Quest for Quirky Quantum Particles May Have Struck Gold

Evidence for elusive Majorana fermions raises possibilities for quantum computers

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

By Eugenie Samuel Reich of Nature magazine

Getting into nanoscience pioneer Leo Kouwenhoven's talk at the American Physical Society's March meeting in Boston, Massachusetts, today was like trying to board a subway train at rush hour. The buzz in the corridor was that Kouwenhoven's group, based at the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, might have beaten several competing teams in solid-state physics -- and the community of high-energy physicists -- to a long-sought goal, the detection of Majorana fermions, mysterious quantum-mechanical particles that may have applications in quantum computing.

Kouwenhoven didn't disappoint. "Have we seen Majorana fermions? I'd say it's a cautious yes," he concluded at the end of a data-heavy presentation.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Quantum particles come in two types, fermions and bosons. Whereas bosons can be their own antiparticles, which means that they can annihilate each other in a flash of energy, fermions generally have distinct antiparticles; for example, an electron's antiparticle is the positively charged positron. But in 1937, Italian physicist Ettore Majorana adapted equations that Englishman Paul Dirac had used to describe the behaviour of fermions and bosons to predict the existence of a type of fermion that was its own antiparticle. Over decades, particle physicists have looked for Majorana fermions in nature, and after 2008, condensed-matter physicists began to think of ways in which they could be formed from the collective behaviour of electrons in solid-state materials, specifically, on surfaces placed in contact with superconductors or in one-dimensional wires.

Kouwenhoven's apparatus is along the latter lines. In his group's set-up, indium antimonide nanowires are connected to a circuit with a gold contact at one end and a slice of superconductor at the other, and then exposed to a moderately strong magnetic field. Measurements of the electrical conductance of the nanowires showed a peak at zero voltage that is consistent with the formation of a pair of Majorana particles, one at either end of the region of the nanowire in contact with the superconductor. As a sanity check, the group varied the orientation of the magnetic field and checked that the peak came and went as would be expected for Majorana fermions.

Although other groups have previously reported circumstantial evidence for the appearance of Majorana fermions in solid materials, Jay Sau, a physicist at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, who attended Kouwenhoven's talk, says that this is a direct measurement. "I think this is the most promising-looking experiment yet," he says. "It would be hard to argue that it's not Majorana fermions."

Multiple schemes have been proposed in which Majorana fermions act as the 'bits' in quantum computers, although Sau cautions that it's not yet clear whether those created by Kouwenhoven will be long-lived enough to be used in that way.

If the Delft group's result holds up, it not only represents an impressive coup in solid-state physics, but does so ahead of other approaches to creating Majorana fermions. For example, the neutralino, a hypothetical supersymmetric particle that could account for some or all of the Universe's dark matter, is thought to be a Majorana fermion. Some models suggest that neutralinos could be produced by the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, the European particle-physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland.

This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on February 28, 2012.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe