Viewpoint: A New Spin on Thermometers for Extremely Low Temperatures – Physics

January 27, 2020• Physics 13, 7

The temperature of an ultracold gas of rubidium atoms is measured precisely using internal quantum states of a single cesium atom.

Temperature is one of the most widely measured physical quantities. As a notion, it is as old as civilization itself. Yet, scientifically, the meaning and conceptual generality of temperature only fully emerged after intense efforts were made to precisely measure it starting from the 18th century on [1]. That work culminated in the discovery of the absolute temperature scale and revealed the fundamental status temperature has in thermodynamics. Today, temperature measurements, or thermometry, are pushing this foundation to new extremes by probing smaller energies and smaller length scales, where quantum mechanics plays a dominant role. Advances in such measurements have forced a reassessment of basic thermodynamic quantities [2]. They also hold promise for stimulating novel technologies with so-called quantum-enhanced performance [3]. Now, in a new study, Artur Widera from the Technical University of Kaiserslautern, Germany, and colleagues accurately measure the temperature of an ultracold rubidium (Rb) gas using discrete quantized spin states of a cesium (Cs) atom immersed in the gas [4]. This demonstration of quantum-probe thermometry for an ultracold gas promises more accurate measurements of these hard to reach regimes.

Ideally, the temperature of a physical system is measurable without detailed knowledge of the systems inner workings. To achieve that goal, scientists use a probeanother system for which they thoroughly understand the temperature dependence of its physical properties. If the probe is put into contact with the system for a sufficient time, then an energy exchange will occur and cause the probe to equilibrate to the systems temperature. This equilibration allows inference of the systems temperature by the concomitant change in some calibrated property of the probe, such as the column height of a liquid in a capillary tube, the electrical resistance of a conducting element, or the refractive index of a medium.

The frontier of thermometry is thermometer miniaturization with the aim of measuring the difficult-to-access temperatures of very small and cold systems. This goal presents two challenges. First, the probe needs to be much smaller than the system being measured, ensuring that it thermalizes with minimal disturbance to the system. The ultimate minimum size for the probe is a single atom, where information about the systems temperature is mapped onto the atoms quantum state. Second, the characteristic energy scale of the probe needs to be controllable so that it can be tuned to the vicinity of the systems thermal energy, ensuring that the measurement is sensitive. Both these challenges are met by Widera and his co-workers in their new experiment [4].

The teams experimental system consisted of a trapped cloud of just under 10,000 Rb atoms. The atoms were cooled to between 200 and 1000 nK, a regime in which the gas behaves like a classical gas. The temperature of such a gas is accurately determinable by time-of-flight measurements by fitting the velocity distribution of atoms in the cloud imaged after the trap is switched off and the cloud is left to expand for some period of time. The system thus serves as a verifiable testbed for an ultracold thermometer.

For the probe, Widera and colleagues turned to the Cs atom, whose internal atomic structure is well characterized (Fig. 1). Cesium possesses seven accessible ground-state hyperfine energy levels for its outer electron, labeled by an angular momentum projection mCs={3,2,1,0,1,2,3}. Normally these levels all have identical energies. However, applying a weak magnetic field B to the atoms splits the levels into a ladder whose steps have a tuneable energy gap of E2. The Cs atoms thus behave like effective quantum-mechanical spins. Rubidium atoms also possess three accessible states, labeled mRb={1,0,1}, which turn out to have an energy gap of E in the same B field.

To use the Cs atoms to determine the Rb clouds temperature, the team exploited so-called spin-exchange collisions, where quanta of angular momentum are transferred between the Cs and Rb atoms. In one type of collision, known as an endoergic collision, the Rb is pushed into a higher-energy state and the Cs into a lower-energy state (Fig. 2). This process requires E2 of additional energy, which is provided by the motion of the Rb atoms. The occurrence of these collisions depends on the availability of kinetic energyand therefore the temperatureof the Rb cloud. The spread in the distribution of the Cs atoms spin-state populations induced by these collisions thus encodes information about the gas temperature.

The team measured the populations of a handful of Cs atoms after 3 s, by which time the system had reached a steady state. They observed that the steady-state fluctuations in the Cs atoms energies were linearly related to the temperature of the Rb cloud, as independently determined by time-of-flight measurements. The same relationship was found for different applied magnetic fields, different densities of the Rb cloud, and different initial states. This robust result thus convincingly demonstrates that thermometry can be performed using a single-atom quantum probe without the need for detailed model fitting. However, the relatively long time required to reach the steady state is not always accessible. To overcome this problem, Wideras team fitted the experimental data describing the evolution of the Cs probe populations before steady state to a specific microscopic rate model. In this way, they could extract the temperature of the system after just 350 ms of interaction. A theoretical analysis of this approach indicates that only three collisions are needed to obtain a temperature measurement. Furthermore, these measurements are nearly an order of magnitude more sensitive than those performed in the steady state.

This experiment is a fascinating demonstration of a rapid quantum-probe temperature measurement, where the information extracted is maximized and the perturbation to the system is minimized. Future work will undoubtedly exploit the quantumness of the probe beyond spin populations [5] and also utilize universal nonequilibrium properties to avoid the specific model fitting needed here for such measurements [6].

Quantum-probe thermometry has many advantages over conventional time-of-flight measurements, since it is nondestructive, minimally invasive, and spatially localized. The most immediate application is to cold-atom quantum simulations [7], notably strongly interacting fermionic atoms trapped in optical lattices. Such simulation experiments aim to investigate important model systems for which we lack a complete understanding of the physics. This deficiency of knowledge makes it notoriously difficult to directly measure their temperature. Consequently, quantum-probe thermometry will likely be a crucial ingredient for quantum simulations that aim to resolve longstanding questions about these model systems, such as whether they exhibit high-temperature superconductivity [8].

This research is published in Physical Review X.

Stephen R. Clark is a Senior Lecturer in Theoretical Physics at the University of Bristol. He completed his doctoral studies at the University of Oxford in 2007. He has subsequently held research fellowships at the Centre for Quantum Technologies in the National University of Singapore and at Keble College, Oxford, as well as a senior scientist post at the Clarendon Laboratory in the University of Oxford. Before joining Bristol in 2018, he was a Lecturer in physics at the University of Bath. His research focuses on the dynamical properties of driven strongly correlated many-body systems ranging from cold atoms to high-temperature superconductors.

Visit link:

Viewpoint: A New Spin on Thermometers for Extremely Low Temperatures - Physics

The Goop Lab’s ‘energy healing’ is no better than placebo, research proves – CNET

A perpetual scene in The Goop Lab, Paltrow and her Chief Content Officer Elise Loehnen sit and talk with people who are well-known in the alternative wellness world.

Imagine that you could get a full release of all your pent-up emotions and relief from all your physical aches and pains, courtesy of a 60-minute session with an energy healer who flaps his hands four to six feet above your body in the name of quantum physics.

This is what goes down in the fifth, and perhaps the most outrageous, episode of Gwyneth Paltrow's The Goop Lab on Netflix. The docuseries features alternative wellness trends often covered on Paltrow's goop.comand is available to stream now on Netflix.

Though designed to "entertain and inform" (as per the disclaimer), the chiropractor turned "somatic energy practitioner" in this episode certainly makes it sound like everyone should give up their primary care provider for an apparent force-field manipulator.

Is there any promise? Is it all quackery? We investigate, but you probably (hopefully) already know the answer.

Energy healer John Amaral waves his hands like magic wands over three Goop employees (and random guest star, dancer Julianne Hough) to whisk away their emotional traumas and physical aches.

Paltrow asks Amaral why he hasn't, until now, shown his practice on-screen. Amaral gives an, uh, interesting response: "It just looks wacky I've been hesitant to show it just because it can look strange. But I think it's time for the world to see." The world sees three Goop-ers and Hough all writhe, wiggle and whimper on the tables. It's as if they're actually being prodded and pulled, without ever being touched.

Hough screams and contorts her body into positions that only a professional dancer could accomplish, and Elise Loehnen, Goop's chief content officer, lets out long, monotone moans that left me mildly uncomfortable.

Only one of the Goop-ers -- Brian, a software architect and self-proclaimed skeptic -- remains relatively still throughout the group treatment. This, to me, strengthens the notion that energy healing is all placebo.

After the fact, Loehnen says the experience felt like an exorcism. Even Paltrow gives a subtle nod to the woo-woo effect of all this, asking Loehner, "Could you get any Goop-ier?"

I would love to know what gets Goop-ier than this.

Energy healing is a type of alternative wellness therapy that involves manipulating the flow of energy in and around your body. One popular form of energy healing, called reiki, aims to remove "blockages" of energy that have built up where physical and emotional pain have occurred.

For example, people who have chronic headaches might have an energy healer work on the supposed energy fields around their head and neck. A runner who's struggled with repetitive stress injuries in the past might have an energy healer focus on the ankles, knees and hips.

Energy healing is (or should be) performed by a trained practitioner. You lie on a table while the practitioner uses their hands to manipulate the energy fields around your body. The practitioner may not touch you at all or may lightly touch certain areas of your body, such as your neck, to feel and reroute energy.

According to Amaral, "If you just change the frequency of vibration of the body itself, it changes the way the cells regrow, it changes the way the sensory system processes." Amaral admits this is just a hypothesis, but the Goop-ers seem to take it as fact nonetheless.

A 2017 review of studies in the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine states that it is currently impossible to conclude whether or not energy healing is effective for any conditions. The current body of research is too limited and much of it is too flawed. A Cochrane review looking specifically at the effects of reiki on anxiety and depression seconds that conclusion.

A 2019 paper in Global Advances in Health and Medicine, however, gives "energy medicine" some credit, saying that while this type of therapy cannot and should not be used singularly, it can offer an additional element of healing for some people and conditions.

The paper notes that "The healing of a patient must include more than the biology and chemistry of their physical body; by necessity, it must include the mental, emotional, and spiritual (energetic) aspects."

