Physicists watch quantum particles tunnel through solid barriers. Here’s what they found. – Live Science

The quantum world is a pretty wild one, where the seemingly impossible happens all the time: Teensy objects separated by miles are tied to one another, and particles can even be in two places at once. But one of the most perplexing quantum superpowers is the movement of particles through seemingly impenetrable barriers.

Now, a team of physicists has devised a simple way to measure the duration of this bizarre phenomenon, called quantum tunneling. And they figured out how long the tunneling takes from start to finish from the moment a particle enters the barrier, tunnels through and comes out the other side, they reported online July 22 in the journal Nature.

Quantum tunneling is a phenomenon where an atom or a subatomic particle can appear on the opposite side of a barrier that should be impossible for the particle to penetrate. It's as if you were walking and encountered a 10-foot-tall (3 meters) wall extending as far as the eye can see. Without a ladder or Spider-man climbing skills, the wall would make it impossible for you to continue.

Related: The 18 biggest unsolved mysteries in physics

However, in the quantum world, it is rare, but possible, for an atom or electron to simply "appear" on the other side, as if a tunnel had been dug through the wall. "Quantum tunneling is one of the most puzzling of quantum phenomena," said study co-author Aephraim Steinberg, co-director of the Quantum Information Science Program at Canadian Institute for Advanced Research. "And it is fantastic that we're now able to actually study it in this way."

Quantum tunneling is not new to physicists. It forms the basis of many modern technologies such as electronic chips, called tunnel diodes, which allow for the movement of electricity through a circuit in one direction but not the other. Scanning tunneling microscopes (STM) also use tunneling to literally show individual atoms on the surface of a solid. Shortly after the first STM was invented, researchers at IBM reported using the device to spell out the letters IBM using 35 xenon atoms on a nickel substrate.

While the laws of quantum mechanics allow for quantum tunneling, researchers still don't know exactly what happens while a subatomic particle is undergoing the tunneling process. Indeed, some researchers thought that the particle appears instantaneously on the other side of the barrier as if it instantaneously teleported there, Sci-News.com reported.

Researchers had previously tried to measure the amount of time it takes for tunneling to occur, with varying results. One of the difficulties in earlier versions of this type of experiment is identifying the moment tunneling starts and stops. To simplify the methodology, the researchers used magnets to create a new kind of "clock" that would tick only while the particle was tunneling.

Subatomic particles all have magnetic properties and when magnets are in an external magnetic field, they rotate like a spinning top. The amount of rotation (also called precession) depends on how long the particle is bathed in that magnetic field. Knowing that, the Toronto group used a magnetic field to form their barrier. When particles are inside the barrier, they precess. Outside it, they don't. So measuring how long the particles precess told the researchers how long those atoms took to tunnel through the barrier.

Related: 18 times quantum particles blew our minds

"The experiment is a breathtaking technical achievement," said Drew Alton, physics professor at Augustana University, in South Dakota.

The researchers prepared approximately 8,000 rubidium atoms, cooled them to a billionth of a degree above absolute zero. The atoms needed to be this temperature, otherwise they would have moved around randomly at high speeds, rather than staying in a small clump. The scientists used a laser to create the magnetic barrier; they focused the laser so that the barrier was 1.3 micrometers (microns) thick, or the thickness of about 2,500 rubidium atoms. (So if you were a foot thick, front to back, this barrier would be the equivalent of about half a mile thick.) Using another laser, the scientists nudged the rubidium atoms toward the barrier, moving them about 0.15 inches per second (4 millimeters/s).

As expected, most of the rubidium atoms bounced off the barrier. However, due to quantum tunneling, about 3% of the atoms penetrated the barrier and appeared on the other side. Based on the precession of those atoms, it took them about 0.6 milliseconds to traverse the barrier.

Chad Orzel, an associate professor of physics at Union College in New York, who was not part of the study, applauded the experiment, "Their experiment is ingeniously constructed to make it difficult to interpret as anything other than what they say," said Orzel, author of "How to Teach Quantum Mechanics to Your Dog" (Scribner, 2010) It "is one of the best examples you'll see of a thought experiment made real," he added.

Experiments exploring quantum tunneling are difficult and further research is needed to understand the implications of this study. The Toronto group is already considering improvements to their apparatus to not only determine the duration of the tunneling process, but to also see if they can learn anything about velocity of the atoms at different points inside the barrier. "We're working on a new measurement where we make the barrier thicker and then determine the amount of precession at different depths," Steinberg said. "It will be very interesting to see if the atoms' speed is constant or not."

In many interpretations of quantum mechanics, it is impossible even in principle to determine a subatomic particle's trajectory. Such a measurement could lead to insights into the confusing world of quantum theory. The quantum world is very different from the world we're familiar with. Experiments like these will help make it a little less mysterious.

Originally published on Live Science.

Read the rest here:

Physicists watch quantum particles tunnel through solid barriers. Here's what they found. - Live Science

Quantum-safe security firm evolutionQ awarded contribution from Canada Space Agency for Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) Network Research and…

KITCHENER, Ontario (PRWEB) August 10, 2020

evolutionQ was awarded a Space Technology Development Program (STDP) contribution by the CSA to develop solutions to advance satellite-based secure quantum communication services and tools to address challenges related to satellite-based Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) networks.

Cryptography underpins the secure communications required for the digital, network-based social and financial interactions that are at the heart of modern society and the economy, including banking, the sharing of confidential healthcare data, and the exchange of sensitive information between governmental institutions. However, rapid advancements in quantum computing threaten current encryption methods because quantum computers, when built, will be able to break commonly used cybersecurity systems. It is important to develop tools, like QKD, that will be resistant to such quantum threats.

QKD technologies leverage the fundamental laws of quantum physics to distribute confidential cryptographic keys between two users, while detecting the attempts of malicious third-parties to intercept such keys. Unfortunately, typical terrestrial methods to establish such direct secure connection between locations are limited to relatively short distances, of the order of at most 200 km. This is clearly a challenge for a country as vast as Canada. Satellite-based QKD will enable secure, reliable, and economical key-sharing across Canada.

A powerful quantum computer has the power to decimate todays cryptography. As key quantum computing milestones are achieved, the need for quantum-safe solutions intensifies, said Dr. Michele Mosca, President and CEO of evolutionQ. Robust cryptography is absolutely necessary for our safety and the proper functioning of our digital economy. We must adopt quantum-safe solutions to secure and safeguard our critical infrastructures, financial services and intellectual property."

Quantum Key Distribution is an important tool in addressing the quantum threat. QKD uses the fundamental laws of physics to protect information shared between two parties. CTO of evolutionQ, Dr. Norbert Ltkenhaus remarked. Satellite-based QKD is essential for a vast country like Canada and will help secure communications from coast to coast. evolutionQ is poised to utilize its expertise and develop solutions to help establish satellite QKD, and to integrate it with existing terrestrial solutions.

evolutionQ will develop tools to address the challenges unique to satellite-based QKD. This will be accomplished by modelling the role and performance of QKD satellites, and by designing optimization algorithms to integrate QKD satellites with terrestrial networks. The software solutions will be designed to be integrated with existing and planned satellite hardware. The project is expected to last 24 months.

The initiative will also help Canada safeguard sovereignty in the quantum age and strengthen Canadian leadership in the space and quantum sectors. The initiative aligns with the new Space Strategy for Canada, the safety and security principle in Canadas Digital Charter and the Government of Canadas Innovations and Skills Plan.

This project is undertaken with the financial support of the Canadian Space Agency.

About evolutionQ:evolutionQ is a leading quantum-safe cybersecurity company led by world-renowned quantum computing experts Dr. Michele Mosca and Dr. Norbert Ltkenhaus. evolutionQ delivers quantum-risk management strategy and advisory services along with robust cybersecurity products designed to be safe against quantum computers.

Share article on social media or email:

Read the original:

Quantum-safe security firm evolutionQ awarded contribution from Canada Space Agency for Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) Network Research and...

Nuh Gedik and Pablo Jarillo-Herrero are 2020 Moore Experimental Investigators in Quantum Materials – MIT News

Physics professorsNuh GedikandPablo Jarillo-Herrerohave been named Experimental Investigators in Quantum Materials by theGordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

The two are among 20 winners nationwide of the foundation's Emergent Phenomena in Quantum Systems (EPiQS) Initiative. Each will receive a five-year, $1.6 million unrestricted grant to support their research in quantum materials.

Gediks research centers on using advanced optical techniques for probing and controlling properties of quantum materials. He will use his grant to search for novel, light-induced phases in these systems.

These materials display fascinating but poorly understood properties, such as high-temperature superconductivity or topological protection, says Gedik. We use ultrafast laser pulses to make femtosecond movies of electrons and atoms inside these systems to understand the mechanism behind their exotic behavior. Our ultimate goal isto use light as a controllable tuning parameter (just as magnetic field orpressure) to switch between equilibrium phases and to engineer newlight-induced stateswith no equilibrium counterparts.

Jarillo-Herrero, theCecil and Ida Green Professor of Physics,leads a laboratory that uses quantum electronic transport and optoelectronic techniques to investigate novel 2D materials and heterostructures, with a focus on emergent correlated and topological phenomena/phases resulting from the interplay between unusual electronic structures and electron interaction effects.

This Moore Foundation award will allow my group to focus on a novel experimental platform called twistronics, where a new degree of freedom, namely the twist angle between two stacked 2D crystalline lattices, enables the exploration of a plethora of intriguing quantum mechanical effects, such as superconductivity. This emergent platform may provide important clues about the origin of many of the most fascinating phases of matter present in the universe, as well as the potential engineering of these phases to create new quantum technologies.

The EPiQS Initiative of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation aims to stimulate experimental research in the physics of quantum materials by providing some of the fields most creative scientists with freedom to take risks and flexibility for agile change of research direction. The collective impact of these investigators will produce a more comprehensive understanding of the fundamental organizing principles of complex quantum matter in solids.

The Experimental Investigator awards are the largest grant portfolio within the EPiQS initiative, says Amalia Fernandez-Paella, program officer of the EPiQS Initiative. We expect that such substantial, stable, and flexible support will propel quantum materials research forward and unleash the creativity of the investigators.

The cohorts research will cover a broad spectrum of research questions, types of materials systems, and complementary experimental approaches. The investigators will advance experimental probes of quantum states in materials; elucidate emergent phenomena observed in systems with strong electron interactions; investigate light-induced states of matter; explore the vast space of two-dimensional layered structures; and illuminate the role of quantum entanglement in exotic systems such as quantum spin liquids. In addition, the investigators will participate in EPiQS community-building activities, which include investigator symposia, topical workshops, and theQuantEmX scientist exchange program.

Since 2013, EPiQS has supported an integrated research program that includes materials synthesis, experiment, and theory, and that crosses the boundaries between physics, chemistry, and materials science. Thesecond phaseof the initiative was kicked off earlier this year with the launch of two major grant portfolios:Materials Synthesis Investigators and Theory Centers. The 20 newly inaugurated experimental investigators will join these grantees to form a vibrant, collaborative community that strives to push the entire field toward a new frontier.

The first cohort of EPiQS Experimental Investigators made advances that changed the landscape of quantum materials, and I expect no less from this second cohort. Emergent phenomena appear when a large number of constituents interact strongly, whether these constituents are electrons in materials, or the brilliant scientists trying to crack the mysteries of materials. says Duan Pejakovi, director of the EPiQS Initiative. Gedik and Jarillo-Herrero were also part of the first cohort of EPIQS awardees.

The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation fosters pathbreaking scientific discovery, environmental conservation, patient care improvements, and preservation of the special character of the San Francisco Bay Area.

Follow this link:

Nuh Gedik and Pablo Jarillo-Herrero are 2020 Moore Experimental Investigators in Quantum Materials - MIT News

Quantum physics: the trick to beat artificial intelligence to Go? | Innovation – Explica

The relationship between artificial intelligence and games can be summed up in two words: cat and mouse. Since 1997 Deep Blue defeated Kasparov at chess, primal mouse, a long list of rodents have been presenting their candidacy to become the definitive game that proves or denies the intellectual superiority of the machine: Jeopardy, Starcraft, Poker Go, another aspiring classic, defeated in 2016, has just returned to the ring determined to make life difficult for the cat with the help of a team of scientists from Shanghai Jiao Tong University.

