Lifeboat Foundation: Safeguarding Humanity
Toggle light / dark theme

Blog

Category: particle physics – Page 364

And that’s where physicists are getting stuck.

Zooming in to that hidden center involves virtual particles — quantum fluctuations that subtly influence each interaction’s outcome. The fleeting existence of the quark pair above, like many virtual events, is represented by a Feynman diagram with a closed “loop.” Loops confound physicists — they’re black boxes that introduce additional layers of infinite scenarios. To tally the possibilities implied by a loop, theorists must turn to a summing operation known as an integral. These integrals take on monstrous proportions in multi-loop Feynman diagrams, which come into play as researchers march down the line and fold in more complicated virtual interactions.

Physicists have algorithms to compute the probabilities of no-loop and one-loop scenarios, but many two-loop collisions bring computers to their knees. This imposes a ceiling on predictive precision — and on how well physicists can understand what quantum theory says.

Read more | >

Work has potential applications in quantum computing, and introduces new way to plumb the secrets of superconductivity. MIT physicists and colleagues have demonstrated an exotic form of superconductivity in a new material the team synthesized only about a year ago. Although predicted in the 1960s.

“An important theme of our research is that new physics comes from new materials,” says Joseph Checkelsky, lead principal investigator of the work and the Mitsui Career Development Associate Professor of Physics. “Our initial report last year was of this new material. This new work reports the new physics.”

Checkelsky’s co-authors on the current paper include lead author Aravind Devarakonda PhD ’21, who is now at Columbia University. The work was a central part of Devarakonda’s thesis. Co-authors are Takehito Suzuki, a former research scientist at MIT now at Toho University in Japan; Shiang Fang, a postdoc in the MIT Department of Physics; Junbo Zhu, an MIT graduate student in physics; David Graf of the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory; Markus Kriener of the RIKEN Center for Emergent Matter Science in Japan; Liang Fu, an MIT associate professor of physics; and Efthimios Kaxiras of Harvard University.

New quantum material

Classical physics can be used to explain any number of phenomena that underlie our world — until things get exquisitely small. Subatomic particles like electrons and quarks behave differently, in ways that are still not fully understood. Enter quantum mechanics, the field that tries to explain their behavior and resulting effects.

Read more | >

Scientists at the University of Birmingham have succeeded in creating an experimental model of an elusive kind of fundamental particle called a skyrmion in a beam of light.

The breakthrough provides physicists with a real system demonstrating the behavior of skyrmions, first proposed 60 years ago by a University of Birmingham mathematical physicist, Professor Tony Skyrme.

Skyrme’s idea used the structure of spheres in 4-dimensional space to guarantee the indivisible nature of a skyrmion particle in 3 dimensions. 3D particle-like skyrmions are theorized to tell us about the early origins of the Universe, or about the physics of exotic materials or cold atoms. However, despite being investigated for over 50 years, 3D skyrmions have been seen very rarely in experiments. The most current research into skyrmions focuses on 2D analogs, which shows promise for new technologies.

Read more | >

Terraforming Mars is one of the great dreams of humanity. Mars has a lot going for it. Its day is about the same length as Earth’s, it has plenty of frozen water just under its surface, and it likely could be given a reasonably breathable atmosphere in time. But one of the things it lacks is a strong magnetic field. So if we want to make Mars a second Earth, we’ll have to give it an artificial one.

The reason magnetic fields are so important is that they can shield a planet from solar wind and ionizing particles. Earth’s magnetic field prevents most high-energy charged particles from reaching the surface. Instead, they are deflected from Earth, keeping us safe. The magnetic field also helps prevent solar winds from stripping Earth’s atmosphere over time. Early Mars had a thick, water-rich atmosphere, but it was gradually depleted without the protection of a strong magnetic field.

Unfortunately, we can’t just recreate Earth’s magnetic field on Mars. Our field is generated by a dynamo effect in Earth’s core, where the convection of iron alloys generates Earth’s geomagnetic field. The interior of Mars is smaller and cooler, and we can’t simply “start it up” to create a magnetic dynamo. But there are a few ways we can create an artificial magnetic field, as a recent study shows.

Read more | >

Superconductivity occurs when electrons in a metal pair up and move through the material without resistance. But there may be more to the story than we thought, as scientists in Germany have now discovered that electrons can also group together into families of four, creating a new state of matter and, potentially, a new type of superconductivity.

Conductivity is a measure of how easily electrons (and therefore electricity) can move through a material. But even in materials that make good conductors, like gold, electrons will still encounter some resistance. Superconductors, however, remove all such barriers and provide zero resistance at ultracold temperatures.

The reason electrons can move through superconductors so easily is because they pair up through a quantum effect known as Cooper pairing. In doing so, they raise the minimum amount of energy it takes to interfere with the electrons – and if the material is cold enough, its atoms won’t have enough thermal energy to disturb these Cooper pairs, allowing the electrons to flow freely with no loss of energy.

Read more | >

What is entanglement theory? It is a Mystery, and here is a potential solution. But its implications are so paradigm shattering that most scientists refuse to believe it. Maybe we can’t handle the truth?

Imagine you found a pair of dice such that no matter how you tossed them, they always added up to 7. Besides becoming the richest man in Vegas, what you would have there is something called an entangled pair of dice.

You could now separate these entangled dice. You could have your friend Alice take one of these to Macau, while the other one stays with you in Las Vegas. And as soon as you rolled your dice, the other one would always instantly show a number that added up to 7.

Since this happens instantly, did your dice communicate at faster than speed of light to Macau?

Scientists can create entangled photons, for example, by shining a laser on a nonlinear optical crystal. The Entanglement means that a pair of photons act like a single entity rather than two separate particles. To understand entanglement better, you first have to accept the fact that at the quantum scale, reality is fuzzy. Reality really doesn’t know what it is, until it is measured.

