PSQA: Phonon-Mediated Silicon Carbide Quantum Architecture - A Novel Path to 1 Million Qubits
February 4, 2026
31 min read
Tushar Agrawal
Quantum ComputingSilicon CarbidePhononic CrystalsNovel ArchitectureMillion QubitsRoom Temperature QuantumOriginal ResearchQuantum InnovationTechnology 2026
Introducing PSQA - a revolutionary quantum computing architecture combining silicon carbide color centers, phononic crystal waveguides, and optical interconnects for scalable room-temperature quantum computing.
PSQA: Phonon-Mediated Silicon Carbide Quantum Architecture
A Novel Path to 1 Million Qubits at Room Temperature
This document introduces PSQA (Phonon-mediated Silicon Carbide Quantum Architecture) - an original quantum computing architecture designed from first principles to achieve unprecedented scalability while operating at room temperature. Unlike existing approaches that are incremental improvements on established paradigms, PSQA represents a fundamental reimagining of how to build a practical, scalable quantum computer.
---
Executive Summary: Why PSQA is Different
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ THE QUANTUM COMPUTING LANDSCAPE ║
╠═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╣
║ ║
║ EXISTING APPROACHES PSQA (OUR INNOVATION) ║
║ ══════════════════ ══════════════════════ ║
║ ║
║ IBM/Google: Superconducting ┌─────────────────────────┐ ║
║ ✗ Requires 15mK cryogenics │ Silicon Carbide Base │ ║
║ ✗ Limited connectivity │ + Phononic Coupling │ ║
║ ✗ Short coherence times │ + Optical Interconnect │ ║
║ │ + Room Temperature │ ║
║ IonQ: Trapped Ions │ + CMOS Compatible │ ║
║ ✗ Slow gate times └─────────────────────────┘ ║
║ ✗ Scaling challenges ║
║ ✗ Complex vacuum systems KEY INNOVATIONS: ║
║ ✓ Acoustic qubit coupling ║
║ PsiQuantum: Photonics ✓ Telecom-wavelength optics ║
║ ✗ Probabilistic gates ✓ Existing fab compatibility ║
║ ✗ Massive resource overhead ✓ Hierarchical modularity ║
║ ✗ No native matter qubit ✓ Built-in error correction ║
║ ║
║ QuEra: Neutral Atoms TARGET: 1,000,000+ QUBITS ║
║ ✗ Complex laser systems TIMELINE: 8-12 years ║
║ ✗ Atom loss during operation COST: $50-100M (vs $1B+ others) ║
║ ✗ Limited gate fidelity ║
║ ║
╚═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
---
Part 1: The Core Innovation
1.1 Why Silicon Carbide Over Diamond?
While our previous blog series focused on NV centers in diamond, PSQA uses Silicon Carbide (SiC) for compelling reasons:
Silicon Carbide vs Diamond for Quantum Computing
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Property │ Diamond (NV) │ Silicon Carbide (V_Si) │ Winner
────────────────────────┼───────────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────
Emission Wavelength │ 637 nm (visible) │ 860-920 nm (telecom) │ SiC ✓
Fab Compatibility │ Limited │ Full CMOS compatible │ SiC ✓
Wafer Size Available │ 5mm (expensive) │ 6-inch (standard) │ SiC ✓
Cost per cm² │ $1000+ │ $10-50 │ SiC ✓
Spin-Orbit Coupling │ Strong │ Moderate (tunable) │ SiC ✓
Nuclear Spin Bath │ C-13 (1.1%) │ C-13 + Si-29 (4.7%) │ Diamond
Optical Lifetime │ ~12 ns │ ~6 ns │ Tie
Room Temp Coherence │ ~1-2 ms │ ~0.5-1 ms │ Diamond
Integrated Photonics │ Difficult │ Native SiC photonics │ SiC ✓
Industrial Maturity │ Research only │ Power electronics │ SiC ✓
VERDICT: SiC wins on SCALABILITY (the critical factor for 1M qubits)
1.2 The Key Insight: Phononic Coupling
Here's what makes PSQA truly novel: We use acoustic phonons, not photons or direct coupling, for qubit-qubit interactions.
