Erik Gustafson
Assistant Professor of Communication
University of Texas at Tyler
Suggested Citation:
Gustafson, E. (2025). Communicating the quantum world: A news framing analysis of recent developments in quantum technologies. Utah Journal of Communication, 3(1), 19-26. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15312243
Abstract
The second quantum revolution has promised to fundamentally alter the world’s computing infrastructure. Consequently, it is expected that quantum computing will reshape nearly every social, economic, political, and personal activity. However, public and expert awareness and knowledge of quantum computing is shockingly low. Therefore, the present paper employed news framing as a qualitative method to investigate the current popular discourse surrounding developments in quantum technologies. Results indicated two primary themes regarding the understanding and speed of development intertwined into the coverage of quantum technology. Broad implications are drawn for both the ways in which we communicate quantum technology and future technologies in general.
Keywords: Quantum computation, News Framing, Technology, Communication, Media
Today, we are in the midst of the second quantum revolution in which theoretical and mechanical developments in quantum technology will be applied to computing hardware and software (Jaeger, 2018). Although Artificial Intelligence (AI) been considered the “next big thing” in technology, quantum computing has quietly and rapidly developed in the background since the 1980s and promises a fundamentally new system of computation that will alter not just computing, but our preconceived notions of physical existence (Calzati & de Kerckhove, 2024; Cuffaro, 2022). Each year governments and tech giants pour billions of dollars into research and development of quantum computers as they race for “quantum supremacy” – the point at which quantum computers outpace the classical computers that run our world (Kaku, 2023). Experts have predicted that at some point in the 2030s the public will see a widespread usability and adoption of quantum computing (Stackpole, 2024). However, public and scholarly awareness and knowledge of quantum computing is shockingly low (Keller, 2023).
Therefore, the present article sought to investigate the popular discourse surrounding quantum computation. As a relatively unacknowledged phenomenon in the social sciences and humanities, a brief description of quantum principles will be provided first along with a review of previous scholarly investigations of the topic. Following the review of the literature, media framing will be employed as a qualitative method for investigating mainstream news coverage of quantum developments. Ultimately, the present article sought to provide further understanding of the ways in which quantum computation is communicated to the public.
Literature Review
An Egregiously Brief Description of Quantum Basics
Put simply, quantum physics, which has been in development for over 125 years, represents a theory of the physical world that challenges the theory of the world that was, and still is, widely accepted under classical Newtonian physics (Jaeger, 2018). Whereas classical Newtonian physics posits a discrete, deterministic, and linear world in which actions were predictable, Quantum physics operates on the principles of superpositioning, entanglement, and wave-particle duality which directly refutes and supersedes Newtonian postulates (Kaku, 2023). In the first quantum revolution, these principles helped create mechanical devices such as MRIs, atomic cocks (GPS), transistors, lasers, and the atomic bomb (Carson, 2024). The second quantum revolution promises to apply quantum principles to computing to provide a new form of computing that will reportedly be faster, more efficient, and able to hand exponentially more data than current classical super computers (Kaku, 2023). Instead of storing information in bits and bytes, quantum computers utilize qubits. Instead of storing information as a 1 or a zero, quantum computers store information as both a one and a zero simultaneously. Information is retrieved not by exact location, but through probabilistic and entangled relations. In quantum systems, information does not even move through traditional transistors, it is able to “tunnel” through energy barriers (Kaku, 2023). Put together, a quantum computer is not just a better form of computing, it is a fundamentally new and different form of computing.
The above paragraph is a wildly brief and incomplete snapshot of the difference between classical and quantum technology. As a theory of the subatomic, quantum physics and mechanics eludes human perception thus escaping human attention and understanding (Logan, 2010). Applications in quantum computing take these difficult theories of the physical world and apply them to digital space. Put analogously, quantum computing seemingly turns our singular world into many and turns computers from digital filing cabinets into continually shifting houses of innumerable mirrors. In sum, quantum concepts change our conceptualizations of and possibilities for technology and society.
Scholarship on Quantum Technology
In the physical sciences, there has been increased attention paid to how physics is communicated both amongst practitioners and to the public (Harmon & Gross, 2023). Once assumed to be immune to communicative exigencies, scientists in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic have paid more attention to the presentation of their ideas and presentation effects on the adoption of ideas and action (Zinkernagel, 2022). At present, there have been a number of efforts to provide a laypersons explanation of quantum concepts, their applications, and potential societal impacts (Jaeger, 2018; Kaku, 2023; Rhode, 2021). However, social scientific and humanistic scholarship on quantum technologies (mechanics, computation, theory, etc.) is limited.
