‘The biggest misconception in my general field is that physics is hard and dominated by a pantheon of all-white-male geniuses,’ says Dr Joshua Heath.

Dr Joshua Heath is a Research Ireland pathway fellow at Maynooth University, where his research focuses on strongly correlated superconductors, quantum simulation complexity and the development of optimal hardware for next-generation quantum devices.

Heath completed his PhD in physics at Boston College before moving on to his first postdoctoral position at Dartmouth College to research universal scaling laws in electron-phonon superconductivity.

Following this, he held joint appointments at the University of Connecticut and the Nordic Institute for Theoretical Physics in Sweden, continuing his work on superconductivity and focusing on the role of ‘two-level system defects’ in superconducting quantum computing hardware.

What inspired you to become a researcher?

I think the boundary between researcher and non-researcher is thin. I think all humans, young and old, have an innate desire to learn about the world around them.

For me, choosing to better understand physics by taking a formal research position is not something that sets me apart from someone who does any other profession.

A researcher takes the easy way out – rather than juggle a profession in tandem with a human’s natural desire to know the world around them, a person who dedicates their profession to scientific research can indulge in this higher human need without fear of neglecting the requirements needed for a decent salary.

In terms of physics versus some other science, I chose physics because of its universality. I can understand (or at least try to understand) some generic biological systems with fundamental physical principles, but I cannot utilise fundamental biological processes to understand some general physical system.

There is an indecisiveness in physics research – an ability to always take a back door from your preferred career direction and start something fresh without relearning an entire toolkit. By taking a physics career path, I give myself the freedom to explore a wide breadth of problems.

Can you tell us about the research you’re currently working on?

My work sits at the intersection of two main areas of physics – condensed matter physics and quantum information.

Condensed matter physics focuses on the properties of matter in solid and fluid phases. What’s interesting about condensed matter physics is that materials we use in our everyday life (like the transistors in our phones) are described by highly complicated physical principles.

Condensed matter physicists study many different kinds of matter, but the central focus of my own work revolves around a class of materials known as ‘superconductors’.

When cooled below a critical temperature, the electrical resistance of superconductors drops to zero, and any existing magnetic fields inside the material are expulsed. This makes superconductivity a very interesting phenomenon to study, and we’re still trying to fully understand it.

In addition to condensed matter physics, I also work in quantum information theory. A central goal of quantum information is to build a quantum computer – a device that utilises intrinsically quantum mechanical phenomena to process information and perform difficult computations.

My main research at Maynooth concerns how interesting materials can be used to make quantum computers, and how the limitations of classical computers (and, thus, the power of quantum computing) can be understood through the lens of similarly interesting materials.

For example, one promising candidate for quantum computing hardware is superconducting quantum circuits, where a fundamental component of the computer is composed of elements made out of superconductors. Of similar and related interest to me are questions of quantum simulability – what systems are intrinsically hard to simulate on a classical computer, and if this ‘hardness’ can be connected to underlying notions of ‘quantumness’ in the many-body system.

Right now, my incoming team is somewhat small – I should have a master’s student and PhD student coming early this autumn, and I’ll be working with a few undergraduates starting this summer. My goal is to have each individual member of my group have a particular sharp focus, so that they can become experts in their specific problems.

In your opinion, why is your research important?

I think this is a subtle question. Important means different things to different people, and my work won’t change the daily life of many people.

In terms of any influence beyond my immediate community, the most important thing my research could do would be to propagate interest in many-electron phases of matter.

Ultimately, my job is to inspire the next generation of scientists to see a simple hunk of boring metal and feel a yearning to understand its nature.

For the condensed matter and quantum information communities specifically, I think my research is important because it builds a bridge between these two subfields. In this way, I’m hoping that my group can spearhead a more interconnected and holistic understanding of quantum phenomena.

What commercial applications do you foresee for your research?

In terms of commercial applications, I prefer to think of applications that will better humanity, rather than those that will make a profit. In terms of such applications, I can think of two which I find very interesting – better pharmaceuticals and clean ammonia production.

Drug discovery requires highly accurate simulations of molecular interactions and chemical reactions, and it’s a hope within the field that quantum computers will be able to simulate the complicated electron behaviour that characterises these molecules.

Still, for either application given above, we need very high-quality quantum states to do these expensive calculations, and preparing these high-quality states is a resource-heavy task itself.

I think a better way of tackling these problems in the short term is to understand the fundamental properties that make a many-electron system (like large biomolecules) ‘hard’ to simulate on a classical computer, and then either avoid them while using classical hardware or somehow exploit this ‘hardness’ as a resource.

What are some of the biggest challenges you face as a researcher in your field?

I think there are two main challenges. On the technical side, I would say computing power is a big setback. We often need to turn to numerics to perform many-body calculations, and thus we often need (classical) supercomputers to help us.

Unfortunately, these supercomputers are in high demand, so we have to apply for computing time, and sometimes this leads to delays in getting results.

The second main challenge would be the rise of AI among the student population. There have always existed online solutions for many problems at the college level, but there is now a serious problem with students using AI to completely solve a difficult problem with the press of a button.

I’ve seen students have AI write the entire code or do the entire project I’ve given them, and if this continues I believe a whole generation of students will start to lose their physical intuition.

Are there any common misconceptions about this area of research?

There are many misconceptions about physics and quantum computing in general. In quantum computing, I think the worst misconception is that quantum computers will change the world.

There currently isn’t even one widely-accepted and conclusive instance where a quantum computer has out-performed a classical computer. In contrast, within condensed matter physics, I think there should be more misconceptions.

Common misconceptions are a sign that the general public are thinking about difficult problems and getting interested in the world around them. We need more crackpot theories of semiconductors.

Finally, I’d say the biggest misconception in my general field is that physics is hard and dominated by a pantheon of all-white-male geniuses.

Continuing this belief will serve nothing more than to continue a ‘leaky pipeline’ of young people (especially young women and members of the LGBTQIA+ community) to look elsewhere for their career objectives. Physics is about universality; the physics toolbox can describe the universe, and anyone in the universe can pick up a tool.

What are some of the areas of research you’d like to see tackled in the years ahead?

It’s always difficult to make predictions. Often it is the more obscure ideas in physics that have the most lasting impact, and knowing what the best problems are can be non-trivial.

One thing I would like to see is a more realistic approach to quantum computing. The physicist John Preskill said we are in the ‘NISQ’ era – the era of noisy, intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices. I think we’re going to be stuck in the NISQ era for a while, and instead of trying to work towards the era of fault-tolerant quantum computers, we should instead make the most of our time with what we have – for example, by incorporating NISQ-era technology into present-day biomedical pipelines.

Don’t miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic’s digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.