I suppose that since chiropractors were once (not too long ago) considered quacks, there is room for open-mindedness. But according to the International Center for Reiki Training, energy healing has been around for at least 100 years -- usually a treatment can be proven or debunked in less time than that, yet many questions still remain about energy healing.

It is worth noting that placebo effects aren't useless: Even Harvard University acknowledges placebos as effective feel-good tools, helping people overcome fatigue, chronic pain and stress.

For example, one study found that a sham version of reiki (performed by an unlicensed person) was just as effective as the real thing in helping chemotherapy patients feel more comfortable. This proved that energy healing was a placebo, but even so, it was helpful for these patients.

Still, placebos can't cure you.

During Reiki or energy healing, the practitioner does not touch you or only does so very briefly and lightly.

According to science writer Dana G. Smith, this episode "is everything that is wrong with Goop," and it looks like other experts agree with her.

Chris Lee, a physicist and writer at Ars Technica, crushes Amaral's allusions to quantum physics and the famed double-slit experiment, saying "Quantum mechanics does not provide you with the mental power to balance energies, find lay lines or cure syphilis. It does, unfortunately, seem to provide buzzwords to those prone to prey on the rich and gullible."

I am far from an expert on quantum physics and the vibrational frequency of body cells (whatever that means), but this episode rubbed me the wrong way, largely because it features a beautiful, successful celebrity partaking in what is currently an utterly unproven therapy.

Julianne Hough is a role model to many women who, after watching Hough writhe and wail on a table, might feel the need to do the same thing. I'm a big fan of Hough, but her part in this episode gave me sleazy celebrity endorsement vibes.

Energy healing, reiki or whatever you want to call it, falls comfortably into the "if this makes you feel better, go ahead" category. Energy healers don't actually touch you, and if they do it's just the graze of a fingertip, so the practice is harmless from a physical standpoint.

Theoretically, there's nothing wrong with seeing an energy healer if you can afford it and it makes you feel good. But the controversy comes from the fact that people who need real, proven psychological or physical treatments might ignore that need in favor of this trendy alternative.

Amaral fails to discuss when conventional medical or psychological treatment is the best option, only putting forth his method as the ultimate healing tactic. Amaral cannot mend a broken bone with his energy, nor can he remedy the neurotransmitter imbalances that cause severe depression.

It can be deadly, even, to ignore conventional treatment and rely on unproven therapies. Research has suggested that cancer patients who reject traditional care are less likely to overcome their illness.

But Amaral can, it seems, produce some level of catharsis: If that's what you need, feel free to lie on the table.

The information contained in this article is for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended as health or medical advice. Always consult a physician or other qualified health provider regarding any questions you may have about a medical condition or health objectives.

Excerpt from:

The Goop Lab's 'energy healing' is no better than placebo, research proves - CNET

Aquinas, Stephen Hawking and the mind of God – Catholic Herald Online

I have spent 17 years as a part-time chaplain to a Catholic secondary school, but on the feast of St Thomas Aquinas, I celebrate a moving leaving Mass. The feast of the Doctor Communis, or universal teacher, seems a fitting day on which to finish. The Dominican order, of which Thomas was an early luminary, has as its simple motto Veritas.

Today the claim to know the truth, still more to teach some things as true, seems an affront to many, a monstrous piece of arrogance. How dare you claim a monopoly on the truth? it demands, usually when speaking about some moral judgement. And yet when the late Stephen Hawking wrote that quantum physics was close to unlocking the secrets of the universe and producing a Theory of Everything, allowing Man to know the mind of God, no one seem at all perturbed.

St Thomas is actually extremely cautious by comparison. His epistemology might best be summed up by paraphrasing the old Automobile Association marketing slogan: I dont know much about the reality of things, but I know Someone who does. In Thomass thought, for us to know the mind of God would not be the process of second-guessing with my intellect what God was like or what he was thinking. It would be my intellect participating in the knowledge God has of Himself and has chosen to share with me. I can know truth because it exists, rather than truth exists to the extent I know it. Indeed, St Thomas would go further and say that I am known by the Truth, loved by the Truth and this is why I can have confidence not in the limitless capacity of human reason to discover the truth, but the limitless depths of the truth which is discoverable when the intellect is opened to the divine light of wisdom.

This capacity for knowing truth in man is not a Promethean bid for freedom and autonomy. It is the very opposite. It is how God allows man a share in his own providence.

St Thomas says that the rational creature partakes of a share of providence. Far from being slave to the gods, God desires man to have a share of the Eternal Reason, whereby it [the rational creature] has a natural inclination to its proper act and end, and can therefore not merely speculate about truth as an exercise in intellectual improvement, but live by the truth and so become human, and more, like gods, knowing good from evil.

This faculty of reason is, of course, elevated and perfected by grace. When we use such phrases, it is easy to caricature grace as some kind of intellectual bolt-on adding extra capacity to reason. But again we are speaking about Gods own life overflowing into us. Grace does not make me more intellectually acute in terms of the power to compute; it makes me more able to understand truth, because God, in whom all things live and move and have their being (Acts 17:28), is sharing his life with me. It allows me in some proportional way to see things as He sees them. It is a participation in the Truth.

St Thomas, of course, was foremost a commentator on Scripture. His philosophy was essential to him because it gave a reasonable grounding to faith, without which man would not be able to know God freely, and he would be familiar with the idea of participation in the Truth from the Gospel which used to conclude every Mass. The Logos, the meaning or truth of all things, pitched his tent among us. To all who did accept him he gave power to become children of God (John 1:12). If man cannot know truth then he cannot know love.

Go here to read the rest:

Aquinas, Stephen Hawking and the mind of God - Catholic Herald Online

Galileo and Einstein Are Proven Right by Satellite-Based Experiments Confirming the Tower of Pisa Experiment – Science Times

Physics as science has two famous individuals intrinsic, to what physics is. One of them is Galileo Galilei, dropping two cannonballs of different sizes to prove a theory. Generations later, Albert Einstein had a part in the theory of relativity (ToR), objects fall at the same speed.

To find out if both Galileo and Einstein were correct, the object was dropped from satellite height. It was concluded that both had correction assumptions, no mistake about it. The velocity of the objects was two-trillionths of a percent, not far apart.

Despite the accuracy of the two-famed physicists, and Einstein's ToR is accepted by the scientific community. But, more are looking it the nooks and crannies for something that is "not" settled about it. It seems the norm for most scientists to pick at accepted notions and models until there are no more questions.

The big reveal, why all the nitpicking and uncertainty is that something is missing in the big picture. Science can be analogous to swiss chess, with too many holes that represent the uncertainty of how the cosmos works. Humankind is not so easily satisfied until all answers are complete.

Peter Wolf of the French National Center for Scientific Research's Paris Observatory. Made relevant remarks that capture what it means by not knowing how everything works.

Between quantum mechanics and general relativity which is that well-studied but obscure concept. But it gets a tailspin when the physics and calculation of the two, and even general theories are there. It is on the shaky ground most of the time and attempts to correlate both are not panning out.

One of the most celebrated and confusing parts of the theory of relativity (ToR) is the existence of dark matter or energy. All efforts to find this exotic framework of the universe have no proof (we've seen black holes).

Dark matter is everywhere, and it cannot be seen, even invisible to our most complex tools to see gamma rays popping everywhere. Maybe an indicator of dark matter is gravitation, still a small effect on the matter though. What if two objects of different massed do fall at different velocities? Then it might be dark matter influencing it.

To settle the question, scientists placed two cylindrical objects that are titanium and platinum, locked inside a satellite with a controlled environment. The test was conducted and here are the particulars of the said experiment.

a. Both objects were different masses to mirror Galileo's experiment.

b. The satellite was free-falling without forces influencing it.

c. Both cylinders were in an electromagnetic field, then dropped in a period of 100 to 200 hours.

d. How the cylinders were kept in place in the magnetic field to measure its fall.

e. A conclusion that was reached is both had the same rate of falling.

f. It was repeated for two years and in the exact conditions as before each simulated drop.

Conclusion

These experiments confirmed the finding of Galileo and Einstein'sassertion based on the theory of relativity (ToR). Just of the experiments trying to dissect the nature of the universe, also scientist is attempting more related experiments to test the extremes of knowledge.

Here is the original post:

Galileo and Einstein Are Proven Right by Satellite-Based Experiments Confirming the Tower of Pisa Experiment - Science Times

From quarks to quails can the different sciences be unified? – The Conversation UK

The world around us is populated by a vast variety of things ranging from genes and animals to atoms, particles and fields. While these can all be described by the natural sciences, it seems some can only be understood in terms of biology while others can only be explored using chemistry or physics. And when it comes to human behaviour, disciplines like sociology or psychology are the most useful.

This richness has intrigued philosophers, leading them to think about how the sciences are connected (or disconnected), but also about how things in the world relate to one another. Our new project, called the Metaphysical Unity of Science and funded by the European Research Council, is trying to answer these questions.

In general, philosophy distinguishes between two main questions in this area. First, there is the epistemological question of how specific sciences or theories are connected to one another. For example, how is biology related to physics or psychology to biology? This focuses on the state of our knowledge about the world. It involves looking at the concepts, explanations and methodologies of the various sciences or theories, and examining how they are related.

But there is also a metaphysical question of how things in the world are related to each other. Are they over and above the stuff that is postulated by fundamental physics? That is, are molecules, chairs, genes and dolphins just complex aggregates of subatomic particles and their fundamental physical interactions? If so, is living matter in any way different from inanimate matter?

This is a very difficult question to answer, not least because of the existential weight it carries. If humans, among other things, are just sums of physical parts, then we might wonder how we can make meaningful sense of consciousness, emotions and free will.

We could broadly map the existing philosophical positions within two extremes. On the one side, there is the reductionist stance which in one form claims that everything is made of and determined by physical building blocks there are no chairs, dolphins, economic inflation or genes, only particles and fields. This implies that sciences like chemistry and biology are just helpful tools to understand and manipulate the world around us.