Those responsible for the new challenge have devised a modality inspired by the quantum physics of this ancient board game. In it, players make their moves with two interlocking tiles instead of one. Quantum physics can give the game the non-deterministic feature typical of games of chance that does not exist in the classical version, they explain in the resulting study. Furthermore, in this revamped Go, it is played under conditions of imperfect information ; that is, players can only know a part of the state of the game, while the rest is kept secret, like the cards in poker.

In classic Go, two players face each other to achieve control of the board and surround their opponent by strategically placing black and white pieces, called stones, on the intersections of a board of 18 by 18 squares. If a player occupies the four intersections that surround an opponents piece, he captures it. At the end of the game, which comes when the two players pass their turn for not seeing more possible moves, the one who has surrounded the most empty intersections with their stones wins. This seemingly simple dynamic allows long successions of plays and generates endless scenarios that, at least until 2016, made Go a challenge with the potential to exceed the capabilities of the machine and remain on the shrinking list of things that Humans still do better.

The quantum version is a twist that exponentially expands the possible states of the game by incorporating interlocking tiles into the game and confronting the algorithm with someone of its size: another machine.

The key to this new and convoluted game mode is that the position of the interlocking stones on the board is not final. As soon as the opponent places a piece on a vertex adjacent to either of the two that are interlocking, one of them will disappear and the other remains on the board. In this way, the player does not know if he has succeeded in his action until he has completed it. In the event that the tile next to which it has been placed disappears when the entanglement collapses, you will have wasted your time. In the same way, the unmasked stone that remains on the board will only be able to surround the enemy from that moment on. Lets say that each player places a pair of interlocking stones separate from their opponents. At that point, the board could have four different configurations depending on which one remains on it.

Who decides stays and who leaves? The permanence or not of the chips is obtained by creating a true quantum entanglement process. The scientists used entangled pairs of photons to extract a random series of measurements of 0 or 1 that were assigned to the paired stones.

Where we come from

Go was considered a worthy successor to the outdated chess for two main reasons. On the one hand, the greatest number of possible positions on your board complicates the tasks of searching for potential movements. On the other hand, the aspect of a victory in chess -capturing the king- is more limited than in Go, where any configuration of the board in which none of the players see more benefits to conquer, gives rise to the final count.

As it is, it is not surprising that, for decades, the machine was incapable of beating a human, whether it was this professional or amateur player. The hunt for Go jumped into the worlds newspapers in 2015, when Fan Hui took on Alpha Go, the algorithm developed by Deep Mind, in a first round from which the machine emerged victorious. In 2016, this artificial intelligence established itself as superior as far as Go is concerned after winning the former world champion, Lee Sedol.

Then Alpha Go Zero would come. And then Alpha Zero. The original learned to play over the course of thousands of games against players of varying levels. The second generation learned by playing against itself. And the third, also self-taught, also taught himself how to play chess and shogi.

Where we go?

It is not unreasonable to ask what humanity wants a quantum Go for. According to the Chinese scientists who have invented it, the aim is basically to raise the bar for the machine. Our results establish a paradigm for inventing new games with quantum features and resources and offer a versatile platform for both classical and quantum machine learning, they explain.

Alpha Zero, for example, brings to Deepmind collateral victories to those that occur on the board. An algorithm capable of assimilating the rules of three different games is a significant advance towards the creation of learning systems of general purpose and adaptable to changing situations. Putting the machines to pursue these new goals can have two results: that the algorithm becomes more sophisticated until it reaches them or that the mouse hunts the cat and we finally find the limit of artificial intelligence.

Go here to see the original:

Quantum physics: the trick to beat artificial intelligence to Go? | Innovation - Explica

August: Quantum thermodynamics | News and features – University of Bristol

The QuamNESS consortium unites researchers in University of Bristol, Queens University of Belfast and Trinity College Dublin with the support of a grant from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council and Science Foundation Ireland (EPSRC-SFI) to explore the thermodynamics of quantum machines and technologies.

Thermodynamics is one of the pillars of natural sciences: it studies the way energy is exchanged between bodies at different temperature, predicts the likeliness of certain chemical reactions, and explains why even the most energy-efficient engine will always produce waste.

However, what happens when the processes of interest involve systems as simple as electrons, atoms or simple molecules? For such nanoscale building blocks of matter, the laws of physics experienced in the everyday world are no longer valid, and quantum mechanics come into play. Therefore, to provide an accurate description of energy-exchange processes occurring at microscopic scales, thermodynamics must be blended with the quantum framework.

Such new avenues of investigation promise to deliver minuscule devices able to make use of the counter-intuitive laws of quantum mechanics to outperform their classical counterparts. Miniaturised to only handfuls of atoms, these machines hold the promise of offering highly efficient ways of generating power, managing heat flows and recovering wasted energy in wide-ranging technologies, from microprocessors to chemical reactions.

The UK-Irish consortium QuamNESS, comprising researchers at the University of Bristol, Queens University Belfast, and Trinity College Dublin, will address this challenging perspective. By developing novel mathematical tools and powerful simulation methods the fundamental principles governing the performance of the smallest possible engines will be revealed. Supported by a large EPSRC-SFI grant, totalling more than 1.6 million, the QuamNESS team will work towards a fully-fledged understanding of how to engineer new technologies that benefit from super-efficient (quantum-enhanced) thermal management.

Dr Stephen Clark, Senior Lecturer in Physics at the University of Bristol and one of the principal investigators of QuamNESS, said: Developing the tools to unravel quantum enhancements is of paramount importance to near-future technologies and is the main objective of our project.

Quantum systems are well known to behave in very unintuitive ways. Under certain conditions, these strange quantum effects can both compete and radically alter the way energy is transformed. Our project will sharpen the view of this interplay by reassessing the fundamental concepts of irreversibility and fluctuations. The long-term aim is then to design schemes to harness quantum effects to make more efficient nanoscale machines.

A crucial feature of QuamNESS is that it brings together a uniquely well-suited team of researchers across world-class institutions in England, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Consequently the EPSRC-SFI partnership scheme was perfectly placed to support a project built on such close cross-border collaboration.

View original post here:

August: Quantum thermodynamics | News and features - University of Bristol

Loop Quantum Cosmology Theory: Cosmic Tango Between the Very Small and the Very Large – SciTechDaily

Tiny quantum fluctuations in the early universe explain two major mysteries about the large-scale structure of the universe, in a cosmic tango of the very small and the very large. A new study by researchers at Penn State used the theory of quantum loop gravity to account for these mysteries, which Einsteins theory of general relativity considers anomalous. Credit: Dani Zemba, Penn State

Theory of loop quantum cosmology describes how tiny primordial features account for anomalies at the largest scales of the universe.

While Einsteins theory of general relativity can explain a large array of fascinating astrophysical and cosmological phenomena, some aspects of the properties of the universe at the largest-scales remain a mystery. A new study using loop quantum cosmologya theory that uses quantum mechanics to extend gravitational physics beyond Einsteins theory of general relativityaccounts for two major mysteries. While the differences in the theories occur at the tiniest of scalesmuch smaller than even a protonthey have consequences at the largest of accessible scales in the universe. The study, which was published online on July 29, 2020, in the journal Physical Review Letters, also provides new predictions about the universe that future satellite missions could test.

While a zoomed-out picture of the universe looks fairly uniform, it does have a large-scale structure, for example because galaxies and dark matter are not uniformly distributed throughout the universe. The origin of this structure has been traced back to the tiny inhomogeneities observed in the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB)radiation that was emitted when the universe was 380 thousand years young that we can still see today. But the CMB itself has three puzzling features that are considered anomalies because they are difficult to explain using known physics.

Diagram showing evolution of the Universe according to the paradigm of Loop Quantum Origins, developed by scientists at Penn State. Credit: Alan Stonebraker. P. Singh, Physics 5, 142 (2012); APS/A. Stonebraker

While seeing one of these anomalies may not be that statistically remarkable, seeing two or more together suggests we live in an exceptional universe, said Donghui Jeong, associate professor of astronomy and astrophysics at Penn State and an author of the paper. A recent study in the journal Nature Astronomy proposed an explanation for one of these anomalies that raised so many additional concerns, they flagged a possible crisis in cosmology. Using quantum loop cosmology, however, we have resolved two of these anomalies naturally, avoiding that potential crisis.

Research over the last three decades has greatly improved our understanding of the early universe, including how the inhomogeneities in the CMB were produced in the first place. These inhomogeneities are a result of inevitable quantum fluctuations in the early universe. During a highly accelerated phase of expansion at very early timesknown as inflationthese primordial, miniscule fluctuations were stretched under gravitys influence and seeded the observed inhomogeneities in the CMB.

To understand how primordial seeds arose, we need a closer look at the early universe, where Einsteins theory of general relativity breaks down, said Abhay Ashtekar, Evan Pugh Professor of Physics, holder of the Eberly Family Chair in Physics, and director of the Penn State Institute for Gravitation and the Cosmos. The standard inflationary paradigm based on general relativity treats space time as a smooth continuum. Consider a shirt that appears like a two-dimensional surface, but on closer inspection you can see that it is woven by densely packed one-dimensional threads. In this way, the fabric of space time is really woven by quantum threads. In accounting for these threads, loop quantum cosmology allows us to go beyond the continuum described by general relativity where Einsteins physics breaks downfor example beyond the Big Bang.

The researchers previous investigation into the early universe replaced the idea of a Big Bang singularity, where the universe emerged from nothing, with the Big Bounce, where the current expanding universe emerged from a super-compressed mass that was created when the universe contracted in its preceding phase. They found that all of the large-scale structures of the universe accounted for by general relativity are equally explained by inflation after this Big Bounce using equations of loop quantum cosmology.

In the new study, the researchers determined that inflation under loop quantum cosmology also resolves two of the major anomalies that appear under general relativity.

The primordial fluctuations we are talking about occur at the incredibly small Planck scale, said Brajesh Gupt, a postdoctoral researcher at Penn State at the time of the research and currently at the Texas Advanced Computing Center of the University of Texas at Austin. A Planck length is about 20 orders of magnitude smaller than the radius of a proton. But corrections to inflation at this unimaginably small scale simultaneously explain two of the anomalies at the largest scales in the universe, in a cosmic tango of the very small and the very large. The researchers also produced new predictions about a fundamental cosmological parameter and primordial gravitational waves that could be tested during future satellite missions, including LiteBird and Cosmic Origins Explorer, which will continue improve our understanding of the early universe.

Reference: Alleviating the Tension in the Cosmic Microwave Background Using Planck-Scale Physics by Abhay Ashtekar, Brajesh Gupt, Donghui Jeong and V. Sreenath, 29 July 2020, Physical Review Letters.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.051302

In addition to Jeong, Ashtekar, and Gupt, the research team includes V. Sreenath at the National Institute of Technology Karnataka in Surathkal, India. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation, NASA, the Penn State Eberly College of Science, and the Inter-University Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics in Pune, India.

Read this article:

Loop Quantum Cosmology Theory: Cosmic Tango Between the Very Small and the Very Large - SciTechDaily

CBD Nation, Available August 25 On Amazon And Video On Demand, Examines The Highest Levels Of Scientific Research And Medical Evidence Surrounding The…

Explains the film's director and producer David Jakubovic, "Over the course of this project, I came to realize that cannabis is far from a gateway drug; for many, it's actually an exit drug from Pharmaceuticals and Narcotics. And in the U.S. - which has 5% of the world's population consuming 75% of the world's pharmaceuticals - we can no longer afford to be in the dark about the facts. Facts can save lives."

Featuring the world's leading experts in cannabis science and medicine - including acclaimed Israeli scientist Raphael Mechoulam, Ph.D., the 'father of cannabis research' whose 1960s discovery of THC jump started the medical and scientific revolution around cannabis - CBD Nation offers a compelling look at 60 years' worth of published and ongoing research.

