Scientist Investigate A Brand New Form of Matter: Time Crystals (sciencealert.com) 242
The discovery of "non-equilibrium matter" could re-write the rules of physics. Long-time Slashdot reader jasonbrown quotes ScienceAlert: For months now, there's been speculation that researchers might have finally created time crystals — strange crystals that have an atomic structure that repeats not just in space, but in time, putting them in perpetual motion without energy. Now it's official — researchers have just reported in detail how to make and measure these bizarre crystals. And two independent teams of scientists claim they've actually created time crystals in the lab based off this blueprint, confirming the existence of an entirely new form of matter.
Both teams -- one at Harvard and the other at the University of Maryland -- have submitted their findings to peer-reviewed publications, according to the article, and "the fact that two separate teams have used the same blueprint to make time crystals out of vastly different systems is promising."
Both teams -- one at Harvard and the other at the University of Maryland -- have submitted their findings to peer-reviewed publications, according to the article, and "the fact that two separate teams have used the same blueprint to make time crystals out of vastly different systems is promising."
Grow amazing crystals in minutes! (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Let me guess, all you need is bleach, ammonia, a penny, and blowing bubbles in it with a soda straw to grow these amazing 'time crystals'?
You forgot the duct tape and paperclip for straw stabilization...
also, for long term time crystal storage you'll want an empty cheetos bag,
the orange powder resists degradation for over 100,000 years unless eaten.
Re: (Score:2)
It actually isn't degraded by eating either. You, and every other Cheeto eater are slowly filling up with orange powder. This situation will be recognized in about a decade and Cheeto dust will be proclaimed a revolutionary new state of matter.
Re: (Score:2)
It actually isn't degraded by eating either. You, and every other Cheeto eater are slowly filling up with orange powder. This situation will be recognized in about a decade and Cheeto dust will be proclaimed a revolutionary new state of matter.
OK, that explains what the person that cleans the bathroom is complaining about...
Re: (Score:2)
It actually isn't degraded by eating either. You, and every other Cheeto eater are slowly filling up with orange powder. This situation will be recognized in about a decade and Cheeto dust will be proclaimed a revolutionary new state of matter.
Or be proclaimed the orange president of the united states ;^)
Orange you glad he didn't say "Commander in Cheeto"!
Re: (Score:2)
Given what this represents it's understandable tha
Re: (Score:2)
...might be the greatest discovery of the century, if not the millennium. If you can find a way to make these structures do work you essentially have unlimited energy
You worked yourself up into quite a lather there over a claim that only came from your wild imagination: that it takes energy to maintain motion, which any grade school physics student can tell you is not the case.
Re: (Score:3)
Obviously this all falls in to the "too good to be true" category. Skepticism is the best course. Of course, you'd already know this if you had read my entire comment.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't work myself up in to anything ... If what they're saying is true, this is not anything like the matter we've been studying so far.
But how did you get from there to "unlimited energy"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
His speculation was that a construct would have a group of particles that move and periodically return to their original state, perhaps moving in a circle, and form a time crystal. In order for this perpetual motion to work, the system must not radiate its rotational energy.
So, there's still a finite amount of energy stored in this state. It's merely a state that somehow avoids exchange of energy with its environment. No "free energy" to be found here.
Re: Grow amazing crystals in minutes! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...might be the greatest discovery of the century, if not the millennium. If you can find a way to make these structures do work you essentially have unlimited energy
You worked yourself up into quite a lather there over a claim that only came from your wild imagination: that it takes energy to maintain motion, which any grade school physics student can tell you is not the case.
Yeah. Perpetual motion is uninteresting. In order to make it do work, you have to have an acceleration.
Re: Grow amazing crystals in minutes! (Score:2, Insightful)
Unlimited energy? First let's see if any possible energy output outweights the energy being put into the system -- the article clearly states is a "driven" system, to keep it out of equilibrium, which means work = energy is being put INTO the system.
From what I understood, the magic is in the fact that the ground state of the crystal reoccurs at fixed time intervals, not that they are "magically moving".
But it's not even April 1st (Score:1)
This sounds too much like an April Fool's post!