This is like a single dice tossed in the air that doesn’t have a distinct face until it lands. When tossed up, it is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 all at once. Quantum particles are similar in that they do not have distinct properties until they are measured. Particles such as a photon exists in all possible states simultaneously. But when it is measured, it is in only one state. And if the photon is entangled, this measurement of one particle causes its entangled pair to simultaneously exhibit the opposite state, no matter what the distance is between them.

Continue reading “Entanglement Theory may Reveal a Reality we can’t Handle” | >

Special offer for ArvinAsh viewers — Go to: https://brilliant.org/arvinash — you can sign up for free! The first 200 people will get 20% off their annual membership.

Background videos:
Fundamental forces: https://youtu.be/669QUJrF4u0
Electroweak theory: https://youtu.be/u05VK0pSc7I
Is Big Bang hidden in gravity waves: https://youtu.be/VXr1mzY2GnY
Cosmic Microwave background: https://youtu.be/XcXCrFIivyk.

Errata:
12:26 — Helium-3 has 2 protons and 1 Neutron.

Chapters:
0:00 — How many atoms are there?
1:01 — We don’t know what happened at or before t=0
3:34 — Cosmic inflation.
5:27 — What we do know.
8:29 — How protons and neutrons formed.
10:41 — How charged nucleons formed.
13:47 — How neutral atoms formed.
15:24 — How to learn more about atoms.

Summary:
Where did the first atom come from? The short answer is the big bang. In the early universe there was an immense amount of energy, The energy condensed, atoms formed. But there’s a lot more that happened, which will be explained here.

The big bang is often thought of as the theory explaining the beginning. but it’s not. We don’t know when the universe actually started, or whether it did. Our best theory of the early universe is the standard model of cosmology, We can only go back to one Planck time, about 10^−43 seconds. This is the smallest unit of time that can theoretically exist according to quantum mechanics. We don’t know what came before this.

Continue reading “How Did the First Atom Form? Where did it come from? | Big Bang Nucleosynthesis” | >

Get your SPECIAL OFFER for MagellanTV here: https://try.magellantv.com/arvinash — It’s an exclusive offer for our viewers! Start your free trial today. MagellanTV is a new kind of streaming service run by filmmakers with 3,000+ documentaries! Check out our personal recommendation and MagellanTV’s exclusive playlists: https://www.magellantv.com/genres/science-and-tech.

Arguments for fine tuning: Physics has many constants like the charge of the electron, the gravitational constant, Planck’s constant. If any of their values were different, our universe, as we know it, would not be the same, and life would probably not exist.
0:00 — Defining fine tuning.
2:20 — Gravitational constant.
3:59 — Electromagnetic Force.
5:02 — Strong force.
6:13 — Weak force.
7:51 — Philosophical Arguments against fine tuning.
9:36 — Scientific arguments against fine tuning.
11:59 — Sentient puddle.
13:29 — Does fine tuning need an agent.
15:14 — Louse on the tail a lion.
Some say that it could not have occurred by chance, that there must be some agent, like a god that set up the constants to enable life.

Let’s just look at the constants associated with the different forces. Gravity: If the gravitational constant was too small, gravity would be too weak, and planets wouldn’t form. If it was too large, then stars like the sun would burn up too fast.

Electromagnetism: The electromagnetic force is responsible for the distance at which electrons orbits in atoms. If the force was weaker, the atomic size would increase because electrons would be further away from the nucleus. This could impact chemistry, as it would change the strength of chemical bonds.

A higher constant would lead to cooler stars and a lower constant would lead to hotter stars. If the constant was bigger, atoms larger than hydrogen atoms could not form and stars may never ignite, because protons may not have been able to overcome the coulomb barrier to fuse in the first place.

Strong force: If the strong coupling constant were lower, then you wouldn’t have stable heavy atoms as it would not be enough to overcome proton-proton repulsion. If the strong nuclear force was only 1% weaker for example, atoms crucial for life like oxygen, carbon and nitrogen may not form in sufficient quantities.

Continue reading “Is the Universe Fine Tuned for Life? The Case FOR and AGAINST Fine Tuning” | >

Signup for your FREE TRIAL to The GREAT COURSES PLUS here: http://ow.ly/5KMw30qK17T. Until 350 years ago, there was a distinction between what people saw on earth and what they saw in the sky. There did not seem to be any connection.

Then Isaac Newton in 1,687 showed that planets move due to the same forces we experience here on earth. If things could be explained with mathematics, to many people this called into question the need for a God.

But in the late 20th century, arguments for God were resurrected. The standard model of particle physics and general relativity is accurate. But there are constants in these equations that do not have an explanation. They have to be measured. Many of them seem to be very fine tuned.

Scientists point out for example, the mass of a neutrino is 2X10^-37kg. It has been shown that if this mass was off by just one decimal point, life would not exist because if the mass was too high, the additional gravity would cause the universe to collapse. If the mass was too low, galaxies could not form because the universe would have expanded too fast.

On closer examination, it has some problems. The argument exaggerates the idea of fine tuning by using misleading units of measurement, to make fine tuning seem much more unlikely than it may be. The mass of neutrinos is expressed in Kg. Using kilograms to measure something this small is the equivalent of measuring a person’s height in light years. A better measurement for the neutrino would be electron volts or picograms.

Another point is that most of the constants could not really be any arbitrary number. They are going to hover around some value close to what they actually are. The value of the mass of a neutrino could not be the mass of a bowling ball. Such massive particles with the property of a neutrino could not have been created during the Big Bang.

Continue reading “Is God in Physics? Fine Tuning Scrutinized” | >