"We published our findings thirty-seven years ago: cannabidiol (CBD) blocks epileptic attacks in patients. What happened? Nothing for thirty years," states Raphael Mechoulam, President of The Multidisciplinary Center for Cannabinoid Research at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem."Nothing happened until desperate parents like those in this film did their own research and found out that cannabidiol can help children with epilepsy. But epilepsy is just one of many conditions that we know cannabis medicine can treat. If the world chooses to not look at all of the science, it is not ignorance it's negligence."

Adds longtime cannabis activist, entrepreneur, and restorative justice champion, Steve DeAngelo, who also appears in the film: "CBD Nation brings you the real science that decades of U.S. government sponsored misinformation have hidden from public view. Watch it, and learn why cannabis may just be the most valuable medicine ever discovered by human beings."

Shot in 2018 over the course of six months in the United States, Canada, and Israel, CBD Nation marries a wealth of scientific breakthroughs with first-person narratives, following the emotional stories of patients for whom CBD is a lifesaving medicine.

"CBD Nation tells the authentic origin story of CBD how it took sick kids like Jayden David, Rylie Maedler, and the late Charlotte Figibecoming messengers for this plant in order for mainstream society to acknowledge its potential as medicine," shares Harborside co-founder, cannabis industry consultant and strategic advisor,Andrew DeAngelo. "It is a story about human biology, human rights, and the ultimate victory of truth and science, which could not be more relevant today."

With interviews from more than 30 physicians, clinicians, researchers, and patients, CBD Nation is the first wide release film to dive deep into how the human body has evolved to work with cannabis, providing not only a second chance at life for patients but also a fighting chance for the world's most politicized plant to be accepted for what it is: medicine.

"I hope that U.S. doctors, educators and politicians see this film," says Rylie Maedler, who worked closely with legislators in her home state of Delaware to pass Rylie's Law, granting children with qualifying conditions access to medical cannabis. "Because I'm living proof of the fact that cannabis and CBD have a place in modern medicine."

To learn more about CBD Nation, please visit CBDNationFilm.com.

PRESS CONTACT:[emailprotected]; 646.943.0541

ABOUT MAD MACHINE FILMSLaunched in 2013, Mad Machine Films produces documentary films and commercial content on a wide range of subjects and genres, from cannabis science and quantum physics, to the Vietnam War and concert films. The company was founded by director David Jakubovic, whose most recent credits include directing National Geographic's 2-hour World War 2 special, Heroes of the Sky: the Mighty Eighth Air Force PBS's 1-hour concert film for British pop icon Charli XCX, and the upcoming feature documentary, CBD Nation.

SOURCE Mad Machine Films

https://www.madmachinefilms.com

More here:

CBD Nation, Available August 25 On Amazon And Video On Demand, Examines The Highest Levels Of Scientific Research And Medical Evidence Surrounding The...

The unending appeal of time loops – SYFY WIRE

For most of us, it began with an alarm clock. The old fashioned, mechanical numbers flipped down to 6 a.m., and the familiar beats of Sonny and Cher's "I Got You Babe" rang out. It was Groundhog Day, again, and Bill Murray's Phil Conners was about to begin reliving the worst day of his life over and over again. Groundhog Day didn't invent its concept, but the comedy manages to occupy an almost impossible intersection of dark, silly, and genuinely heartfelt, and as such has stood as the defining example of the time-loop genre for almost 20 years.

The trope is simple enough: A character or multiple characters experience the same period of time on a loop, with their interactions within it being the only element of change. And though Groundhog Day's shadow loomed large over the '90s, the mid-2000s and onward allowed for a veritable explosion of new takes on it. From the underrated Emily Blunt (and Tom Cruise, but mostly we're here for Emily Blunt) vehicle Edge of Tomorrow (aka Live. Die. Repeat.), the Happy Death Day horror franchise, the popular Netflix comedy series Russian Doll, and the newest entry, Hulu's Palm Springs, the "It's like Groundhog Day but" genre has been booming.

Warning: The following may contain spoilers for Palm Springs.

What is it about the time loop trope that draws us in? It certainly feels like it has an extra dose of relevance currently, with many folks working from home while trying to retain any awareness of the difference between days. Palm Springs especially has benefited from a timeliness the filmmakers had never intentioned. The film eerily predicted the behavioral patterns we're seeing within our real-life national time loop. Andy Samberg's character is adrift without an anchor; Cristin Miliotti dives into workhorse mode, teaching herself complicated quantum physics in the booth of a diner; J.K. Simmons devolves into abject primal cruelty, admitting he hadn't even considered the way his actions affected the others.

But outside of a stay-at-home crisis, time loops have gained traction in their appeal due to the same themes that made Groundhog Day so popular to begin with. Like the drunken locals that Phil Conners laments to in Punxsutawney, or the fellow wedding guest in the Palm Springs hotel pool talking to Samberg's Nyles, those existing outside the loop can relate on a visceral level to the experience of feeling like today is the same as yesterday and tomorrow. For Bill Murray, the appeal of Groundhog Day as a script was its representation of people's fear of change, and how we choose to repeat our daily lives to avoid it. These themes echoed in Russian Doll, which as a bingeable streaming series really allowed audiences to inhabit the repetitive nature of the loops, ironically utilizing the same technologies that have sped our lives up and caused them to feel even more cyclical.

But these themes are not the universal notes behind all time-loop stories. The first season of Star Trek: Discovery made excellent use of the trope in the episode "Magic to Make the Sanest Man Mad" as a tool for villainous Harry Mudd's schemes, and in which the crew members repeatedly attempt to prevent the destruction of the ship. Similarly, the "Eleventh Hour" arc of the actual-play RPG podcast The Adventure Zone features a time loop in which the characters must try to stop the destruction of a rural town. Stories like this, often using much shorter time loops to up the stakes with a ticking clock, magnify one of the other key relatable themes of the trope, repeating events over and over until one can get them right.

The appeal for this "getting it right" element to time loops is fairly universal. Who among us hasn't replayed a past mistake or fumbled social encounter over and over in our heads, imagining all the ways that we could have done it better? The time-loop premise offers us a wish-fulfillment fantasy, giving us the most literal representation of that experience possible. In a "be careful what you wish for" lesson in morality though, often it's the characters' attempts to stop a thing from happening that leads to much more catastrophic results. The lesson perhaps being that obsessing over a past event is ultimately destructive and the goal should be to move on.

These two themes are not completely independent of each other. In seemingly lower-stakes stories, the thing that the characters might be most actively trying to fix is their own lives. In the real world, those of us who live repetitious loops from day to day likely don't do so out of a sense that we've got everything exactly how we like it rather, we do it thinking that, if we just stick with our grind, one day it will probably all pay off.

The simple beauty of a time-loop story is that when presented with a world where everything is ultimately static, the only element of true change must come from the characters themselves. According to Groundhog Day screenwriter Danny Rubin, what starts as the worst day of Phil's life ends up as the best day, based entirely on how he personally changes and how that affects the way he experiences the world. Similarly, in Edge of Tomorrow, while there is a very real alien threat, Tom Cruise's character has moved from being a coward trying to escape conflict to rushing into danger, sacrificing himself to save the world, even after he's been freed from the time loop.

Between the relatability, the darkened wish fulfillment, and the intense zeroing in on character development, all combined with the inherent entertainment value of a well managed time-loop story, it's easy to see why time loops moved out of being a seldom-used premise from a handful of specific sources into a full-on subgenre of its own. It's a near-certainty that we'll continue to see more and more of these stories as time moves forward. Or doesn't.

Read this article:

The unending appeal of time loops - SYFY WIRE

The Force of Nothingness Has Been Used to Manipulate Objects – ScienceAlert

Scientists can use some pretty wild forces to manipulate materials. There's acoustic tweezers, which use the force ofacoustic radiationto control tiny objects. Optical tweezers made of lasers exploit the force of light. Not content with that, now physicists have made a device to manipulate materials using the force of nothingness.

OK, that may be a bit simplistic. When we say nothingness, we're really referring to the attractive force that arises between two surfaces in a vacuum, known as the Casimir force. The new research has provided not just a way to use it for no-contact object manipulation, but also to measure it.

The implications span multiple fields, from chemistry and gravitational wave astronomy all the way down to something as fundamental and ubiquitous as metrology - the science of measurement.

"If you can measure and manipulate the Casimir force on objects, then we gain the ability to improve force sensitivity and reduce mechanical losses, with the potential to strongly impact science and technology," explained physicist Michael Tobar of the University of Western Australia.

The Casimir force was first predicted in 1948 by Dutch theoretical physicist Hendrik Casimir, and finally demonstrated within his predicted values in 1997.

But, since then, it has been generating a lot more interest, not just for its own sake, but for how it might be used in other areas of research.

What Casimir predicted was that an attractive force would exist between two conducting plates in a vacuum, due to contrasts in quantum fluctuations in the electromagnetic field.

"To understand this, we need to delve into the weirdness of quantum physics. In reality a perfect vacuum does not exist - even in empty space at zero temperature, virtual particles, like photons, flicker in and out of existence," Tobar said.

"These fluctuations interact with objects placed in vacuum and are actually enhanced in magnitude as temperature is increased, causing a measurable force from 'nothing' - otherwise known as the Casimir force."

The team's experiment took place in room temperature settings.They made use of a tiny metallic enclosure designed to confine certain kinds of electromagnetic radiation, referred to as a microwave re-entrant cavity.

Separated from this cavity by a gap of about one micrometre was a metal-plated silicon nitride membrane acting as a Casimir spring.

By applying an electrostatic force, the team was able to control the re-entrant gap with exquisite precision.

This, in turn, allowed them to manipulate the membrane with the Casimir force that arose when the gap was sufficiently small.

"Because of the Casimir force between the objects, the metallic membrane, which flexed back and forth, had its spring-like oscillations significantly modified and was used to manipulate the properties of the membrane and re-entrant cavity system in a unique way," Tobar said.

"This allowed orders of magnitudes of improvement in force sensitivity and the ability to control the mechanical state of the membrane."

But controlling the gap also allowed the researchers to measure the force. As the gap opened, the Casimir force grew weaker, until it was at a point where it was no longer acting on the membrane. By studying the changes to the membrane, the team could generate high precision measurements.

It's a novel way of measuring nothing, though other methods have used tiny rapidly moving materials to also get a grip on the force exerted by variations in otherwise vacant quantum fields.

Other studies have also put the force to use in less precise ways, helping tiny silicon devices keep their distance, for example.

"The technique presented here has high potential to create additional schemes and devices by manipulating the thermal Casimir force," the researchers wrote in their paper.

"For example, 'in situ' agile programmable devices, engineered to manipulate mode structures and improve resonator losses as needed at room temperature, could be constructed, including the development and manipulation of topological mechanical oscillators."

Doesn't that sound fun?

The research has been published in Nature Physics.

See the rest here:

The Force of Nothingness Has Been Used to Manipulate Objects - ScienceAlert

Fake ‘Freedom to Breathe Agency’ was caught in Facebook COVID-19 purge – Insider – INSIDER

A video being widely shared on social media has renewed attention on a group that falsely presents itself as a government agency fighting against compulsory mask-wearing.

In the video filmed in a California grocery store a woman says she is from the "Freedom to Breathe Agency."

She tells a store worker that she could be sued for enforcing mask rules. She also handed her papers, which, according to BuzzFeed News, claimed that she could be sent to prison.

The group has no affiliation with any state or federal authority, and has been warned by the Department of Justice to stop mis-using its seal.

It has also been censured as part of a Facebook crackdown on coronavirus misinformation, linked to fake cards marked "FACE MASK EXEMPT" and said to be issued by the agency.

In July the Department of Justice (DoJ) denied any affiliation with the group after imagery emerged of the cards, which feature the department's seal.

"These postings were not issued by the Department and are not endorsed by the Department," said the DoJ in a statement to NPR.

The cards threatened business owners requiring patrons to wear masks with a referral to the DoJ, and potential fines of $150,000.

Pictures of the exemption cards were being linked to widely in a Facebook group called Unmasking America, reported The Verge in July.

The page was subsequently banned from the site for spreading coronavirus misinformation.

One poster in the group reportedly advised others to "print it, laminate it and use it. The number is legit."

The group's Facebook page is currently unavailable, with a message from Facebook suggesting possible reasons, including that it had been deleted.

The group's founder was identified by The New York Times as Lenka Koloma.

The outlet reported that she was selling the cards on a page on the Shopify platform. She describes herself on her webpage as an "entrepreneur, motivational speaker, transformation expert and researcher in the field of biology, nutritional science, science of life, neuroscience and quantum physics."

She is also, according to BuzzFeed News, the woman in the video confronting the grocery store worker.

She claims wearing a mask is part of "subliminal mind conditioning," and her website contains a print-out of grounds for refusing to obey mask-wearing rules.

Koloma did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Facebook also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Do you have a personal experience with the coronavirus you'd like to share? Or a tip on how your town or community is handling the pandemic? Please email covidtips@businessinsider.com and tell us your story.

More here:

Fake 'Freedom to Breathe Agency' was caught in Facebook COVID-19 purge - Insider - INSIDER

Scientists Played a Game of Go at the Quantum Scale – Futurism

Quantum Realm

A team of Chinese scientists put a new twist on the ancient game Go: They shrunk it down to the quantum scale.

In this new version, the classic black and white stones players use as game pieces were taken away and replaced by pairs of entangled photons, according to Phys.org. While the game is an unusual quantum experiment on its own, the researchers say that the work could herald a new era of quantum physics-based games.

In a regular game of Go, players try to claim territory on a board and capture each others stones by surrounding them with their own. Its an extremely complex game governed by extremely simple rules, which has made it a common target for AI researchers.

But in the quantum version, which is described in a paper shared on the preprint server ArXiv last month, the use of entangled photons introduces new layers of complexity and randomness.

The main difference between the two games is that now it matters whether an encircled photon is entangled with another or not. When a player places down two photons, they remain entangled until another photon is placed next to one of them. For as long as theyre entangled, neither photon can be captured.

And thanks to the tricky nature of quantum physics, a player wont know whether a given photon is entangled with another until they try to capture it, adding a new element of chance and trickery that renders classic Go strategies useless.

READ MORE: Using entangled photons to play quantum Go [Phys.org]

More on Go: Human Go Champion Who Lost to AI Says Machines Cannot Be Defeated

Continued here:

Scientists Played a Game of Go at the Quantum Scale - Futurism

How Wave.tv is making the World’s Strongest Man think bigger with its digital plans – SportsPro Media

Boasting one of the most evocative titles in sport, and having grown from a light-hearted entertainment show into an international franchise watched by millions, it seems disingenuous to label the Worlds Strongest Man (WSM) as small or niche.

Then again, in an industry swarming with billion dollar broadcast deals, eye-popping viewing figures, and lucrative commercial partnerships, it is a mark of the times that even WSMs feats of superhuman strength have not been able to keep up with other sports properties in the search for expansion.

A reported annual global viewership of around 220 million would certainly challenge the assumption that WSM is on the fringes of global recognition. But if you really break it down, the sport, while capturing the imagination, has yet to fully immerse itself in the public consciousness.

Aside from the cream of the crop, who get the majority of their income from sponsorships, few athletes make a living out if it. Even Eddie Hall, WSM 2017 winner and the first man to pull a 500kg deadlift (for context, that is heavier than a polar bear) could only afford to turn pro in 2015. He is one of the few select strongmen, certainly in the UK, who qualify for household name status. The other being Geoff Capes, who claimed two titles in 1983 and 1985 during the sports fledgling years.

A staple of the Christmas TV schedule during the past five decades, that reliance on linear broadcasting has perhaps held WSM back given audiences propensity today for digital, on-demand content. Even a 170kg bloke pulling an airplane is not as attention grabbing as it once was.

But that could all be about to change. In June, sports entertainment company Wave.tv struck a partnership with IMG to strengthen its content offering across the agency giants properties, one being WSM.

The deal secured Wave.tv rights to distribute WSM content via an array of digital media brands on Snapchat, Instagram, TikTok, Facebook and YouTube channels, meaning keg tossing, axle pressing and tyre flipping were all at the fingertips of the Wave.tv audience.

We believe that a formula of fandoms, plusprogramming formats, plus IP equals new hit programming, Brian Verne (pictured right), Wave.tvs chief executive and co-founder, tells SportsPro. When we started Wave.tv,we set out to go sport by sport, or fandom by fandom, and create this portfolio of digitally native media brands, covering everything from traditional sports to non-traditional sports to anything in between.

We wanted to do it squarely on the core and emerging social and digital platforms, where we saw young fans really migrating to for their sports entertainment experience.

We felt like if we were able to do that, and take this view of providing fans with a true breadth of programming, and then also marry that with mastering different programming formats, then we'd be able to go and work with rights holders or IP holders.

We simply reimagine a lot of the same stories and narratives that fans have cared about for years into new hit programming for the platforms on which our media brands live.

Wave.tv had already tested the waters with IMG through the launch of The Pump on Snapchat. Described as the destination for the strongest content on the planet, the show features strongmen and other fitness personalities hitting the iron. Over a 12-month period, WSM content generated more than 345 million views, with The Pump now boasting a dedicated fanbase and becoming one of Wave.tvs top performing properties.

Over the last 18 months, Vernes operation has also been distributing WSM content across the Wave TV, Highlights WAVE, and Greatest Highlights channels, demonstrating bold plans to take the rights holders IP to the masses.

I think in general, there has been this massive misconception in the market that fandom is decreasing with the next generation of fans, when in fact it's actually at an all-time high, explains Verne.

People's viewing habits have changed. Today, yes, that younger fan isn't necessarily behaving the same way as previous generations. But they're consuming more content than ever on their phones across the social and digital platforms where our brands live.

So, if anything, I think its a reminder to the industry that people still love all sorts of sports for all sorts of fandoms.

There are all these amazing stories or moments that are happening on a daily basis and just because it might not be soccer, football, basketball, baseball, or hockey, doesn't mean there isn't an incredible story to be told. That was our worldview as it relates to Worlds Strongest Man.

Magns Ver Magnsson and Bill Kazmaier won seven WSM titles between them during the 1980s and 90s

Indeed, WSM has been packed with engrossing storytelling since its first edition in 1977, adding some brains to its considerable brawn.

The 1980s saw Capes, the US Bill Kazmaier and Icelands Jn Pll Sigmarsson, who called himself the Viking, trade titles and insults during the decade. The mid 1990s to early 2000s saw more Nordic power reign supreme, with competitors from Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Iceland again dominating the field.

From 2010, weve arguably seen the highest standard of competition in the sports history, with ydrnas Savickas, Brian Shaw, Eddie Hall and Game of Thrones star Hafr Jlus Bjrnsson breaking numerous world records.

Savickas fittingly known as Big Z and regarded in many circles as the strongest man in history was described by strength icon and WWE star Mark Henry as being the Michael Jordan of lifting. Yet, his profile pales in comparison to the fastest man who ever lived, Usain Boult, or even Jordan himself.

Considering the quality on show today, staunch WSM fans could make a case that the sport does not need to drastically alter its broadcasting approach for fear of pampering the most masculine of vocations. But, facing competition from the likes of the Arnold Strongman Classic, it would be short-sighted not to tap into a digital methodology as more established sports already have done.

ydrnas Savickas is an icon of the sport

Crucially, the Wave.tv tie-up ensures WSM, along with other IMG properties such as EuroLeague Basketball and Edge Sport, will enjoy a flow of organic coverage and engagement with Gen Z and millennial audiences. Currently, 80 per cent of Wave.tvs viewers are aged between 13 and 34.

Added to that, since being founded in 2017, Wave.tv has become the fourth largest sports media entity in the US and fastest growing overall globally, according to measurement solution firm Shareablee. Boasting more than 3.2 billion monthly views, the company has over 60 million followers and subscribers, reaching at least 200 million fans each month.

I think that the beauty of sport is that its truly this universal language, continues Verne. We often say that fandom cannot, and should not, fit within a singular box.Regardless of what your favourite sport is, that doesn't mean youre not equally as passionate.

If you think about how many different fandoms exist and manifest globally, it is very limiting as a media company to only focus on a small subset. Thus, we took this approach that whether a sport is traditional or non-traditional, or anything you can even imagine, we want to develop a media brand and programming for it.

Other IMG properties including EuroLeague Basketball and Edge Sport are part of Wave.tvs content deal

Verne notes that he expects rights holders to lean even more heavily on digital content in the ongoing battle for increased exposure. Linear TV will continue to be the bread and butter, certainly with the biggest leagues, for the foreseeable future. But the added potential of opening up further sponsorship inventory, coupled with the Covid-19 uncertainty, would suggest social media has an even more sizeable role to play.

At the end of the day, it increases fandom, which drives enterprise value. From a pure commercial and revenue generating point of view, we see this as massively valuable sports sponsorship inventory, says Verne.

You think about the industry at large and, every single year, every white paper talks about the value of the ecosystem increasing. Now, we're in the midst of this paradigm shift of sorts where all sorts of things are changing.

So we view this type of programming that lives across core and emerging social and digital [platforms] as being incredibly valuable and lucrative to all sorts of rights holders. Weve certainly found a way to differentiate ourselves by working with a lot of non-traditional sports to date.

If you think about how many different fandoms exist and manifest globally, it is very limiting as a media company to only focus on a small subset.

The clamour for properties, not just WSM, to grasp the next wave of fans is all the more urgent as they look to shore up their earnings amid the economic downturn. An exact formula is elusive, given the variable nature of each generation. But, Wave.tvs youthful audience offers some clues to maximise digital engagement.

Don't overthink things. Regardless of whether it was year 1900, 1960 or 2020, sports is escapism. Its entertainment for people, explains Verne.

The same underlying pillars still exist today when you talk about developing effective programming. People want to learn something, they want to be entertained, they want to laugh, they want to be motivated, they want to be inspired. If you take that approach to your programming, irrespective of the medium or the format, then I think it's going to be effective.

For whatever reason, over the last decade or so, there has been a little bit of a misconception or over complicating a lot of what we do. We're not solving quantum physics. Were just taking the same things you and I grew up with, that our parents and grandparents grew up watching, the same interests, and just adapting it to how fans across the world are behaving today.

That's why I always tell people that the beauty in our business is truly the simplicity.

Without mammoth TV and commercial contracts to fall back on, the post-Covid future is even more uncertain for non-traditional sports. However, for WSM, its collaboration with Wave.tv offers a chance to leverage content old and new for an untapped demographic.

Boosting those prospects further arethe considerable resources Wave.tv is able to allocate to its partners. In June, Verne closed a Series A funding round worth US$32 million to further build Wave.tv's roster of media brands, while company acquisitions are on the agenda too.

With consumers watching more content during lockdown, Wave.tv was able to sustain its business by drawing on it deep archive. Whilst other media brands have been hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic, Verne claims Wave.tv is on target to see about 100 per cent year-over-year revenue growth meaning it has enough budget to target the addition of between 12 and 20 new staff this quarter.

WSM athletes may be competing bicep to bicep, but Wave.tvs approach to having ardent fans from varying sports at the centre of its approach highlights the value of putting passion into practice.

Weve always viewed ourselves as this modern day sports and entertainment enterprise. From a media point of view, we have 18 media brands within our portfolio, each covering some subset of fandom. That's made us well positioned to continue to add media brands to the roster, says Verne.

Our worldview is that we can develop a very successful, digitally native media brand for a particular area of sports fandom. So, you'll definitely see us expand into new categories.

Given the time that were in, were at the convergence of a lot of change within sports sponsorship. Sports betting, especially in North America, is one of the fastest growing sectors, so that's something that we're looking at really heavily.

Thats on our roadmap from a programming and commercial opportunity point of view. Well be continuing to diversify and add assets to our portfolio as things evolve. Were very much in growth mode.

Visit link:

How Wave.tv is making the World's Strongest Man think bigger with its digital plans - SportsPro Media

Large Hadron Collider Detects Evidence of a Rare Higgs Boson Process: God Particle Decaying Into a Pair of Muons – SciTechDaily

The Compact Muon Solenoid (CMS) is a general-purpose detector at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). It has a broad physics programme ranging from studying the Standard Model (including the Higgs boson) to searching for extra dimensions and particles that could make up dark matter. The CMS detector is built around a huge solenoid magnet. This takes the form of a cylindrical coil of superconducting cable that generates a field of 4 tesla, about 100,000 times the magnetic field of the Earth. The field is confined by a steel yoke that forms the bulk of the detectors 14,000-tonne weight. Credit: CERN

The ATLAS and CMS collaborations at the Large Hadron Collider have seen evidence of a new type of decay not yet observed: the Higgs boson decaying into a pair of muons.

US CMS the United States contingent of the global CMS collaboration played a crucial role in this result, contributing to the excellent performance of CMS detector. US CMS members have been instrumental in the design, construction and upgrades of detector components that capture the particle tracks and help filter potential signals from the background noise: the tracker detector, the muon detectors, the muon trigger system and the computing system. They continue to lead the successful maintenance and operations of these systems.

US CMS is very proud to acknowledge the significant impact made by its members in deploying innovative analysis techniques, including cutting-edge AI methods, which were critical in establishing the evidence for Higgs boson decays into a muon and antimuon pair, said Brown University physicist Meenakshi Narain, chair of the US CMS collaboration. This is a rare process, and finding evidence for it is a vital step toward understanding the Higgs particle and the Standard Model.

CMS is an international collaboration with members from 238 institutes across 55 countries. US CMS, hosted by the U.S. Department of Energys Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, makes up about a third of the CMS collaboration.

The achievement, reached significantly ahead of what was expected, relies on the excellent performance of our detector, on the large data set provided by LHC and on advanced analysis techniques, said Roberto Carlin, spokesperson for the CMS experimental collaboration.

The ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN have announced new results that show that the Higgs boson decays into two muons. The muon is a heavier copy of the electron, one of the elementary particles that constitute the matter content of the universe. While electrons are classified as a first-generation particle, muons belong to the second generation. The physics process of the Higgs boson decaying into muons is a rare phenomenon as only about one Higgs boson in 5,000 decays into muons. These new results have pivotal importance for fundamental physics because they indicate for the first time that the Higgs boson interacts with second-generation elementary particles.

Physicists at CERN have been studying the Higgs boson since its discovery in 2012 to probe the properties of this very special particle. The Higgs boson, produced from proton collisions at the Large Hadron Collider, disintegrates referred to as decay almost instantaneously into other particles. One of the main methods of studying the Higgs bosons properties is by analyzing how it decays into the various fundamental particles and the rate of disintegration.

A candidate of a Higgs boson decays into two muons as recorded by CMS. Credit: CMS collaboration, CMS collaboration, Thomas McCauley

CMS achieved evidence of this decay with 3 sigma, which means that the chance of seeing the Higgs boson decaying into a muon pair from statistical fluctuation is less than one in 700. ATLAS two sigma result means the chances are one in 40. The combination of both results would increase the significance well above 3 sigma and provides strong evidence for the Higgs boson decay to two muons.

CMS is proud to have achieved this sensitivity to the decay of Higgs bosons to muons and to show first experimental evidence for this process. The Higgs boson seems to interact also with second-generation particles in agreement with the prediction of the Standard Model, a result that will be further refined with the data we expect to collect in the next run, says Roberto Carlin, spokesperson for the CMS experiment.

The Higgs boson is the quantum manifestation of the Higgs field, which gives mass to elementary particles it interacts with, via the Brout-Englert-Higgs mechanism. By measuring the rate at which the Higgs boson decays into different particles, physicists can infer the strength of their interaction with the Higgs field: the higher the rate of decay into a given particle, the stronger its interaction with the field. So far, the ATLAS and CMS experiments have observed the Higgs boson decays into different types of bosons such as W and Z, and heavier fermions such as tau leptons. The interaction with the heaviest quarks, the top and bottom, was measured in 2018. Muons are much lighter in comparison, and their interaction with the Higgs field is weaker. Interactions between the Higgs boson and muons had, therefore, not been seen at the LHC.

A candidate ATLAS event display of a Higgs boson decay to two muons. Credit: ATLAS collaboration

This evidence of Higgs boson decays to second-generation matter particles complements a highly successful Run 2 Higgs physics program. The measurements of the Higgs bosons properties have reached a new stage in precision and rare decay modes can be addressed. These achievements rely on the large LHC data set, the outstanding efficiency, and performance of the ATLAS detector, as well as the use of novel analysis techniques, says Karl Jakobs, ATLAS spokesperson.

What makes these studies even more challenging is that, at the LHC, for every predicted Higgs boson decaying to two muons, there are thousands of muon pairs produced through other processes that mimic the expected experimental signature. The characteristic signature of the Higgs bosons decay to muons is a small excess of events that cluster near a muon-pair mass of 125 GeV, which is the mass of the Higgs boson. Isolating the Higgs boson to muon-pair interactions is no easy feat. To do so, both experiments measure the energy, momentum and angles of muon candidates from the Higgs bosons decay. In addition, the sensitivity of the analyses was improved through methods such as sophisticated background modeling strategies and other advanced techniques such as machine-learning algorithms. CMS combined four separate analyses, each optimized to categorize physics events with possible signals of a specific Higgs boson production mode. ATLAS divided their events into 20 categories that targeted specific Higgs boson production modes.

The results, which are so far consistent with the Standard Model predictions, used the full data set collected from the second run of the LHC. With more data to be recorded from the particle accelerators next run and with the High-Luminosity LHC, the ATLAS and CMS collaborations expect to reach the sensitivity (5 sigma) needed to establish the discovery of the Higgs boson decay to two muons and constrain possible theories of physics beyond the Standard Model which would affect this decay mode of the Higgs boson.

References:

Measurement of Higgs boson decay to a pair of muons in proton-proton collisions at s=13TeV by CMS Collaboration, 29 July 2020, CMS Physics Analysis Summaries.Report: CMS-PAS-HIG-19-006

A search for the dimuon decay of the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector by ATLAS Collaboration, 15 July 2020, High Energy Physics Experiment.arXiv: 2007.07830

Read more:

Large Hadron Collider Detects Evidence of a Rare Higgs Boson Process: God Particle Decaying Into a Pair of Muons - SciTechDaily

Space-Time Refraction Defies Fermats Principle: New Class of Laser Beam Doesnt Follow Normal Laws of Refraction – SciTechDaily

A new study in Nature Photonics details the unique properties of the UCF-developed laser beam.

The speed of a message traveling in these packets is no longer affected by traveling through different materials of different densities.

University of Central Florida researchers have developed a new type of laser beam that doesnt follow long-held principles about how light refracts and travels. The findings, which were published recently in Nature Photonics, could have huge implications for optical communication and laser technologies.

This new class of laser beams has unique properties that are not shared by common laser beams, says Ayman Abouraddy, a professor in UCFs College of Optics and Photonics and the studys principal investigator.

The beams, known as spacetime wave packets, follow different rules when they refract, that is when they pass through different materials. Normally, light slows down when it travels into a denser material.

In contrast, spacetime wave packets can be arranged to behave in the usual manner, to not change speed at all, or even to anomalously speed up in denser materials, Abouraddy says. As such, these pulses of light can arrive at different points in space at the same time.

Think about how a spoon inside a water-filled glass looks broken at the point where the water and air meet, Abouraddy says. The speed of light in air is different from the speed of light in water. And so, the light rays wind up bending after they cross the surface between air to water, and so apparently the spoon looks bent. This is a well-known phenomenon described by Snells Law.

Although Snells Law still applies, the underlying change in velocity of the pulses is no longer applicable for the new laser beams, Abouraddy says. These abilities are counter to Fermats Principle that says light always travels such that it takes the shortest path, he says.

What we find here, though, is no matter how different the materials are that light passes through, there always exists one of our spacetime wave packets that could cross the interface of the two materials without changing its velocity, Abouraddy says. So, no matter what the properties of the medium are, it will go across the interface and continue as if its not there.

For communication, this means the speed of a message traveling in these packets is no longer affected by traveling through different materials of different densities.

If you think of a plane trying to communicate with two submarines at the same depth but one is far away and the other ones close by, the one thats farther away will incur a longer delay than the one thats close by, Abouraddy says. We find that we can arrange for our pulses to propagate such that they arrive at the two submarines at the same time. In fact, now the person sending the pulse doesnt even need to know where the submarine is, as long as they are at the same depth. All those submarines will receive the pulse at the same time so you can blindly synchronize them without knowing where they are.

Abouraddys research team created the spacetime wave packets by using a device known as a spatial light modulator to reorganize the energy of a pulse of light so that its properties in space and time are no longer separate. This allows them to control the group velocity of the pulse of light, which is roughly the speed at which the peak of the pulse travels.

Previous work has shown the teams ability to control the group velocity of the spacetime wave packets, including in optical materials. The current study built upon that work by finding they could also control the spacetime wave packets speed through different media. This does not contradict special relativity in any way, because it applies to the propagation of the pulse peak rather than to the underlying oscillations of the light wave.

This new field that were developing is a new concept for light beams, Abouraddy says. As a result, everything we look into using these beams reveals new behavior. All the behavior we know about light really takes tacitly an underlying presumption that its properties in space and time are separable. So, all we know in optics is based on that. Its a built-in assumption. Its taken to be the natural state of affairs. But now, breaking that underlying assumption, were starting to see new behavior all over the place.

Co-authors of the study were Basanta Bhaduri, lead author and a former research scientist with UCFs College of Optics and Photonics, now with Bruker Nano Surfaces in California, and Murat Yessenov, a doctoral candidate in the college.

Bhaduri became interested in Abouraddys research after reading about it in journals, such as Optics Express and Nature Photonics, and joined the professors research team in 2018. For the study, he helped develop the concept and designed the experiments, as well as carried out measurements and analyzed data.

He says the study results are important in many ways, including the new research avenues it opens.

Space-time refraction defies our expectations derived from Fermats principle and offers new opportunities for molding the flow of light and other wave phenomena, Bhaduri says.

Yessenovs roles included data analysis, derivations and simulations. He says he became interested in the work by wanting to explore more about entanglement, which in quantum systems is when two well-separated objects still have a relation to each other.

We believe that spacetime wave packets have more to offer and many more interesting effects can be unveiled using them, Yessenov says.

Abouraddy says next steps for the research include studying the interaction of these new laser beams with devices such as laser cavities and optical fibers, in addition to applying these new insights to matter rather than to light waves.

Reference: Anomalous refraction of optical spacetime wave packets by Basanta Bhaduri, Murat Yessenov and Ayman F. Abouraddy, 22 June 2020, Nature Photonics.DOI: 10.1038/s41566-020-0645-6

The research was funded by the U.S. Office of Naval Research.

Bhaduri earned his doctorate in physics (applied optics) from the Indian Institute of Technology in Madras, India. He was a research scientist at UCF before recently moving to Bruker Nano Surfaces in California where he is a senior staff optical engineer.

Yessenov earned his bachelors in physics from Nazabayev University, Kazakhstan, and joined Abouraddys group in 2017.

Abouraddy received his doctorate in electrical engineering from Boston University and worked as a postdoctoral researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He joined UCF in 2008.

Read this article:

Space-Time Refraction Defies Fermats Principle: New Class of Laser Beam Doesnt Follow Normal Laws of Refraction - SciTechDaily

Editorial, August 10, 2020: Your cellphone might be "Big Brother" – Richmond.com

You might not know geofencing, but it knows you.

Geofencing is defined as a technology that draws a virtual line around a physical area so that a signal can be sent to a mobile electronic device, such as a cellphone, that has passed through that area.

If youve ever walked into a store, spoken to no one and then very shortly gotten an email or text from that store, youre familiar with the practice if not the word.

Geofencing also is a law enforcement tool, at least until and unless the courts decide otherwise.

Last year, a man robbed a Richmond-area bank of $195,000. A search warrant led to Google opening its cellphone accounts to focus on everyone near the bank at the time of the robbery. With a little sleuthing, the cops narrowed their search down to one man whose phone was inside the bank when it was robbed. He was caught with $100,000 and he confessed.

Now the mans lawyers claim that the Google search violated the Fourth Amendment, which guarantees citizens protection against unreasonable searches and guards our expectation to privacy.

His attorneys say finding the location of every cellphone near that bank is like searching every home in a neighborhood because of a nearby robbery. The federal court in Richmond will decide whether theyre right.

Freeing a man who pretty obviously did the crime on a technicality would be a hard pill to swallow. However, the way he was caught is problematic.