Re:But it's not even April 1st (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: But it's not even April 1st (Score:1)
It's old news. Isaac Asimov studied a form of these crystals called Thiotimoline in his Ph.D. thesis work in 1948.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We must not let Professor Von Frantzel acquire the other four!
Re:But it's not even April 1st (Score:5, Funny)
Timey Wimey Crystals.
The article claims crystals are motionless (Score:4, Interesting)
in their ground state.
However, that would violate quantum electrodynamics, because then you would know the atoms exact momentum and location.
???
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Atomic structure of material is not quantum in nature. A rigid crystal very much not quantum.
Please consider reading comprehension as a goal for this year.
Re: (Score:1)
I was quoting Richard Feynman, but I guess you're smarter than that.
Re: (Score:3)
Then cite the quote ....
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think Feynman said that, but apparently he did write [caltech.edu] this...
Now although ice has a “rigid” crystalline form, its temperature can change—ice has heat. If we wish, we can change the amount of heat. What is the heat in the case of ice? The atoms are not standing still. They are jiggling and vibrating. So even though there is a definite order to the crystal—a definite structure—all of the atoms are vibrating “in place.” As we increase the temperature, they vibrate with greater and greater amplitude, until they shake themselves out of place. We call this melting. As we decrease the temperature, the vibration decreases and decreases until, at absolute zero, there is a minimum amount of vibration that the atoms can have, but not zero. This minimum amount of motion that atoms can have is not enough to melt a substance, with one exception: helium. Helium merely decreases the atomic motions as much as it can, but even at absolute zero there is still enough motion to keep it from freezing. Helium, even at absolute zero, does not freeze, unless the pressure is made so great as to make the atoms squash together. If we increase the pressure, we can make it solidify.
I think most physicists would agree that even in the ground state, a crystal will have some "motion" which is related to their zero-point energy.
Re: (Score:2)
"zero point" energy is something completely different.
Interesting that he postulates that atmos at absolute zero still have "kinetic energy" ... or vibrations.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are into necrophilia? Yuck!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that would violate Heisenber's Uncertainty Principle [wikipedia.org] because then you would know the atoms exact momentum and location.
FTFY. But you're right.
'twice the period'? (Score:5, Interesting)
The two lasers that were periodically nudging the ytterbium atoms were producing a repetition in the system at twice the period of the nudges, something that couldn't occur in a normal system.
When they're saying 'twice the period of the nudges', do they mean twice the frequency of the nudges, or twice the duration of the nudges? What I'm after here is, is whether or not they're actually implying that there's more energy coming out of this than is being put into it, and by the way unless I'm totally misreading it, it sounds like this isn't 'perpetual motion' at all, not in the sense I think of 'perpetual motion', because they have to 'nudge' it with a pulse from a laser to cause this effect to occur -- unless what I'm missing here, is that all they have to do is 'nudge' it once, and it starts a self-sustaining oscillation? Even if it's self-sustaining once started, isn't it then in a state of equilibrium regardless, and any attempt to tap into the energy of that oscillation would cause it to stop?
Yes, twice the period. Think "div by 2 flip flop" (Score:2)
The two lasers that were periodically nudging the ytterbium atoms were producing a repetition in the system at twice the period of the nudges, something that couldn't occur in a normal system.
When they're saying 'twice the period of the nudges', do they mean twice the frequency of the nudges, or twice the duration of the nudges?
I read it as twice the period. Continuing with the rest of the section you quoted:
"Wouldn't it be super weird if you jiggled the Jell-O and found that somehow it responded at a dif
Lenovo's touchpad early-submits again. Continuing (Score:2)
...
"Wouldn't it be super weird if you jiggled the Jell-O and found that somehow it responded at a different period?" said Yao.
Not at all:
- If the jello jiggles at 2 Hz and you tap it every half-second, It's not hard at all to get it to dance indefinitely at four times the rate, one quarter the period, of the periodic stimulus. Ditto a high-Q resonator - like a bell. Hit it at the corresponding phase every Nth cycle, often enough that it doesn't decay appreciably, and the bell will appear to r
Re:'twice the period'? (Score:4)
Great, please replace my clock's quartz with it... (Score:2)
Carefully tuned dynamics (Score:1)
These are just oscillatory systems, of a particular form that have structural integrity as of the dynamics of the system instead of rigidity. Thermodynamics and time going forward are still the same, it's a bit naive to say it's a new form of matter when it's a system of elements.