Interestingly, perhaps the most sustained area of inquiry by social scientists and humanist scholars has been in an unexpected location: the overlap of art and physics. For instance, Shlain (1991) investigated how art and physics developed in tandem throughout history. Specifically, Shlain (1991) argued that, despite the lack of attention that physicists pay to artists, and vice versa, scientific developments, such as Newton’s gravity, Einstein’s spacetime, and Bohr’s complementarity all changed the ways in which artists can conceive space, light, and their elements as constituted in art (Popova, 2014; Wilkes, 1991). During roughly the same time period, Gregory Morales, spearheaded the efforts for a “quantum aesthetics” that was inspired by quantum concepts and focused on artistic creation as opposed to scholarly attention (Caro & Murphy, 2002). Scoon (2017) provided a more specific framework for quantum artists to work from and how they might think of the artistic as mimesis of the unknown. Artists and scholars of art, often considered to be at the forefront of technological change, are one area in which the possibilities of quantum technology have been probed.
In addition to art and artists, scholars have also attempted to grapple with the philosophical and social consequences. For instance, Barad (2007) probed specific experiments in quantum physics, such as the double-slit experiment, and argued for fundamental shifts in our epistemological and ontological orientations towards the world – termed by Barad (2007) as onto-epistemology. Kroker and Cook (2023) argued along similar lines stating that a “quantum zone” as a new way of understanding the personal, professional, and political culture(s) of our world. Rosen (2023) might term what is discussed by Kroker and Cook (2023) as “quantum perception”, which is a term he uses to describe a form of perceiving the world that pushes away from the tradition objectivist stances and towards a more “ontologically entangled” society based on observations from proprioceptive mode of observation of entangled protons (p. 157). Ultimately, it may be Calzati and de Kerkhove (2024) who most aptly characterized quantum developments by calling the new environment a “quantum ecology” in which changes to epistemological and ontological bases will create an existential crisis for society that necessitates a new paradigm of thought. Gustafson (2025) argued that quantum media technologies will be the next era-defining communication medium and will eclipse both the internet and AI. Gustafson’s (2025) argument is undergirded by the notion that AI programs are merely software enabled by already existing technology, whereas quantum computing represents fundamentally new hardware that provides previously unimagined possibilities (Gustafson, 2024). In each of the above works, the monumental shifts that quantum technology may trigger are traced and explored.
However, despite the supposed dawning of the “quantum era” scholars have yet to turn their attention to the specific machinations of the quantum movement. Though we have been alerted via academic scholarship to the seismic changes quantum technologies will bring, we must also focus on the other specific and multifaced discourses regarding quantum technology.
Framing Theory
Media framing – which can be considered synonymous with news framing and framing in general – is one of the most employed theoretical frameworks in communication studies and has a long a storied history in the service of communication scholarship (de Vreese, 2005). Though closely related to receiver-oriented agenda-setting research, framing analysis, originally coined by Goffman (1974), is an approach that is sender-oriented and focuses on how the message is designed and presented to the viewer. Put simply by Blaney (2021),
news framing works from the assumption that within an issue of any salience, indeed at the level of a particular story on a given issue, some characteristics of the issue will be addressed while others are ignored (p. 9).
In essence, by focusing attention on particular components of a message, the viewers are directed to and learn about different components of the story and the phenomenon in general. Thus, the way in which media frames a particular idea, artifact, and/or event can shape how individuals think about the idea, artifact, and/or event.
There is no dearth of research regarding framing of technological advancement in general. From the specific figureheads, such as Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, or Elon Musk, who push forward technological innovations and organizations, to specific technologies themselves, such as social media, the internet, or AI, there are libraries of research studies. However, to date, there exists no formal media framing study of people, organizations, or quantum technologies – whether computation, mechanics, theory, etc. – themselves. As such, the present article sought to answer the following question:
RQ1: How are quantum technologies framed by mainstream news sources?
