Abstract

Majorana fermions (particles that are their own antiparticle) may or may not exist in nature as elementary building blocks, but in condensed matter they can be constructed out of electron and hole excitations. What is needed is a superconductor to hide the charge difference and a topological (Berry) phase to eliminate the energy difference from zero-point motion. A pair of widely separated Majorana fermions, bound to magnetic or electrostatic defects, has non-Abelian exchange statistics. A qubit encoded in this Majorana pair is expected to have an unusually long coherence time. I discuss strategies to detect Majorana fermions in a topological superconductor, as well as possible applications in a quantum computer. The status of the experimental search is reviewed.

Authors

Beenakker, C. W. J.

Publons users who've claimed - I am an author
Contributors on Publons
  • 1 author
  • 1 reviewer
Followers on Publons
Metrics
Publons score (from 1 score)
7.6
Altmetric
Web of Science Core Collection Citations
  • Abstract, title and references ● Is the aim clear? Yes ● Is it clear what the study found and how they did it? Yes ● Is the title informative and relevant? Yes ● Are the references: ● Relevant? Yes ● Recent? Yes ● Referenced correctly? Yes ● Are appropriate key studies included? Yes Introduction/ background ● Is it clear what is already known about this topic? Yes ● Is the research question clearly outlined? Yes ● Is the research question justified given what is already known about the topic? Yes Methods ● Is the process of subject selection clear? Yes ● Are the variables defined and measured appropriately? Yes ● Are the study methods valid and reliable? To some Extent ● Is there enough detail in order to replicate the study? Yes Results ● Is the data presented in an appropriate way? Yes ● Tables and figures relevant and clearly presented? Yes ● Appropriate units, rounding, and number of decimals? Yes ● Titles, columns, and rows labelled correctly and clearly? Yes ● Categories grouped appropriately? Yes ● Does the text in the results add to the data or is it repetitive? repetitive ● Are you clear about what is a statistically significant result? Yes ● Are you clear about what is a practically meaningful result? Yes Discussion and Conclusions ● Are the results discussed from multiple angles and placed into context without being over interpreted? Yes ● Do the conclusions answer the aims of the study? To some extent ● Are the conclusions supported by references or results? Yes ● Are the limitations of the study fatal or are they opportunities to inform future research? Needs Future Research.

    Ongoing discussion
All peer review content displayed here is covered by a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license.