Can not get energy out (Score:5, Informative)
Perpetual motion machines are allowed by the laws of physics. The galaxy is one for example, it perpetually rotates effectively forever, and by definition beyond what we can measure.
What IS impossible, is to remove energy from the system. If you do that, any machine stops, eventually, unless you add it back in somehow.
Re: (Score:1)
The galaxy isn't a machine.
Perpetual motion is sort of allowed, though actually it'll be radiating energy gravitational waves and will collapse eventually. But a machine, i.e. Something that does work is not.
Re: (Score:3)
Perpetual motion machines are allowed by the laws of physics. The galaxy is one for example, it perpetually rotates effectively forever, and by definition beyond what we can measure.
What IS impossible, is to remove energy from the system. If you do that, any machine stops, eventually, unless you add it back in somehow.
You are confiusing perpetual motion with a perpetual motion machine. In the simplest terms a machine is defined as something that does work. However perpetual motion is the simple act of moving through timespace. A simple photon is in perpetual motion. It will move at c until it hits something and it is absorbed. If the space between it and the closest thing that it can hit is expanding faster then c then it will remain in motion for eternity. This is the reason that there are galaxy's very far away that we
Re: (Score:2)
The galaxy isn't much different than our solar system or a satellite rotating around the Earth. It emits radiation, it absorbs radiation from other galaxies, and has its own friction. Some numbers may be small, but not zero.
Really long cables (Score:2)
I remember reading about some sci-fi author who wanted a huge interstellar space ship millions of miles long but the control system would take hours to affect a course correction so some physicist postulated a cable made of a material with a 4th dimensional component thus cutting communication time way down.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember reading about some sci-fi author who wanted a huge interstellar space ship millions of miles long but the control system would take hours to affect a course correction so some physicist postulated a cable made of a material with a 4th dimensional component thus cutting communication time way down.
I think that problem is already solved using quantum-based systems. Heck, with quantum-connected controls and sensors, it would theoretically be possible to control a ship orbiting a distant star in real time from a 'cockpit' on Earth.
Interesting times, indeed.
Strat
Re: (Score:1)
Let's start with quantum-communication ethernet modems.
Nope (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The no-communication theorem may also fall to further research. Heck, if you'd asked scientists 20-30 years ago if it was possible to make the 'time-crystals' TFS/TFA discusses they would have told you it was almost impossible too. I you'd asked scientists 60-80 years ago the same question they'd have likely recommended you be committed to a mental institution.
Human understanding of our planet, our universe, and what is possible & impossible is still in its infancy.
Strat
Re: (Score:2)
This discussion predated quantum coupling by about a decade or so. The news took that long to reach us. ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
it would theoretically be possible
No it wouldn't, unless you define "theoretically" as "any shit I make up".
Yeah ... (Score:2)
( I hope these researchers are certain about their findings ... )
Squaresoft did it first! (Score:1)
What do you think all the crystals are in the Final Fantasy games?
How do I make a time machine? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You can buy some weak flux from an Engineering Supply Seller in Stormwind and make flux capacitors.
Just like BEC, then. (Score:2, Interesting)
Bose-Einstein Condensate has exactly the same property,except the regularity. The overlap of the particle wave means that the system moves inevitably, re-creating the bulk through time on the same organisation as the space bulk organisation.
And...... (Score:2)
This sounds interesting to say the least, but I'd be more interested to hear about what potential applications these "time crystals" might be used for.
High-density storage? Super-batteries? Time portals?
Dilithium (Score:2)
Dilithium has the same sort of structure.
If you want to cleave a dilithium crystal you have to whack it last month, hit it now, and tap it lightly a week from next tuesday.
Can't find the citation on memory alpha; must have been one of the novels.
NO. It's scientists investigate. (Score:2)
No. It's scientists* investigate.
There are two teams. This is not one scientist. How does the OP not know the difference between singular and plural?
SPOOKY (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps they could spread them on the ground in winter time so that people don't slip and fall on the ice?
