Quantum Mirror.

The full proofread research record.

Read every page, equation, limitation, appendix, and reference without leaving Qalice.

From the July architecture to testable models.

30 October 2026 · A dated extension to the 24 July 2026 edition. The original PDF remains unchanged.

Qalice’s research program began in November 2023, as reported by its founder. The July 2026 whitepaper adopted and cited later independent quantum-mirror work. Project inception is not a claim to priority over those physical models.

1. Keep the physical definition precise

The July edition defines a quantum mirror as a qubit-controlled optical scatterer. Qalice’s qMirror Control Layer is a proposed surrounding control and telemetry architecture; a generic feedback loop does not itself implement a physical quantum mirror. In the ideal two-mode map, |0⟩ transmits |α,β⟩ and |1⟩ maps it to |−β,−α⟩.

2. Add an inspectable analytical slice

For the input √p|0⟩ + √(1−p)|1⟩ with optical modes |α,0⟩ and n = |α|², the two output optical branches overlap by s = exp(−n). The reduced control purity is p² + (1−p)² + 2p(1−p)exp(−2n). This follows from the cited ideal map; it is not a new physical theory or a measured fidelity.

At n = 0, both optical branches are vacuum and control purity is one. At p = 0 or 1, it also remains one. For p = ½ and large n, it approaches ½ because the control becomes entangled with the optical modes while the ideal joint state remains pure.

Explore the working analytical model. Next: compare a loss-channel extension with a converged Fock-space simulation. Check trace preservation, positivity, basis and vacuum limits before interpreting any performance claim.

3. Treat steady power as a system requirement

Astro studies energy conversion and local resources as connected engineering paths. Sunlight, other energy sources or stored fuels must supply the energy sent by a laser. Material extraction and refining consume energy; local materials could support manufacturing and infrastructure but are not automatically a continuous energy supply.

The new continuity model uses delivered electrical power at the receiver. For load L, availability a, and charge/discharge efficiencies ηc, ηd, the required online delivery is L[1 + (1−a)/(aηcηd)]. A gap t hours needs at least Lt/(1000ηd) kWh of usable stored energy. The current assumptions are ηc = ηd = 0.90. Orbit schedules, aging, auxiliary loads and charge-rate constraints remain outside this sizing check.

Explore the continuity budget · Read the contextual NASA and public studies.

4. Account for every energy destination

Astro now uses an ideal Gaussian beam envelope and a centered finite receiver. It integrates capture with a declared zero-mean Gaussian pointing-jitter distribution. Launch/relay optical throughput and path transmission are separate scenario inputs. A full power ledger separates unconverted sunlight, laser and optical losses, missed light, receiver conversion loss and useful electricity; its unrounded sum equals the incident power.

Compare direct electricity, local storage and the current laser route from the same incident solar energy. Conventional generator efficiencies use thermal fuel input and are shown with their own denominator and EIA source. No quantum multiplier is applied to the energy budget, and no measured Qalice efficiency advantage is claimed.

What has actually been checked?

The source-generated CL-001 passive interface and ME-001 mounting geometry have software and asset checks, not physical qualification. A live IBM read-only check verified authentication, backend access and retrieval of a completed two-item Executor workload. No new IBM hardware job was submitted. This does not reproduce an optical quantum-mirror protocol.

Primary quantum sources: Uria et al. (March 2026 preprint); Srakaew et al. (2023 experiment); Uria et al. (June 2026 tomography preprint). NASA studies below establish independent context, not Qalice validation.

An architecture around a quantum-controlled scatterer.

A physical quantum mirror conditions optical transmission and reflection on a control qubit. Qalice proposes node roles and a surrounding layer for simulation, calibration, coordination and evidence collection.

The goal is not to claim a finished physical device. It is to define testable interfaces and experiments for studying whether mirror-like control loops can improve state transfer, stability, and network behavior under realistic loss, noise, delay, and imperfect measurement.

Observe. Estimate. Reflect. Correct.

The physical interaction follows a conditional two-mode scattering map. The proposed control software prepares experiments, records measurement outcomes and coordinates allowed responses. State estimation requires repeated preparations and a specified measurement scheme; it cannot read out an arbitrary unknown quantum state without disturbance.

The Qalice node-pair model.

