![]() ![]() That project was partly funded by Microsoft, and the company hired Kouwenhoven to work on Majoranas in 2016. The 2018 paper claimed to show firmer evidence for Majorana particles than a 2012 study with more ambiguous results that nevertheless won fame for Kouwenhoven and his lab at Delft Technical University. From the fuller data, there’s no doubt that there’s no Majorana.” “I don’t know for sure what was in their heads,” says Sergey Frolov, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh, “but they skipped some data that contradicts directly what was in the paper. Two physicists in the field say extra data Kouwenhoven’s group provided them after they questioned the 2018 results shows the team had originally excluded data points that undermined its news-making claims. An attached note from the authors said the original paper, in the prestigious journal Nature, would be retracted, citing “technical errors.” It concludes that they did not find the prized particle after all. Late last month, Kouwenhoven and his 21 coauthors released a new paper including more data from their experiments. Three years later, Microsoft’s 2018 physics fillip has fizzled. The company’s director of quantum computing business development, Julie Love, told the BBCthat Microsoft would have a commercial quantum computer “within five years.” Kouwenhoven’s discovery buoyed Microsoft’s chance to catch up. ![]() Rivals IBM and Google had already built impressive prototypes using more established technology. Microsoft hoped to harness Majorana particles to build a quantum computer, which promises unprecedented power by tapping quirky physics. In March 2018, Dutch physicist and Microsoft employee Leo Kouwenhoven published headline-grabbing new evidence that he had observed an elusive particle called a Majorana fermion. In a 2018 paper, researchers said they found evidence of an elusive theorized particle. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |