The people, physics and patents of the 2025 Nobel prize

No items found.
​
December 9, 2025

The Nobel Prize in physics 2025 was awarded to John Clarke, Michel H. Devoret and John M. Martinis “for the discovery of macroscopic quantum mechanical tunnelling and energy quantisation in an electric circuit” [1]. Their discovery paved the way for the race to achieve a working quantum computer and quantum supremacy – demonstrating a programmable quantum computer can solve a problem infeasible for any classical computer. Thus, the three physicists are rightfully rewarded for showing a phenomenon that provides a significant source of technical innovation today. Interestingly, Clarke, Devoret and Martinis have also been prolific in patenting their findings and technologies and getting on the deep tech patent train, probably before the word was even invented. In the light of the Nobel ceremony, this article will dive into the people, physics and patents of macroscopic quantum tunnelling (MQT).

Figure 1: Illustration of an electron tunnelling through a potential barrier. The wave amplitude is smaller outside the barrier, indicating a lower probability of finding the particle there. AI-generated imagery

Bringing quantum tunnelling to the macroscopic scale

Let’s start with an overview of the science. As many of us know, a classical particle in a potential well, for example a golf ball in a cup, will never leave the well unless energy is brought into the system. For the golf ball, this might mean lifting it out of the cup. However, a particle governed by the laws of quantum mechanics may spontaneously leave a potential well without any addition of energy to the system, in a phenomenon called quantum tunnelling. This happens for tiny particles such as electrons and has been a well-known phenomenon for decades. Simplifying somewhat, the probability and strength of quantum tunnelling can be said to be inversely proportional to the size of the system. As illustrated in Figure 1, the probability of the particle existing outside the potential well is smaller, but not zero, and reduces with the size of the system. Once the effect had been demonstrated for the electron, the question became how large a system could become before the probability of quantum tunnelling becomes negligible, and the search for a system exhibiting MQT was inevitable.

Physicists discovered a candidate for MQT in superconducting circuits. One such circuit is called a current biased Josephson junction, illustrated in Figure 2, formed from two superconducting leads (A and B) separated by a potential barrier (C).

Figure 2: A schematic diagram of a Josephson junction. From [2] under CC-BY SA 3.0.

According to the BCS theory of superconductivity, pairs of electrons may bind together at sufficiently low temperatures, forming what is known as Cooper pairs. The theoretical potential seen by Cooper pairs at C will be of the shape of a tilted washboard as shown in Figure 3. At zero current, the Cooper pair (depicted as a black ball) cannot move. When the bias current over the Josephson junction increases, it may tunnel through the barrier, and no voltage will be seen between A and B. As the current further increases, the potential will be so steep that even a classical particle may “roll” down the potential, and a voltage will be seen between A and B. The current where a voltage can be seen across the junction is called the critical current.

Figure 3: Tilted washboard potentials with increasing current. Own work.

In the beginning of the 1980s, experiments were performed to experimentally verify this behaviour. When the bias current across a Josephson junction was increased gradually, a critical current could indeed be detected. However, there was uncertainty regarding whether this effect was due to disturbances in the circuit, noise or true superconductivity.

When John Clarke was working at the University of California, he formed a group with his doctoral student John Martinis and post-doc Michel Devoret to conduct a series of experiments that finally confirmed, beyond reasonable doubt, that the effect seen in the Josephson junction indeed was MQT. They showed that a circuit “big enough to get one’s grubby fingers on” [1] could be made to exhibit quantum tunnelling. This laid the groundwork for the decades of work on quantum computing and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that followed.

A case study of deep tech patents

The three physicists continued working on applications for Josephson junctions, many of which have been patented. A search for patents attributed to at least one of the laureates reveals 53 patent families totalling 434 patents across the world. The most significant portion of the families, 23 of them, are attributed to Martinis and collaborators. Yale University owns 18 families, while 16 are owned by Google and mostly relate to Martinis’ work with quantum computing, and 11 by the University of California. Let’s dive into two of them relating to MRI.

An early patent attributed to Clarke, Martinis and Claude Hilbert, US patent 4585999 A, claims priority in April of 1984. The patent concerns an amplifier based on a superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) and was owned by the US Department of Energy. The device comprises two Josephson junctions, showing its practical applicability at an early stage. It is mentioned in the patent that the device “would have particular use in nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) imaging”, also known as MRI.

Figure 4: A schematic drawing of a SQUID. From US4585999A

Fast-forwarding a few years, a patent attributed to Clarke and collaborators claiming priority in February 2002, EP1474707B1, indeed concerns “SQUID detected NMR and MRI at ultra low fields”. MRI is normally performed at magnetic field strengths around 1-10 T, while the patent describes NMR using fields in the micro tesla range using a SQUID as a magnetometer, shown as 33 in Figure 5. This is in the same range as the magnetic field of the Earth. Such a device would thus be able to detect the miniscule fields produced by nuclei excited by micro tesla fields while simultaneously distinguishing them from noise and the Earth. Although MRI at ultra low fields is uncommon today, this may create the opportunity to build portable MRI machines in the future, increasing the availability of this ground-breaking technology.

