There has been creativity in constructing the “qubit” – the fundamental unit of quantum-based ‘storage’ envisioned to be at the base of any quantum computation device. 

Hence Google and IBM have been working on superconducting qubits, Honeywell on ion trap based qubits, PsiQ on photon-based qubits, ACQC on silicon-based qubits, and Microsoft on Majorana particle based qubits, to mention a few.

This is no doubt laudable and lessons learned will in the future be leveraged and be put to good use. 

But the path to that future has to be rethought. After all, it is not randomness that defines life, but some combination of contextual order animated by controlled randomness. This is evident in the way matter and life arise (refer to ‘Qualified Determinism in Emergent-Technology Complex Adaptive Systems’ for a hint of some of the math that would govern ‘contextual order animated by controlled randomness’ and the Cosmology of Light books for a a more comprehensive view).

If contextual order animated by controlled randomness as opposed to the essentially random statistical-probabilistic black-box approach is true, then it is inevitable that the operation and the architecture of qubits has to be rethought. For the interested reader I offer some hints on such a rethinking:

• Link to 'Envisioning A Light-Based Quantum-Computational Nano-Cyborg' paper
• Link to backup IEEE nano-cyborg presentation

If reverse extrapolation can indeed be used as a basis for re-envisioning quantum-level dynamics, then it is clear that quantum-level dynamics also exist in more stable structures such as atoms and molecules. If this is the case then there are fundamental implications to the size of quantum computers, lifetime of quantum-states, architecture of quantum gates, and the general accuracy possible in quantum-computing operations. 

Here I summarize some of these:

• Size of quantum computer can be radically larger based on photons that can operate at room temperatures, and atom-based computational units that are also stable at room temperatures.
• Quantum-states lifetime is now based on stable atoms and will far exceed the currently engineered qubit-lifetime.
• Gates will be built using photons and atoms.
• Reverse-extrapolation implies preexisting entanglement and superposition, as opposed to trying to manufacture these from bottom-up. This also will reduce the high-levels of decoherence.
• Atoms and molecules are known to have 100% accuracy in operations, as opposed to manufactured qubits with ~95% accuracy or so at best.  

Here I suggest some hi-level implications to do with the quantum computing technology stack given reverse-extrapolation and re-envisioned qubit architecture and operation:

• At the fundamental level, “Level 1”, hardware will be radically more precise, and based on interpretation of a range of stable atom-based quantum-computers. Knowledge of existing silicon substrate architecture will be used to create quantum computers, and will leverage proven quantum-approaches manifest in LED, MRI, Laser, and GPS, amongst other technologies.
• At the next layer up, “Level 2”, control systems will provide ample readability. Further, leveraging the idea of contextual order animated by controlled randomness in lieu of today’s statistical-probabilistic black-box approach, such readability will be built on an approach of mathematical meta-functions central to quantum dynamics, as I have explored in the 10-volume Cosmology of Light books.
• At “Level 3”, the meta-function basis will also be the basis of algorithms that in turn will be central to the software that will control the lower layers.
• Finally “Level 4” will provide the application interface to allow generation, interpretation, and testing of quantum phenomenon.

The mastery of this alternative technology stack will create massive implications for the quantum computing industry itself, and several downstream industries, ranging from genetics, to material sciences, to medical technology.