I spent a portion of today catching up with old friends and colleagues, so fewer highlights, but here are a couple:
- Like a few hundred other people, I went to the invited talk by Chetan Nayak, leader of Microsoft's quantum computing effort. It was sufficiently crowded that the session chair warned everyone about fire code regulations and that people should not sit on the floor blocking the aisles. To set the landscape: Microsoft's approach to quantum computing is to develop topological qubits based on interesting physics that is predicted to happen (see here and here) if one induces superconductivity (via the proximity effect) in a semiconductor nanowire with spin-orbit coupling. When the right combination of gate voltage and external magnetic field is applied, the nanowire should cross into a topologically nontrivial state with majorana fermions localized to each end of the nanowire, leading to "zero energy states" seen as peaks in the conductance dI/dV centered at zero bias (V=0). A major challenge is that disorder in these devices can lead to other sources of zero-bias peaks (Andreev bound states). A 2023 paper outlines a protocol that is supposed to give good statistical feedback on whether a given device is in the topologically interesting or trivial regime. I don't want to rehash the history of all of this. In a paper published last month, a single proximitized, gate-defined InAs quantum wire is connected to a long quantum dot to form an interferometer, and the capacitance of that dot is sensed via RF techniques as a function of the magnetic flux threading the interferometer, showing oscillations with period h/2e, interpreted as charge parity oscillations of the proximitized nanowire. In new data, not yet reported in a paper, Nayak presented measurements on a system comprising two such wires and associated other structures. The argument is that each wire can be individually tuned simultaneously into the topologically nontrivial regime via the protocol above. Then interferometer measurements can be performed in one wire (the Z channel) and in a configuration involving two ends of different wires (the X channel), and they interpret their data as early evidence that they have achieved the desired majorana modes and their parity measurements. I look forward to when a paper is out on this, as it is hard to make informed statements about this based just on what I saw quickly on slides from a distance.
- In a completely different session, Garnet Chan gave a very nice talk about applying advanced quantum chemistry and embedding techniques to look at some serious correlated materials physics. Embedding methods are somewhat reminiscent of mean field theories: Instead of trying to solve the Schrödinger equation for a whole solid, for example, you can treat the solid as a self-consistent theory of a unit cell or set of unit cells embedded in a more coarse-grained bath (made up of other unit cells appropriately averaged). See here, for example. He presented recent results on computing the Kondo effect of magnetic impurities in metals, understanding the trends of antiferromagnetic properties of the parent cuprates, and trying to describe superconductivity in the doped cuprates. Neat stuff.
- In the same session, my collaborator Silke Buehler-Paschen gave a nice discussion of ways to use heavy fermion materials to examine strange metals, looking beyond just resistivity measurements. Particularly interesting is the idea of trying to figure out quantum Fisher information, which in principle can tell you how entangled your many-body system is (that is, estimating how many other degrees of freedom are entangled with one particular degree of freedom). See here for an intro to the idea, and here for an implementation in a strange metal, Ce3Pd20Si6.
More tomorrow....
(On a separate note, holy cow, the trade show this year is enormous - seems like it's 50% bigger than last year. I never would have dreamed when I was a grad student that you could go to this and have your pick of maybe 10 different dilution refrigerator vendors. One minor mystery: Who did World Scientific tick off? Their table is located on the completely opposite side of the very large hall from every other publisher.)
4 comments:
Thank you for reporting on the topological qubit talk. In the last few weeks, there has already been quite a bit of talk surrounding the Microsoft announcement, and questions were raised about the protocol itself and about the evidence presented in papers published so far. I think it's fair to say that, despite all the assurances of the MS team, there is a healthy dose of skepticism in the community regarding the significance of the results. For example, see this article: https://thequantuminsider.com/2025/03/10/major-debate-continues-to-swirl-around-majorana-findings/
The Microsoft session was also discussed by Dan Garisto at Nature.
Thanks, folks.
Lots of other journalism about this, with the common theme being that lots of people think the evidence falls short of proving the Majoranas are there. Here is story by Matteo Rini at Physics.
Post a Comment