Scientists Find Long-Sought Majorana Particle 128
New submitter boner writes "In a follow-up to an earlier Slashdot story, scientists at the Technical University of Delft in the Netherlands yesterday published their findings that they have indeed found the Majorana particle. The announcement on the university website provides both a summary of the academic paper (PDF) and background of this groundbreaking discovery. Quoting: 'Majorana fermions are very interesting – not only because their discovery opens up a new and uncharted chapter of fundamental physics; they may also play a role in cosmology. A proposed theory assumes that the mysterious ‘dark matter, which forms the greatest part of the universe, is composed of Majorana fermions. Furthermore, scientists view the particles as fundamental building blocks for the quantum computer.'"
Did anyone else read "Marijuana Particle?" (Score:5, Funny)
Or was it just me?
Re:Did anyone else read "Marijuana Particle?" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
No, but it would explain a lot (Score:2, Interesting)
All elementary particles have an antiparticle of opposite charge
get published. That would be "all" except for the photon, gluon and Z which are their own anti-particle and possibly the neutrino which might actually be a majorana fermion (we just don't know yet - underground experiments are looking into this). The webpage article is no better because it gets hopelessly confused about the difference between a fundamental particle and a condensed matter excitation. However at l
Re:No, but it would explain a lot (Score:4)
The statement is perfectly true as written. Every particle has an antiparticle, not necessarily a distinct antiparticle, and its antiparticle has the opposite charge. (Hint: zero is its own opposite.)
Re: (Score:2)
All elementary particles have an antiparticle of opposite charge (for example, an electron and a positron); the meeting of a particle with its antiparticle results in the annihilation of both.
which requires a distinct antiparticle.
Re: (Score:2)
it wasn't just you
Which just goes to show the detrimental effect that majorana can have on your cognitive abilitittties.
Re:Did anyone else read "Marijuana Particle?" (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yeah? If it's oregano, you can use it in your soup!
Re: (Score:2)
*Sigh*... I will never understand bistromathematics.
Re: (Score:1)
Tripped me up for a minute, actually.
Re: (Score:2)
as for the Hicks-Boozehound particle: they're looking in Switzerland, but if you ask me they'd be better of scouting the southern USA
the names for these particles are a bit strange, but not without a certain charm imho..
Re: (Score:3)
It's a pretty stiff competition between Switzerland and Wisconsin, USA for who will find the Hicks-Boozehound particle, for the moment I think WI is in the lead after formalizing the "Teeth to Tattoo" ratio, and important step in finding the Hicks-Boozehound particle.
Re: (Score:2)
You guys are both wrong. If it's in Anerica it's obviously Kentucky, the only place you can make Bourbon, and home of Hicks and rednecks, and if it's in Europe it's obviously Irish.
How many Irish does it take to change a light bulb? Three. One to hold the bulb and two to drink until the room spins. Obviously, the Irish will find the Hicks-Boozehound particle, particularly if it's an Irishman who's immigrated to Kentucky.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well I read the damn thing as Majoram, as in the damn spice. Planning dinner right now and I just had to wonder what in hell these idiots are doing with majoram
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Or was it just me?
Let me read this again at 4:20 Eastern and I will let you know what I find.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We should just call it the Munchies Particle.
Re: (Score:2)
I was like "a particle? Jeez they're desperate."
Re: (Score:1)
Not Fundamental (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Not Fundamental (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
He obviously turned into dark matter.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
That's just the bong talking man.
Re: (Score:3)
Right. So it's kind of misleading to mention dark matter in this context. This "quasiparticle" is not dark matter.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
nah, man. but if you've put enough majorana particles in the air, it can get pretty hazy.
That would be purple haze... (jimi hendrix reference for you youngsters)
Re: (Score:2)
nah, man. but if you've put enough majorana particles in the air, it can get pretty hazy.
That would be purple haze... (jimi hendrix reference for you youngsters)
Who is Jimi Hendricks, grandpa?
And what was his unit, rank, and service number before he left the US Army? Seriously, if they don't recognize the reference to one of his most popular songs (as measured by radio play on FM radio, sponsored by stores with names like Heads Together) why would they recognize his name?
Not a fundamental particle (Score:2, Informative)
My understanding is that what's been discovered is a pseudo-particle, a quantum excitation which behaves like a Majorana particle, not an actual particle like an electron or a neutron.
MS (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Yep.
Microsoft Corporation Station Q.
(What's Station Q?)