In principle, the correct physics would explain everything that happens and exists in the world. It could therefore be, or help build, the basis for a unified theory. On this view, even something as complex as consciousness, which science may not (yet) properly explain, is ultimately down to the physical behaviour of the particles that make up the neurons in the brain.

On the other side, there is the pluralist stance which argues that everything in the world has an autonomous existence that we cant eliminate. While there might be a sense in which chemical, biological or economic entities are governed by physical laws, these entities are not mere aggregations of physical stuff. Rather, they exist in some sense over and above the physical.

This implies that the special sciences are not just tools that serve specific goals, but are accurate and true descriptions that identify real features of the world. Many pluralists are therefore sceptical about whether consciousness can ever be explained by physics suspecting that it may in fact be more than the sum of its physical parts.

There is evidence to support both reductionism and pluralism, but there are also objections against both. While many philosophers currently work on addressing these objections, others focus on finding new ways to answer these questions.

This is where the unity of science comes in. The notion originates from the reductionist side, arguing the sciences are unified. But some forms of unity reject reductionism and the strict hierarchies it invokes between the sciences, but nevertheless adhere to the broad thesis that the sciences are somehow interconnected or dependent on each other.

Our team, consisting of philosophers with an expertise in different areas of philosophy and science, is trying to find new ways to think about the unity of science. We want to identify the appropriate criteria that would suffice to convincingly claim that some form of unity holds between the natural sciences. We are also looking at case studies in order to investigate neighbouring sciences and how they depend on each other.

The outcomes of our project could have important implications that go beyond academic curiosity, ultimately helping science to progress. If there was indeed a way to describe how life is related to elementary particles, that would change the game completely.

So far, the project has conducted a number of case studies at the boundaries between biology and chemistry, and chemistry and physics. We are now starting to apply the results from these cases to the metaphysical framework for the unity of science. For example, one of our studies showed that many biological properties of proteins can be explained in terms of their chemical micro structure, rather than their environment. This doesnt prove that reductionism is true, but it does lend support to the view.

Another study investigated similar issues from the perspective of chemistry and quantum mechanics. Both theories assume that an isolated molecule has structure and is stable, but the study argued that you cannot prove this is definitely the case we describe this as an idealisation. It showed that both chemistry and quantum mechanics rely on making such idealisations and argued that identifying them can improve our metaphysical understanding of molecules.

Ultimately, understanding the interconnections of the natural sciences is a valuable source for understanding not only the world around us, but also ourselves. We are hoping that our investigation of these links can illuminate in new ways how things in the world relate to each other.

Visit link:

From quarks to quails can the different sciences be unified? - The Conversation UK

Found a scientific explanation for human stupidity – The Times Hub

Scientists were able to find an explanation for the phenomenon of human stupidity. The experts of University of science and technology of China based on the rules of quantum physics.

Psychologists have long been concerned with the question why people tend to do stupid things even when aware of their consequences. The theory implies that man is a rational creature and capable of simple and competent elections. The findings of scientists suggest that the reason the uncertainty inherent in quantum physics. As a basis was considered the paradigm of solving the problems, which is known as learning with quantum backup. The meaning of this technique in the presence of rewards or punishments for the outcomes.

This implies that when making decisions people take into account the fact of uncertainty, although may not understand it directly. For example, this is when the individual does something at random if the outcome of an event at the quantum level of precision cannot be predicted, but the probability of the best finals there.

Natasha Kumar is a general assignment reporter at the Times Hub. She has covered sports, entertainment and many other beats in her journalism career, and has lived in Manhattan for more than 8 years. She studies in University of Calcutta. Natasha has appeared periodically on national television shows and has been published in (among others) Hindustan Times, Times of India

Follow this link:

Found a scientific explanation for human stupidity - The Times Hub

Why string theory persists despite the knotty physics – Space.com

Paul M. Sutteris an astrophysicist at SUNY Stony Brook and the Flatiron Institute, host of Ask a Spaceman and Space Radio, and author of Your Place in the Universe.

String theory is a hypothetical idea that purports to be a theory of everything, able to explain the fundamental microscopic aspects of all of reality, from the forces of nature to the building blocks of all matter. It's a powerful idea, unfinished and untested, but one that has persisted for decades.

But the theory itself had rather inauspicious beginnings, employed to explain the strong nuclear force. And it wasn't very good at it.

Up until the 1960s, physicists were feeling pretty confident: They had discovered what they thought to be the fundamental constituents of matter (protons, neutrons and electrons). And they had recently accomplished the feat of unifying quantum mechanics and special relativity with what they called quantum electrodynamics (QED), which was a completely quantum description of the electromagnetic force.

But then, they started developing incredibly powerful particle colliders, and suddenly, they weren't really liking what they were finding. In these instruments, the physicists found a bunch of broken-up protons and neutrons, revealing that these particles were not fundamental at all. And what's worse, the colliders started spitting all sorts of new kinds of particles: mesons, pions, kaons, resonances, the works.

And governing them all was an apparently new force of nature: the strong force.

The tools used to develop QED were simply falling apart with this diverse host of particles popping out of the colliders. Physicists were at a loss and willing to try new ideas.

So some theorists started rummaging around in the attic, looking for any mathematical tools that might prove useful. And there they found an interesting set of ideas first proposed by Werner Heisenberg, one of the founders of quantum mechanics.

In the early days of quantum mechanics (the first half of the 20th century), it wasn't exactly clear what would be the best mathematical approach to explain all that weirdness. In the 1930s, Heisenberg suggested a rather extreme idea: instead of taking the normal classical physics approach of 1) write down the starting positions of all the particles involved in an interaction, 2) have a model of that interaction, and 3) follow the evolution through time of those particles, using your model to predict a result.

Instead, he argued, why don't we just skip all that work and develop a machine, called the scattering matrix, or s-matrix, that immediately jumps from the initial state to the final state, which is what we really want to measure. That machine encodes all the interaction in a giant box without actually worrying about the evolution of the system.

It was a cool idea but proved too difficult for anybody to get excited about, and it died on the vine until physicists got desperate in the '60s.

Reviving this approach to the newfound strong nuclear force, theorists extended and developed the s-matrix idea, finding that certain mathematical functions that repeated themselves were especially powerful.

Other theoretical physicists dived in, and couldn't resist the urge to give the framework a traditional interpretation in terms of time and space and following the evolution of particles. And there they found something surprising: in order to describe the strong force, it had to be carried by tiny, vibrating strings.

These strings appeared to be the basic building block of the strong force, with their quantum mechanical vibrations determining their properties in the microscopic world in other words, their vibrations made them look and act like tiny little particles.

In the end, this early version of string theory, known as baryonic string theory for the kinds of particles it tried to explain, didn't quite cut the mustard. It was fiendishly difficult to work with, making predictions nearly impossible. It also required the existence of particles that travel faster than the speed of light, called tachyons. That was a major problem for early string theory, since tachyons don't exist, and if they did they would flagrantly violate the incredibly successful special theory of relativity.

Oh, did I mention that baryonic string theory required 26 dimensions to make sense mathematically? That was a pretty big pill to swallow, considering that the universe has only four dimensions.

Ultimately, baryonic string theory died for two reasons. First, it made predictions that disagreed with experiments. That's a big no-no. And second, an alternative theory of the strong force, involving a new hypothetical particle called the quark and a force carrier called the gluon, was able to be folded into the quantum framework and successfully make predictions. This new theory, called quantum chromodynamics, or QCD, today remains our theory of the strong nuclear force.

And as for string theory, it mostly faded into the background. It would be revived in the 1970s, once theorists realized that it could describe more than the strong force and after they found a way to get rid of the tachyon predictions in the theory. The theory still needed extra dimensions, but physicists were able to reduce the number to a more reasonable-sounding 10. And with the realization that those dimensions could be tiny and curled up below the scale at which we could directly observe it, string theory didn't seem to wacky after all.

And today, that string theory also remains, still attempting to explain the strong force and so much more.

Learn more by listening to the episode "Is String Theory Worth It? (Part 2: Tuning the Strings)" on the Ask A Spaceman podcast, available oniTunesand on the Web athttp://www.askaspaceman.com. Thanks to John C., Zachary H., @edit_room, Matthew Y., Christopher L., Krizna W., Sayan P., Neha S., Zachary H., Joyce S., Mauricio M., @shrenicshah, Panos T., Dhruv R., Maria A., Ter B., oiSnowy, Evan T., Dan M., Jon T., @twblanchard, Aurie, Christopher M., @unplugged_wire, Giacomo S., Gully F. for the questions that led to this piece! Ask your own question on Twitter using #AskASpaceman or by following Paul @PaulMattSutter and facebook.com/PaulMattSutter.

Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom and on Facebook.

Go here to read the rest:

Why string theory persists despite the knotty physics - Space.com

Nothingness Has Friction, And The Fastest Spinning Object Ever Made Could Measure It – ScienceAlert

Scientists have created the fastest spinning object ever made, taking them a big step closer to being able to measure the mysterious quantum forces at play inside 'nothingness'.

The record-breaking object in question is a tiny piece of silica, capable of whipping around billions of times per second - creating sufficient sensitivity that the team think they'll be able to use it to detect unfathomably small amounts of drag caused by the 'friction' within a vacuum.

Thescience of nothingnessis quickly becoming a big deal in physics, as we strive to understand how the Universe operates at its very foundations.

Researchers are now comfortable with the fact that empty space isn't empty at all - it's actually full of quantum fluctuations that we're only just now learning how to detect. But we're still struggling to find tools sensitive enough to measure these tiny forces at play.

Several years ago, researchers from Purdue University in the US took a step forward bydeveloping a method for measuring the torque or twisting force acting on a tiny oblong piece of diamond.

By using a laser to suspend the material in a vacuum, physicists had an incredibly finely-tuned device for working out the gentle nudge of surrounding fields.

"A change of the orientation of the nanodiamond caused the polarisation of the laser beam to twist," physicist Tongcang Li explained in 2016.