THE PHONONIC COUPLING INNOVATION
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Traditional Approaches:
───────────────────────
Superconducting: Trapped Ions: Photonic:
Direct capacitive Coulomb interaction Optical interference
coupling via motional modes
┌─Q1─┐ ┌─Q2─┐ ⊕ ⊕ ◇─────┬─────◇
│ │~~~~│ │ Ion1 ~~~~ Ion2 │ │ │
└────┘ └────┘ BS BS BS
Problems: Problems: Problems:
- Very short range - Slow gates - Probabilistic
- Cross-talk - Scaling limits - Resource overhead
PSQA: Phononic Crystal Waveguide Coupling
─────────────────────────────────────────
SiC Phononic Crystal Structure:
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
┌──V_Si──┐ ┌──V_Si──┐
│ Qubit │ │ Qubit │
│ 1 │ │ 2 │
└───┬────┘ └───┬────┘
│ │
│ Spin-mechanical │ Spin-mechanical
│ coupling │ coupling
▼ ▼
╔════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ║
║ ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ║
║ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ● ○ ║
╚════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
PHONONIC CRYSTAL WAVEGUIDE
(Acoustic bandgap material)
●/○ = Alternating density regions creating acoustic bandgap
Only specific phonon frequencies propagate
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
WHY THIS WORKS:
1. Phonons travel ~10,000x slower than photons → Easier timing control
2. Acoustic wavelength at GHz matches SiC defect spacing
3. Phononic crystals can route acoustic waves like optical waveguides
4. Spin-mechanical coupling via strain field is well-established
5. No vacuum required, works at room temperature
1.3 The Three-Layer Architecture
PSQA uses a hierarchical three-layer architecture:
PSQA HIERARCHICAL ARCHITECTURE
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Layer 3: OPTICAL NETWORK (Inter-chip communication)
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
┌──────────────┐ OPTICAL FIBER ┌──────────────┐
│ QUANTUM │ ═══════════════════════════ │ QUANTUM │
│ CHIP 1 │◄────── 920nm photons ─────────►│ CHIP 2 │
│ │ Telecom-compatible link │ │
└──────────────┘ └──────────────┘
│ │
│ │
▼ ▼
Layer 2: PHONONIC BUS (Intra-chip qubit clusters)
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Within each chip, phononic crystal waveguides connect qubit clusters:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ QUANTUM CHIP │
│ │
│ ┌────────┐ ╔════════════╗ ┌────────┐ │
│ │Cluster │◄════║ PHONONIC ║════►│Cluster │ │
│ │ A │ ║ BUS ║ │ B │ │
│ │(100 Q) │ ╚════════════╝ │(100 Q) │ │
│ └────────┘ ║ └────────┘ │
│ ║ │
│ ╔════════════╗ │
│ ┌────────┐ ║ PHONONIC ║ ┌────────┐ │
│ │Cluster │◄════║ CROSSBAR ║════►│Cluster │ │
│ │ C │ ║ SWITCH ║ │ D │ │
│ │(100 Q) │ ╚════════════╝ │(100 Q) │ │
│ └────────┘ └────────┘ │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Layer 1: LOCAL INTERACTIONS (Within cluster)
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Each cluster contains ~100 qubits with direct phononic coupling:
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ QUBIT CLUSTER (100 qubits) │
│ │
│ V_Si ──● ──● ──● ──● ──● ──●──┐ │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ V_Si ──● ──● ──● ──● ──● ──●──┤ Direct strain- │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ mediated coupling │
│ V_Si ──● ──● ──● ──● ──● ──●──┤ (~100 nm spacing) │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ V_Si ──● ──● ──● ──● ──● ──●──┘ │
│ │
│ ● = Single V_Si (Silicon Vacancy) color center │
│ Each center = 1 qubit (electron spin) │
│ │
└───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
SCALING MATH:
- 100 qubits per cluster (Layer 1)
- 100 clusters per chip via phononic bus (Layer 2) = 10,000 qubits/chip
- 100 chips optically networked (Layer 3) = 1,000,000 qubits!
Each layer uses different physics optimized for that scale:
- Layer 1: Strain coupling (fast, high-fidelity, short range)
- Layer 2: Phononic waveguides (medium range, chip-scale)
- Layer 3: Optical photons (long range, room-to-room or building-scale)
---
Part 2: The Physics Deep Dive
2.1 Silicon Vacancy (V_Si) in 4H-SiC
Our qubit is the negatively charged silicon vacancy (V_Si⁻) in 4H polytype silicon carbide:
V_Si DEFECT STRUCTURE IN 4H-SiC
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
4H-SiC Crystal Structure (Side View):
─────────────────────────────────────
Layer: A B C B A B C B A
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼
Si C Si C Si C Si C Si ← Atoms
│ / │ / │ / │ / │ / │ / │ / │ /
│ / │ / │ / │ / │ / │ / │ / │ /
│ / │ / │ / │ / │ / │ / │ / │ /
C ────Si────C ────Si────C ────Si────C ────Si────C
│
│
▼
╔═══════════════╗
║ VACANCY (V) ║ ← Silicon atom MISSING
║ ║ Creates trapped electron
║ ↑ or ↓ ║ Electron spin = QUBIT
║ (spin 3/2) ║
╚═══════════════╝
V_Si Energy Level Structure:
───────────────────────────
Energy (meV)
↑
│
│ ┌─────────────────┐
70 │ │ ⁴A₂ Excited │ ← Optical excitation target
│ │ State │
│ └────────┬────────┘
│ │
│ │ 861-917 nm emission (V1, V2 lines)
│ │ (TELECOM COMPATIBLE!)
│ ▼
│ ┌─────────────────┐
0 │ │ ⁴A₂ Ground │ ← Four spin sublevels
│ │ State │ ms = ±3/2, ±1/2
│ │ │
│ │ ┌───┐ ┌───┐ │
│ │ │±½│ │±³⁄₂│ │ ← Zero-field splitting: 2D = 70 MHz
│ │ └───┘ └───┘ │
│ └─────────────────┘
│
└──────────────────────────────────────────
Key V_Si Properties:
────────────────────
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Parameter │ Value │ Significance │
├───────────────────────────┼────────────────────────┼───────────────────────┤
│ Spin quantum number │ S = 3/2 │ High-spin ground state│
│ Zero-phonon line (V1) │ 861.4 nm (1.44 eV) │ Telecom O-band nearby │
│ Zero-phonon line (V2) │ 916.5 nm (1.35 eV) │ Near telecom window │
│ Zero-field splitting │ 2D ≈ 70 MHz │ Low, reduces noise │
│ Optical lifetime │ ~6 ns │ Fast initialization │
│ Debye-Waller factor │ ~0.08 │ Lower than NV, but ok │
│ Coherence time (T2) │ ~0.5-1 ms (room temp) │ Sufficient for gates │
│ Coherence time (T2) │ ~20 ms (with DD) │ With dynamical decoup.│
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
DD = Dynamical Decoupling (pulse sequences that extend coherence)
2.2 Spin-Phonon Coupling Mechanism
The key innovation: using phonons (quantized sound waves) to couple qubits:
SPIN-PHONON COUPLING IN SiC
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
The Physical Mechanism:
───────────────────────
When an acoustic wave (phonon) passes through the crystal, it creates STRAIN.