If you have an Android phone or iPhone, and Location History is enabled, the data from that phone is tracked and stored.

Many of us do not like the idea that our every move is being recorded. That seems invasive, not to say irritating.

A man in Florida learned that police were seeking information on his Google account. He coincidentally was in the same area where a home was burglarized and was a suspect. He spent thousands clearing his name.

An Arizona man spent six days in jail after a geofence search showed him at a place where a crime was committed. Turns out, hed given his old cellphone to another man, who did the deed.

New York state is considering a bill that would ban geofence warrants there. The federal ruling in Richmond will help determine their legality nationwide.

Geofencing is no doubt valuable in catching criminals, but the amount of privacy every citizen gives up seems like a high price to pay for making crime prevention a little easier.

If the police came knocking on your door, demanding to search your house because somebody on your block committed a crime, you likely would feel violated. Geofencing is like that, except you dont even know youre being searched. That makes it even scarier.

Adapted from The Free Lance-Star, Fredericksburg

More:

Editorial, August 10, 2020: Your cellphone might be "Big Brother" - Richmond.com

Legal Brief: Surveillance and the Fourth Amendment – SecurityInfoWatch

Timothy J. Pastore, Esq., is a Partner in the New York office of Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP (www.saul.com), where he is the Chair of the Security Systems Practice Group. Before entering private practice, Mr. Pastore was an officer and Judge Advocate General (JAG) in the U.S. Air Force and a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice. Reach him at (212) 980-7204 or by e-mail at timothy.pastore@saul.com.

Are you a homeowner? Do you value your privacy?

Do me a favor stand inside your front door. Do you expect that your conduct is private in your home? Now, step immediately outside your front door, just a few feet from where you stood inside. How about now?

You may be surprised to learn that the law may treat these two spots very differently.

It could be that you have a reasonable expectation of privacy inside your home, but no such reasonable expectation immediately outside your home. This appears to be the ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (an intermediate federal appeals court) in a case known as United States v. Moore-Bush, 2020 WL 3249060 (1st Cir. 2020).

In this recently decided case, the court considered whether the governments warrantless use of a pole camera to continuously record the front of the defendants home infringed on the defendants reasonable expectation of privacy in and around their home and, thereby, violated the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The appellate court reversed the trial court and determined that the warrantless use of the camera was permissible and not a violation of the defendants fourth amendment rights.

As a former prosecutor, I agree with the decision, and I am glad that the drug and gun dealing defendants were caught and are subject to punishment; however, the decision is nevertheless thought-provoking and controversial.

The principal defendant an attorney and magistrate operated a side business dealing in illegal drugs and guns. Not a good idea.

She and her boyfriend lived with her mother in a quiet residential neighborhood. After a confidential informant bought four guns illegally at the residence, officers installed a pole camera across the street that viewed one side of the house.

The pole camera took continuous video recording for approximately eight months; focused on the driveway and the front of the house; had the ability to zoom in so close that it can read license plate numbers; and created a digitally searchable log.

The police also conducted physical surveillance of the residence seeing what anyone on the street could see.

Based, in part, on evidence gathered by the pole camera, the police obtained a series of other search warrants related to the investigation. Eventually, the principal defendant, her boyfriend and the principal defendants mother were charged with drug trafficking.

In advance of the presentation of evidence, the trial court ruled that the use of the pole camera for an extended period, coupled with the ability to zoom and to search the recordings, constituted an illegal search under the Fourth Amendment, leading to suppression of critical evidence in the case.

The government appealed the ruling of the trial court that the use of the pole camera violated the defendants rights. The appellate court reversed holding that the pole camera revealed nothing more than could be lawfully viewed by officers on the street; and therefore, no warrant was required, and the evidence gathered by the camera and other warrant-based evidence gathered subsequently was admissible and could be used against the defendants in their criminal trial.

Among other things, the appellate court held that what one knowingly exposes to public view does not invoke reasonable expectations of privacy protected by the Fourth Amendment.

The majority opinion in the Moore-Bush case was accompanied by what is known as a concurring opinion where one or more appellate judges agree with the conclusions of the majority of the court, but for different reasons. In this case, one of the appellate judges separately wrote a concurring opinion that began by acknowledging the logic of defendants arguments. In particular, the judge analogized the case to sign stealing in baseball, where it is acceptable that a base runner might steal a sign from the other team, but using a hidden camera to continuously record all signs throughout a game is not.

The concurring opinion also raised a concern that, given the pace of innovation, law enforcement will have license to conduct a degree of unchecked criminal investigatory surveillance that the Fourth Amendment could not possibly have been intended to allow. Nevertheless, the concurrence did not disagree with the result.

What is interesting is that the police officers investigating the defendants could have sought a warrant from a court at any time for the use of the camera essentially mooting the issues ultimately raised in the appeal. For whatever reason, they did not. Maybe they did not want to risk being denied a warrant, maybe they were worried about bias because one of the defendants was a magistrate judge, maybe they deemed it totally unnecessary because, in their view, it did not rise to the level of an unreasonable search and seizure otherwise prohibited by the Fourth Amendment.

We may never learn the motivation of these investigating officers, but, at a minimum, we can thank them for getting guns and drugs off the street. The issue, of course, is whether they violated the Constitution in the process. I believe not and the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit agrees.

How about you? Do you agree? I suggest you think about it maybe out on your front porch and be sure to smile for the camera.

Timothy J. Pastore, Esq., is a Partner in the New York office of Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP (www.saul.com), where he is the Chair of the Security Systems Practice Group. Before entering private practice, Mr. Pastore was an officer and Judge Advocate General (JAG) in the U.S. Air Force and a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice. Reach him at (212) 980-7204 or by e-mail attimothy.pastore@saul.com.

Originally posted here:

Legal Brief: Surveillance and the Fourth Amendment - SecurityInfoWatch

Common Ways to Fight Against a Drug Possession Charge – Student Assembly of the State University of New York

Drug possession is the most common type of drug charge there is. Possession can fall under either a felony or a misdemeanor, and the category of crime it will fall under hinges on the type of controlled substance involved and how much of it there is.

Getting arrested for drug possession can be frightening, but you have less to worry about if your case is in the hands of an experienced drug possession attorney. Depending on the nature of your charges and your arrest, you and your attorney have a number of defenses to use to fight against your charge.

Here are the most common defenses you can expect to use for your case.

Entrapment is a defense that is built on the interaction you had with the arresting officers before or during the alleged crime. Illegal entrapment occurs when the arresting officer lures you into committing a crime that you wouldnt perpetrate otherwise. Police officers have every right to set up a string operation, but its illegal for them to compel you to do something you wouldnt have anyway. For example, if an officer forces you to consume a drug or offer to them to someone else, this can be considered illegal entrapment.

In the case of unwitting possession, your defense is that you werent aware the substances were in your person. This could happen if perhaps you were borrowing your friends car or watching their house for them while they were away and the police find the drugs in these locations and pin the crime on you.

Lack of possession means that there is a lack of evidence that establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the controlled substance actually belonged to you. You cant be found guilty on the basis of mere proximity to the item since there is no sufficient proof to demonstrate that its yours.

There are plenty of substances that only simulate the appearance of drugs, but are actually made up of a completely different material. For example, talcum powder may resemble a drug like cocaine, even though they have completely different chemical make-ups. If the crime lab analysis shows that the controlled substance is not an illegal narcotic or if the lab makes an error in their investigation, then its likely that you can use this defense to get your case dismissed.

As an American citizen, you have the right to due process under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This law protects you from illegal search and seizure procedures made by the police. Youre required to give your full consent for them to be able to do so, or they must have a search warrant or establish probable cause to legally conduct a search. Any piece of evidence against you that had to be obtained illegally cant be used in a trial which increases the chances of your case being dismissed.

This defense works much like the entrapment defense in that it claims that a police officer is forcing you to commit a crime you wouldnt normally commit. The only difference is that in this particular case, the drugs were planted on you by the arresting officers without your knowledge.

If you or someone you know is currently facing drug possession charges, an experienced attorney may use any of these defenses to help you get the most favorable results for your case.

Here is the original post:

Common Ways to Fight Against a Drug Possession Charge - Student Assembly of the State University of New York

Trump Judge Casts Deciding Vote to Grant Qualified Immunity on First Amendment Retaliation Claim: Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears – People For the…

Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears is a blog series documenting the harmful impact of President Trumps judges on Americans rights and liberties. Cases in the series can be found by issue and by judge at this link.

Trump Sixth Circuit judge Chad Readler cast the deciding vote to reverse a district court and rule that a government security officer had qualified immunity and could not be sued for excessive use of force in responding to a persons protest against government officials. The July 2020 decision is Sevy v Barach.

Anthony Sevy went to a Michigan state courthouse to pay a $10 parking ticket. When he tried to pay with a debit card, he was told he would have to pay an additional $1.75 processing fee. He refused and later returned with $10 worth of pennies as a form of protest, which officials refused to accept. Things escalated and two security officers became involved. According to Sevy, one of those officers, Philip Barach, grabbed him as he was leaving, threw him to the ground, and choked him until he lost consciousness while he was placed under arrest. When he awoke, he was handcuffed and taken to an elevator where, Sevy explained, Barach threw him to the ground and knocked his head against the side of the elevator. Sevy was charged with disorderly conduct, to which he pleaded no contest, and was allowed to go home.

Sevy then proceeded to sue the officers in federal court, claiming Fourth Amendment excessive force and First Amendment retaliation. The district court granted qualified immunity to the other officer but denied it to Barach, who then appealed.

All three judges ruled against Barach on the Fourth Amendment immunity claim, either based on the merits or for lack of jurisdiction. In a 2-1 vote with Readler providing the deciding vote, however, the majority reversed the district court and ruled that Barach should get immunity on the First Amendment claim. In order to overcome qualified immunity, a person must show that clearly established constitutional rights were violated. The majority maintained that Sevys First Amendment claim was not clearly established because he could point to no caselaw establishing a right to recover on a First Amendment retaliation theory for excessive use of force in executing an arrest.

Judge Karen Nelson Moore strongly dissented. Sevys First Amendment right to protest and criticize government officials, Moore explained, is clearly established such that a reasonable officer would know that he could not use any force to retaliate against an individual for the exercise of that speech. Moore continued that [a]mple precedent supports the clarity of Sevys rights, and that a reasonable officer cannot claim that they would be surprised to learn that the use of physical force in retaliation for the exercise of those First Amendment rights was a constitutional violation. A previous decision addressing identical action, as the majority seemed to be demanding, was simply not necessary according to Moore, and the decision should have been affirmed.

As a result of Readlers deciding vote, however, Sevy will not be able to pursue his First Amendment retaliation claims. The case is yet another example of an appeals court decision made possible by a Trump nominee that reversed a lower court and dismissed a claim without trial against a law enforcement official for excessive use of force, in this case in retaliation for the exercise of a First Amendment right to protest.

View post:

Trump Judge Casts Deciding Vote to Grant Qualified Immunity on First Amendment Retaliation Claim: Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears - People For the...

Did Judge Reeves Reach the Correct Result in Jamison v. McClendon? – Reason

As many readers know, District Judge Carlton Reeves recently published a blistering opinion about the injustice of qualified immunity law in Jamison v. McClendon. In the case, Judge Reeves argues that its factsinvolving a Black driver allegedly badgered, lied to, and searched by a white police officershine a light on why justice demands that qualified immunity must be overturned. The officer violated the Constitution, Judge Reeves concludes, but he cannot be held liable thanks to the "unsustainable" doctrine of qualified immunity that in "real life . . . operates like absolute immunity." Judge Reeves writes: "Just as the Supreme Court swept away the mistaken doctrine of separate but equal, so too should it eliminate the doctrine of qualified immunity." He concludes: "Let us waste no time in righting this wrong."

There's a lot going on in the Jamison case, and there are many aspects of the case that are very interesting and very much worth reading. As most readers know, there's an ongoing national conversation about whether qualified immunity should be abolished. I gather Jamison was designed to be (and already is) part of that public conversation. That's a hugely important debate that has often been discussed here at the blog, in particular with respect to Will Baude's important scholarship.

