Sergey Frolov🇺🇦 Profile picture
Not really here anymore https://t.co/jaUZlxyknu https://t.co/uVQcRYWtCF https://t.co/hgCEZUzAzu Glory to Ukraine!
Mar 14, 2022 9 tweets 5 min read
When you meet a colleague at #apsmarch, you discuss each other's work, family and war in 🇺🇦.
Then you may say 'oh, have you seen ...' I suggest the subject of that discussion my work with @VincentMourik on investigating unreliable research on the topic of Majorana.
A summary 🧵 Image 1. The retracted Nature paper from last year is widely known. But do you know that there are several others hopefully headed in the same direction? They are...

Feb 17, 2022 7 tweets 4 min read
Amazing passage from @QuTech_news external review report in 2019, by @RHDijkgraaf (the new Dutch minister of science) & Co.

Every paper mentioned, except the 2012 one, is now known to have undisclosed data manipulation. 4 out of 5 we recommended to be retracted: Nature Nanotechnology 2018 - myself and @vincentmourik recommend retraction

Dec 13, 2021 10 tweets 5 min read
We found another Delft paper unreliable - Nature Nanotechnology 2018🧵. The stated innovation of this work is in the word 'ballistic'. (Majorana evidence echoes earlier work and is based on zero-bias peaks.) What is the meaning of 'ballistic' here?

nature.com/articles/s4156… According to authors, there are no quantum dots (claim familiar from Nature 2017) and there is 'quantized conductance' (familiar from Nature 2018). Illustrated by Fig1d (black trace plateau at 1) and quotes from the text.

We cannot confirm this central 'ballistic' claim. ImageImage
Mar 14, 2021 4 tweets 2 min read
I celebrate #PiDay2021 in my own way. To me pi will always be about this. Image My first physics result: "Measurement of the Current-Phase Relation of SFS pi-Josephson junctions" with magnificent junctions from Chernogolovka, and experiments done in Urbana: arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0…
Mar 11, 2021 7 tweets 3 min read
The most important figure in the retracted 'Quantized Majorana Conductance' paper was Figure 2e. A tiny technical panel based on the same raw data as the infamous 'plateau'. What's the big deal? Read on... Image First, let's take it in. You see how perfectly the red datapoints all line up at 1 (the quantized value). Members of the Academic Community already memed about it: even the totally commanding theory could not get so close to 1. Image