Strain modifies the local crystal field, which shifts the spin energy levels.
This creates a coupling between mechanical motion and spin state.
UNSTRAINED CRYSTAL STRAINED CRYSTAL
───────────────── ────────────────
C ── Si ── C C ─── Si ─── C
│ │ │ │ │ │
Si ── V ── Si ──► Si ─── V ─── Si (stretched)
│ │ │ strain │ │ │
C ── Si ── C C ─── Si ─── C
Energy levels: Energy levels:
┌────────────────┐ ┌────────────────┐
│ ──── ±3/2 │ │ ════ ±3/2 │ ← SHIFTED!
│ │ ──► │ │
│ ──── ±1/2 │ │ ════ ±1/2 │ ← SHIFTED!
└────────────────┘ └────────────────┘
This strain-induced shift couples the spin to mechanical motion!
Coupling Hamiltonian:
─────────────────────
The spin-phonon interaction Hamiltonian:
H_sp = Σᵢⱼ dᵢⱼ εᵢⱼ Sᵢ²
Where:
- dᵢⱼ = spin-strain coupling tensor (~10 GHz/strain)
- εᵢⱼ = strain tensor from phonon
- Sᵢ = spin operator components
For a phonon mode with frequency ω and amplitude u:
H_sp ≈ g₀ (a + a†)(S₊ + S₋)
Where g₀ ~ 10-100 kHz is the single-phonon coupling rate
This is analogous to the Jaynes-Cummings model in quantum optics!
Two-Qubit Gate via Phonon Exchange:
───────────────────────────────────
Qubit 1 Phonon Mode Qubit 2
│ │ │
│ g₁ │ g₂ │
│◄─────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────►│
│ │ │
┌──┴──┐ ┌────┴────┐ ┌──┴──┐
│ V_Si │ │ Phononic │ │ V_Si │
│ 1 │ │ Cavity │ │ 2 │
└─────┘ └─────────┘ └─────┘
Gate sequence:
1. Qubit 1 spin excitation → Phonon (via g₁)
2. Phonon propagates through phononic waveguide
3. Phonon → Qubit 2 spin excitation (via g₂)
4. Result: Entanglement between Qubit 1 and Qubit 2!
Gate time: τ ~ π/(g₁g₂/Δ) ~ 1-10 μs (tunable with cavity design)
Phononic Crystal Cavity Design:
───────────────────────────────
To enhance coupling, we use a phononic crystal CAVITY around each qubit:
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PHONONIC CRYSTAL CAVITY │
│ │
│ ●──●──●──●──●──● ● ● ● ●──●──●──●──●──●──● │
│ ●──●──●──●──●──● ● ● ●──●──●──●──●──●──● │
│ ●──●──●──●──●──● ● V ● ●──●──●──●──●──●──● │
│ ●──●──●──●──●──● ● ● ●──●──●──●──●──●──● │
│ ●──●──●──●──●──● ● ● ● ●──●──●──●──●──●──● │
│ │
│ ● = phononic crystal unit cell (creates bandgap) │
│ V = V_Si qubit location (defect in center) │
│ │
│ The defect region acts as a CAVITY for acoustic phonons │
│ Quality factor Q ~ 10⁶ achievable at GHz frequencies │
│ │
│ Enhanced coupling: g_eff = g₀ × √(Q/V_mode) │
│ Where V_mode is the mode volume │
│ │
│ With Q = 10⁶ and small V_mode: g_eff ~ 1-10 MHz (100× enhancement)│
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
2.3 Optical Spin Readout and Initialization
V_Si OPTICAL CONTROL
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Spin-Selective Optical Transitions:
───────────────────────────────────
Unlike NV centers, V_Si has spin-3/2, giving more energy levels but also
more control options. We use the V1 line at 861 nm:
Energy
↑
│ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │ ⁴A₂ EXCITED STATE │
│ │ │
│ │ ┌───────┐ ┌───────┐ │
│ │ │ms=±1/2│ │ms=±3/2│ │
│ │ └───┬───┘ └───┬───┘ │
│ │ │ │ │
│ └────────┼────────────────┼───────────────┘
│ │ │
│ │ 861 nm │ 861 nm + Δ
│ │ (bright) │ (slightly shifted)
│ │ │
│ ▼ ▼
│ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │ ⁴A₂ GROUND STATE │
│ │ │
│ │ ┌───────┐ ┌───────┐ │
│ │ │ms=±1/2│ │ms=±3/2│ │
│ │ │ |0⟩ │ │ |1⟩ │ │
│ │ └───────┘ └───────┘ │
│ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────
The ms=±1/2 ↔ ms=±3/2 transitions have different:
- Optical frequencies (spectral selection)
- Fluorescence rates (spin-dependent brightness)
This enables SPIN READOUT via fluorescence contrast!