Method
Selected Texts
In order to answer RQ1, the author collected articles written in the high-circulation newspapers that were geographically dispersed across the United States. Despite the diminished presence of the physical newspaper, the selection of such outlets was justified on the grounds that mainstream newspapers are intended to bring important ideas in a minimally biased format to the general population. Trade and industry publications were excluded for their potential economic and/or ideological bias – though this should be investigated in future research. Thus, the newspapers sampled included The New York Times, USA Today, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, and The Los Angeles Times. Articles were collected from January 1, 2024, to January 28, 2025. Articles were identified by searching the news archives using “quantum” as the primary search term. Due to the scarcity of articles treating developments in quantum technology substantially, the following analysis relied on several key exemplar articles that arose from the archive searches. In line with previous educational and psychological research, exemplars can be extremely helpful when a phenomenon is rare given exemplars, as Bronk (2012) stated, exhibited “a particular characteristic in a highly developed manner” (p. 1). Thus, exemplar articles were selected based on the degree of attempted or actual development of and sustained attention to quantum principles.
Analytic Procedures
To systematize framing analysis of the selected texts, descriptive coding followed by theming of the data, as outlined by Saldana (2013) was employed. In short, descriptive coding was used for assigning basic labels to data as identified in the specific elements of the varying components of a news article, such as the headline, image, lead, and general article content. Coding notes were recorded in a handwritten research journal. From the specific descriptive codes, the author went on to identify thematic links between the specific descriptive codes. As stated by Saldana (2013), “a theme is an outcome of coding, categorization, or analytic reflection” (p. 14). In essence, the author moved from small chunks of data, such as single images or words, towards larger connections between data points and themes the data may be indicative of.
Results
Frame 1: Pop Quanta
As mentioned, the initial search returned many articles that were tagged with the term “quantum”. However, as is the case with most open-ended searches, many of the results were not necessarily pertaining to specific developments and ideas surrounding quantum computation, physics, or mechanics. Still, any article tagged with the “quantum” keyword shed light on understanding of the broader phenomenon. As such, the first frame highlights the degree to which actual quantum happenings are overshadowed by general and broad popular culture usage.
For example, one of the most prominent results of the initial search highlighted American singer Tinashe’s release of an album titled, Quantum Baby, on August 16, 2024. According to James (2024) of the Los Angeles Times, Tinashe’s album name “shows her as an artist who is most comfortable with the unknown, with the things that don’t make sense”. Tinashe is quoted as saying the title fits the album because
There’s so much contradiction within the music on “Quantum Baby” that mimics quantum theory. This energy toggling between vulnerability and also a nastiness, an “I don’t give a f—” spirit (James, 2024).
Here, readers learn about quantum theory through the singer’s point-of-view. Ultimately it is an introduction to quantum physics through popular culture. The introduction highlights “contradiction”, “energy”, and “things that don’t make sense”. The sentiment of these codes pointed toward the general ethos of quantum physics but does not teach readers anything specific about the terms or their meaning in quantum physics. Moreover, Tinashe’s use of the term “mimic” is compelling insofar that the definition of mimicry is imitation for entertainment or ridicule, but not education (“Mimic,” 2025). While some popular culture artifacts are intentionally designed and efficacious for science education purposes, others, such as Tinashe’s album, have no intention nor inclination towards educational purposes. However, inviting individuals to engage with scientific concepts is difficult, but popular culture has been proven as a bridge to incite interest from audiences in many contexts (Dietrich et. al, 2021). Therefore, Quantum Baby may help to stoke awareness for quantum ideas – or at the very least the term itself – by bringing them into a realm where they did not exist before, even if little is learned about the concepts.
Additional commentary on the album in The Washington Post, simply noted that “Tinashe can’t match her own freak on quantum baby” and did not bring up anything related to quantum concepts (Kelly, 2024). As such, the album name intentionally invoked the quantum world and intended to have a quantum “feel” to it, but the significance of such inclusion was ignored in some outlets. Reporters may have ignored the inclusion of quantum concepts due to the perceived lack of relevance of the concepts to the reception of album. Only the track, “No simulation”, in which Tinashe lyrics grapple with truth, reality, going deeper to find meaning, and what’s next, does the listener become pushed towards the difficulties of the quantum world, but goes no further (Tinashe, 2024). Additionally, perceived information-related effects of the album could have been undercut by the perceived efficacy of the performer as a knowledgeable source on the subject, which research has suggested affects whether scientific information is taken seriously (Chen & Song, 2017). While it is more likely that the album does not substantially treat any quantum topics or that reporters viewed other elements of the album as more enticing for readers, coverage that does not engage with the scientific elements of a message alludes to how a layperson’s interpretation or adaptation of quantum concepts is, at present, only treated at the surface level if at all.
