Microsoft’s quantum computing claims are being called out by scientists once more, tech company responds
Microsoft’s claims about building a quantum computer have been challenged once again. A newly published critique in the journal Nature has raised fresh questions about a key breakthrough Microsoft claimed last year that is related to the company's announcement this month that it will deploy a workin
By Toi Tech Desk
Microsoft’s claims about building a quantum computer have been challenged once again.
A newly published critique in the journal Nature has raised fresh questions about a key breakthrough Microsoft claimed last year that is related to the company's announcement this month that it will deploy a working quantum system by 2029.News agency Reuters reports that the latest controversy centers on a peer-reviewed critique published in Nature by Henry Legg, a lecturer in quantum physics at the University of St.
Andrews in Scotland.
Legg took aim at a crucial Microsoft research paper published in February 2025, which serves as the foundation for all of Microsoft’s subsequent quantum efforts.What the paper claimed and its critiqueMicrosoft publicly claimed last year that it had successfully observed the “Majorana” – a long-theorized subatomic particle essential to its hardware approach.
However, Microsoft never published that discovery in a peer-reviewed journal.
Instead, its February 2025 paper made a narrower claim: that Microsoft had developed software capable of identifying a minute, stable “gap” in an otherwise conductive wire.Finding this stable gap is critical because “qubits” (the fundamental building blocks of quantum computers) are fragile and often lose their computing state in a fraction of a second.
Microsoft believes this gap will allow them to create longer-lasting, more practical qubits.However, Legg’s independent analysis found that Microsoft’s identification software “yielded inconsistent and misreported outcomes.” Furthermore, Legg reviewed a broader dataset that Microsoft released but left out of the official paper, concluding it showed nothing but random digital noise with no clear evidence of the stable gap Microsoft claimed to have found.In an interview with Reuters, Legg compared Microsoft's scientific process to searching through an entire bakery’s worth of bread until you happen to find a piece that looks like a religious icon.“If you're looking into something which is essentially just random physics, eventually you will find the Jesus in your toast,” Legg was quoted as saying.Notably, even as tech rivals like Google, IBM and Quantinuum have engineered machines based on better-understood, established quantum technologies, Microsoft has spent nearly two decades pursuing an unproven scientific path.
Microsoft argues its unique approach will eventually allow it to completely leapfrog the competition.Microsoft’s history of retractionsThis is far from the first time Microsoft’s quantum department has faced intense scrutiny.
Two previous Microsoft-backed research papers were completely retracted from Nature.
Editors also flagged formal alerts regarding potential research defects in two additional papers published in Nature and Science.Microsoft has defended its past record by stating that the previously retracted papers were conducted entirely outside of its own corporate labs, noting it did not review the data before those findings were published.Last year, Amazon executives expressed skepticism and even frustration with Microsoft's claims of a major quantum computing breakthrough, adding that the leadership believe that the Windows-maker's achievement is overhyped and lacks substantial evidence.
Business Insider reported that Simone Severini, Amazon's head of quantum technologies, emailed CEO Andy Jassy, questioning the validity of Microsoft's claims.Microsoft’s response: ‘We are building the plane’Microsoft is standing firmly behind its data.
In a formal reply published in Nature and an interview with Reuters, the tech giant insisted its quantum program is making tangible, practical progress.
Microsoft countered Legg's critique by explaining that the disputed software was never meant to be a flawless diagnostic tool, but rather a “practical tuning tool” used by engineers to find the best locations on physical microchips to place qubits.Chetan Nayak, the executive overseeing Microsoft’s quantum hardware division, told the news agency that the code is so reliable that Microsoft engineers use it daily to set up chips that are actively performing quantum operations right now.Get the latest technology news and updates.
Download the TOI App.