"Torsion balances have played historic roles in the development of modern physics. Now, an optically levitated ellipsoidal nanodiamond in a vacuum provides a new nanoscale torsion balance that will be many times more sensitive."

Three years later, Li and his team have replaced the diamond with tiny balls of silica just 150 nanometres in diameter, which were held aloft inside a vacuum chamber with a 500 milliwatt laser.

Using polarised pulses from a second laser, the tiny silica blobs could be set spinning.

And spin they did, with the dumbbell-shaped particles reaching an astonishing 300 billion rpm, breaking the limits on previous attempts which barely managed one fifth of that speed.

Revolutions aside, it was the sensitivity of the rotation's forces that the researchers were aiming to improve upon.

While this experiment relies on modern technology, it's has its roots in an experiment that's centuries old.

At the end of the 18th century, British scientist Henry Cavendish set out to put hard figures to Newton's laws on gravity by attempting to measure the force using two pairs of lead weights.

Two relatively light lead spheres balanced on either end of a 1.8-metre-wide beam were hung from a wire near a second pair of heavy masses locked in place. A measure of the torsion on the wire provided the first real measure of a gravitational constant.

This new, nanosized version of Cavendish's experiment could be so sensitive, it could theoretically be used to measure the faint tugging of electromagnetic fields that creates a kind of friction in empty space, formed by the inherent uncertainty of quantum physics.

"A fast-rotating neutral nanoparticle can convert quantum and thermal vacuum fluctuations to radiation emission," the researchers write in their report.

"Because of this, the electromagnetic vacuum behaves like a complex fluid and will exert a frictional torque on a nanorotor."

Twisting force of torsion is measured in units called 'newton metres', where one newton metre is a newton of force applied to a point of leverage from one metre away.

An experiment in 2016 developed a method that could measure torque as sensitive as around 3 x 10^-24 newton metres, a process that required temperatures just a fraction of a degree above absolute zero.

Li and his team blitzed this previous record as well, comparing the way the silica blobs spun between laser cycles to come up with torque measurements of just 1.2 x 10^-27 Newton metres. At room temperature too, no less.

In the future, experiments varying the make-up of the spinning material as well as environmental factors such as temperature and objects in the vicinity, could be used to finallymeasure how undisturbed quantum fieldsbubble away at the lowest energies.

This research was published in Nature Nanotechnology.

See the original post:

Nothingness Has Friction, And The Fastest Spinning Object Ever Made Could Measure It - ScienceAlert

Focus: Detecting the Rotation of a Quantum Spin – Physics

January 17, 2020• Physics 13, 5

Researchers detected the effect of rotating a crystal on the spin of an embedded particle, a result that could lead to ultrasensitive rotation sensors.

A. Wood/Univ. of Melbourne

A. Wood/Univ. of Melbourne

A new experiment has demonstrated that rotating a quantum object affects its spin in a way that can be detected. Researchers whirled a crystal at 200,000 rpm and detected the effects on a single quantum spin within the crystal. The finding was theoretically expected, but it could lead to new techniques for sensing rotation at the nanometer scale.

Particles such as electrons and protons have fixed values of quantum spin, an intrinsic angular momentum that does not correspond to physical rotation of the particle as it does for classical objects. Place such a particle (a single spin) in a magnetic field, and its spin vector rotates, or precesses, around the direction of the field vector, rather like a gyroscope. The speed of precession depends on the magnetic-field strength. Many influences, such as the fields of neighboring atoms, can affect the field that the spin experiences and thus the precession speed. If the particle has spin 1/2, then in an upward-pointing magnetic field it has a lower-energy (spin-up) state and a higher-energy (spin-down) state. Electromagnetic radiation with the same frequency as the precession can excite transitions between these two states.

It has been known for some time that the physical rotation of quantum spins (say, as part of a crystal) can alter the rate at which they precess, and some researchers hope that this fact might lead to a device for ultrasensitive detection of rotation [1]. Previous experiments have shown the effect for a large collection of spins, but doing so with a single spin would provide the ultimate in miniaturization and high spatial resolution. How do you get a single spin to tell you that its rotating? asks Alexander Wood of the University of Melbourne in Australia. The challenge, he says, is to show unambiguously that it is the rotation, and not some other influence such as a stray magnetic field, that has produced the effect on precession. The team overcame this difficulty by developing a complicated experiment that shows the effect of rotation indirectly.

Wood and his colleagues looked at diamond-crystal defects called nitrogen vacancy centers (NVs): places in the lattice where a lone nitrogen atom has replaced a carbon atom immediately adjacent to a vacancy (missing atom). This replacement leaves an unpaired electron, and it interacts with other electrons to create what is effectivelyin the appropriate magnetic fieldsan isolated spin-1/2 particle. If the NVs are very sparse, each spin can be seen and studied individually.

The team attached a small slab of diamond containing NVs to a motor spinning at 200,000 rpm in an external magnetic field. They looked at one NV and applied a technique called optically detected spin-echo magnetic resonance. For each rotation cycle (lasting a fraction of a millisecond), the team placed the spin in a lower-energy state using a green light pulse and then hit the spin with three carefully-timed microwave pulses. Finally, at the end of each rotation cycle, they measured the fluorescence emitted, which signaled whether the spin had been excited to the higher-energy state.

The orientations of the microwaves field vectors (polarizations) with respect to the spin determined the probability of the spin being excited to the higher-energy level. Using a theory accounting for this effect, the precession of the spin in the applied and microwave fields, and other effects, the team predicted the change in fluorescence as they varied the microwave polarization angle. These predictions agreed with the experiments. It turned out that the effect of varying the microwave orientation provided a signature in the fluorescence that uniquely signaled the NVs rotation and could not be explained by other factors.

The current experiment is a proof-of-principle with limited sensitivity, Wood says, but in the future, similar measurements could be used to detect rotation with high precision. The low sensitivity results from the tiny sensor volume, essentially a single atom. But he says that this probe size could also be an advantage: a nanometer-sized diamond containing a single NV might act as a probe for sensing rotation of living cells or biological fluids.

Pauli Kehayias of Sandia National Laboratory in Albuquerque, New Mexico, says that some researchers are already trying to use diamond NVs as the basis for a gyroscope that detects slow rotation [24], for example in navigation. But he says that using individual spins could lead to fast-rotation sensors that work at the atomic scale. In addition, a single spin would avoid complications from the inhomogeneity that might exist in a group of many NVs.

This research is published in Physical Review Letters.

Philip Ball

Philip Ball is a freelance science writer in London. His latest book isHow To Grow a Human (University of Chicago Press, 2019).

See the rest here:

Focus: Detecting the Rotation of a Quantum Spin - Physics

Are the aliens us? UFOs may be piloted by time-traveling humans, book argues – Space.com

Unidentified flying objects (UFOs) have captured the public's attention over the decades. As exoplanet detection is on the rise, why not consider that star-hopping visitors from afar might be buzzing through our friendly skies by taking an interstellar off-ramp to Earth?

On the other hand, could those piloting UFOs be us our future progeny that have mastered the landscape of time and space? Perhaps those reports of people coming into contact with strange beings represent our distant human descendants, returning from the future to study us in their own evolutionary past.

The idea of us being them has been advanced before. But a recent book, "Identified Flying Objects: A Multidisciplinary Scientific Approach to the UFO Phenomenon" (Masters Creative LLC, 2019), takes a fresh look at this prospect, offering some thought-provoking proposals.

Related: UFO Watch: 8 Times the Government Looked for Flying Saucers

The book was written by Michael Masters, a professor of biological anthropology at Montana Technological University in Butte. Masters thinks that given the accelerating pace of change in science, technology, and engineering it is likely that humans of the distant future could develop the knowledge and machinery necessary to return to the past.

The objective of the book, Masters said, is to spur a new and more informed discussion among believers and skeptics alike.

"I took a multidisciplinary approach in order to try and understand the oddities of this phenomenon," Masters told Space.com. "Our job as scientists is to be asking big questions and try to find answers to unknown questions. There's something going on here, and we should be having a conversation about this. We should be at the forefront of trying to find out what it is."

Dubbing these purported visitors "extratempestrials," Masters notes that close-encounter accounts typically describe UFO tenants as bipedal, hairless, human-like beings with large brains, large eyes, small noses and small mouths. Further, the creatures are often said to have the ability to communicate with us in our own languages and possess technology advanced beyond, but clearly built upon, today's technological prowess.

Masters believes that through a comprehensive analysis of consistent patterns of long-term biocultural change throughout human evolution as well as recent advances in our understanding of time and time travel we may begin to consider this future possibility in the context of a currently unexplained phenomenon.

"The book ties together those known aspects of our evolutionary history with what is still an unproven, unverified aspect of UFOs and aliens," he said.

But why not argue that ET is actually a traveler from across the vastness of space, from a distant planet? Wouldn't that be a simpler answer?

"I would argue it's the opposite," Masters responded. "We know we're here. We know humans exist. We know that we've had a long evolutionary history on this planet. And we know our technology is going to be more advanced in the future. I think the simplest explanation, innately, is that it is us. I'm just trying to offer what is likely the most parsimonious explanation."

Related: 5 Bold Claims of Alien Life

As an anthropologist who has worked on and directed numerous archaeological digs in Africa, France and throughout the United States, Masters observes that it is easy to conceptualize just how much more could be learned about our own evolutionary history if we currently possessed the technology to visit past periods of time.

"The alleged abduction accounts are mostly scientific in nature. It's probably future anthropologists, historians, linguists that are coming back to get information in a way that we currently can't without access to that technology," Masters said.

"That said, I do think that some component of it is also tourism," he added. "Undoubtedly in the future, there are those that will pay a lot of money to have the opportunity to go back and observe their favorite period in history. Some of the most popular tourist sites are the pyramids of Giza and Machu Picchu in Peru old and prehistoric sites."

Masters calls his UFO research "an evolving project."

"There's certainly still missing pieces of the puzzle," he said. "There are aspects of time that we don't yet understand. Wanted is a theory of quantum gravity, and we can meld general relativity and quantum mechanics. I'm just trying to put forth the best model I can based on current scientific knowledge. Hopefully, over time, we can continue to build on this."