Figure 5: A block diagram of NMR spectroscopy. From EP 1474707B1.

Conclusion

In summary, after demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that MQT exists, the three physicists went on to develop their techniques into something applicable. These patents show that the laureates of this year’s Nobel prize were on the case of deep tech patents even before the word was invented. Being active and claiming the rights to your inventions remains important today. If you have the opportunity to do so, take the chance. We at EIP, specialising in complex and high-value patents, would be happy to help you.

References

[1] Royal Swedish   Academy of Sciences, “The Nobel Prize in Physics 2025,” 7 October 2025.   [Online]. Available:   https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2025/10/press-physicsprize2025-2.pdf.

[2] Wikimedia Commons,   “File: Single josephson junction.svg,” 2 September 2020. [Online].   Available:   https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Single_josephson_junction.svg&oldid=446854302.   [Accessed 27 November 2025].

 

 

‍

‍

‍

‍

The Latest Thought Leadership pieces in the Content Hub

Analysis of Intel’s cellular patent portfolio
September 20, 2019
Intel has built a cellular portfolio of 5G patent assets at some pace. The industry should take note, says James Seymour in this article in the September 2019 issue of Intellectual Property Magazine.
Stay in the Know

The Patent Strategist

Get expert insights and the top patent stories delivered straight to your inbox.

Heading
This is some text inside of a div block.
This is some text inside of a div block.

Latest Insights

Showing 0 of 100
Data Detection Technologies Ltd v Doytec Automation Ltd UPC_CFI_554/2024
23 May 2025
Order of 25 September 2024 [1] This Order to Preserve Evidence pursuant to Art. 60 UPCA concerns a machine manufactured by the defendant that was being displayed at a 3-day trade fair.
#
Litigation
​
Quantum Sensors: What are they and why do they matter to healthcare?
19 May 2025
The UN says we are in a year of quantum, celebrating 100 years since the development of quantum mechanics. While quantum computing is often the main talking point, the other areas of quantum tech,...
#
Consulting
​
Exploring IP in a Space Sector Product
09 May 2025
Introduction Innovative space sector businesses generate IP all the time. But it can be difficult to appreciate the range of IP being generated, or the value of that IP.
#
Patenting
​
Charged Up: Are we missing the potential of domestic battery storage for the energy transition?
21 May 2024
It's accepted that batteries will play a more and more important role in managing electricity demand as we transition to a greater proportion of renewables, but have we been thinking about them in...
#
Patenting
​
AI and Big Data in Agritech
28 March 2024
First published by Process Engineering - February 2024 The world's population stands above 8 billion in 2024 and is still growing. That growth may be slowing down but nonetheless there may be another...
#
Patenting
​
Trade Secrets vs. Patents in the UK Space Sector
11 September 2023
In this article we take a look at how trade secrets and patents compare as means of protecting inventions by UK space sector businesses. Background Properly protecting intellectual property is a key...
#
Patenting
​
A Year in Patents - Part 3/4: The Procedures of International Patent Prosecution
05 September 2023
Dr Girish Nivarti joined EIP's London office in October 2022. In this four-part series, he chronicles his first year as a trainee patent attorney.
#
Patenting
​
The UK National Semiconductor Strategy: a first glance
23 May 2023
The UK Government has released its National Semiconductor Strategy. The Strategy sets out the UK Government's vision for the semiconductor industry in the UK, and details funding and other...
#
Patenting
​
The Deep Non-Thinker
27 April 2023
Lock up your authors! ChatGPT is here! And it's coming for your IP! The internet is awash with content written about, or written by, the new chat-bot in town, ChatGPT.
#
Consulting
​
Geographic Scope of the UPC and Unitary Patent
22 February 2023
The grant of a European Patent allows patent rights to be obtained in respect of over 35 states by means of the respective validation procedures for those states.
#
Litigation
​
A Year in Patents - Part 1/4: Swapping Simulations for the Patent Profession
14 February 2023
Dr Girish Nivarti joined EIP's London office in October 2022. In this four-part series, he chronicles his first year as a trainee patent attorney.
#
Patenting
​
Opt-out decision
02 December 2022
Owners of European patent rights (both pending and granted patents) need to decide, in respect of each right individually, whether to opt out of the Unified Patent Court ("UPC") system.
#
Litigation
​
Information from the UPC Registry
01 December 2022
The Registry of the Unified Patent Court maintains a number of Registers which are publicly accessible via their website at www.unified-patent-court.org.
#
Patenting
​
Unitary Patent as an object of property
09 November 2022
A registered intellectual property right such as a patent is normally considered a property right of the country in which it has effect. Rules relating to the patent as an object of property, for...
#
Patenting
​
What are the options if you want to avoid the UPC?
03 November 2022
During the transitional period, it is possible to opt classical (i.e. non-unitary) European patents and applications out of the competence of the UPC (provided that no action has commenced at the UPC...
#
Patenting
​