Taking the ethics of quantum physics seriously

2025 marks the 100th anniversary of the development of quantum mechanics, a fundamental theory that is credited with rewriting our understanding of the universe. Work in this field has already sparked important technological innovations, including the development of MRI machines and GPS systems.

Quantum technology development marches onwards, with extra effort being put into creating functioning quantum computers. But as the science continues to evolve, many members of the research community are also reconciling how quantum innovations can best help society – without leaving anyone behind. As Gang Xu, Chair of the Ethics in Physics at Perimeter, ponders, “Everybody is talking about quantum advantage – but who will get it?”

Quantum consequences

“Technology doesn’t help everyone equally, and it doesn’t hurt everyone equally,” says Joan Arrow, founder and CEO of the Quantum Ethics Project, a non-profit dedicated to imagining an equitable quantum future.  

When she first started college, Arrow believed physics was a neutral, objective field of study. But as she dived deeper into her research, that view began to change.  

During her graduate studies at the Institute for Quantum Computing at the University of Waterloo, Arrow recalls hearing conversations within the AI community about how this technology could harm society. This made her wonder: why weren't quantum researchers also talking about the societal impact of their technology?

“As computer scientists and physicists, we have the power to write a single paper or line of code that may impact millions, if not billions, of people,” Arrow says. “That scale is why we need a higher standard of responsibility.”  

An example of how a theory can cause ripple effects is Shor’s Algorithm. Developed in  1994 by Peter Shor, a theoretical computer scientist who is currently the Morss Professor of Applied Mathematics at MIT, the algorithm is predicted to allow future quantum computers to quickly factorize large numbers. This has powerful implications for cybersecurity: a common encryption algorithm, RSA, relies on the difficulty of such a task. 

“Peter Shor is a theorist,” says Arrow. “He didn’t build any quantum devices. But by proving in his theorem that there’s an exponential speed-up for factoring – which is the basis of the security of RSA, our most popular form of encryption – he set a series of events in motion.”  

The hype factor

On the other hand, there’s a difference between carefully planning how a new technology could impact society and simply smashing a panic button. Arrow predicts a Shor-capable quantum computer is decades away. But misinformation and hyperbole, regardless of whether they applaud or demonize a technology, can quickly spin out of control.  

Arrow is particularly concerned about a phenomenon called hype. “Hype is a distance,” she explains. It's the length between what someone says a technology can do and what it’s actually capable of, or the distance between a promise and reality. It’s also a risk to the field, she says.

We’ve been down this road before: in the 1950s, the biggest minds in computing and information science were proposing AI advancements without the material hardware to back up their claims. “Their promises were in the stratosphere,” says Arrow. “Their capabilities were in the dirt.”

Eventually, Arrow explains, the public decided they were being scammed. No one would touch the topic, ushering in what’s known as AI winter.  

“This delayed the field about 30 years,” she says. “In the 1980s, when the next AI renaissance took place, the same pattern repeated.” The promises were high; the payoffs were low. A second AI winter occurred, and the field didn’t recover until the modern day.

Arrow believes that history is repeating itself with quantum hype. In an article published in Nature, she makes the argument that demystifying quantum mechanics and establishing clear benchmarks are essential for combatting hype and charting a sustainable course for the technology.

Demystifying quantum  

When it comes to demystifying quantum, Arrow says that researchers should be trained to be better communicators – to talk to the public in ways that are both scientifically accurate and accessible. And she maintains that quantum ethics education is key for researchers, students, professionals, and members of the public. “Everyone has a role to play,” she says, “and we should allow everybody to recognize that role as early in their career as possible.”

In 2023, Arrow led a summer reading group on quantum ethics at Perimeter Institute. The group tackled problems surrounding the development of quantum and AI technology –including who stands to benefit from advancements in research and who is at risk of missing out or harm.  

After Arrow left Canada to pursue her career in Colorado, USA, Gang Xu, one of the participants in the course, felt compelled to keep the ethics conversations alive at Perimeter. This led her to take on the Chair position of Perimeter's Ethics in Physics Working Group.  

Xu, like Arrow, is passionate about quantum education – but she would like to see it introduced to younger age groups.

“In undergrad you have to take classical mechanics, and so the earliest you ever learn anything about quantum is as an adult,” Xu says. “Which means if you don’t go into physics, you will have no idea what’s fun about it.” She uses games to make the abstract concepts central to quantum accessible for all – a key step in responsible quantum education.  

“We want more people to become aware of it and why it’s really important,” adds Xu. “But the people who show up to the working group are very enthusiastic. Everybody is very passionate about this.”

One big change that Xu and her colleagues have already put in place was adding ethics in physics scenarios as a mandatory component of a machine learning course offered to Perimeter students.

For Arrow, the reading group was a big success because it empowered people – like Xu – to carry the work on quantum ethics forward. “Now it sounds like it’s evolving, and that’s amazing – but I think it was a helpful starting point. There’s a lot more that needs to be done, but I’m proud of what we did that summer.”