Ask Runable forDesign-Driven General AI AgentTry Runable For Free
Runable
Back to Blog
Technology7 min read

A new paper argues Microsoft exaggerated its quantum claims a year ago | The Verge

A peer-reviewed critique of Majorana 1 claims Microsoft did not conclusively demonstrate a working topological qubit. Microsoft disagrees. Discover insights abo

TechnologyInnovationBest PracticesGuideTutorial
A new paper argues Microsoft exaggerated its quantum claims a year ago | The Verge
Listen to Article
0:00
0:00
0:00

A new paper argues Microsoft exaggerated its quantum claims a year ago | The Verge

Overview

Tech Expand Amazon Apple Facebook Google Microsoft Samsung Business See all tech

Reviews Expand Smart Home Reviews Phone Reviews Tablet Reviews Headphone Reviews See all reviews

Details

Science Expand Space Energy Environment Health See all science

Entertainment Expand TV Shows Movies Audio See all entertainment

Policy Expand Antitrust Politics Law Security See all policy

Gadgets Expand Laptops Phones TVs Headphones Speakers Wearables See all gadgets

Verge Shopping Expand Buying Guides Deals Gift Guides See all shopping

Streaming Expand Disney HBONetflix You Tube Creators See all streaming

Transportation Expand Electric Cars Autonomous Cars Ride-sharing Scooters See all transportation

Tech Close Tech Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Tech

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Science Close Science Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Science

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Microsoft Close Microsoft Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Microsoft

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

A new paper argues Microsoft exaggerated its quantum claims a year ago

A peer-reviewed critique of Majorana 1 claims Microsoft did not conclusively demonstrate a working topological qubit. Microsoft disagrees.

A peer-reviewed critique of Majorana 1 claims Microsoft did not conclusively demonstrate a working topological qubit. Microsoft disagrees.

Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

A critique published in Nature Wednesday calls the basic technology behind Microsoft’s “breakthrough” quantum computing chip the Majorana 1 into question. Microsoft unveiled the chip in February 2025 and said it featured a brand-new technology known as a topological qubit. Topological qubits, they said, would be the “building blocks” for their future quantum computer. Microsoft announced the next generation chip Majorana 2 at Build earlier this month.

But in a peer-reviewed article, Henry Legg, a physicist at the University of St. Andrews, re-analyzed Microsoft’s data on their device and argued that the company’s researchers did not conclusively demonstrate a working topological qubit in the first place.

Theory predicts that the electrons in this wire behave in a collective pattern known as a Majorana particle, for which the chip is named.

Proponents of quantum computing predict that the technology’s computational abilities will advance new medicine discovery, encryption, and machine learning. Companies like Google and IBM have already demonstrated more advanced machines than Majorana 1 or 2, although presently, no one has conclusively gotten any quantum computer to perform anything useful. But Microsoft claimed that Majorana 1, and subsequently Majorana 2, paved their path toward a practical quantum computer.

Microsoft’s design, unique among quantum computing companies, involves a tiny wire, thinner than a human hair, made of the semiconductor indium arsenide stuck to a superconductor. Theory predicts that the electrons in this wire behave in a collective pattern known as a Majorana particle, for which the chip is named. Microsoft wants to encode information in the properties of the Majorana particle. (A topological qubit is to a Majorana particle as a transistor is to silicon.)

Microsoft’s next-gen quantum chip cuts timeline to useful quantum computing

Proponents of the Majorana particle think it is promising qubit material because theory predicts that when formed into topological qubits, the Majorana should compute with fewer errors than competing materials, such as superconducting circuits pursued by IBM. This suggests that ultimately, fewer topological qubits are needed to scale up to a useful quantum computer.

That is, if Microsoft has actually made a Majorana particle. “They haven’t convincingly shown that they have Majoranas,” Legg told The Verge. “You can’t make a qubit if you don’t have the Majoranas.”

In Legg’s critique, he writes that what Microsoft claims as a signature of the Majorana particle could actually be from the formation of quantum dots, which are electron-containing structures, in the device. Quantum dots would not be useful for building the quantum computer. He also writes that Microsoft cherry-picked their data.

“You can’t make a qubit if you don’t have the Majoranas.”

Microsoft’s team published a rebuttal in Nature disputing Legg’s interpretation of their data. Legg’s critique “does not constitute a substantial scientific challenge to our findings,” the Microsoft team wrote. Legg has not “proposed an alternative model that fits all of our data,” Chetan Nayak, a physicist leading Microsoft’s quantum team, told The Verge.

Legg first posted his critique on the online physics repository ar Xiv on February 26, 2025, within a week of Microsoft’s Majorana 1 announcement. It took a year for Nature to conduct a peer review and publish his article.

Meanwhile, on June 2, Microsoft announced a new chip, the Majorana 2, featuring what they claimed was the next generation of their topological qubits. The company says they can build a “scalable quantum computer” by 2029. “We 100% stand behind our results,” Nayak told The Verge. “We stand by our roadmap. We stand behind our long-standing commitment to scientific rigor and dialogue.”

Legg says the company’s characterization of Majorana 2, which Microsoft wrote in a non-peer reviewed manuscript, suffers from similar problems he pointed out a year ago. “Nothing in this [manuscript] resolves the fundamental issues that so many scientists have with this company’s previous claims,” Legg told The Verge.

Sophia Chen Close Sophia Chen Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All by Sophia Chen

Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Microsoft Close Microsoft Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Microsoft

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Science Close Science Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Science

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Tech Close Tech Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Tech

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Meta launches cheaper smart glasses without Ray-Ban

I drove the Slate Truck — there’s more to it than EV minimalism

Prime Day has some solid deals on Switch 2, PS5, and Xbox games

The best Prime Day deals we found on our favorite gear

Key Takeaways

  • Tech Expand Amazon Apple Facebook Google Microsoft Samsung Business See all tech
  • Reviews Expand Smart Home Reviews Phone Reviews Tablet Reviews Headphone Reviews See all reviews
  • Science Expand Space Energy Environment Health See all science
  • Entertainment Expand TV Shows Movies Audio See all entertainment
  • Policy Expand Antitrust Politics Law Security See all policy

Cut Costs with Runable

Cost savings are based on average monthly price per user for each app.

Which apps do you use?

Apps to replace

ChatGPTChatGPT
$20 / month
LovableLovable
$25 / month
Gamma AIGamma AI
$25 / month
HiggsFieldHiggsField
$49 / month
Leonardo AILeonardo AI
$12 / month
TOTAL$131 / month

Runable price = $9 / month

Saves $122 / month

Runable can save upto $1464 per year compared to the non-enterprise price of your apps.