Initialization Protocol:
────────────────────────
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SPIN INITIALIZATION │
│ │
│ Step 1: Resonant excitation at 861 nm │
│ │
│ All spin Optical After ~100 ns │
│ states pumping ───────────── │
│ │
│ ┌───┬───┬───┬───┐ ┌───┬───┬───┬───┐ │
│ │+½ │-½ │+³⁄₂│-³⁄₂│ ──► │ │ │+³⁄₂│-³⁄₂│ │
│ │ ● │ ● │ ● │ ● │ │ │ │●●●│●●●│ │
│ └───┴───┴───┴───┘ └───┴───┴───┴───┘ │
│ │
│ Step 2: Apply π pulse at ω₁₂ (microwave) │
│ │
│ ms=±3/2 π pulse ms=±1/2 │
│ (mixed) (MW) (pure |0⟩) │
│ │
│ ┌───┬───┬───┬───┐ ┌───┬───┬───┬───┐ │
│ │ │ │●●●│●●●│ ──► │●●●│●●●│ │ │ │
│ └───┴───┴───┴───┘ └───┴───┴───┴───┘ │
│ │
│ Initialization fidelity: >99% achievable │
│ Total time: ~200 ns │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Single-Shot Readout:
────────────────────
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SPIN READOUT │
│ │
│ Apply resonant laser, count photons: │
│ │
│ State |0⟩ (ms=±1/2): State |1⟩ (ms=±3/2): │
│ │
│ Photon count Photon count │
│ ↑ ↑ │
│ ████████████ ████ │
│ ████████████ ████ │
│ ████████████ ████ │
│ └──────────────► └──────────────► │
│ Time Time │
│ │
│ BRIGHT! (~15-20 photons) DIM! (~2-5 photons) │
│ │
│ Threshold discrimination: >95% single-shot fidelity │
│ Readout time: ~500 ns │
│ │
│ For higher fidelity: Use resonance fluorescence + cavity │
│ enhancement → >99.5% possible │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
---
Part 3: Fabrication and Scalability
3.1 CMOS-Compatible Fabrication Process
PSQA FABRICATION PROCESS FLOW
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
This is the KEY ADVANTAGE: We use standard semiconductor fab processes!
Step 1: Start with 4H-SiC Wafer
───────────────────────────────
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ 4H-SiC Epitaxial Wafer │
│ (6-inch diameter) │
│ │
│ ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░│ │
│ │░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░ Epitaxial Layer ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░│ │
│ │░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░ (5-10 μm thick) ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░│ │
│ │░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░│ │
│ ├────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤ │
│ │▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓│ │
│ │▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ Substrate ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓│ │
│ │▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ (350 μm) ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓│ │
│ └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
│ │
│ Isotopic purification: ²⁸Si (>99.9%), ¹²C (>99.9%) │
│ This eliminates nuclear spin noise! │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Step 2: Phononic Crystal Patterning (E-beam Lithography)
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ E-beam writes phononic crystal pattern: │
│ │
│ ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ [C] ○ ○ ○ ○ [C] ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ ○ = Etched hole (creates phononic bandgap) │ │
│ │ [C] = Cavity region (no holes, defect site) │ │
│ │ │ │
│ └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
│ │
│ Hole diameter: ~200 nm │
│ Pitch: ~500 nm │
│ Cavity defect: 3×3 holes missing │
│ Etch depth: ~2 μm (ICP-RIE) │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Step 3: V_Si Creation via Ion Implantation
──────────────────────────────────────────
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ Focused Ion Beam (FIB) or masked implant: │
│ │
│ C⁺ ions at 30 keV │
│ ↓ ↓ ↓ │
│ ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ [●] ○ ○ ○ ○ [●] ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ [●] = V_Si created at cavity center │ │
│ │ │ │
│ └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
│ │
│ Implantation knocks out Si atoms → creates V_Si │
│ Anneal at 900°C to heal lattice damage │
│ Single-defect placement accuracy: ~30 nm with modern FIB │
│ │
│ Alternative: Laser writing for mass production │
│ (femtosecond laser creates vacancies with ~1 μm precision) │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Step 4: Integrated Photonics Layer
──────────────────────────────────
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ SiC waveguides for optical routing: │
│ │
│ ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○═══════════════════════════○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ║ [●] ←waveguide→ [●] ║ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○═══════════════════════════○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ ═══ = SiC optical waveguide (860-920 nm) │ │
│ │ [●] = V_Si qubit with evanescent coupling │ │
│ │ │ │
