Physics vs. Code: Why Google’s ‘Quantum Money’ Could Make Blockchain Obsolete

For more than a decade, the world of digital currency has been built on a single foundation: the blockchain.

This complex, code-based system of distributed ledgers was a revolutionary approach to creating digital scarcity and preventing counterfeiting.

But now, researchers at Google are exploring a concept that could bypass it entirely, securing money not through a chain of code but through the fundamental laws of physics.

This new research into “quantum money” offers an alternative to cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and targets the very problem a blockchain was designed to solve.

If successful—a big if, since it presumes advanced quantum computers—it would effectively obviate the need for a blockchain’s core technology, representing a fundamentally different path toward a secure digital future.

In a new study, dubbed “Anonymous Quantum Tokens with Classical Verification,” researchers from Google Quantum AI, the University of Texas at Austin, and the Czech Academy of Sciences have advanced a decades-old idea for a theoretical currency secured by the unalterable laws of quantum mechanics.

The paper outlines a system where money is not just data on a ledger, but a unique quantum object whose integrity is guaranteed by the fabric of reality itself.

The Uncopyable Dollar

The concept hinges on one of the strangest and most powerful principles in physics: the “no-cloning theorem.”

This law states that it is impossible to create a perfect, independent copy of an unknown quantum state. While a string of data on a computer can be copied endlessly, a quantum state cannot.

“If you had a $1 bill that was actually a quantum state, you could prove, based on the properties of quantum mechanics, that copying such a state is impossible,” Dar Gilboa, a Google Quantum AI researcher and co-author of the study, told Decrypt. “You could only succeed with very small probability.”

In this system, counterfeiting isn’t just computationally difficult, as in Bitcoin; it is physically forbidden.

Replacing the ledger with physics

This is where the technology becomes a direct threat to the blockchain model.

A blockchain’s primary function is to prevent “double-spend” without a central authority. It does this by creating a massive, public, and unchangeable accounting book—the distributed ledger—that everyone watches.

Quantum money solves the same problem far more directly. You don’t need a global ledger to track ownership history if the token itself is physically uncopyable and can only be spent once.

• Blockchain secures transaction history in a ledger.
• Quantum Money secures the token itself.

If each digital dollar has its own inherent physical security, the entire energy-intensive apparatus of a proof-of-work blockchain becomes redundant. Verification is a direct physical process, not a global consensus event.

A different philosophy: The centralized compromise

While quantum money could replace blockchain’s technology, it does not share its decentralized philosophy. Gilboa is quick to draw this distinction.

“We’re not solving the same problem,” he emphasized. “What we’re doing isn’t decentralized, so it’s not really an analog of cryptocurrencies in any strong sense.”

The Google model assumes a trusted central issuer, such as a bank, to create quantum tokens. However, it brilliantly uses physics to keep that issue honest.

The system is designed to provide a powerful privacy guarantee, preventing the bank from tracking its own currency. Users can team up to perform a “swap test” on their quantum tokens.

“If they’re not… identical, that means the bank could be tracking you,” Gilboa said. Any attempt by the bank to secretly tag its money would be instantly revealed.

A glimpse of a distant future

This financial revolution will not happen tomorrow.

Gilboa stresses that the research is entirely theoretical and far beyond current capabilities.

“It assumes not only that you have a large, fault-tolerant quantum computer, but also the ability to do quantum communication… a whole other set of very difficult engineering challenges,” he said.

Even so, the research is profoundly important.

It shows that the defining technological solution of the last decade—the blockchain—is not the only answer to securing digital value. The brute-force accounting of a distributed ledger could one day be replaced by the elegant and absolute laws of the quantum realm.

“It’s this crazy tool,” Gilboa concluded. “You can do all these wild things. It’s high risk, high reward—but that’s what makes it exciting.”