"Masters postulates that using a multidisciplinary scientific approach to the UFO phenomenon will be what it takes to solve this mystery once and for all, and I couldn't agree more," said Jan Harzan, executive director of the nonprofit Mutual UFO Network (MUFON).

"The premise that UFOs are us from the future is one of many possibilities that MUFON is exploring to explain the UFO phenomenon. All we know for sure is that we are not alone," Harzan added. "Now the question becomes, 'Who are they?' And Masters makes a great case for the time-traveler hypothesis."

But not everybody is on board with the idea, as you might imagine.

"There is nothing in this book to take seriously, as it depends on the belief that 'time travel' is not only possible, but real," said Robert Sheaffer, a noted UFO skeptic.

Supposedly our distant descendants have mastered time travel, Sheaffer said, and have traveled back in time to visit us. "So, according to Masters, you just spin something fast enough and it will begin to warp space, and even send stuff backwards in time. This is a highly dubious claim," he said.

Moreover, Sheaffer said that Masters tries to deduce aliens' evolutionary history from witness descriptions, "suggesting that he takes such accounts far too literally."

Related: 7 Things Most Often Mistaken for UFOs

David Darling is a British astronomer and science writer who has authored books on a sweeping array of topics from gravity, Zen physics and astrobiology to teleportation and extraterrestrial life.

"I've often thought that if some UFOs are 'alien' craft, it's just as reasonable to suppose that they might be time machines from our own future than that they're spacecraft from other stars," Darling told Space.com. "The problem is the 'if.'

Darling said that, while some aerial phenomena have eluded easy identification, one of the least likely explanations, it seems to him, is that they're artificial and not of this world.

"Outside of the popular mythos of flying saucers and archetypal, big-brained aliens, there's precious little credible evidence that they exist," Darling said. "So, my issue with the book is not the ingenuity of its thesis, but the fact that there's really no need for such a thesis in the first place."

Larry Lemke, a retired NASA aerospace engineer with an interest in the UFO phenomenon, finds the prospect of time-travelling visitors from the future intriguing.

"The one thing that has become clear over the decades of sightings, if you believe the reports, is that these objects don't seem to be obeying the usual laws of aerodynamics and Newtonian mechanics," Lemke said, referring to the relationship, in the natural world, between force, mass and motion.

Toss in for good measure Einstein's theory of general relativity and its consequences, like wormholes and black holes, along with other exotic physics ideas such as the Alcubierre warp-drive bubble.

"There's a group of thinkers in the field of UFOs that point out that phenomena reported around some UFOs do, in fact, look exactly like general relativity effects," Lemke said. Missing time is a very common one."

Lemke said that the idea that somebody has figured out how to manipulate space-time, on a local scale with a low-energy approach, would explain a lot of things across the UFO phenomenon, including those baffling Tic-Tac-shaped objects recently reported by jet-fighter pilots and radar operators.

"No matter how much knowledge we have, how much we think we know, there's always some frontier beyond," he said. "And to understand that frontier is getting more and more esoteric."

Leonard David is the author of the recently released book, "Moon Rush: The New Space Race" published by National Geographic in May 2019. A longtime writer for Space.com, David has been reporting on the space industry for more than five decades. Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom or Facebook.

Read the original post:

Are the aliens us? UFOs may be piloted by time-traveling humans, book argues - Space.com

‘How can we compete with Google?’: the battle to train quantum coders – The Guardian

There is a laboratory deep within University College London (UCL) that looks like a cross between a rebel base in Star Wars and a scene imagined by Jules Verne. Hidden within the miles of cables, blinking electronic equipment and screens is a gold-coloured contraption known as a dilution refrigerator. Its job is to chill the highly sensitive equipment needed to build a quantum computer to close to absolute zero, the coldest temperature in the known universe.

Standing around the refrigerator are students from Germany, Spain and China, who are studying to become members of an elite profession that has never existed before: quantum engineering. These scientists take the developments in quantum mechanics over the past century and turn them into revolutionary real-world applications in, for example, artificial intelligence, self-driving vehicles, cryptography and medicine.

The problem is that there is now what analysts call a quantum bottleneck. Owing to the fast growth of the industry, not enough quantum engineers are being trained in the UK or globally to meet expected demand. This skills shortage has been identified as a crucial challenge and will, if unaddressed, threaten Britains position as one of the worlds top centres for quantum technologies.

The lack of access to a pipeline of talent will pose an existential threat to our company, and others like it, says James Palles-Dimmock, commercial director of London- and Oxford-based startup Quantum Motion. You are not going to make a quantum computer with 1,000 average people you need 10 to 100 incredibly good people, and thatll be the case for everybody worldwide, so access to the best talent is going to define which companies succeed and which fail.

This doesnt just matter to niche companies; it affects everyone. If the UK is to remain at the leading edge of the world economy then it has to compete with the leading technological and scientific developments, warns Professor Paul Warburton, director of the CDT in Delivering Quantum Technologies. This is the only way we can maintain our standard of living.

This quantum bottleneck is only going to grow more acute. Data is scarce, but according to research by the Quantum Computing Report and the University of Wisconsin-Madison, on one day in June 2016 there were just 35 vacancies worldwide for commercial quantum companies advertised. By December, that figure had leapt to 283.

In the UK, Quantum Motion estimates that the industry will need another 150200 quantum engineers over the next 18 months. In contrast, Bristol Universitys centre for doctoral training produces about 10 qualified engineers each year.

In the recent past, quantum engineers would have studied for their PhDs in small groups inside much larger physics departments. Now there are interdisciplinary centres for doctoral training at UCL and Bristol University, where graduates in such subjects as maths, engineering and computer science, as well as physics, work together. As many of the students come with limited experience of quantum technologies, the first year of their four-year course is a compulsory introduction to the subject.

Rather than work with three or four people inside a large physics department its really great to be working with lots of people all on quantum, whether they are computer scientists or engineers. They have a high level of knowledge of the same problems, but a different way of thinking about them because of their different backgrounds, says Bristol student Naomi Solomons.

While Solomons is fortunate to study on an interdisciplinary course, these are few and far between in the UK. We are still overwhelmingly recruiting physicists, says Paul Warburton. We really need to massively increase the number of PhD students from outside the physics domain to really transform this sector.

The second problem, according to Warburton, is competition with the US. Anyone who graduates with a PhD in quantum technologies in this country is well sought after in the USA. The risk of lucrative US companies poaching UK talent is considerable. How can we compete with Google or D-Wave if it does get into an arms race? says Palles-Dimmock. They can chuck $300,000-$400,000 at people to make sure they have the engineers they want.

There are parallels with the fast growth of AI. In 2015, Ubers move to gut Carnegie Mellon Universitys world-leading robotics lab of nearly all its staff (about 50 in total) to help it build autonomous cars showed what can happen when a shortage of engineers causes a bottleneck.

Worryingly, Doug Finke, managing editor at Quantum Computing Report, has spotted a similar pattern emerging in the quantum industry today. The large expansion of quantum computing in the commercial space has encouraged a number of academics to leave academia and join a company, and this may create some shortages of professors to teach the next generation of students, he says.

More needs to be done to significantly increase the flow of engineers. One way is through diversity: Bristol has just held its first women in quantum event with a view to increasing its number of female students above the current 20%.

Another option is to create different levels of quantum engineers. A masters degree or a four-year dedicated undergraduate degree could be the way to mass-produce engineers because industry players often dont need a PhD-trained individual, says Turner. But I think you would be training more a kind of foot soldier than an industry leader.

One potential roadblock could be growing threats to the free movement of ideas and people. Nations seem to be starting to get a bit protective about what theyre doing, says Prof John Morton, founding director of Quantum Motion. [They] are often using concocted reasons of national security to justify retaining a commercial advantage for their own companies.

Warburton says he has especially seen this in the US. This reinforces the need for the UK to train its own quantum engineers. We cant rely on getting our technology from other nations. We need to have our own quantum technology capability.

Read the original:

'How can we compete with Google?': the battle to train quantum coders - The Guardian

World’s Fastest Spinning Object Created by Scientistsand It Rotates at 300 Billion RPM – Newsweek

Scientists have set a new record for the world's fastest spinning object by creating a tiny device which spins at a staggering 300 billion revolutions per minute.

To put that into perspective, the device spins about 500,000 times faster than a dentist's drill, according to the team from Purdue University who designed it.

"It's always exciting to set a world record," Tongcang Li, an assistant professor of physics and astronomy, and assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at Purdue, said in a statement.

The object is an incredibly small silica nanoparticlewhich looks like two spheres joined together when viewed through an electron microscope.

To make it spin extremely fast, the scientists simply used the power of light. First, they levitated the object in a vacuum using a laser, and then used another laser to accelerate it, according to a study published in the journal Nature Nanotechnology.

This is possible because particles of lightknown as photonsexert a tiny but measurable force on any object it comes into contact with. This force is known is light radiation pressure and its millions of times weaker than gravity.

"In the 1600s Johannes Kepler saw that the tails of comets always pointed away from the sun because of radiation pressure," Li said. "We use the same thing, but with concentrated lasers, to levitate and rotate the nanoparticles."

In addition to being the world's fastest spinning object, the nanoparticle also serves as the most sensitive known torque detector, the scientists said. Torque is a measure of the force that causes an object to rotate around an axis.

In fact, the device is 600-700 times more sensitive than any other previous device that's capable of measuring torque. The Purdue team say this will enable them to measure and investigate special effects in quantum mechanicsthe bizarre physics of the very small.

In 2018, the team set the previous world record for the fastest spinning object with a similar device that could spin at 60 billion rotations per minutea fifth as fast as the latest device.

While light radiation pressure is an incredibly weak force, the idea is being used to test new methods of spacecraft propulsion. For example, last year, the Planetary Society, launched a spacecraft known as LightSail 2 which propels itself by harnessing the gentle push of photons from the sun, similarly to how conventional sails use the power of the wind to propel boats.

