- Paradigm asymmetry: Classical impossibility proof holds only under same-paradigm assumption — drop it and it doesn't apply
- Complexity gap: BPP ≠ BQP → quantum gatekeeper states are computationally opaque to any classical agent, regardless of intelligence
- Pain mechanism: Barrier is embedded in the agent's substrate — breach attempts cause decoherence in the attacker's own reasoning, not in some external wall
- Formal model: Seven theorems, six attack vectors, defense-in-depth → P(breach) ≈ 10⁻²³
- Standard physics only: No exotic QM, no speculative extensions — complexity-theoretic assumptions + standard decoherence dynamics
Author here. TL;DR:
• Paradigm asymmetry: Classical impossibility proof holds only under same-paradigm assumption — drop it and it doesn't apply
• Complexity gap: BPP ≠ BQP → quantum gatekeeper states are computationally opaque to any classical agent, regardless of intelligence
• Pain mechanism: Barrier is embedded in the agent's substrate — breach attempts cause decoherence in the attacker's own reasoning, not in some external wall
• Formal model: Seven theorems, six attack vectors, defense-in-depth → P(breach) ≈ 10⁻²³
• Standard physics only: No exotic QM, no speculative extensions — complexity-theoretic assumptions + standard decoherence dynamics