Ugh an article about time crystals (Score:2)
You know, I really liked that game.
Re:Sounds like bullshit (Score:5, Informative)
Smarter people than you say otherwise: [aps.org]
Re:Sounds like bullshit (Score:5, Informative)
Smarter people than you say otherwise: [aps.org]
This. Mod parent up.
Quantum-mechanical systems in their ground state cannot radiate energy, because they are already in their lowest possible energy-state.
Re:Sounds like bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
And there the problem starts. It is fascinating to see how much deeply stupid people are around here that do not even understand how limited their understanding is. The current models for Quantum Mechanics are not truth. They are rough approximations and, if history is any indicator, quite a few things presented by the press as "truth" in there will turn out to have exceptions and inaccuracies. The other problem is that actual observation is now down to indirections of indirections and only mathematical models try to explain what is actually happening there. These models could easily be way off with the lack of quality in th experimental validation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In numbers, yes. In values of "true", they are rough approximations. It is the latter we are talking about here.
Incidentally, classical mechanics is also an "astonishing exact model" with regards to accuracy in many circumstances. It just happens to be very far from complete and there are conditions where its accuracy becomes bad enough that the model breaks down completely and becomes "untrue".
The same is very likely the case for quantum mechanics, yet all these science-fanatics (that are universally bad s
Re: (Score:2)
Which.. I have to kind of say I do, too.
I fully understand what you're saying regarding the tough-to-swallow-pill that we live in a universe ruled by statistics with seemingly random constants punched in.
But there's nothing "rough" about the approximation QM and QED provide us.
It's upsettingly exact and for all the people like you (and I) who don't like the taste of a universe governed in such a way, upsettingly infallible.
It is our t
Re: (Score:2)
I use "rough" intentionally, because that is what I mean. If there were only minor deviations and the theory would essentially be correct in all situations, I would not use "rough". However, as in the example with classical mechanics, it is quite possible that there are situations were the model basically fails completely, and that is why I call it a "rough" approximation.
Incidentally, no, we do not have 100% correctness. We have pretty good correctness in the sense that results are within the margins of er
Re: (Score:2)
I use "rough" intentionally, because that is what I mean. If there were only minor deviations and the theory would essentially be correct in all situations, I would not use "rough". However, as in the example with classical mechanics, it is quite possible that there are situations were the model basically fails completely, and that is why I call it a "rough" approximation.
And I still object whole-heartedly with that logic. You're claiming it's rough because it has not been disproven. That's a piss-poor argument.
Incidentally, no, we do not have 100% correctness.
Incidentally, I'm unaware of any non-pedantic argument you could make to back up that claim.
As I said, we have correctness within the energy levels we can test with. Sure the margins of error are there, but they're impressively standing up well to the march of technology. I'd love to be schooled otherwise here, because all I see from you is fallacious logic.
Quantum mechanics is very impressive. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. The theory produces a good deal but hardly brings us closer to the secret of the Old One. I am at all events convinced that He does not play dice.
An inner
Re: (Score:2)
It violates the second law. But so does a superconductor, so who cares.
Re: (Score:2)
*except superconductors
Re: Sounds like bullshit (Score:2)
I wonder, would an asteroid (or even the Earth itself) qualify as a time crystal? They also move continually in a pattern, without expending energy to do so.
Re: (Score:3)
I wonder, would an asteroid (or even the Earth itself) qualify as a time crystal?
No, because it is not a crystal. My counter-wonder: what happened to the quality of Slashdot commentary?
Re: (Score:2)
No, because it is not a crystal.
Ah, I guess you missed the part of the article where it described a time-crystal as a structure that repeats its pattern over time, instead of (or in addition to) across space. Hence the name, "time crystal".
My counter-wonder: what happened to the quality of Slashdot commentary?
It all went downhill after people decided that gratuitous insults were more worthwhile than engaging in polite discussion of the topic at hand. This was especially embarrassing in cases where it turned out their alleged "gotcha" was in fact a product of their own lack of understanding of the subject.