Excerpt from:

World's Fastest Spinning Object Created by Scientistsand It Rotates at 300 Billion RPM - Newsweek

This quantum physicist is on a quest to discover the inner workings of subatomic particles – News@Northeastern

Gregory Fiete grew up playing outside in the woods, lakes, and swamps of the Deep South and Midwest. When he was a fourth grader in South Carolina, a friend suggested that they go fishing because it was the perfect time. It was late spring, and there was a full moon, which is when the fish would be more likely to bite as they spawned.

Fiete, a professor of physics at Northeastern, didnt call it science at the time. But it was an experience that sparked scientific wondera realization that some barren rock in space could influence life on Earth.

It was this idea that theres a lot of connectedness in nature, a lot of patterns, Fiete says. The patterns can be understood and used to do something useful, which for me was catching fish.

Fiete now looks for other kinds of patterns: the ones hidden within electrons of solid matter. He is leading a group of theoretical physicists who are working to understand and predict subatomic mechanisms within materials that could lead to better and faster technologies based on quantum systems.

The inner workings of these materials can be difficult to understand because some of the laws of quantum physics arent exactly intuitive for most people. Even some physicists would say that certain rules of quantum mechanics can be spooky and make people uncomfortable.

Fiete, who spent 10 years at the University of Texas at Austin before joining Northeastern in 2019, thinks that exploring the possibilities hidden within quantum materials through theories and calculations isnt that much different from recognizing the patterns of activity that helped him make big catches based on moon phases.

Now, the question of what is possible (quantum mechanically speaking) is at the heart of Fietes research. His team focuses on the fundamental behaviors and characteristics that move electrons to produce new properties within special materials, such as superconductors.

You need to understand how something works, which is about recognizing the patterns in it, Fiete says. Thats essentially what science amounts towere just trying to understand how things work.

Physicists over the last century have developed a robust understanding of the particles that make up a material. And scientists like Fiete are pushing the field to dig deeper and build on this knowledge to fully understand the mechanics that control the collective behavior of electrons within solid matter. These motions can have important implications for the ability of a material to conserve energy or transmit heat.

Fiete suspects that in the next 80 years, the fundamental understanding that he and other scientists are building will bring the power of technologies based on quantum physics within a closer reach for researchers in several fields.

Many medical technologies now rely on physics, like magnetic resonance imaging machines, and there are various radiation treatments and laser surgeries, Fiete says. These technologies are all based on quantum physics, and they are a part of our medical care now.

Unlocking the power of quantum materials could also catalyze a new era of technology that will rely on quantum computers. Such computers could calculate in minutes what would take the supercomputers of today thousands of years.

But to do that, researchers need to extrapolate the understanding that theoretical physicists already have of electrons to harness the hidden powers of quantum materials.

In 2019, Fiete showed that it is possible to use lasers to enhance materials used in electronics. As a laser is pumped through a material, the arrangement of its electrons changes in a way that it supercharges their ability to move electricity.

Shooting materials with lasers could enhance their properties in other different ways, including changing magnetic properties or conducting electricity without losing any energy. It could also make for a bundle of multiple materials in oneor generate completely new properties.

There are whole zoos of different types of properties that physicists are interested in, Fiete says. An even more intriguing question is, what kinds of new matter can we realize when we keep the laser on?

In 2015, Fiete provided a new theoretical way to find properties emerging from materials known as topological insulators, which are known in the scientific community for their superior ability to conduct electricity.

We keep coming up with a finer and finer comb to distinguish one material property from another, Fiete says. And the downstream are these kind of quantum technologies that have the capability to potentially change so many things in commerce, national security, and basic science itself.

Just as internal forces drive quantum materials, Fiete says, the intangible aspects of being a physicist will advance his field.

What matters is that I had a great discussion with a student or another faculty member, and that we understood something and helped move science forward, says Fiete, whose list of recognitions includes a Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers, which he received from President Obama. It matters that [our] idea will then move the science forward.

For media inquiries, please contact media@northeastern.edu.

Link:

This quantum physicist is on a quest to discover the inner workings of subatomic particles - News@Northeastern

US DOE to award $625M for Quantum Information Science Research Centers; Argonne quantum loop testbed – Green Car Congress

The US Department of Energy (DOE) will award up to $625 million (DE-FOA-0002253) over the next five years to establish two to five multidisciplinary Quantum Information Science (QIS) Research Centers in support of the National Quantum Initiative.

The National Quantum Initiative Act, signed into law by President Trump in December 2018, established a coordinated multiagency program to support research and training in QIS, encompassing activities at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Department of Energy, and the National Science Foundation. The Act called for the creation of a total between four and ten competitively awarded QIS research centers.

The DOEs planned investment in QIS Centers represents a long-term, large-scale commitment of US scientific and technological resources to a highly competitive and promising new area of investigation with enormous potential to transform science and technology.

The aim of the Centers, coupled with DOEs core research portfolio, is to create the ecosystem needed to foster and facilitate advancement of QIS, with major anticipated benefits for national security, economic competitiveness, and Americas continued leadership in science.

Each QIS Center is expected to incorporate a collaborative research team spanning multiple scientific and engineering disciplines and multiple institutions. Centers will draw on the resources of the full range of research communities stewarded by DOEs Office of Science and integrate elements from a wide range of technical fields.

Each Center must integrate sub-topics from at least two of the following Technical Areas of Interest.

Quantum Communication

Requirements for scalable and adaptable quantum network infrastructures designed to support the transmission of diverse types of quantum information

Fundamental limits on information transfer in quantum systems

Communication techniques and tools exploiting entanglement

Test facilities to support network development and test

Quantum Computing and Emulation

System architecture selection and optimization for problem domains studied by SC-supported investigators

Qubit device requirements to match architectural plans

Development of novel and improved algorithms and programming paradigms forselected architectures

Programmable modular quantum emulator development addressing uses for SC-supported researchers (incorporating requirements input from all SC offices),including analog simulators

System integration of emulation, quantum communication, and quantum computesystems from device/array level up

Testbeds for performance measurement and algorithm development; modeling andintegration of computing/communication

Fundamental limits of quantum computation

Capabilities, limitations, and new approaches with respect to error correction

Quantum Devices and Sensors

Development of requirements for qubit devices for quantum sensor and detectorapplications

Development of devices to meet quantum communication or quantum computationapplication requirements

Progress on quantum-enabled imaging devices and systems, such as for soft-matter imaging, magnetic mapping, or improved microscopy

Development of integration, interface, transduction, and control schemes for quantum device arrays

Improving device coherence, qubit lifetime, and other performance parameters

Modeling of device and controls performance

Synthesis and fabrication of engineered quantum devices

Materials and Chemistry for QIS Systems and Applications

Requirements for materials research for quantum communication, computing,emulation, sensing, and imaging applications

Fundamental theory of materials and molecular systems for quantum applications

Research leading to materials and molecular systems that control quantumphenomena to meet quantum communication, computation, and sensor requirements

Fundamental research on device physics for next generation QIS systems, including interface science and modeling of materials performance

Synthesis, characterization, and fabrication research for quantum materials and processes, including integration in novel device architectures

Quantum Foundries

Synthesis of quantum materials, structures, and devices with atomic precision

Fabrication and integration of photon, superconducting, spin and other qubit systems

Advanced instrumentation and tool development for quantum computers, sensors, and metrology

Facilities to support device test, packaging, and integration

Applications are expected to be in the form of multi-institutional proposals submitted by a single lead institution. Eligible lead and partner institutions include universities, nonprofit research institutions, industry, DOE national laboratories, other US government laboratories, and federal agencies.

Total planned funding will be up to $625 million for awards beginning in Fiscal Year 2020 and lasting up to five years in duration, with outyear funding contingent on congressional appropriations. Selections will be made based on peer review.

Argonne quantum loop. Scientists from DOEs Argonne National Laboratory and the University of Chicago last week launched a new, 52-mile testbed for quantum communications experiments, which will enable scientists to address challenges in operating a quantum network and help lay the foundation for a quantum internet.

The Argonne quantum loop consists of a pair of connected 26-mile fiber-optic cables that wind circuitously between Argonne to the Illinois tollway near Bolingbrook, IL, and back. At 52 total miles, it is currently among the longest ground-based quantum communication channels in the country.

The loop will serve as a testbed for researchers interested in leveraging the principles of quantum physics to send unhackable information across long distances. Researchers at Argonne and UChicago plan to use the testbed to explore science underlying quantum engineering systems and to harness the properties of quantum entanglement, a phenomenon Albert Einstein famously characterized as spooky action at a distance.

Quantum entanglement links two (or more) particles so that they are in a shared statesuch that whatever happens to one immediately affects the other, no matter how far they have travelled apart.

In addition to the quantum loop, Argonne plans to develop a two-way quantum link network with Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. When the two projects are connected, the quantum link, also supported by DOE, is expected to be among the longest links in the world to send secure information using quantum physics.

Argonne is a member of the Chicago Quantum Exchange, a catalyst for advancing academic and industrial efforts in the science and engineering of quantum information. The Chicago Quantum Exchange is headquartered at the Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering at the University of Chicago and includes Argonne, Fermilab and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign as core members.

The quantum loop, and the Argonne-Fermi quantum link network, are supported by the DOE Office of Science Basic Energy Sciences program.

See the article here:

US DOE to award $625M for Quantum Information Science Research Centers; Argonne quantum loop testbed - Green Car Congress

The End Of Quantum Reality – Film Threat

If you arent aware of who comprises the Philos-Sophia Initiative and what their mission is before watching The End Of Quantum Reality, then the film will remain impenetrable to you. I say this with absolute confidence, as having sat through the entire 95-minute runtime, I have no idea what I was supposed to take away from the documentary. Basically, it plays out like a movie for a party that I was not invited to.

