Microsoft-Led Team Retracts Disputed Quantum-Computing Paper (wired.com) 23
A Microsoft-led team of physicists has retracted a high-profile 2018 paper that the company touted as a key breakthrough in the creation of a practical quantum computer, a device that promises vast new computing power by tapping quantum mechanics. From a report: The retracted paper came from a lab headed by Microsoft physicist Leo Kouwenhoven at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands. It claimed to have found evidence of Majorana particles, long-theorized but never conclusively detected. The elusive entities are at the heart of Microsoft's approach to quantum computing hardware, which lags behind that of others such as IBM and Google. WIRED reported last month that other physicists had questioned the discovery after receiving fuller data from the Delft team. Sergey Frolov, from the University of Pittsburgh, and Vincent Mourik, at University of New South Wales, in Australia, said it appeared that data that cast doubt on the Majorana claim was withheld.
Monday, the original authors published a retraction note in the prestigious journal Nature, which published the earlier paper, admitting the whistleblowers were right. Data was "unnecessarily corrected," it says. The note also says that repeating the experiment revealed a miscalibration error that skewed all the original data, making the Majorana sighting a mirage. "We apologize to the community for insufficient scientific rigor in our original manuscript," the researchers wrote. Frolov and Mourik's concerns also triggered an investigation at Delft, which Monday released a report from four physicists not involved in the project. It concludes that the researchers did not intend to mislead but were "caught up in the excitement of the moment," and selected data that fit their own hopes for a major discovery. The report sums up that breach of the norms of the scientific method with a quote from physics Nobel laureate Richard Feynman: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself -- and you are the easiest person to fool." The Delft lab released raw data from its 2018 experiment Monday. Frolov and Mourik say that it should also release full data from its Majorana hunting project going back until 2010 for others to analyze.
Monday, the original authors published a retraction note in the prestigious journal Nature, which published the earlier paper, admitting the whistleblowers were right. Data was "unnecessarily corrected," it says. The note also says that repeating the experiment revealed a miscalibration error that skewed all the original data, making the Majorana sighting a mirage. "We apologize to the community for insufficient scientific rigor in our original manuscript," the researchers wrote. Frolov and Mourik's concerns also triggered an investigation at Delft, which Monday released a report from four physicists not involved in the project. It concludes that the researchers did not intend to mislead but were "caught up in the excitement of the moment," and selected data that fit their own hopes for a major discovery. The report sums up that breach of the norms of the scientific method with a quote from physics Nobel laureate Richard Feynman: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself -- and you are the easiest person to fool." The Delft lab released raw data from its 2018 experiment Monday. Frolov and Mourik say that it should also release full data from its Majorana hunting project going back until 2010 for others to analyze.
Nah, can't be (Score:2)
Microsoft lie? Nnneever!
It's a chiffon (Score:2)
You think it's Marjoana but it's not; it's chiffon.
A chiffon is a poly unsaturated particke substitute.
Re: (Score:1)
You do not detect quantum space particles with normal space particles. What you do is create normal space structure which will manipulate quantum space particle field flows, which will the generate, normal space particle changes. That gap between normal space particle interactions, needing to be logically filled and obviously quantum space particles fit it. Like electromagnetic fields but that would be too course, what you want to do is achieve more finely tuned changes and make adjustments to those changes
Ant man would disagree (Score:2)
He's been to the quantum realm and back. He's seen the Chiffon
Re: (Score:1)
Or too much management.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Quantum computing is a scam (Score:3)
I think it is more like using fusion for energy generation. We can do it, but it is not worth the costs. A practical quantum computer is like cold fusion. It is a myth that everyone claims to be just on the cusp of realizing.
Re: (Score:3)
More like the Higgs boson. There have been many claimed discoveries of the Higgs boson but when measured it has _always_ turned out to be something else. CERN is in the midst of refuting their own measurement of the particle from 2012, because the mass and interaction with other forms of matter of what they claim to have found make no sense.
https://www.newscientist.com/a... [newscientist.com]
Re: Quantum computing is a scam (Score:1)
Can't help to associate.. (Score:1)
Being from The Netherlands, their precious Majorana particles got diluted by Marijuana particles.
Science is its own hubris. (Score:3)
Pickle Rick: Flip the pickle over.
Morty: Are you going to, I mean, you know, is this the first part of some magic trick?
Pickle Rick: I don't do magic, Morty, I do science. One takes brains, the other takes dark eye liner.
Majorana... (Score:3)
Clearly, what they actually found was Marijuana particles from smoking out in the lab...
Uncertaity principle in action ... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently, they also looked at my "n" and it went missing ... DAMN Physicists!
Re: (Score:1)
It's not a pink-slip until the unemployment office sees it.
observation bias (Score:2)
'the researchers did not intend to mislead but were "caught up in the excitement of the moment," and selected data that fit their own hopes for a major discovery.' An age-old story, so many of the same have come and gone. Cold Fusion anybody? How about N-Rays?
interesting topic (Score:1)