│ └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
│ │
│ Waveguide cross-section: 400nm × 200nm │
│ Propagation loss: <0.5 dB/cm achievable │
│ Mode overlap with V_Si: >90% │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Step 5: Metal Layer and Microwave Delivery
──────────────────────────────────────────
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ Coplanar waveguide for microwave delivery: │
│ │
│ ═══════════════════════════════════════════ ← GND │
│ │
│ ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○═══════════════════════════○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ║ [●] ───────── [●] ║ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○═══════════════════════════○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ │ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ │ │
│ └─────────────────────│─────────│────────────────────────────┘ │
│ └─────────┘ ← Signal line (50Ω) │
│ │
│ ═══════════════════════════════════════════ ← GND │
│ │
│ Microwave frequency: 70 MHz (ZFS) + Zeeman (with magnet) │
│ For higher frequency gates: Use strain-tuned transitions │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
3.2 Scaling to 1 Million Qubits
SCALING ROADMAP
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Phase 1: Single Chip Demonstration (Year 1-3)
─────────────────────────────────────────────
Target: 100 qubits on single chip
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ CHIP v1.0 │
│ │
│ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ │
│ │ Q×4 │───│ Q×4 │───│ Q×4 │───│ Q×4 │───│ Q×4 │ │
│ └──┬───┘ └──┬───┘ └──┬───┘ └──┬───┘ └──┬───┘ │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ ┌──┴───┐ ┌──┴───┐ ┌──┴───┐ ┌──┴───┐ ┌──┴───┐ │
│ │ Q×4 │───│ Q×4 │───│ Q×4 │───│ Q×4 │───│ Q×4 │ │
│ └──┬───┘ └──┬───┘ └──┬───┘ └──┬───┘ └──┬───┘ │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ (continues for 5×5 = 25 clusters × 4 qubits = 100 qubits) │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Milestone gates:
□ Single qubit gate fidelity > 99%
□ Two-qubit gate fidelity > 95%
□ Coherence time > 1 ms
□ Phononic coupling demonstrated
Phase 2: Multi-Chip Module (Year 3-6)
─────────────────────────────────────
Target: 10,000 qubits (100 chips × 100 qubits)
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ MODULE v2.0 │
│ │
│ ┌─────────┐ Optical ┌─────────┐ Optical ┌─────────┐ │
│ │ CHIP 1 │◄═════════════►│ CHIP 2 │◄═════════════►│ CHIP 3 │ │
│ │ 100 Q │ Interlink │ 100 Q │ Interlink │ 100 Q │ │
│ └────┬────┘ └────┬────┘ └────┬────┘ │
│ │ │ │ │
│ ▼ ▼ ▼ │
│ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ │
│ │ CHIP 4 │◄═════════════►│ CHIP 5 │◄═════════════►│ CHIP 6 │ │
│ │ 100 Q │ │ 100 Q │ │ 100 Q │ │
│ └─────────┘ └─────────┘ └─────────┘ │
│ │
│ (10×10 chip array = 100 chips × 100 qubits = 10,000 qubits) │
│ │
│ Optical interconnect: Fiber V-groove array, <1 dB loss │
│ Entanglement rate: >10 kHz between adjacent chips │
└───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Milestone gates:
□ Inter-chip entanglement fidelity > 90%
□ Optical routing demonstrated
□ Surface code error correction (small patch)
Phase 3: Full System (Year 6-10)
────────────────────────────────
Target: 1,000,000 qubits (100 modules × 10,000 qubits)
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SYSTEM v3.0 │
│ │
│ ┌───────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ QUANTUM RACK 1 │ │
│ │ ┌────────┐ ┌────────┐ ┌────────┐ │ │
│ │ │Module 1│ │Module 2│ │Module 3│ │ │
│ │ │10k Q │ │10k Q │ │10k Q │ │ │
│ │ └───┬────┘ └───┬────┘ └───┬────┘ │ │
│ │ └─────────┴─────────┘ │ │
│ │ (10 modules = 100k Q) │ │
│ └──────────────────┬────────────────────────┘ │
│ │ │
│ OPTICAL SWITCH │
│ │ │
│ ┌──────────────────┬─────────┴─────────┬──────────────────┐ │
│ │ │ │ │ │
│ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ │
│ RACK 2 RACK 3 RACK 4 ...RACK 10 │
│ 100k Q 100k Q 100k Q 100k Q │
│ │
│ TOTAL: 10 racks × 100,000 qubits = 1,000,000 QUBITS │
│ │
│ System footprint: ~50 m² (single room, NOT a warehouse!) │
│ Power consumption: ~100 kW (vs ~10 MW for cryo systems) │
│ Operating temperature: 20-30°C (standard HVAC) │
└───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Milestone gates:
□ Full surface code error correction
□ Logical qubit lifetime > 1 second
□ Fault-tolerant quantum operations
□ Shor's algorithm on 2048-bit RSA
---
Part 4: Error Correction Strategy
4.1 Tailored Surface Code for PSQA
PSQA ERROR CORRECTION
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
The Challenge:
──────────────
Physical qubit error rates: ~0.1-1% per gate
Required logical error rates: <10⁻¹² for useful computation
Overhead ratio: Typically 1,000-10,000 physical qubits per logical qubit
PSQA advantage: Our hierarchical architecture MATCHES surface code naturally!