As a Fourth Amendment nerd, though, I wanted to focus on a doctrinal part of the case that has not been discussed: Was Judge Reeves correct that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity under current law?

I'm skeptical. It seems to me that that Judge Reeves likely was wrong, and that the officer was not entitled to qualified immunity. In particular, I worry that Judge Reeves may have misunderstood the relevant Fourth Amendment doctrine. That misunderstanding may have led Judge Reeves to treat the constitutional violation as a close call that required ruling in favor of the officer on qualified immunity grounds. It seems to me, though, that the officer's constitutional violation was obvious. It therefore violated clearly established law, and the officer should not be entitled to qualified immunity.

Let me be the first to add: Yes, I realize that, if it turns out I'm right, it doesn't undermine the case against qualified immunity. Most of Judge Reeves's opinion is addressed to a public debate about whether the Supreme Court should overturn its qualified immunity cases. My post is on a really small-scale issue. I'm only talking about how current law should apply to this one case. And to the extent it's relevant to some readers, I oppose qualified immunity, too, I would like to see it overturned. (At least as long as that change wouldn't lead to eliminating the exclusionary rule or create other systematic changes in Fourth Amendment law, which is entirely possible. But that's a complicated question for another day. )

Nonetheless, given that this opinion is already getting a lot of attention, I thought it might be interesting to explain why I think the result in this particular case was likely incorrect. It shouldn't change the national debate, but it does lead me to wonder if Judge Reeves picked the wrong case to demonstrate qualified immunity's problems. It's a small point, I concede, but perhaps of interest to the fellow Fourth Amendment nerds reading.

I'll start with the facts; turn to the Fourth Amendment analysis; next turn to the qualified immunity question; and conclude with my own take.

I. The Basic Facts

The plaintiff, Jamison, was stopped for a license plate tag violation. The defendant, Officer McClendon, pulled him over. Jamison is Black. McClendon is white. McClendon became suspicious that Jamison had something illegal in the car. However, McClendon had zero actual legal suspicion to think Jamison had anything illegal in the car. It was purely a hunchand one, we can assume, was based in part on Jamison's race.

Eventually, Jamison expressed consent to search the car . An extremely thorough search of the car followed. After almost two hours, absolutely zero evidence was found. McClendon then allowed Jamison to leave, although Jamison's car was damaged as a result of the search.

Jamison later sued McClendon. The Jamison opinion is focused on the first of Jamison's claims, brought under the Fourth Amendment. In particular, the new decision focuses on a specific part of the traffic stop. In their depositions, Jamison and McClendon gave starkly different recollections of what happened in this part of the stop. But because Jamison involves a motion for summary judgment filed by McClendon, we have to accept Jamison's version of the facts as true.

According to Jamison's deposition, McClendon repeatedly badgered him into consenting. McClendon pleaded with Jamison to consent five times before Jamison finally gave up and permitted the search. To pressure Jamison to consent, McClenson lied multiple times to him about a report that there were massive amounts of cocaine in the car.

And this next part is particularly important. According to Jamison, while McClendon was trying to get Jamison's consent, McClendon "placed his hand into the car, and patted the inside of the passenger door," and then "moved his arm further into the car . . while patting it with his hand."

For what it's worth, McClendon denies all of this happened. His story is just that he asked Jamison for consent and Jamison simply consented. But McClendon's conflicting version of events is not relevant at this stage because McClendon is the moving party. Where the facts conflict, we have to accept Jamison's version of events as true.

II. The Intrusion Into the Car

Now let's turn to the Fourth Amendment claim. Just to make this super-long post more manageable, I want to focus specifically on Jamison's claim that McClendon violated the Fourth Amendment by placing his hands inside the car and patting the inside of the passenger door.

Was that an unconstitutional search? Judge Reeves reasons that it was. First, it was obviously a search. McClendon's body physically intruded into the car. The next question is whether it was an unreasonable search.

And here Judge Reeves makes a critical assumption. Judge Reeves assumes that whether an officer's physical intrusion into a car is reasonable is governed by a Fifth Circuit case, United States v. Pierre, 958 F.2d 1304, 1309 (5th Cir. 1992), that involved a border check point.

In Pierre, a border patrol agent stuck his head inside a car at a border check point to speak with a passenger about his citizenship. Upon poking his head in the car, he smelled marijuana. The Fifth Circuit analyzed the constitutionality of the officer sticking his head into the car using a totality of the circumstances analysis that looked to the extent of the privacy right, how much the border agent needed to see the passenger, and officer safety concerns.

Pierre in turn relied on New York v. Class, 475 U.S. 106 (1986), a case in which an officer, during a traffic stop, reached into the passenger compartment of the car to move papers that had obscured the car's VIN. The Court subjected that search to a general reasonableness analysis, holding that the search "was sufficiently unintrusive to be constitutionally permissible in light of the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy in the VIN and the fact that the officers observed respondent commit two traffic violations."

In Jamison, Judge Reeves applies the totality of the circumstances inquiry from Pierre and Class to McClendon's search into the car. Applying the Pierre factors, Judge Reeves concludes that Officer McClendon's search of the car was on balance unreasonable and therefore unconstitutional.

III. The Qualified Immunity Analysis

Judge Reeves then concludes that McClendon is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity. Because the reasonableness of searching the car is based on a totality of the circumstances, he reasons, we need factually similar caselaw telling us how the totality of the circumstances test should apply before the violation is clear.Here's how Judge Reeves frames the question:

The question in this case is whether it was clearly established that an officer who has made five sequential requests for consent to search a car, lied, promised leniency, and placed his arm inside of a person's car during a traffic stop while awaiting background check results has violated the Fourth Amendment. It is not.

It was not clearly established, Judge Reeves reasons, because there was no factually similar caselaw that could establish how the totality of the circumstances test applied. In particular, neither Pierre nor Class clearly established that the search here was unreasonable:

While it has been clearly established since at least 1986 that an officer may be held liable for an unreasonable "intrusion into the interior of a car," this is merely a "general statement of the law." Clearly established law must be particularized to the facts of the case.

In Pierre, the officer could not see into the suspect's back seat and had to put his head inside to speak to the suspect. In Class, the suspect had been removed from his car and the officer put his hand inside to move papers so that he could see the car's VIN. Neither case considered a police officer putting his arm inside a car while trying to get the driver to consent to a search. Both cases also found the officer's conduct to be reasonable, thus not providing "fair and clear warning" of what constitutes an unreasonable intrusion into a car.

"Given the lack of precedent that places the Constitutional question beyond debate," Judge Reeves concludes, "Jamison's claim cannot proceed." Officer McClendon is entitled to qualified immunity.

IV. Why I Think Judge Reeves Likely Was Mistaken

That brings me, finally, to why I think Judge Reeves was likely wrong. By focusing on Pierre (the check point case), and Class (the VIN case), Judge Reeves concluded that the constitutionality of an officer reaching into a car must be analyzed in the Jamison case using a totality-of-the-circumstances test. That created lots of room for qualified immunity because vague standards can't provide the clear notice to the police of a bright-line rule. You need similar cases before the vague standard becomes clear.

But I think that framing was problematic. Pierre and Class were specific kinds of Fourth Amendment cases that fit into a specific doctrinal box. Pierre was a border check point case. Class was a case about finding a VIN to check for traffic violations. Both are examples of non-law-enforcement so-called "special needs"-type searches. In that doctrinal box of Fourth Amendment law, the doctrine relaxes the usual probable cause requirement and instead applies a more relaxed reasonableness test given the non-law-enforcement interests (such as border inspections or traffic safety) advanced by the search.

But Jamison is not a special needs case. McClendon does not claim that he physically intruded into the car and patted the inside of the door for reasons of officer safety. He doesn't claim he did that to inspect Jamison's car for safety violations. There was no border checkpoint. McClendon's claim, as I understand it, is just that it didn't happen at all. Once we accept Jamison's claim that it did happen, as I believe we must at this stage of the case, we have a clear search (McClendon placing his hands in the car and patting down the inside of the door) that has absolutely zero legal justification and that is not subject to a general reasonableness test.

Outside the special-needs context, the Fourth Amendment law of searching a car is a clearly established bright-line rule. Because it's a bright-line rule, the violation becomes obvious even if there is no factually identical or closely similar case.

Consider how the Fifth Circuit stated the rule, citing cases, in Emesowum v. Cruz, 756 Fed.Appx. 374 (5th Cir. 2018): "It has long been clearly established that police may not search a car for evidence absent probable cause or consent." There's considerable Fifth Circuit caselaw not just establishing that rule, but also saying the rule is clearly established. See, e.g., Mack v. City of Abilene, 461 F.3d 547 (5th Cir. 2006) ("Appellees' search of a car in an open parking lot without a search warrant, without probable cause, without a concern for officer safety, and without consent violates clearly established law. A reasonable officer would not think the Constitution allows a random search of a vehicle where none of the above justifications apply.").

To be sure, qualified immunity can still apply if there are fair questions about how that clearly-established rule applies. For example, imagine an officer searched a car but was just slightly short of probable cause. Qualified immunity will apply because how the clearly established doctrine applies is tricky: the officer might reasonably believe that there was probable cause even if a court later disagrees. But when it's clear that the clearly established rule was violated, then qualified immunity can't apply.

My sense, then, is that McClendon did violate clearly established law. Sticking his arm inside the car and patting down the inside of the door was obviously a search. It was governed by the rule, long recognized in the Fifth Circuit as clearly-established law, that the officer needed some justification for that searchprobable cause, or a warrant, or a safety concern, or a special needs concern. But there's no plausible argument I am aware of that any of those justifications could apply. To use the Fifth Circuit's language in Mack, this was "a random search of a vehicle where none of the above justifications apply."

V. Conclusion

For these reasons, I tend to think Judge Reeves was mistaken to confer qualified immunity on McClendon as to that particular part of the case.

As always, I have posted my best sense of things, but I may be wrong. If you think I'm mistaken, I'd appreciate it if you could explain why so I can consider the argument and post a correction if I've erred. And there are lots of other fascinating doctrinal parts of the opinion to talk about, as well as of course the underlying policy debate over whether the Supreme Court should overturn qualified immunity.

Go here to read the rest:

Did Judge Reeves Reach the Correct Result in Jamison v. McClendon? - Reason

The Police Lie. All the Time. Can Anything Stop Them? – Slate

Police patrol outside of a Manhattan courthouse on Jan. 9, 2015, in New York City.Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Christopher Parham was grocery shopping for his boss when Henry Daverin, a plainclothes NYPD officer, approached him. Daverin accused Parham of driving recklessly on an illegal scooter without a helmet; a few minutes later, Parham was writhing in pain on the sidewalk outside. What happened during those few minutes was a matter of dispute. The NYPD said that Parham, a Black 19-year-old, had violently resisted arrest. Daverin and his colleagues said that they did not use force against him even though Parham had gruesome Taser burns all across his back.

Then surveillance video of the episode emergedand proved that nearly every detail of the NYPDs account was false. Parham had immediately cooperated with Daverin; he did not resist arrest. Nonetheless, Daverin and his colleagues had assaulted Parham, tackling him to the ground, then Tasing him over and over again. After Parhams attorneys released the videoand his local representatives raised concernsthe district attorney dropped all charges. Daverin, who had been named in at least 10 other misconduct lawsuits, was never disciplined, either for brutalizing Parham or for lying about it. Two years later, he remains on the force.

The police reaction to George Floyds murder, as well as the resulting nationwide protests, introduced many Americans to the fact that law enforcement officers lie. After officer Derek Chauvin killed George Floyd, the Minneapolis Police Department issued a statement falsely claiming that Floyd physically resisted officers and excluding the fact that Chauvin knelt on Floyds neck for nearly nine minutes. When Buffalo police officers violently shoved a peaceful 75-year-old man, their department falsely asserted that the victim tripped and fell during a skirmish involving protesters.

This tendency to lie pervades all police work, not just high-profile violence, and it has the power to ruin lives. Law enforcement officers lie so frequentlyin affidavits, on post-incident paperwork, on the witness standthat officers have coined a word for it: testilying. Judges and juries generally trust police officers, especially in the absence of footage disproving their testimony. As courts reopen and convene juries, many of the same officers now confronting protesters in the street will get back on the stand.