In addition to Tinashe’s album release, other popular culture references peppered the initial results. The sci-fi television show, Quantum Leap, appeared in several instances. The film, The Universal Theory, about a WWII conspiracy involving a physicist surfaced as well (Loayza, 2024). In each, there was scant discussion of any specific quantum concepts. This is important insofar as an individual’s first impression of quantum theory may come from popular culture. Kirby (2019), in their study of Hollywood filmmaking, found that cinematic science, even if lacking in depth, often adeptly communicates “cultures of science” to lay audiences. Thus, the scarcity of meaningful discussion of quantum principles in popular culture artifacts is in line with previous research on films, such as Oppenheimer (2023), which have tended to eschew the discussion of the scientific principles instead highlighting personal lives or the political context within which events occur (Faux, 2024; Monk, 2024; Stevenson, 2023). In short, media artifacts may or may not intend to be explicitly inspired by or centered around quantum physics, but may still inform the viewer of general predispositions towards the area. Ultimately, it was revealed pop culture references are intended and reported on primarily for entertainment purposes despite being attached to the “quantum” keyword.
Frame 2: Inching Forward
Another frame that arose was that of the slowness of progress on quantum development, termed “inching forward”. This frame was surprising due to prevailing public sentiment that technology in general is, and has been, moving forward at an alarmingly fast rate. However, the notion that quantum computing is developing slowly was prevalent.
Perhaps most emblematic of this frame, an article written in The New York Times was titled “Quantum Computing Inches Closer to Reality after another Google Breakthrough” (Metz, 2024). Touting new developments in Google’s quantum computer that would take “the most powerful supercomputers” over “10 septillion years” years to complete, Metz (2024) referred to quantum computing as an “experimental technology” and stated, quoting a Harvard Physics Professor, that even though it was never envisioned as a practical possibility it has exited the arena of science fiction and become a reality. Similarly, Neils (2024) reported for USA Today that Google has come up with a new chip that helps to mitigate some of the challenges posed by quantum computing. Neils (2024) goes on to highlight that qubits are “error-prone” and that scientists have been working to reduce and correct errors in quantum computing since the 1990s. For The Chicago Tribune, McPoppin (2024) reported on the creation of the “one of world’s first commercially useful quantum computers in Chicago – despite huge obstacles” and noted the “huge” engineering problems yet to be solved. Discourse regarding the economic investment element of quantum technology mirrored such concerns. For instance, a USA Today was titled “Interested in quantum computing investments?” and went on to discuss the “considerable momentum” in quantum stocks while noting that they are going to be “long-term opportunity” (Spatacco, 2025). Thus, readers are shown that confidence in the quantum technology markets is still tentative, both in engineering and economic terms.
Additionally, the reader is presented with references to the people behind the physics itself as indicative of this speed or lack thereof. Specifically, a number of articles referencing dead scientists – such as Werner Herzog, Albert Einstein, Peter Higgs, and Tsung-Dao Lee – and their contributions to ongoing discussions were referenced (Loeb-McClain, 2025; Wilkinson, 2024). Interestingly, when introduced to the individuals behind the quantum development, readers are primarily shown scientists of a century past whose life’s work has still not been fully actualized at the time of their passing. Coverage of deceased scientists working on quantum physics appeared to exacerbate the felt distance from initial breakthroughs of the first revolution due to the age of the scientists, date of discoveries, and the old photos accompanying them. Additionally, by highlighting the time elapsed since the most prominent breakthroughs, the supposedly impending second revolution may be felt as farther off into the future.
The “inching forward” theme contradicts tech industry professionals predictions, as stated in the introduction. Moreover, the massive investments made in quantum computing may indicate a chasm between coverage and actuality. Historically, periods of interest in technology ebb and flow with funding and felt distance from actuality. For instance, Artificial Intelligence (AI) went through many “winters” of diminished attention (Werner, 2024). AI received intense attention and health funding in the 1950s-1970s, only to be put on the backburner in the 1970s, then regained interest in the early 1980s, only to be abandoned again in late 1980s. Interest would be return, and public attention would begin, in the late 1990s when it was felt practical applications were possible from theoretical discussions (Werner, 2024). Thus, because there is no lack of funding to quantum technology at the moment, the tentative coverage of quantum technology could be considered due to inconceivability of practical applications for quantum technology.
In sum, the above collection of articles referenced in this frame highlighted important milestones and inventions in quantum computing technology, while tempering excitement with statement of substantial theoretical and material challenges. Despite massive breakthroughs in quantum technology, reportage content tends to be cautious in proclaiming “quantum supremacy” that the tech companies and technologists have called for. Put in historical context, the tension between perceived and actual progress of quantum computing, mirrored other technological developments in which progress is perceived as slow right up until it appears as rapturous.