Re:MS (Score:5, Informative)
It is their quantum computing research group. http://stationq.ucsb.edu/ [ucsb.edu]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, the research program that funded this research is a public private partnership between MS and the Dutch Physics funding agency FOM. Both payed half of the budget for this research.
(I know since worked at the HQ of the funding agency)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the research program that funded this research is a public private partnership between MS and the Dutch Physics funding agency FOM. Both payed half of the budget for this research.
(I know since worked at the HQ of the funding agency)
If there are two, then is your name Schrodinger?
Re:MS (Score:5, Funny)
Why is that so surprising? Microsoft software has been based on quantum physics for a very long time now. Users are constantly struggling with the uncertainty principle, and can often make systems collapse simply by observing them.
Re:MS (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I know it is popular to view MS as if they eat babies... But they actually have some very cool research going on.
Re:MS (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
I know it is popular to view MS as if they only eat babies...
FTFY.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Did I read the article correctly that this was funded by Microsoft? That's sort of coolish...
So it's probably already patented.. That, and we'll all be forced to run Windows 9 on our quantum computers. How is that cool?
Re: (Score:1)
You clearly don't understand quantum computing if you think it'll run Windows 9.
A proper quantum computer will be running a superposition of Windows 0.8beta through Windows Finale. Unfortunately, it will usually waveform collapse into ME with a Metro interface.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You're right, better that our quantum computers only be available in one model that's produced by one company. Or maybe it'll run an operating system that comes in 101 different flavors. Who wants a generic, hardware agnostic, fairly open and friendly OS after all?
ROFL Hardware agnostic? Fairly open? Friendly? You must be a Microserf.
Have you ever heard of Windows Genuine DisAdvantage? Upgrade your graphics card and The Allseeing Eye of Redmond decides to cut you off from the eternal stream of XP patches.
The only way to lift that spell that is to drop all of your XP licenses in the fires of Doom Mountain. Not easy, since "one does not walk simply into Redmond".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Save it pal, I've coded on both linux and MS for years and you're not going to convince me that the experience on linux comes anywhere close to what it is on windows.
Hey, I think it's great you can write your Minesweeper clones in Visual Basic on XP! Too bad MS sends the *user* 'critical' XP updates that break 3rd party firewalls, break Wordpad backward compatibility, or install an unwanted new version of IE. It makes you hold your breath every time you boot, and keeps you on your toes.
Oh, and by the way, I just LOVE flamewars about a soon-to-be obsolete OS with random slashdot posters!
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and by the way, I just LOVE flamewars about a soon-to-be obsolete OS with random slashdot posters!
I can tell.
"On the border between matter and anti-matter" (Score:1)
A particle that is its own anti-particle? Sounds pretty special! Of course, that would also describe photons, the commonest particle in the universe.
Come on, science reporting.
Re:"On the border between matter and anti-matter" (Score:5, Informative)
A particle that is its own anti-particle? Sounds pretty special! Of course, that would also describe photons, the commonest particle in the universe.
Come on, science reporting.
Photons are bosons. Bosons being their own antiparticle is nothing unusual. A fermion that is its own antiparticle has never been observed in nature before.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:"On the border between matter and anti-matter" (Score:5, Informative)
There is one possible exception, the neutrino is a half spin fermion and if it really is zero mass it would be its own anti-particle.
Actually it's the other way around: massless Fermions are Dirac, because of Chiral symmetry: in the Standard Model with massless neutrinos, all neutrinos are Dirac particles, with neutrinos being left-handed and all antineutrinos being right-handed. Mass terms break chiral symmetry, and a massive neutrino could be either Dirac or majorana depending on how the mass term is generated:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterile_neutrino#Majorana_or_Dirac.3F [wikipedia.org]
it's own antiparticle? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:it's own antiparticle? (Score:4, Informative)
Spin. Anti-neutrons spin the opposite way. ("Spin" here being a particle physics term--it's not the same thing as spinning in the macro world).
Re: (Score:2)
OK, all I really want to know is how one reverses the tachyon beam.
Re: (Score:3)
Antiparticles are not just particles with opposite electric charge. They're not magically, fundamentally different, but other particle properties are negated as well.
If it was just electric charge, then neutral-charge particles would have no antiparticle. But they do -- for example, the neutrinos (and antineutrinos).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually for the Neutrinos, the question is not yet settled. That's why experimentalists are seeking for neutrino-less double-beta decay.
Re: (Score:2)
Neutrinos are just an example, but yes.