Defense attorneys around the country believe the practice is ubiquitous; while that belief might seem self-serving, it is borne out by footage captured on smartphones and surveillance cameras. Yet those best positioned to crack down on testilying, police chiefs and prosecutors, have done little or nothing to stop it in most of the country. Prosecutors rely on officer testimony, true or not, to secure convictions, and merely acknowledging the problem would require the government to admit that there is almost never real punishment for police perjury.

Officers have a litany of incentives to lie, but there are two especially powerful motivators. First, most evidence obtained from an illegal search may not be used against the defendant at trial under the Fourth Amendments exclusionary rule; thus, officers routinely provide false justifications for searching or arresting a civilian. Second, when police break the law, they can (in theory) suffer real consequences, including suspension, dismissal, and civil lawsuits. In many notorious testilying cases, including Parhams, officers blame the victim for their own violent behavior in a bid to justify disproportionate use of force. And departments will reward officers whose arrests lead to convictions with promotions.

Two major cities are taking two different approaches to the problem. In New York City, prosecutors keep secret databases of unreliable police officers, though only two boroughs actually prohibit those officers from taking the stand. Without further reforms, however, this approach fails to address the underlying problem: Prosecutors are reluctant to accuse officers of lying in the first place, or to investigate an officers claims to learn if they align with reality. As a result, an officer who lies convincingly can evade the list indefinitely. In San Francisco, by contrast, District Attorney Chesa Boudin has sought to eradicate the incentives that lead police to lie in the first place. Both cities are witnessing an experiment play out in real time: What happens when the criminal justice system can no longer rely on its enforcers to tell the truth?

The New York Police Department provides a case study in how the criminal justice system rewards lying. One NYPD officer, David Griecocommonly known as Bulletheadhas been sued at least 32 times, costing the city $343,252, for civil rights violations, including excessive force and fabrication of evidence. Yet Grieco was promoted and prosecutors continued to call him to the stand long after a slew of his victims blew the whistle on his violent and lawless behavior. Judges continued to rely on his word to lock up defendants. And Griecos name did not appear on Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalezs long-secret list of officers with known credibility problems.

When you have a system of that kind of impunity, it snowballs. It teaches, encourages, and enforces badbehavior. Chesa Boudin, San Francisco district attorney

Grieco is a symptom of a much deeper problem. Widespread lying about Fourth Amendment violations is at least as old as the exclusionary rule itself. The Supreme Court applied this rule nationwide in 1961s Mapp v. Ohio, preventing state prosecutors from relying upon illegally obtained evidence to secure a conviction. Mapp spawned a surge in dropsy cases: Rather than admit to an illegal search, police claimed that defendants simply dropped drugs on the ground in front of them, since evidence found in plain view can be used at trial. Studies of criminal trials in New York City found that, after Mapp, police began lying about arrests to ensure that evidence would be admissible. In the early 1970s, the New York district attorney even told the New York Court of Appeals that, since Mapp, officers lied on the stand in a substantial number of dropsy cases. Two decades later, the Mollen Commissiona famous investigation of the NYPDfound that officers routinely engaged in perjury and falsification of records, the most common form of police corruption.

When NYPD officers are accused of illegal behavior, the department itself usually investigates, then conceals its findings and imposes, at worst, a slap on the wrist, like brief paid leave. Prosecutors could separately investigate, but they have little incentive to question an officers story: If they know an officer is lying, they cannot legally rely on his testimony; if they remain in the dark, they can still use his perjury to clinch a conviction. Moreover, prosecutors and police work together to put defendants behind bars, developing a team mentality that prevents prosecutors from scrutinizing officers testimony with appropriate skepticism. As long as officers lies cannot be proved false, prosecutors have little reason to question their account of events. As a New York assistant district attorney told the Mollen Commission: Taking money is considered dirty, but perjury for the sake of an arrest is accepted. Its become more casual.

Occasionally, the system will catch these lies. Yvette, an Egyptian American who lives in New York City, believes cross-examination of deceitful officers likely secured her acquittal. (Her name has been changed at her request to protect her from retaliation.) In 2017, Yvette witnessed three NYPD officers arresting the owner of a Brooklyn hookah lounge. As the police were detaining him, he handed Yvette his phone and asked her to call his mom. The officers promptly attacked her, she told me, severely damaging her knee. When she begged for an ambulance, the officers ignored her. Yvette eventually called one herself and learned at the hospital that the attack tore her ACL. When two officers visited her bedside, she asked if they were going to take her statement. They explained that they were there to arrest her for allegedly attacking the officers at the hookah lounge.

What these officers did not know was that Yvette had recently recovered from multiple surgeries on her knee, one of which resulted in a staph infection. It had been a mere two weeks since Yvette learned how to walk without a cane again. Now the NYPD was accusing her of a violent assault.

At a three-day bench trial, Yvettes public defender, Theodore Hastings, grilled the cops about their account. Two officers claimed that Yvette had attacked them at the exact same time, a physical impossibility. A third alleged that Yvette had run about 500 feet before lunging at the officers.

Yvette herself also testified. The judge heard my story and understood and felt my pain, she told me. She saw I really wasnt lying. The judge acquitted Yvette of all charges.

But hoping a judge will vindicate the truth is a luxury most wrongfully accused people cannot afford. Not everyone has a medical record or video footage to prove their account. If an individual goes to trial, they have a right to access the arresting officers record of misconduct because it could help prove their innocence. But the vast majority of criminal cases do not go to trial, and until recently, defense attorneys in New York City could not obtain officers disciplinary records due to a notorious shield called Section 50-A. The state repealed this law in June, and Mayor Bill de Blasio has since promised to publish an online database of police disciplinary records. With New York Citys prosecutors still fighting to conceal their do-not-call lists, it will now be left to defense attorneys, activists, and the public to track untrustworthy officers.

Across the country in San Francisco, newly elected District Attorney Chesa Boudin is taking a different approach. Boudin, a former public defender and staunch critic of mass incarceration, confronted testilying head-on. Police are allowed to lie and get away with it over and over and over again in matters big and small, he told me. I can think of dozens of examples where police were either able to get away withor faced no consequences if they were impeached and called out on their dishonesty. When you have a system of that kind of impunity, it snowballs. It teaches, encourages, and enforces bad behavior.

Boudin has minimal control over the SFPD itself. But he has created a robust do not call list of officers whom his office will not call to the stand as a witness. Officers who are caught testilying go on the list, as do those who commit other forms of misconduct. Boudin has also mandated careful assessment of charges like assaulting an officer and resisting arrest. When police use excessive force or brutalize someone, Boudin said, the most common outcome is that the police arrest the person and ask prosecutors to charge that person with resisting arrest or assaulting an officer. He now requires his staff to review video footage of the incident before filing those charges. Its not because we think officers are lying most of the time, he said. We just know that, until we watch video footage, we have no ability to distinguish between a testilying police report to cover up excessive force and legitimate criminal activity of assaulting an officer.

A third reform may have more direct practical consequences for victims of routine testilying designed to avoid the exclusionary rule. Too often, officers find a trivial reason to stop someone, or just make one up, then discover drugs or weapons in the ensuing search. The target of these pretextual stops is usually a person of color. We know driving while black is a reality for far too many people, Boudin said. If you have dark skin, youre more likely to get pulled over, more likely to get searched, and more likely to get arrested. Youre also more likely to have force used during your arrest than if youre white.

To disincentivize this behavior, Boudins office stopped charging any contraband case that grew out of a pretextual stop. As an example, he cited searches initiated after a stop for some minor traffic offense. Our vehicle code makes it possible for police to legally stop any car, Boudin said. We all know that most drivers do not come to complete stops at stop signs and most police dont enforce that law most of the time. If the police do pull over a driver for an incomplete stop, and the encounter results in an arrest for possession of drugs or guns, his office will not bring charges.

Ilona Solomon, a San Francisco public defender and former colleague of Boudins, admires his work but remains skeptical that he has the power to change the citys broken law enforcement apparatus. There is an entrenched culture in the DAs office that is very resistant to reform, Solomon told me. Chesa cant fix all the problems immediately, and some things he doesnt have control over.

Still, in his seven months on the job, Boudin has made headway in the face of sustained opposition from the SFPD. Solomon pointed to two recent cases involving the same officer, Robert Gilson. In 2017, a California judge found Gilson had changed his testimony regarding a search and arrest, deeming him not reliable. Yet prosecutors continued to call him to the stand, and judges continued to paper over his inconsistencies.

In one recent case, Gilson stopped a Samoan man who was holding a bag of marijuana, which is legal in California. After a lengthy search, the officer discovered bindles of cocaine. Gilsons reason for the stop shifted: At the time, he said he wanted to search bulges in the mans pocket; later, he testified that he sought to determine if the man was holding an illegal amount of marijuana. A judge accepted this reasoning and refused to suppress the cocaine. In another case, Gilson stopped a Black man, justifying the action because the man was jaywalking. After Gilson threatened to strip search the man, he let the officer search him, uncovering a small stash of cocaine. A judge refused to suppress the evidence, crediting Gilsons testimony that he believed the man was concealing drugs due to his worried demeanor during the search.

Solomon represented both men. She told Boudin that, in both cases, Gilson had engaged in blatant racial profiling. Boudin agreed and dismissed all charges. Still, Boudins office could not say whether it had placed Gilson on its do not call list, which is not public. The SFPD confirmed Gilson was assigned to field operations but said they could not comment further on personnel matters.

The system cannot exist without it. It would grind to ahalt. Bennett Capers, Fordham Law professor

Kate Levine, a Cardozo Law professor and former public defender who studies police accountability, told me shes skeptical that patchwork solutions like a do not call list can ever stamp out testilying. Maryanne Kaishian, a public defender in Brooklyn, agreed, noting that its easy for clean officers to conceal the involvement of a known dirty cop by keeping his name off all paperwork. Nor do these lists remove officers strong incentive to lie: Police are more likely to get promoted if they effect more arrests that result in successful prosecutions. Promotions come with more prestige and a higher salary. Prosecutors still have an incentive not to question officers blue lies.

To end testilying, Levine said, I would entirely change incentive structures. Officers would be rewarded for reporting on their colleagues lies and scrutinized when their stories do not line up. They would no longer be able to coordinate their stories before testifying, a common procedure that lets them iron out potential inconsistencies. Nor could they watch bodycam footage before providing their version of events, another perk thats not provided to civilians. Prosecutors would be rewarded for rooting out unconstitutional behavior. Officers who lie, and prosecutors who tolerate them, would be terminated immediately. In short, the system would encourage police officers and prosecutors to focus less on winning cases and more on following the rules, even when a constitutional violation stands in the way of a conviction.

What would happen if a city really tried to eliminate testilying? I posed this question to Bennett Capers, a former federal prosecutor and Fordham Law professor who studies police lies. In all honesty, I think my initial reaction would be that the system cannot exist without it, he told me. It would grind to a halt. Capers said that run of the mill policing would have to change. We are doing about 13 million misdemeanor arrests a year. With a lot of those small crimes, theres fudging. Nobodys paying attention.

Police, in other words, would have to stop arresting so many people for minor crimes. Once cities stopped deploying officers to harass misdemeanants, they could shrink their police force, reducing the number of encounters between cops and civilians. Agencies might then dedicate those resources to investigative and detective work in order to build solid cases against suspects, thereby creating a higher bar for which cases to pursue. Prosecutors would be forced to make a more careful calculation about the risk of bringing a case to trial and drop cases that rested on a search of dubious legality. In the short term, the legitimacy of the entire system might take a hitthough only because its participants confronted the illegitimate basis of so many convictions. Over time, however, the system might regain the legitimacy it lost with a preference for punishment over justice.

We all wanted to see justice happen, Capers recalled from his time as a prosecutor. And law enforcement often thinks that, in the interest of justice, the rules get in the way. Im not aware of ever saying, Does this story sound quite right? We benefited from small lies.

For more of Slates news coverage, subscribe to What Next on Apple Podcasts or listen below.

Readers like you make our work possible. Help us continue to provide the reporting, commentary, and criticism you wont find anywhere else.

Continued here:

The Police Lie. All the Time. Can Anything Stop Them? - Slate