Discussion and Limitations
There are several important takeaways to be discerned from the above results. First, popular culture continues to be a vehicle through which laypersons are introduced to scientific concepts. American singer Tinashe is just one example, but there are other mentions in films, shows, songs, etc. For many, this may be their only introduction to anything quantum. At a time when mentions, acknowledgement, and understanding of anything in the quantum realm is scarce, continued attention to popular culture artifacts may provide a key to understanding how quantum ideas and technologies are portrayed to individuals as those very ideas and technologies become mechanically feasible within society. However, it is also important to understand that popular culture artifacts are primarily designed for entertainment purposes and as a consequence will likely not do more than scratch the surface of meaningful comprehension. As such, scholars must pay sustained, critical attention to the mimicry or coopting of quantum concepts in popular culture to identify how individuals may understand, or misunderstand, quantum concepts.
Second, quantum technology is portrayed as “inching forward” and being plagued with problems in general discourse. Readers are shown slow contemporary progress, unfinished work of trailblazing scientists, and unsure economic analyses. Yet, a cursory review of select scholarship and specialist discourse shows an increased faith, excitement, and sureness in a fast-approaching quantum era. Here there is a contradictory image presented: Is quantum still a long way away or is it around the corner? If the former, there is plenty of time to ignore. If the latter, then a sense of urgency in understanding – much like what was brought with ChaptGPT in 2022 and the ensuant AI wave – may be felt more intensely. By describing quantum developments as inching forward, readers are encouraged to delay grappling with the opportunities and consequences which, as learned from other avenues, are promised to be quite expansive.
While the above discussion of the implications of the analysis, it is important to note the present article does have a few key limitations to consider. First, the use of traditional newspapers leaves out innumerable other trade, tech, economic, and other niche publications that may have more insightful and informed commentary. Second, the relatively small sample size and preference of recency of articles excluded several major breakthroughs in quantum technologies that, despite being a number of years ago, garnered significant and more sustained attention for quantum technology than was seen during the sampling period. Elongating this sampling period further into the past would offer a more comprehensive view of media framing of the phenomenon. Third, and lastly, further effects-based research on media framing of quantum technology would provide a clearer picture of individual knowledge, perceptions, and potential actions regarding quantum images and policy in the future.
Conclusion
In sum, the present article represented a brief and initial investigation into media framing of quantum technology. By analyzing traditional news outlets, the analysis provided a snapshot of recent media framing of quantum technology intended for a general audience that highlighted the popular culture mimicry of concepts while emphasizing the slowness and difficulty of the progression of quantum developments. The implications of this analysis highlighted how imperfect references in popular culture and contradictory information on future predictions necessitate sustained attention in order provide a more cohesive and extensive body of knowledge not just on the communication of quantum technology, but on the public’s understanding of quantum technology in general.
References
Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.
Blaney, J. R. (2021). A world grappling with Pope Francis: Laudato Si’ and the contested frames of a secular-minded church. Journal of Communication and Religion, 44(2), 6–15.
Bronk, K. C. (2012). The exemplar methodology: An approach to studying the leading edge of development. Psychology of Well-Being: Theory, Research and Practice, 2(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/2211-1522-2-5
Calzati, S., & de Kerckhove, D. (2024). Quantum ecology: Why and how new information technologies will reshape societies. The MIT Press.
Caro, M., & Murphy, J. (2002). The world of quantum culture. Praeger.
Chen, C., & Song, M. (2017). Representing scientific knowledge. Springer.
Cuffaro, M. E. (2022). The philosophy of quantum computing. In Miranda (Ed.), Quantum computing in the arts and humanities: An introduction to core concepts, theory, and applications (pp. 107–152). Springer.
De Wolf, R. (2017). The potential impact of quantum computers on society. Ethics & Information Technology, 19(4), 271–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-017-9439-z
de Vreese, C. (2005). News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal, 13(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1075/idjdd.13.1.06vre
Dietrich, N., Jimenez, M., Souto, M., Harrison, A. W., Coudret, C., & Olmos, E. (2021). Using pop culture to engage students in the classroom. Journal of Chemical Education, 98, 896–906. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00233
Faux, E. (2024). Deserted myths and nuclear realities: Revisiting the symbolism of nuclear weapons in contemporary popular culture through Oppenheimer (2023). Media, War & Conflict, 17(3), 354–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/17506352231216901
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Northeastern University Press.