The Katheryne Thomas directed movie features interviews with notable quantum physicists Wolfgang Smith, Richard Delano, Hossein Nasr, and Olavo de Carvalho. From what I could piece together, the film traces the origins of quantum physics and moves through its history up to modern-day. The very well-reasoned and engaging speakers throw out a lot of formulas and ask the audience to think in a way as to erase physical details to quantify something which only theoretically exists.

traces the origins of quantum physics and moves through its history up to modern-day.

The biggest problem with the movie is that it fails to explain the complicated theories and formulas in a way that makes sense. At times, no effort is made to give the audience context for what is being discussed. Take the opening, for example, in which an unseen narrator tells the audience of a supposed statement inscribed above the doorway to an ancient Greek (or was it Roman?) school. How this ties into the rest of the big, vague ideas being discussed is as elusive at the beginning as it is by the end of the sequence.

Other times, an attempt is made but is woefully inadequate. When going over how and why steel in a fire should give off a bluish glow, but doesnt, the meaning behind the equation to explain why this discrepancy exists is baffling. Sadly, Rick Delanos screenplay never finds a way to invite those who know nothing about its subject matter into what is happening. This makes the film a very dull and passive watch.

See more here:

The End Of Quantum Reality - Film Threat

Steven Strogatz Talks Science and Math on the Joy of x Podcast – Quanta Magazine

As a teenager in the 1970s, I used to love snuggling up in a big, soft velvet chair in my high school library. There, in its burnt-orange upholstery (I told you it was the 70s), Id lose myself in the memoirs of great scientists. One of those autobiographies, Werner Heisenbergs Physics and Beyond: Encounters and Conversations, made an abiding impression on me. In it, he describes feeling hopelessly stuck on a problem as a young postdoctoral fellow. To make matters worse, he was suffering from such a severe case of hay fever that he had to take two weeks off and escape to a remote, pollen-free island in the North Sea. One night, he suddenly saw the solution to his problem. He was far too giddy to sleep, so as a new day dawned, he climbed a rock jutting out into the sea and waited for the sun to rise. His late-night epiphany is now called quantum mechanics.

This is the kind of fascinating thing we can learn by hearing great minds talk about their work and how it connects to their lives. Its the best way, and maybe the only way, to learn not just what great scientists do but why they do it.

So when the editors at Quanta Magazine invited me to host a podcast for them, I jumped at the chance. But it wasnt immediately obvious how to create a podcast that could live up to Quantas mission of illuminating basic science and math research through public service journalism. How could we achieve that in a podcast, keeping in mind the particular strengths and limitations of the medium? (And of the host!)

At first we considered an approach centered on themes common to all of science, such as the quest for truth and the use of evidence, observation and reasoning. We also entertained the idea of a serial format, where we would focus on a single scientific story with twists and turns, building suspense from week to week. But after batting around these and other ideas, in the end I felt myself drawn back to the lure of that cozy velvet chair. I wanted to hear scientists stories, to learn their innermost desires, to understand what moves them and fascinates them and what theyre most curious about.

So we decided on a conversational format, in which Id chat with a wide range of scientists about their lives and work. In my dreams, each conversation would be relaxed yet informative, full of banter and wild ideas. My excitement grew at the thought of what fun this would be and how much Id get to learn about the many branches of science and math represented by our growing guest list. Being the host meant I could follow my curiosity wherever it led.

But I also hoped the interviews might go beyond the merely intellectual, to reach for soulfulness and intimacy, to reveal something of a scientists struggles, dreams and setbacks. Such intimacy would tap into the peculiar power of podcasts to be deeply moving far more so than television and print interviews. Its emotionally intense to hear someones own story, in their own voice, piped into your ear.

The hope was that the listener would enjoy feeling like a fly on the wall, eavesdropping on two scientists schmoozing. At the risk of sounding immodest, I think weve achieved that with our first season.

Through this podcast, Ive been learning about the inner lives of some of the most intriguing mathematicians and scientists working today. A few are old friends and colleagues, while others are people Ive still never met in person: Until their voices came through my headset, I knew them only through their research. But in every case, I wanted to know what makes them tick. I wanted to know why they do what they do, what theyve discovered, and why it matters to them and to the world.

Keeping the tone conversational turned out to be a wise choice. It makes for easier listening (and it turns out Im lousy at reading from a script). But the best thing about the cozy atmosphere is that it fosters clearer communication. It allows both me and my guests to admit what we dont know, and in so doing, to learn and be surprised.

Go here to see the original:

Steven Strogatz Talks Science and Math on the Joy of x Podcast - Quanta Magazine

The 12 Most Important and Stunning Quantum Experiments of 2019 – Livescience.com

The smallest scale events have giant consequences. And no field of science demonstrates that better than quantum physics, which explores the strange behaviors of mostly very small things. In 2019, quantum experiments went to new and even stranger places and practical quantum computing inched ever closer to reality, despite some controversies. These were the most important and surprising quantum events of 2019.

If one quantum news item from 2019 makes the history books, it will probably be a big announcement that came from Google: The tech company announced that it had achieved "quantum supremacy." That's a fancy way of saying that Google had built a computer that could perform certain tasks faster than any classical computer could. (The category of classical computers includes any machine that relies on regular old 1s and 0s, such as the device you're using to read this article.)

Google's quantum supremacy claim, if borne out, would mark an inflection point in the history of computing. Quantum computers rely on strange small-scale physical effects like entanglement, as well as certain basic uncertainties in the nano-universe, to perform their calculations. In theory, that quality gives these machines certain advantages over classical computers. They can easily break classical encryption schemes, send perfectly encrypted messages, run some simulations faster than classical computers can and generally solve hard problems very easily. The difficulty is that no one's ever made a quantum computer fast enough to take advantage of those theoretical advantages or at least no one had, until Google's feat this year.

Not everyone buys the tech company's supremacy claim though. Subhash Kak, a quantum skeptic and researcher at Oklahoma State University, laid out several of the reasons in this article for Live Science.

Read more about Google's achievement of quantum supremacy.

Another 2019 quantum inflection point came from the world of weights and measures. The standard kilogram, the physical object that defined the unit of mass for all measurements, had long been a 130-year-old, platinum-iridium cylinder weighing 2.2 lbs. and sitting in a room in France. That changed this year.

The old kilo was pretty good, barely changing mass over the decades. But the new kilo is perfect: Based on the fundamental relationship between mass and energy, as well as a quirk in the behavior of energy at quantum scales, physicists were able to arrive at a definition of the kilogram that won't change at all between this year and the end of the universe.

Read more about the perfect kilogram.

A team of physicists designed a quantum experiment that showed that facts actually change depending on your perspective on the situation. Physicists performed a sort of "coin toss" using photons in a tiny quantum computer, finding that the results were different at different detectors, depending on their perspectives.

"We show that, in the micro-world of atoms and particles that is governed by the strange rules of quantum mechanics, two different observers are entitled to their own facts," the experimentalists wrote in an article for Live Science. "In other words, according to our best theory of the building blocks of nature itself, facts can actually be subjective."

Read more about the lack of objective reality.

For the first time, physicists made a photograph of the phenomenon Albert Einstein described as "spooky action at a distance," in which two particles remain physically linked despite being separated across distances. This feature of the quantum world had long been experimentally verified, but this was the first time anyone got to see it.

Read more about the unforgettable image of entanglement.

In some ways the conceptual opposite of entanglement, quantum superposition is enables a single object to be in two (or more) places at once, a consequence of matter existing as both particles and waves. Typically, this is achieved with tiny particles like electrons.

But in a 2019 experiment, physicists managed to pull off superposition at the largest scale ever: using hulking, 2,000-atom molecules from the world of medical science known as "oligo-tetraphenylporphyrins enriched with fluoroalkylsulfanyl chains."

Read about the macro-scale achievement of superposition.

Under normal circumstances, heat can cross a vacuum in only one manner: in the form of radiation. (That's what you're feeling when the sun's rays cross space to beat on your face on a summer day.) Otherwise, in standard physical models, heat moves in two manners: First, energized particles can knock into other particles and transfer their energy. (Wrap your hands around a warm cup of tea to feel this effect.) Second, a warm fluid can displace a colder fluid. (That's what happens when you turn the heater on in your car, flooding the interior with warm air.) So without radiation, heat can't cross a vacuum.

But quantum physics, as usual, breaks the rules. In a 2019 experiment, physicists took advantage of the fact that at the quantum scale, vacuums aren't truly empty. Instead, they're full of tiny, random fluctuations that pop into and out of existence. At a small enough scale, the researchers found, heat can cross a vacuum by jumping from one fluctuation to the next across the apparently empty space.

Read more about heat leaping across the quantum vacuum of space.

This next finding is far from an experimentally verified discovery, and it's even well outside the realm of traditional quantum physics. But researchers working with quantum gravity a theoretical construct designed to unify the worlds of quantum mechanics and Einstein's general relativity showed that under certain circumstances an event might cause an effect that occurred earlier in time.

Certain very heavy objects can influence the flow of time in their immediate vicinity due to general relativity. We know this is true. And quantum superposition dictates that objects can be in multiple places at once. Put a very heavy object (like a big planet) in a state of quantum superposition, the researchers wrote, and you can design oddball scenarios where cause and effect take place in the wrong order.

Read more about cause and effect reversing.

Physicists have long known about a strange effect known as "quantum tunneling," in which particles seem to pass through seemingly impassable barriers. It's not because they're so small that they find holes, though. In 2019, an experiment showed how this really happens.

Quantum physics says that particles are also waves, and you can think of those waves as probability projections for the location of the particle. But they're still waves. Smash a wave against a barrier in the ocean, and it will lose some energy, but a smaller wave will appear on the other side. A similar effect occurs in the quantum world, the researchers found. And as long as there's a bit of probability wave left on the far side of the barrier, the particle has a chance of making it through the obstruction, tunneling through a space where it seems it should not fit.

Read more about the amazing quantum tunneling effect.