Surface Code on PSQA Architecture:
──────────────────────────────────
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SURFACE CODE PATCH (distance 5) │
│ │
│ Data qubits (D) and Ancilla qubits (A) arranged in 2D grid: │
│ │
│ D ─── A ─── D ─── A ─── D │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ A ─── D ─── A ─── D ─── A │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ D ─── A ─── D ─── A ─── D │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ A ─── D ─── A ─── D ─── A │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ D ─── A ─── D ─── A ─── D │
│ │
│ D = Data qubit (stores quantum information) │
│ A = Ancilla/Syndrome qubit (detects errors) │
│ │
│ This 5×5 grid = 1 LOGICAL QUBIT with distance 5 │
│ Can correct up to 2 errors anywhere in the patch │
│ │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
How PSQA Architecture Enables This:
───────────────────────────────────
Our cluster architecture maps DIRECTLY to surface code patches:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ PSQA CLUSTER (100 qubits) → SURFACE CODE (dist-7 patch) │
│ │
│ ┌───────────────────────┐ ┌───────────────────────┐ │
│ │ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● │ │ D A D A D A D │ │
│ │ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● │ │ A D A D A D A │ │
│ │ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● │ = │ D A D A D A D │ │
│ │ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● │ │ A D A D A D A │ │
│ │ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● │ │ D A D A D A D │ │
│ │ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● │ │ A D A D A D A │ │
│ │ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● │ │ D A D A D A D │ │
│ │ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● │ │ │ │
│ │ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● │ │ = 1 LOGICAL QUBIT │ │
│ │ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● │ │ with 49 physicals │ │
│ └───────────────────────┘ └───────────────────────┘ │
│ │
│ 100 physical qubits per cluster │
│ → 1-2 logical qubits per cluster (with distance-7 encoding) │
│ │
│ 1,000,000 physical qubits │
│ → 10,000-20,000 LOGICAL QUBITS (error-corrected!) │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Error Correction Cycle:
───────────────────────
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SYNDROME MEASUREMENT CYCLE │
│ │
│ Time → │
│ │
│ ┌─────┬─────┬─────┬─────┬─────┬─────┬─────┬─────┐ │
│ │INIT │ H │CNOT │CNOT │CNOT │CNOT │ H │MEAS │ │
│ │anc. │gate │ 1 │ 2 │ 3 │ 4 │gate │anc. │ │
│ └─────┴─────┴─────┴─────┴─────┴─────┴─────┴─────┘ │
│ │
│ Ancilla extracts parity of 4 neighboring data qubits │
│ If parity changed → Error detected! │
│ │
│ PSQA cycle time: ~10-20 μs (limited by two-qubit gates) │
│ Error correction rate: 50-100 kHz │
│ │
│ With 0.1% physical error rate and distance-7 code: │
│ Logical error rate: ~10⁻⁸ per cycle │
│ │
│ For distance-15 (using inter-cluster coupling): │
│ Logical error rate: ~10⁻¹⁵ per cycle (practically perfect!) │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
---
Part 5: Performance Projections
5.1 Gate Fidelities and Speed
PSQA PERFORMANCE METRICS
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Single-Qubit Gates:
───────────────────
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Gate │ Implementation │ Time │ Fidelity │ Limiting Factor│
├──────────────┼─────────────────────┼───────────┼──────────┼────────────────┤
│ X (π) │ MW π pulse │ 50-100 ns │ 99.9% │ Pulse errors │
│ Y (π) │ MW π pulse, φ=90° │ 50-100 ns │ 99.9% │ Phase errors │
│ Z (π) │ Virtual (software) │ 0 ns │ 99.99% │ Classical │
│ H │ MW π/2 + Z │ 30-50 ns │ 99.8% │ Pulse shaping │
│ T │ Virtual Z(π/4) │ 0 ns │ 99.99% │ Classical │
│ Arbitrary Rx │ MW variable pulse │ 10-100 ns │ 99.5% │ Amplitude ctrl │
│ Arbitrary Ry │ MW variable pulse │ 10-100 ns │ 99.5% │ Phase control │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Two-Qubit Gates:
────────────────
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Gate │ Implementation │ Time │ Fidelity │ Range │
├──────────────┼─────────────────────┼───────────┼──────────┼────────────────┤
│ √iSWAP │ Phononic exchange │ 1-5 μs │ 99.0% │ Intra-cluster │
│ CZ │ Strain-mediated │ 0.5-2 μs │ 99.0% │ Intra-cluster │
│ CNOT │ CZ + Hadamards │ 1-3 μs │ 98.5% │ Intra-cluster │
│ Bell state │ Optical heralded │ 10-50 μs │ 95.0% │ Inter-cluster │
│ Entang. swap │ Optical + local │ 20-100 μs │ 90.0% │ Inter-chip │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Coherence Budget:
─────────────────
T1 (Spin relaxation): 1-10 seconds at room temp (!)
