Physicists Attempting To Test 'Time Crystals' 231
ceview writes "This story at Wired seems to have lots of people a bit confused: 'In February 2012, the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Frank Wilczek decided to go public with a strange and, he worried, somewhat embarrassing idea. Impossible as it seemed, Wilczek had developed an apparent proof of "time crystals" — physical structures that move in a repeating pattern, like minute hands rounding clocks, without expending energy or ever winding down. ... [A] Berkeley-led team will attempt to build a time crystal by injecting 100 calcium ions into a small chamber surrounded by electrodes. The electric field generated by the electrodes will corral the ions in a "trap" 100 microns wide, or roughly the width of a human hair. The scientists must precisely calibrate the electrodes to smooth out the field. Because like charges repel, the ions will space themselves evenly around the outer edge of the trap, forming a crystalline ring.' The experimental set up is incredibly delicate (Bose Einstein Condensate), so it implies this perpetual motion effect can't really be used to extract energy. What is your take on it? It's unlike to upend anything, as the article suggests, because at a quantum level things behave weirdly at the best of times. The heavy details are available at the arXiv."
Newton? (Score:5, Insightful)
From the article: "How can something move, and keep moving forever, without expending energy? It seemed an absurd idea — a major break from the accepted laws of physics. "
Isn't that what Newton's first law of motion says? Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it. Clearly the article isn't explaining this properly.
Sad. Super Duper Sad. (Score:5, Insightful)
It always saddens me when scientists are afraid of looking like fools. Fortunately this one over came his fear.
Re:Bose never got a Nobel (Score:5, Insightful)
Generally awesome speakers
I was always under the impression that BOSE meant Buy Other Sound Equipment
Re:Bose never got a Nobel (Score:3, Insightful)
if runaway government spending gets you a nobel prize in economics, i shudder to think what kind of experiment is required to win the physics category
Re:Newton? (Score:5, Insightful)
They also can not perform work,
Being observed is performing work.
Yuck (Score:4, Insightful)
All these times we've been complaining how the "editors" were trolling with their crap story selection. And now, for once an editor selects an interesting and relevant story, and all the comments are at the level of 4chan crap.
Slashdot really has fell off the cliff.
perpetual motion OK, but won't generate energy (Score:4, Insightful)
At the quantum level, a "ring around the rosie" dance of atoms (really just nodes of a complex wave function) in a BEC is a freebie, however delicately balanced. Provided the containment isn't perturbed, there's no input energy required to keep things "moving". However, any attempt to extract energy from the setup will cause it to collapse. Even extracting information, such as the spin of the BEC will have to provide all of the energy in the probe.
Re:Bose never got a Nobel (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess it would be similar to winning a Nobel Peace Prize by running an experiment in 'peace' by a president with a kill list and an apparent case of latent bloodlust.
Re:Bose never got a Nobel (Score:3, Insightful)
Nope. Pretty much only hear more belligerent Keynesian neofascism from Krugman these days.
Re:Bose never got a Nobel (Score:3, Insightful)
like fdr and his debt, this debt too will shrink massively soon as the economy starts to expand
it's funny how keynesians hold fdr in such high regard, and how they think his policies made everything better... nothing i say could ever change their clouded view of the world, but their ignorance must surely be bliss
if only we could all be so happy... oh hang on a minute it's a bit hard when everyone's either broke and indebted or bankrupt
but of course we should all be out there spending more of what little money we have, just to keep the keynesian gravy train going