it. It is an interesting case of the quantum emperor having no clothe whatsoever…


  4. divya Says:

    I didn’t even write this paper. I contributed exactly 2 sentences, and they were pretty much written for me by my co-authors. My co-authors originated the idea for this piece and asked me to tag along, have written other pieces since, and are quantum physicists themselves. They are also both white. So I would love to know why you didn’t write little paragraphs about them and include their photos, too.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Hi Divya! And let me immediately present my excuses for my slightly vile behavior, concentrating on you (… because you were the one I had a photograph for… Hard to get more base than that…)
      I did not answer you right away because I saw your comment just now, I was in a camping trip in (what I think is your) beloved Sierra Nevada, by Yosemite… For more than week. I saw plenty of pictures of you, when I searched who these authors were… And none of the others… I had no idea they were white, nor do I know if they get outside (something I do know about you…)
      I knew you were NOT a quantum physicist… That’s why I got irritated, I assumed the others were not either… And let me insist that many a non physicist can make excellent science: my dad was a (Algerian born and raised) geologist, and full of scientific acumen (he also discovered Algerian oil and gas; my grandfather was also a geologist in Algeria…)

      As far as your quantum colleagues are concerned, I find their behavior rather curious: anybody familiar with quantum mechanics know it is fundamentally different from classical mechanics in some aspects. So concepts such as “Quantum Supremacy”, “Quantum Exclusivity” are fully appropriate.
      It may even look as if they tried to hide behind you? Considering your greater, and charming Internet exposure?

      I personally attach great ethical, epistemological, scientific and logical importance to whom, or what originated ideas…. And also to the semantic they are entangled with.
      And I am quite often over the top, as I view strong debate as important as high temperature to cook otherwise indigestible vegetables… Not racist; Neanderthals were already doing it, 200,000 years ago…

      In any case, I appreciate your comment as a gesture of friendship… And let me present my excuses again… BTW, I can be supremely idiotic myself (as I demonstrated to my entire satisfaction in very dangerous runs in the Sierra in the last few days…) We all make mistakes, errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum… but it is through errors that we learn…


      • divya Says:

        Hi Patrice, no, my co-authors didn’t “hide” behind me in any capacity considering I have exactly no weight in their field, the paper was published for their field, and I was tacked onto this paper as explained above. So please ascribe as much or more agency to them as you ascribe to me in this hit piece you’ve written in which you’ve assumed all sorts of nefarious motivations which amount to or near slander. If you are admitting you are wrong then the most gracious thing to do is to remove this. If it is through error that you learn, let the lesson be that you should do some self-teaching on semiotics and other literature about this terminology, and that singling out a random person to pin “leveraging her brown skin” on is unhinged behavior.


  5. Gmax Says:

    Wow this Divyia person is getting pretty angry. But why was she pinned in that paper?
    She seems to admit she is a pinup girl, and that’s just a courtesy nobody should be offended by.

    IMHO, this looks like scientific fraud, claiming to be an author, while authoring nothing, by self admission. That’s the way scientists beef up their resumes and careers by claiming they wrote plenty of papers they never truly wrote. I have heard how it’s done. Some use A to do that


    • Gmax Says:

      Typo: I mean some researchers use AI, artificial intelligence, to write non sensical papers to beef up the number of papers they authored.
      The lady got published, at least her name. In Nature, no less. Did you get published in Nature? That’s a great honor. No?


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Yes. Nature has opted to call “science supremacy” “science advantage”, so that “supremacy” would have no “advantage”… Lest people get prestigiously published for no work?


  6. D'Ambiallet Says:

    So this angry lady considers that calling attention to scientific fraud is ‘slanderous’? This is beyond curious and quite entertaining. Ethics in science has really gone down the drain. FRAUDSTERS protest against those who expose them, they have no decency

    Maybe these white guys she talks vehemently about got funds for including a minority woman in their work group? Don’t these grants made specialty for minorities exist? Is not that fraud with the government if it’s all make belief?


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Thanks Carole! Yes, this goes against the tendency to become more real as who authors what in science… And you are not the only one…
      A science PhD armed lawyer who read some of the comments above, contacted me verbally, regarding the preceding situation, and, offering completely unsolicited advice, said this was serious, and potential crime activity was involved… The lawyer also suggested, once again unsolicited, that I should not answer and cease all contacts (I do not see why, I was very surprised by this, but she did not elaborate, instead sounding as if I were a complete fool not to see the obvious).

      It smells of fraud in attribution of government research grants, she said. She told me not to quote her by name, and insisted she had no proof, of course, but this smacked of it: apparently some government funds are often distributed, conditional to minority participation… The lawyer said this situation had the optics of such a case…


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: