The post Beam-me-up money – Blockworks appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. This is a segment from The Breakdown newsletter. To read full editions, subscribe. “Money has been reduced to a simulacrum of its former self, a mere obligation by a counterparty to perform bookkeeping functions.”— Stefano Gogioso, A Quantum Moneyfesto In Star Trek, it took only seconds to travel from the Starship Enterprise down to a nearby planet. Crewmembers only had to step into the Transporter, which dematerialized them into a pattern of energy (accurate to the quantum level) and beamed them to a target location where the energy would be converted back into matter so the person could be reassembled. But is the person who beams back up the same that beamed down? The official, in-universe answer is that they’re one and the same. The consciousness of transported crewmembers remains continuous, they say, thanks to the perfection of the Transporter’s quantum-level scan and reconstruction.  As proof, they cite crewmembers claiming a memory of being in transit. But we’ve since learned how quantum-level transportation works, and that’s not it. In quantum teleportation, first discovered in 1993, the only thing being teleported is information. Teleporting, say, a qubit, requires that the original quantum state of that qubit be destroyed: By the laws of physics, collecting precise information on a quantum state collapses its superposition, thereby destroying it.  But the collected information can then be sent as classical data (ones and zeros) over a satellite or fiber optic cable and then, thanks to the physics-magic of entanglement, reassembled (from other particles) at its destination. So the unsettling truth is that the Transporter on the Starship Enterprise can only have worked by killing its passengers — the crewmember who beamed down is not the one who beamed back up. This has some sci-fi implications for the future of money. In banking, the way money… The post Beam-me-up money – Blockworks appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. This is a segment from The Breakdown newsletter. To read full editions, subscribe. “Money has been reduced to a simulacrum of its former self, a mere obligation by a counterparty to perform bookkeeping functions.”— Stefano Gogioso, A Quantum Moneyfesto In Star Trek, it took only seconds to travel from the Starship Enterprise down to a nearby planet. Crewmembers only had to step into the Transporter, which dematerialized them into a pattern of energy (accurate to the quantum level) and beamed them to a target location where the energy would be converted back into matter so the person could be reassembled. But is the person who beams back up the same that beamed down? The official, in-universe answer is that they’re one and the same. The consciousness of transported crewmembers remains continuous, they say, thanks to the perfection of the Transporter’s quantum-level scan and reconstruction.  As proof, they cite crewmembers claiming a memory of being in transit. But we’ve since learned how quantum-level transportation works, and that’s not it. In quantum teleportation, first discovered in 1993, the only thing being teleported is information. Teleporting, say, a qubit, requires that the original quantum state of that qubit be destroyed: By the laws of physics, collecting precise information on a quantum state collapses its superposition, thereby destroying it.  But the collected information can then be sent as classical data (ones and zeros) over a satellite or fiber optic cable and then, thanks to the physics-magic of entanglement, reassembled (from other particles) at its destination. So the unsettling truth is that the Transporter on the Starship Enterprise can only have worked by killing its passengers — the crewmember who beamed down is not the one who beamed back up. This has some sci-fi implications for the future of money. In banking, the way money…

Beam-me-up money – Blockworks

2025/12/11 00:24

This is a segment from The Breakdown newsletter. To read full editions, subscribe.


In Star Trek, it took only seconds to travel from the Starship Enterprise down to a nearby planet.

Crewmembers only had to step into the Transporter, which dematerialized them into a pattern of energy (accurate to the quantum level) and beamed them to a target location where the energy would be converted back into matter so the person could be reassembled.

But is the person who beams back up the same that beamed down?

The official, in-universe answer is that they’re one and the same. The consciousness of transported crewmembers remains continuous, they say, thanks to the perfection of the Transporter’s quantum-level scan and reconstruction. 

As proof, they cite crewmembers claiming a memory of being in transit.

But we’ve since learned how quantum-level transportation works, and that’s not it.

In quantum teleportation, first discovered in 1993, the only thing being teleported is information.

Teleporting, say, a qubit, requires that the original quantum state of that qubit be destroyed: By the laws of physics, collecting precise information on a quantum state collapses its superposition, thereby destroying it. 

But the collected information can then be sent as classical data (ones and zeros) over a satellite or fiber optic cable and then, thanks to the physics-magic of entanglement, reassembled (from other particles) at its destination.

So the unsettling truth is that the Transporter on the Starship Enterprise can only have worked by killing its passengers — the crewmember who beamed down is not the one who beamed back up.

This has some sci-fi implications for the future of money.

In banking, the way money is “sent” from Bank A to Bank B is that Bank A subtracts a number in its spreadsheet and sends a message to Bank B instructing it to add the same number to theirs.

Only the message is sent, not the money — which is why we need banks: to send each other messages about our money.

With quantum money, however, the money sends its own messages.

Quantum money is the idea that value could be represented by the quantum state of a particle and exchanged via quantum teleportation.

“The most important thing to understand here is that quantum [money] behaves like a resource, not like data,” Fabrizio Genovese explained in an email.  

Where a bank deposit is information about money and Bitcoin is a consensus record representing money, quantum money would be the money itself — an uncopyable atom, photon, or molecule that is money.

Not data about money but the physical resource of money.

This has utility because it would allow money to be secured and transported according to the unbreakable laws of superposition, entanglement and the no-cloning theorem. 

In other words, physics might someday do what databases and distributed ledgers do now, but without the database or distributed ledger.

Quantum money would therefore have the self-custodial properties of physical cash: You could keep qubits of money in a hardware device the same way you keep cash in your pocket.

That would make exchanging money perfectly permissionless (no intermediary required) and perfectly private (there’s no ledger of transactions).

But quantum money would also have the transportable properties of digital money: Destroying the money on your device creates the sendable information required to recreate it on another device, however far away.

(There is a moment when the quantum state, in transit as classical data, does not exist — which proves that the Star Trek Transporter really is a suicide machine.)

Sending quantum money will be like sending physical cash in the mail. But better, because it arrives instantly.

Sending money over great distances created the need for banks, but solving that problem introduced the intermediaries that now control nearly all of our money.

Bitcoin, of course, is a way of making peer-to-peer transactions possible over great distances. 

But quantum money would be the unstoppable way to do it.

“Blockchain transactions are not quite peer-to-peer,” Stefano Gogioso says, “because there’s always going to be part of the mechanism that can stop your transaction from going through. For economical, political, or technological reasons.”

Nothing will stop a quantum transaction, for any reason.

There is one limitation, however: Unlike Star Trek, where Captain Kirk could beam down to a newly discovered planet, quantum money can only be transported to a hardware device prepared to receive it.

That device does not yet exist, so quantum money is not yet feasible — we’re three or four years away from the earliest iteration, Gogioso estimates. 

When it arrives, though, it will be the safest conceivable way to send money.

Getting security from quantum states, Genovese says, is like getting energy from the Sun: “It’s what the universe gave us.”

As such, he expects all cybersecurity will eventually be done through quantum states — including money.

We’ll still have to give that money value, however, which might prove to be the hardest trick. 

Building a transporter to teleport qubits is one thing; getting others to accept them as payment is another.


Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters:

Source: https://blockworks.co/news/beam-me-up-money

Market Opportunity
BEAM Logo
BEAM Price(BEAM)
$0.03273
$0.03273$0.03273
+3.18%
USD
BEAM (BEAM) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
PA Daily | Moonshot launches New XAI gork ($gork); analysis shows that Trump’s crypto assets account for about 40% of his total assets

PA Daily | Moonshot launches New XAI gork ($gork); analysis shows that Trump’s crypto assets account for about 40% of his total assets

CryptoQuant predicts three future trend scenarios for Bitcoin: in an optimistic scenario, it will rise to $150,000 to $175,000; Binance Alpha will launch Anon, BEETS and SHADOW; Moonshot announced the launch of New XAI gork ($gork).
Share
PANews2025/05/01 17:30
XRP ETF’s bereiken belangrijke mijlpaal: $1 miljard aan netto instroom

XRP ETF’s bereiken belangrijke mijlpaal: $1 miljard aan netto instroom

De markt voor crypto-exchange-traded funds (ETF’s) heeft opnieuw een belangrijke mijlpaal bereikt. XRP ETF’s hebben gezamenlijk meer dan 1 miljard dollar aan netto
Share
Coinstats2025/12/16 21:01