Gustafson, E. (2024). Probing the limits of figures and grounds: Artificial intelligence and quantum computation. New Explorations, 4(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.7202/1111636ar
Gustafson, E. (2025). The future of mediation: McLuhanisms for the quantum era. Iowa Journal of Communication, 56, 83–100.
Harmon, J. E., & Gross, A. G. (2023). The many voices of modern physics: Written communication practices of key discoveries. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Jaeger, L. (2018). The second quantum revolution: From entanglement to quantum computing and other super technologies. Springer.
James, J. (2024, December 4). Tinashe has had a year, and she’s daring us to meet her on her level. The Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/lifestyle/image/story/2024-12-04/tinashe-on-touring-quantum-baby
Kaku, M. (2023). Quantum supremacy: How the quantum computer revolution will change everything. Doubleday.
Keller, J. B. (2023, December 5). U.S. quantum leadership may hinge on public perceptions. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/u-s-quantum-leadership-may-hinge-on-public-perceptions/
Kelly, C. (2024, August 14). Tinashe can’t match her own freak on Quantum Baby. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/music/2024/08/14/tinashe-quantum-baby-review/
Kirby, D. A. (2019). Knowledge production between popular culture and scientific culture. In A. Görgen, G. A. Nunez, & H. Fangerau (Eds.), Handbook of popular culture and biomedicine (pp. 11–24). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90677-5_2
Loayza, B. (2024, September 27). ‘The Universal Theory’ review: A quantum noir. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/26/movies/the-universal-theory-review.html
Loeb-McClain, D. (2024, August 5). Tsung-Dao Lee, 97, physicist who challenged laws of nature, dies. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/05/science/tsung-dao-lee-dead.html
McPoppin, R. (2025, January 2). PsiQuantum plans to build one of the world’s first commercially useful quantum computers in Chicago – despite huge obstacles. Chicago Tribune. https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/12/26/psiquantum-computer-plans/
Merriam-Webster. (2025). Mimic. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mimic
Metz, C. (2024, December 11). Quantum computing inches closer to reality after another Google breakthrough. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/09/technology/google-quantum-computing.html
Monk, R. (2024). Oppenheimer the man versus Oppenheimer the movie. Raritan, 43(4), 86–95.
Neils, S. (2024, December 10). Google says quantum computing team says it cracked a key challenge with new chip. USA Today. https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2024/12/09/google-quantum-computing-challenge-chip/76864291007/
Kroker, A., & Cook, D. (2023). The quantum revolution: Art, technology, culture. University of Toronto Press.
Popova, M. (2025). Leonard Shlain on integrating wonder and wisdom at the intersection of art and physics. The Marginalian. https://www.themarginalian.org/2014/08/07/art-physics-leonard-shlain/
Rhode, P. P. (2021). The quantum internet: The second quantum revolution. Cambridge University Press.
Rosen, S. M. (2023). The strange nature of quantum entanglement: Can observers entangled photons become entangled with each other? Journal of Mind and Behavior, 44(3–4), 157–170.
Logan, R. K. (2010). The poetry of physics and the physics of poetry. World Scientific.
Saldana, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Scoon, A. (2017). Quantum art: Mimesis, uncertainty, and the infinite. Atropos Press.
Shlain, L. (1991). Art & physics: Parallel visions in space, time, and light. Mariner Books.
Spatacco, A. (2025, January 18). Interested in quantum computing investments? Hear what Nvidia’s CEO just said about it. USA Today. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2025/01/18/quantum-computing-investing-nvidia/77742922007/
Stackpole, B. (2024, January 11). Quantum computing: What leaders need to know now. MIT Sloan: Ideas Made to Matter. https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/quantum-computing-what-leaders-need-to-know-now
Stevenson, J. (2023). Oppenheimer: The man, the movie and nuclear dread. Survival: Global Politics and Strategy, 65(5), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2023.2261262
Susskind, L., & Freidman, A. (2014). Quantum mechanics: The theoretical minimum. Basic Books.
Werner, J. (2024, April 9). 3 lessons learned from the second AI winter. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnwerner/2024/04/09/three-lessons-learned-from-the-second-ai-winter/
Wilkes, J. (1991, October 1). Book review: Visionary uses his art in brilliant battle with skeptics. The Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-10-01-vw-3389-story.html
Wilkinson, A. (2024, December 13). Who better to explore the mysteries of the brain than Werner Herzog? The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/13/movies/werner-herzog-theater-of-thought.html
Zinkernagel, H. (2022). Aesthetic motivation in quantum physics: Past and present. Annalen der Physik, 534, 220083. https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.202200283