Re:it's own antiparticle? (Score:5, Interesting)
When two of them meet, they annihilate. Note from the article that there are two of these things, and they are at opposite ends of the nanowire. Presumably when you turn off the power or cooling they get together and turn back into energy.
Dark matter is suspected to be the same - when two particles meet, they annihilate, potentially giving us a signal we can measure. They don't meet very often though, because dark matter barely interacts with anything, including itself.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Particles have all sorts of properties that may have to be conserved in any decay, including annihilation. Any stable Majorana particle would have to be only able to decay into energy if it meets another particle with complementary quantum numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
So what's the difference between two particles meeting and a single particle by itself? The former is the same as the latter, just double the amount, right?
Wouldn't that be half the amount, not double?
After all
if particles = 1 then amount = 1
if particles = 2 then annihilate =1 && amount = 0
Of course zero can't be half of something, and you can't have twice of zero, so now I'm just more confused!
Re:it's own antiparticle? (Score:4, Interesting)
The interesting thing here is that it's a massive particle with that property, rather than a massless one.
Re: (Score:2)
"Go boom" is just an inaccurate way of describing a particle-antiparticle interaction. Particle interactions generally involve some particles going in and some other particles, or particles in different states, coming out. If a particle and it's antiparticle interact, neither of them are products of the interaction. (Often the product is just photons.)
It's in theory more impressive if you have bulk antimatter, since matter holds a ton of energy. Individual particles, though, have relatively little energy, s
Re: (Score:2)
Trying to simplify, particle behaviour is "driven" by their "wavefunction", particles and antiparticles have similar complex wave functions (complex as complex numbers, i.e. 2+5i), but happen to have the imaginary part of opposite signs, lets say if in a place and time a particle's wavefunction is 2+5i, the antiparticle would show 2-5i.
Simplify.
You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.
Re: (Score:2)
He did simplify, he did not however make it simple. Complaining however that someone hasn't made it simple enough for you to understand is however part their failing for not being able to explain it well enough, but also part your problem for not having the required background to understand the first attempt at an answer to the question.
Let me try a different answer to the question, try thinking of it like this:
bosons (i.e. photons in the example) do not tend to interact with each other, one laser does not
Re: (Score:2)
(Shrug) He simplified it to the level of junior high school math. If you don't understand complex numbers, you're not going to get anything out of this thread but a headache.
He's looking for an anti-headache.
Implications for the standard model? (Score:2)
A Majorana particle not THE Majorana Particle (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
NO particle was discovered but an excitation of a novel condensed matter state which behaves in an analogous way to a Majorana fermion.
How perfect is the analogy? If there's no difference, there's no reason to say that it's not a particle. Maybe the "real" particles are similarly excitations of yet other phenomena.
Well... (Score:1)
It works like this, the more you find out the less you know because of exponential growth in knowledge does not gain wisdom does it now? No big deal. Higgs maybe bigger deal. They know nothing. It's the force, that is what holds it all together. Yoda--
If I have enough of them (Score:1)
Can I make my own Tina Majorino?
For those that have to look it up (Score:2, Funny)
(like myself), here is the Wikipedia link [wikipedia.org]
A Majorana fermion is a fermion that is its own anti-particle.
What the heck?! I am starting to think that my knowledge of physics will never reach even a mediocre level just because every time I start to think that I got some stuff covered, some smart-ass physicist comes by and pulls jet another particle out of his, ehem, hat.
Re: (Score:2)
Physicists feel the same way about the universe. :)
Marijuana particle (Score:2)
LOL, that's how I first read it. I thought, "What have they been smoking" followed by "Cool, there's no stopping it now".
I just thought I'd share that with all.
When did The Knack get into particle physics? (Score:2)
Other uses for dark matter (Score:1)
quasiparticles unite! (Score:1)
I believe (in a metaphysical sense) that all particles will be found to be "quasiparticles" in sence that they are emergent from some other phenomena. So, stop hating on the fact that this is not a "fundamental" particle. The idea of the quasiparticle is one of the most significant physics developments evar.
In other news:
Condensed matter physicists enherit the earth!!!!!
Pass it on man (Score:3)
"Scientists Find Long-Sought Majorana Particle" and they had all raided the vending machines down the hall and where found in their lab coats sitting cross legged in a circle each in turn sharing there own far-out theories of reality... "hey man don't Bogart that marjorana particle pass in on man".
I found the Higgs Bosun particle (Score:1)
Amazing Confession (Score:2)
Re:I found it first! (Score:5, Funny)
Sometimes it looks like there's twelve.
Re: (Score:3)