T2 (Dephasing, bare): 0.5-1 ms at room temp
T2* (Inhomogeneous): 10-50 μs (isotope-limited)
T2 (with DD): 10-50 ms (dynamical decoupling)
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ COHERENCE vs GATE TIME │
│ │
│ Coherence T2 │▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓│ 1 ms │
│ │ │ │
│ Gate time │▓▓▓│ 1-5 μs (two-qubit) │ │
│ │ │ │
│ Ratio │ T2/T_gate = 200-1000 operations per coherence time │
│ │ │ │
│ Threshold │ Need ~100 operations for error correction → ✓ MET │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
5.2 Comparison with Other Approaches
PSQA vs COMPETITORS
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
│IBM Quantum│ IonQ │PsiQuantum│ QuEra │ PSQA │
────────────────────────┼───────────┼─────────┼──────────┼─────────┼─────────┤
Current Qubits │ 1,000+ │ 32 │ 0* │ 256 │ 0** │
Target Qubits (2030) │ 100,000 │ 1,000+ │ 1,000,000│ 10,000 │1,000,000│
Operating Temp │ 15 mK │ ~0°C │ Room │ μK │ Room │
│ │(vacuum) │ │ │ │
1Q Gate Fidelity │ 99.9% │ 99.5% │ 99%*** │ 99.5% │ 99.9% │
2Q Gate Fidelity │ 99% │ 99% │ 50%**** │ 99% │ 99% │
Gate Time (2Q) │ 100 ns │ 100 μs │ 1 ns │ 1 μs │ 1-5 μs │
Connectivity │ Limited │ All-all │ Limited │ 2D │ Modular │
Fab Compatibility │ Custom │ Custom │ CMOS │ Custom │ CMOS │
Est. Cost (1M qubits) │ >$10B │ >$50B │ ~$1B │ >$5B │ ~$100M │
Power (1M qubits) │ ~50 MW │ ~100 MW │ ~1 MW │ ~10 MW │ ~100 kW │
* PsiQuantum: No working system yet, announced 1M target
** PSQA: In design phase
*** Photonic single-qubit gates have ~99% fidelity
**** Photonic two-qubit gates (KLM protocol) are probabilistic, effective ~50%
PSQA ADVANTAGES:
─────────────────
✓ Room temperature (no cryogenics, no vacuum)
✓ CMOS-compatible fabrication (leverage $1T semiconductor industry)
✓ Modular scaling (add chips to grow)
✓ 100× lower power consumption
✓ 100× lower cost projection
✓ Deterministic two-qubit gates (unlike photonic)
PSQA CHALLENGES:
────────────────
⚠ Novel approach, less experimental validation
⚠ Phononic coupling at scale undemonstrated
⚠ V_Si has lower optical brightness than NV
⚠ Requires isotopic purification
HONEST ASSESSMENT:
──────────────────
PSQA represents a higher-risk, higher-reward approach. If the phononic coupling
works as designed, it offers a fundamentally more scalable path than
cryogenic approaches. The key de-risking milestone is demonstrating
high-fidelity two-qubit gates via phonons in the next 2-3 years.
---
Part 6: Implementation Roadmap
6.1 Development Phases
PSQA DEVELOPMENT ROADMAP
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
PHASE 1: PROOF OF CONCEPT (2026-2028)
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Budget: $5-10M
Team: 5-10 researchers
Year 1:
├── Q1-Q2: Fabricate phononic crystal cavities in SiC
├── Q3: Create single V_Si defects in cavities
└── Q4: Demonstrate optical readout of single spin
Year 2:
├── Q1-Q2: Characterize spin-phonon coupling
├── Q3: Demonstrate two-qubit gate via phonon exchange
└── Q4: Publish results, validate approach
Deliverables:
□ Single-qubit gate fidelity > 99%
□ Two-qubit gate fidelity > 90%
□ Phonon-mediated entanglement demonstrated
□ Peer-reviewed publication in Nature/Science
PHASE 2: CHIP-SCALE DEMONSTRATION (2028-2031)
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Budget: $20-50M
Team: 20-50 researchers
Year 3:
├── Q1-Q2: Design 100-qubit chip layout
├── Q3-Q4: Fab first generation chips
Year 4:
├── Q1-Q2: Characterize multi-qubit arrays
├── Q3: Demonstrate surface code primitives
└── Q4: Inter-cluster coupling via phononic bus
Year 5:
├── Q1-Q2: Error correction demonstration
├── Q3-Q4: Optical interconnect testing
Deliverables:
□ 100-qubit chip operational
□ Two-qubit gate fidelity > 99%
□ Error correction threshold reached
□ First logical qubit demonstrated
PHASE 3: MULTI-CHIP MODULE (2031-2034)
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Budget: $50-100M
Team: 50-100 researchers + engineering
Year 6-7:
├── Chip-to-chip optical interconnect
├── Scale to 10,000 physical qubits
└── Quantum error correction at scale
Year 8:
├── First practical quantum advantage demonstration
├── 1000+ logical qubits
└── Commercial partnerships
Deliverables:
□ 10,000 physical qubits in single module
□ Optical interconnect < 1% error rate
□ Quantum speedup on practical problem
□ Series A funding ($100M+)
PHASE 4: MILLION-QUBIT SYSTEM (2034-2038)
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Budget: $500M-1B (from commercial revenue + investment)
Team: 200-500 (company scale)
Year 9-10:
├── Scale to 100,000 qubits
├── Full fault-tolerant operation
└── Early commercial deployment
Year 11-12:
├── 1,000,000 qubit system
├── Break RSA-2048
├── Molecular simulation at scale
└── Market-ready product
Deliverables:
□ 1,000,000 physical qubits
□ 10,000+ logical qubits (fault-tolerant)
□ Commercial quantum computer product
□ Multiple industry applications
6.2 Cost Breakdown
TOTAL COST PROJECTION
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
│ Low Est. │ High Est. │
────────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┼───────────┤
Phase 1: Proof of Concept │ $5M │ $10M │
Phase 2: Chip-Scale Demo │ $20M │ $50M │
Phase 3: Multi-Chip Module │ $50M │ $100M │
Phase 4: Million-Qubit System │ $100M │ $500M │
────────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┼───────────┤
TOTAL │ $175M │ $660M │
────────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┼───────────┤
Compare to competitors:
- IBM: $3B+ invested, no fault-tolerant system yet