Two logical nodes coordinate quantum interfaces, optical modes, authenticated classical control, and a shared experiment record. Each layer can be simulated independently before being composed.

1. 01

   Quantum interfaces

   Prepare, transform, and measure the states used by a reviewed experiment.

2. 02

   Photonic transport

   Represent optical modes, attenuation, phase, coupling, and receiver response.

3. 03

   Classical coordination

   Authenticate feed-forward messages and retain timing, backend, and calibration context.

Measure performance, not mythology.

A valid experiment declares the circuit or optical model, parameter ranges, shot count, backend, noise assumptions, random seed, software versions, timestamps, and result hashes.

Results must report uncertainty and failure modes. A high simulator fidelity is evidence about the stated model—not proof that a corresponding physical mirror exists.

From local reference to IBM hardware.

The public platform currently has a seeded ideal Bell sampler, a separate optical heuristic, and the analytical coherent-state slice above. It also contains a guarded IBM one-qubit Z check. A full non-ideal photonic digital twin is proposed work.

Laser and photonic energy infrastructure.

Astro Qalice is a classical photonic systems research program exploring how energy and information might be converted, transported, redirected, and received during future exploration and resource operations.

Candidate studies include lunar shadow-region support, excavation and sensing, beneficiation and volatile handling, in-situ resource utilization, relay networks, thermal control, and space-to-space energy transfer. Every link budget must declare wavelength, power, aperture, divergence, range, pointing error, receiver efficiency, rejected heat, and fail-safe logic.

Build evidence in layers.

1. Now

   Reproducible software

   Named simulations, manifests, tests, and explicit uncertainty.

2. Next

   Bench validation

   Classical optical hardware-in-the-loop measurements and calibrated noise models.

3. Then

   Quantum-compatible experiments

   Constrained gate-model tests and photonic component characterization.

4. Horizon

   Responsible field systems

   Safety cases, governance, thermal design, pointing assurance, and mission-specific review.

Qalice advances by making the next test clearer. The project does not collapse hypothesis, simulation, and deployment into a single claim.

References.

External research is preserved here as scholarly context for the Qalice-authored program.

1. M. Uria, C. Hermann-Avigliano, P. Solano, and A. Delgado, “Alice and Bob through a quantum mirror,” arXiv:2603.18371v1 (2026).
2. R. Bekenstein et al., “Quantum metasurfaces with atom arrays,” Nature Physics 16, 676–681 (2020).
3. K. Srakaew et al., “A subwavelength atomic array switched by a single Rydberg atom,” Nature Physics 19, 714–719 (2023).
4. K. Azuma et al., “Quantum repeaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet,” Reviews of Modern Physics 95, 045006 (2023).
5. S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, “Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead,” Science 362, eaam9288 (2018).
6. C. H. Bennett et al., “Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen channels,” Physical Review Letters 70, 1895–1899 (1993).
7. M. Uria et al., “Continuous-variable quantum-state tomography enabled by quantum mirrors,” arXiv:2606.04277v1 (2026).
8. J.-G. Ren et al., “Ground-to-satellite quantum teleportation,” Nature 549, 70–73 (2017).
9. M. Petrovich et al., “Broadband optical fibre with an attenuation lower than 0.1 decibel per kilometre,” Nature Photonics 19, 1203–1208 (2025).
10. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, 10th Anniversary Edition (2010).
11. E. T. Jaynes and F. W. Cummings, “Comparison of quantum and semiclassical radiation theories with application to the beam maser,” Proceedings of the IEEE 51, 89–109 (1963).
12. C. W. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise, 3rd ed. (2004).
13. R. K. Tyson, Principles of Adaptive Optics, 4th ed. (2015).
14. IBM Quantum Documentation, Qiskit Runtime REST API, API version 2026-04-15.
15. IBM Quantum Documentation, primitives and Qiskit Runtime execution modes (2026).
16. NASA Space Technology Research Grants, “Moonbeam—Beamed Lunar Power” (2021 project description; accessed October 2026).
17. NASA TechPort Project 118529, “High Efficiency Laser Power Beaming Receivers for Lunar and Extraterrestrial Exploration” (2026).
18. W. A. Ruperto Hernandez et al., “Orbital Power Beaming to Provide Increased Mobility, Flexibility, and Science Measurements on the Lunar Surface,” NASA NTRS 20250003718 (2025).