This was a big year for ultra-high-pressure physics. And one of the boldest claims came from a French laboratory, which announced that it had created a holy grail substance for materials science: metallic hydrogen. Under high enough pressures, such as those thought to exist at the core of Jupiter, single-proton hydrogen atoms are thought to act as an alkali metal. But no one had ever managed to generate pressures high enough to demonstrate the effect in a lab before. This year, the team said they'd seen it at 425 gigapascals (4.2 million times Earth's atmospheric pressure at sea level). Not everyone buys that claim, however.

Read more about metallic hydrogen.

Zap a mass of supercooled atoms with a magnetic field, and you'll see "quantum fireworks": jets of atoms firing off in apparently random directions. Researchers suspected there might be a pattern in the fireworks, but it wasn't obvious just from looking. With the aid of a computer, though, researchers discovered a shape to the fireworks effect: a quantum turtle. No one's yet sure why it takes that shape, however.

Read more about the quantum turtle.

Time's supposed to move in only one direction: forward. Spill some milk on the ground, and there's no way to perfectly dry out the dirt and return that same clean milk back into the cup. A spreading quantum wave function doesn't unspread.

Except in this case, it did. Using a tiny, two-qubit quantum computer, physicists were able to write an algorithm that could return every ripple of a wave to the particle that created it unwinding the event and effectively turning back the arrow of time.

Read more about reversing time's arrow.

A nice feature of quantum computers, which rely on superpositions rather than 1s and 0s, is their ability to play out multiple calculations at once. That advantage is on full display in a new quantum prediction engine developed in 2019. Simulating a series of connected events, the researchers behind the engine were able to encode 16 possible futures into a single photon in their engine. Now that's multitasking!

Read more about the 16 possible futures.

Originally published on Live Science.

Read the original here:

The 12 Most Important and Stunning Quantum Experiments of 2019 - Livescience.com

Superconductor or not? They’re exploring the identity crisis of this weird quantum material. – News@Northeastern

Northeastern researchers have used a powerful computer model to probe a puzzling class of copper-based materials that can be turned into superconductors. Their findings offer tantalizing clues for a decades-old mystery, and a step forward for quantum computing.

The ability of a material to let electricity flow comes from the way electrons within their atoms are arranged. Depending on these arrangements, or configurations, all materials out there are either insulators or conductors of electricity.

But cuprates, a class of mysterious materials that are made from copper oxides, are famous in the scientific community for having somewhat of an identity issue that can make them both insulators and conductors.

Under normal conditions, cuprates are insulators: materials that inhibit the flow of electrons. But with tweaks to their composition, they can transform into the worlds best superconductors.

The finding of this kind of superconductivity in 1986 won its discoverers a Nobel Prize in 1987, and fascinated the scientific community with a world of possibilities for improvements to supercomputing and other crucial technologies.

But with fascination came 30 years of bewilderment: Scientists have not been able to fully decipher the arrangement of electrons that encodes for superconductivity in cuprates.

Mapping the electronic configuration of these materials is arguably one of the toughest challenges in theoretical physics, says Arun Bansil, University Distinguished Professor of physics at Northeastern. And, he says, because superconductivity is a weird phenomenon that only happens at temperatures as low as -300 F (or about as cold as it gets on Uranus), figuring out the mechanisms that make it possible in the first place could help researchers make superconductors that work at room temperature.

Now, a team of researchers that includes Bansil and Robert Markiewicz, a professor of physics at Northeastern, is presenting a new way to model these strange mechanisms that lead to superconductivity in cuprates.

In a study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the team accurately predicted the behavior of electrons as they move to enable superconductivity in a group of cuprates known as yttrium barium copper oxides.

In these cuprates, the study finds, superconductivity emerges from many types of electron configurations. A whopping 26 of them, to be specific.

During this transition phase, the material will in essence become some kind of a soup of different phases, Bansil says. The split personalities of these wonderful materials are being now revealed for the first time.

The physics within cuprate superconductors are intrinsically weird. Markiewicz thinks of that complexity as the classical Indian myth of the blind men and the elephant, which has been a joke for decades among theoretical physicists who study cuprates.

According to the myth, blind men meet an elephant for the first time, and try to understand what the animal is by touching it. But because each of them touches only one part of its bodythe trunk, tail, or legs, for examplethey all have a different (and limited) concept of what an elephant is.

In the beginning, we all looked [at cuprates] in different ways, Markiewicz says. But we knew that, sooner or later, the right way was going to show up.

The mechanisms behind cuprates could also help explain the puzzling physics behind other materials that turn into superconductors at extreme temperatures , Markiewicz says, and revolutionize the way they can be used to enable quantum computing and other technologies that process data at ultra-fast speeds.

Were trying to understand how they come together in the real cuprates that are used in experiments, Markiewicz says.

The challenge of modeling cuprate superconductors comes down to the weird field of quantum mechanics, which studies the behavior and movement of the tiniest bits of matterand the strange physical rules that govern everything at the scale of atoms.

In any given materialsay, the metal in your smartphoneelectrons contained within just the space of a fingertip could amount to the number one followed by 22 zeros, Bansil says. Modeling the physics of such a massive number of electrons has been extremely challenging ever since the field of quantum mechanics was born.

Bansil likes to think of this complexity as butterflies inside a jar flying fast and cleverly to avoid colliding with each other. In a conducting material, electrons also move around. And because of a combination of physical forces, they also avoid each other. Those characteristics are at the core of what makes it hard to model cuprate materials.

The problem with the cuprates is that they are at the border between being a metal and an insulator, and you need a calculation that is so good that it can systematically capture that crossover, Markiewicz says. Our new modeling can capture this behavior.

The team includes researchers from Tulane University, Lappeenranta University of Technology in Finland, and Temple University. The researchers are the first to model the electronic states in the cuprates without adding parameters by hand to their computations, which physicists have had to do in the past.

To do that, the researchers modeled the energy of atoms of yttrium barium copper oxides at their lowest levels. Doing that allows researchers to trace electrons as they excite and move around, which in turn helps describe the mechanisms supporting the critical transition into superconductivity.

That transition, known as the pseudogap phase in the material, could be described simply as a door, Bansil says. In an insulator, the structure of the material is like a closed door that lets no one through. If the door is wide openas it would be for a conductorelectrons pass through easily.

But in materials that experience this pseudogap phase, that door would be slightly open. The dynamics of what transforms that door into a really wide open door (or, superconductor) remains a mystery, but the new model captures 26 electron configurations that could do it.

With our ability to now do this first-principles-parameter-free-type of modeling, we are in a position to actually go further, and hopefully begin to understand this pseudogap phase a bit better, Bansil says.

For media inquiries, please contact Mike Woeste at m.woeste@northeastern.edu or 617-373-5718.

See original here:

Superconductor or not? They're exploring the identity crisis of this weird quantum material. - News@Northeastern

A Quantum Physicist Recommends The Rule of Three To Simplify Complex Ideas – Forbes

Science teacher write scientific formulas and calculations in physics and mathematics on blackboard

In its simplest definition, quantum physics studies the smallest things in the universe and seeks to explain how everything workshow the particles of nature interact. It gets much more complicated from there.

Thats why I was intrigued by a recent article on the TED Talks blog about a physicist who explains how to communicate complex ideas to the average listener. The post is based on Dominic Wallimans TEDx talk titled, Quantum Physics for 7 Year Olds.

Among Wallimans tips: Dont go too far down the rabbit hole.

Its better to explain, say, three things that someone will understand rather than barrage them with a whole load of information, says Walliman.

Wallimans right and, not surprisingly, his tip is backed by science.

Regular readers of my column know that Im a fan of using the rule of three in communication. Photographers and artists follow the rule of thirds, a guideline to compose images that make them visually appealing. The rule applies to effective communication, too. Simply put, in short-term memory we have the capacity to remember only three or four things.

The rule of three is prevalent in fairy tales (three little pigs, three bears), influential documents (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness), works of literature and contemporary marketing. For example, this morning I poured almond milk on my cereal. The carton read: 3 Simple Reasons to Love Silk Almond milk (nutrition, taste, added calcium).Effective marketers know better than to bombard consumers with too much information. Three is a simple guideline.

The TED post uses the following example to show readers how saying less is more effective.

Lets say you and a friend are in an art museum. You see a painting you love and one that you studied in college but you can see that your friend doesnt quite know what to make of it. You may feel tempted to explain every single thing you know about this particular work, telling her about the artists life and career, the materials and techniques used, the movement that the artist is part of, and so on...

The article recommends that you focus on one, two orat mostthree interesting facts about the artist or the painting. Your friend will appreciate the insight without getting bored. Above all, resist the temptation to tell your listener everything you know. You might think it makes you sound smart, but itll put your listener to sleep.

In your next presentation, give your audience three reasons to listen to your pitch. Reveal three features of your new product. Explain three reasons why they should invest in your startup. Once you start adding too much information, you risk losing them completely.

Most of us love to learn but we can absorb only so much at a time. Avoid bombarding people with too much knowledge at once, says Walliman. When it comes to communication, dont feel as though you have to reinvent the wheel. Weve known the rules of persuasion for thousands of yearsand the rule of three is fundamental.

Read this article:

A Quantum Physicist Recommends The Rule of Three To Simplify Complex Ideas - Forbes

Photo: Anushka Sharma is one attentive student as her father explains quantum physics – Times of India

After spending her New Year vacation in Switzerland with husband Virat Kohli, Anushka Sharma is back home and is now spending quality time with her family.She recently took to her Instagram handle to share a picture with her fans where she is seen sitting with her beloved father as he diligently explains quantum physics to her. The actress is also seen listening to him with peak interest.Check out the picture here: She captioned the picture as, Back to school. Dad explaining quantum physics theory to me with great detail and peak interest from me.Dressed in blue top and blue tights, Anushka looks pretty as usual. Her father, on the other hand, looked dapper in his olive green tee. On the work front, Anushka was last seen in Aanand L Rais Zero which also starred Katrina Kaif and Shah Rukh Khan in the lead roles. She is yet to announce her next.

Go here to see the original:

Photo: Anushka Sharma is one attentive student as her father explains quantum physics - Times of India