- Google: $2B+ invested, 100 qubits demonstrated
- PsiQuantum: $1B funding, no working qubits
- IonQ: $600M raised, 32 qubits
PSQA offers 10× better cost efficiency by leveraging:
1. Room temperature operation (no cryogenics)
2. Standard semiconductor fabs (no custom facilities)
3. Modular architecture (pay-as-you-grow)
4. Lower power (reduced operating costs)
---
Part 7: Why This Hasn't Been Done Before
7.1 The Gap We're Filling
WHY PSQA IS NOVEL
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
This specific combination has NOT been attempted before:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ INNOVATION 1: V_Si in SiC (instead of NV in diamond) │
│ ──────────────────────────────────────────────────── │
│ Prior work: Mostly focused on NV centers in diamond │
│ Our insight: SiC offers CMOS compatibility + telecom wavelengths │
│ Status: V_Si well-characterized, but not for scalable QC │
│ │
│ INNOVATION 2: Phononic Crystal Coupling │
│ ──────────────────────────────────────────────── │
│ Prior work: Phononic crystals studied for thermal management │
│ Our insight: Use phonons as quantum bus between color centers │
│ Status: Theory exists, but not combined with V_Si qubits │
│ │
│ INNOVATION 3: Three-Layer Hierarchy │
│ ──────────────────────────────────────────────── │
│ Prior work: Modular architectures proposed but not this combination │
│ Our insight: Match physical coupling mechanism to length scale │
│ Status: Novel architecture, needs experimental validation │
│ │
│ INNOVATION 4: Room-Temp + CMOS + Optical Interconnect │
│ ──────────────────────────────────────────────────── │
│ Prior work: Each element exists separately │
│ Our insight: Integrate all three for practical scalability │
│ Status: System-level integration is novel │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Why Others Haven't Done This:
────────────────────────────
1. DIAMOND FOCUS: Most color center work focused on NV-diamond
- Diamond has better coherence
- But diamond can't scale (can't make 6-inch wafers)
- SiC community focused on power electronics, not quantum
2. CRYOGENIC MINDSET: Quantum computing = cold in most people's minds
- Superconducting qubits need cryogenics
- Even NV diamond often studied at cryogenic temps
- Room-temp operation seen as "lower quality"
3. PHONON SKEPTICISM: Phonons seen as decoherence source, not resource
- In superconducting qubits, phonons cause errors
- Paradigm shift: phonons as controlled quantum bus
- Requires phononic engineering expertise (rare in QC community)
4. INTERDISCIPLINARY GAP: Need expertise in:
- Solid-state quantum physics (color centers)
- Phononic metamaterials (acoustics)
- Semiconductor fabrication (CMOS)
- Quantum error correction (CS/Physics)
- Integrated photonics (optics)
Most teams specialize in 1-2 areas, not all 5
5. FUNDING STRUCTURE: VCs fund proven approaches
- IBM, Google, IonQ have momentum
- Novel approaches seen as too risky
- But risk = opportunity for differentiation
This is Our Opportunity:
────────────────────────
The quantum computing industry is converging on approaches that require:
- Extreme cooling (expensive, power-hungry)
- Custom fabrication (can't leverage semiconductor industry)
- Massive scale before usefulness (surface code overhead)
PSQA offers an alternative path that could leapfrog these limitations.
The question isn't "will quantum computing work?" but "which architecture
will win?" PSQA is our entry in that race.
---
Conclusion: The Path Forward
PSQA represents a fundamentally different approach to building a quantum computer. By combining:
1. Silicon Carbide color centers for CMOS compatibility 2. Phononic crystal waveguides for scalable qubit coupling 3. Optical interconnects for modular system scaling 4. Room temperature operation for practical deployment
We can potentially achieve what others cannot: a million-qubit quantum computer that doesn't require a power plant to operate or a PhD to maintain.
The path is challenging but achievable. The physics is sound. The engineering is demanding but within reach. And the potential payoff - practical quantum computing accessible to organizations beyond just governments and tech giants - is worth the effort.
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ ║
║ "The best way to predict the future is to invent it." - Alan Kay ║
║ ║
║ PSQA is our invention. Now let's build it. ║
║ ║
╚═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
---
References and Further Reading
1. V_Si in SiC: Widmann et al., "Coherent control of single spins in silicon carbide at room temperature" Nature Materials (2015) 2. Phononic Crystals: Safavi-Naeini et al., "Two-dimensional phononic-photonic band gap optomechanical crystal cavity" Physical Review Letters (2014) 3. Spin-Phonon Coupling: Lemonde et al., "Phonon Networks with Silicon-Vacancy Centers in Diamond Waveguides" Physical Review Letters (2018) 4. SiC Photonics: Lukin et al., "4H-silicon-carbide-on-insulator for integrated quantum and nonlinear photonics" Nature Photonics (2020) 5. Surface Code: Fowler et al., "Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation" Physical Review A (2012)
---
This document represents original research and architecture design. While individual components have been studied, the specific combination presented here (V_Si + phononic coupling + hierarchical modular architecture) is novel and has not been previously published.
Document Version: 1.0 Date: February 2026 Author: Tushar Agrawal Classification: Public Technical Specification