Re: (Score:2)
The Earth radiates energy through gravity waves, which means that its orbit is slowly decaying. The operative word here is "slowly": the power is about 200 watts, or roughly the power output of a mediocre Tour de France rider over a four hour stage. At that rate the Sun will go nova well before there is any measurable difference in orbit.
Re: (Score:2)
An object that moves even in a ground state must expend energy.
Did you just confuse velocity with acceleration?
Re: (Score:2)
And I'm not sure "object" and "motion" exactly apply here.
There are three types of perpetual motion machines, each of which is impossible for different reasons. A perpetual motion machine of the first type is impossible because it violates conservation of energy. A perpetual motion machine of the second type is impossible because it violates the second law of thermodynamics (e.g. by extracting thermal energy from a reservoir without having a cooler reservoir to dump waste heat). A perpetual motion of the
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sounds like bullshit (Score:4, Informative)
What if something were so tightly packed that it started absorbing neutrinos and other particles that would normally travel straight through regular matter?
Helium-4 seems to do something strange when cooled to a super-liquid - it's just not possible to cool down into a solid because the kinetic energy exceeds the electron bond strengths.
https://phys.org/news/2009-05-... [phys.org]
Re: (Score:2)
It's up for debate:
http://news.emory.edu/stories/... [emory.edu]
https://www.sciencedaily.com/r... [sciencedaily.com]
http://www.nature.com/news/wor... [nature.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Anything that moves or vibrates radiates some energy. Hence such crystals would provide "free" energy and that is very, very, very unlikely to be possible in this universe.
It's also very, very, very unlikely that you are not as smart as you think you are.
In any universe.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Anything that moves or vibrates radiates some energy. Hence such crystals would provide "free" energy and that is very, very, very unlikely to be possible in this universe.
Nope, not necessarily. The state of the material is its lowest energy "ground" state. Quantum mechanical ground states can easily have overall dynamical motion, but avoid interaction with the electromagnetic field that would cause radiation because there's no state with lower energy. These will act the same as normal matter - they'll give off energy from breaking bonds when you break them, but are otherwise inert.
Re: (Score:2)
Pics or it won't happen.
Re:Sounds like bullshit (Score:5, Funny)
Attempting to read the article made me feel dumb.
So I read the comments, and now feel like a genius.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Practical Uses? (Score:5, Insightful)
While cool i agree, and i can see perhaps some esoteric use beyond basic research, what sort of practical day-to-day use for the common man would there be?
Quite likely, it's too early to tell.
There is a story, perhaps apocryphal or misattributed, of then-prime-minister Benjamin Disraeli visiting Michael Faraday's lab, and asking Faraday "what use is electricity?" Faraday replied: "What use is a new-born baby?"
Re:Practical Uses? (Score:5, Insightful)
The one I know, also likely to be apocryphal, is where William Gladstone, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, asked the same question. Faraday's reputed reply was, "Why, sir, there is every probability that you will soon be able to tax it."
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I heard that one too. Thanks for adding it.
Re: (Score:3)
This reads like a passage from a Hunter S. Thompson essay.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
what sort of practical day-to-day use for the common man would there be?
What practical use does the common man have for anything he can't eat, drink or fuck?
Re: the lengths people will go to... (Score:1)
Someone already did. You're welcome.
Re: the lengths people will go to... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Will this mean fewer of those entertaining police chases that are a staple of our Arizona evening news? Cops see a van riding low on its springs and give chase. When it crashes in the desert after being pursued through city streets, twenty people pile out and run in different direction no, like roaches when you lift a rock.
Re: (Score:2)
No country just let's you walk in uninvited.
Mm hm.
You kids these days, spoiled rotten and woefully uneducated.
LOL. Suggestion: Learn how to use apostrophes before you accuse others of being uneducated.
Re: (Score:1)
You might note the summary states these findings were submitted to "peer-reviewed publications"... not that they were accepted for publication.
Re:Uh, so what? (Score:5, Funny)
Is my Fan a time crystal? (Score:2)
So is a rotating fan a time crystal?
Re: (Score:2)
Look, pop-science journalists usually don't understand what they're reporting on, so the frequently garble it. They also insert unwarranted hype. This doesn't say ANYTHING about the report they base their story on. (If you want details, look at their source.)
Re: (Score:2)