The World Of Quantum Physics: EVERYTHING Is Energy – In5D …

by John Assaraf,

Nobel Prize winning physicists have proven beyond doubt that the physical world is one large sea of energy that flashes into and out of being in milliseconds, over and over again.

This is the world of Quantum Physics.

They have proven that thoughts are what put together and hold together this ever-changing energy field into the objects that we see.

So why do we see a person instead of a flashing cluster of energy?

A movie is a collection of about 24 frames a second. Each frame is separated by a gap. However, because of the speed at which one frame replaces another, our eyes get cheated into thinking that we see a continuous and moving picture.

A TV tube is simply a tube with heaps of electrons hitting the screen in a certain way, creating the illusion of form and motion.

This is what all objects are anyway. You have 5 physical senses (sight, sound, touch, smell, and taste).

Each of these senses has a specific spectrum (for example, a dog hears a different range of sound than you do; a snake sees a different spectrum of light than you do; and so on).

In other words, your set of senses perceives the sea of energy from a certain limited standpoint and makes up an image from that.

It is not complete, nor is it accurate. It is just an interpretation.

All of our interpretations are solely based on the internal map of reality that we have, and not the real truth. Our map is a result of our personal lifes collective experiences.

Our thoughts are linked to this invisible energy and they determine what the energy forms. Your thoughts literally shift the universe on a particle-by-particle basis to create your physical life.

Look around you.

Everything you see in our physical world started as an idea, an idea that grew as it was shared and expressed, until it grew enough into a physical object through a number of steps.

You literally become what you think about most.

Your life becomes what you have imagined and believed in most.

The world is literally your mirror, enabling you to experience in the physical plane what you hold as your truth until you change it.

Quantum physics shows us that the world is not the hard and unchangeable thing it may appear to be. Instead, it is a very fluid place continuously built up using our individual and collective thoughts.

What we think is true is really an illusion, almost like a magic trick.

Fortunately we have begun to uncover the illusion and most importantly, how to change it.

Nine systems comprise the human body including Circulatory, Digestive, Endocrine, Muscular, Nervous, Reproductive, Respiratory, Skeletal, and Urinary.

Tissues and organs.




Sub-atomic particles.


You and I are pure energy-light in its most beautiful and intelligent configuration. Energy that is constantly changing beneath the surface and you control it all with your powerful mind.

If you could see yourself under a powerful electron microscope and conduct other experiments on yourself, you would see that you are made up of a cluster of ever-changing energy in the form of electrons, neutrons, photons and so on.

So is everything else around you. Quantum physics tells us that it is the act of observing an object that causes it to be there where and how we observe it.

An object does not exist independently of its observer! So, as you can see, your observation, your attention to something, and your intention, literally creates that thing.

This is scientific and proven.

Your world is made of spirit, mind and body.

Each of those three, spirit, mind and body, has a function that is unique to it and not shared with the other. What you see with your eyes and experience with your body is the physical world, which we shall call Body. Body is an effect, created by a cause.

This cause is Thought.

Body cannot create. It can only experience and be experienced that is its unique function.

Thought cannot experience it can only make up, create and interpret. It needs a world of relativity (the physical world, Body) to experience itself.

Spirit is All That Is, that which gives Life to Thought and Body.

Body has no power to create, although it gives the illusion of power to do so. This illusion is the cause of much frustration. Body is purely an effect and has no power to cause or create.

The key with all of this information is how do you learn to see the universe differently than you do now so that you can manifest everything you truly desire.

Tags: electrons, energy, EVERYTHING Is Energy, illusion, magic, particles, Physics, quantum physics, The World Of Quantum Physics, The World Of Quantum Physics: EVERYTHING Is Energy

View original post here:

The World Of Quantum Physics: EVERYTHING Is Energy – In5D …

How quantum mechanics can change computing – San Francisco … – San Francisco Chronicle

(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.)

Jonathan Katz, University of Maryland

(THE CONVERSATION) In early July, Google announced that it will expand its commercially available cloud computing services to include quantum computing. A similar service has been available from IBM since May. These arent services most regular people will have a lot of reason to use yet. But making quantum computers more accessible will help government, academic and corporate research groups around the world continue their study of the capabilities of quantum computing.

Understanding how these systems work requires exploring a different area of physics than most people are familiar with. From everyday experience we are familiar with what physicists call classical mechanics, which governs most of the world we can see with our own eyes, such as what happens when a car hits a building, what path a ball takes when its thrown and why its hard to drag a cooler across a sandy beach.

Quantum mechanics, however, describes the subatomic realm the behavior of protons, electrons and photons. The laws of quantum mechanics are very different from those of classical mechanics and can lead to some unexpected and counterintuitive results, such as the idea that an object can have negative mass.

Physicists around the world in government, academic and corporate research groups continue to explore real-world deployments of technologies based on quantum mechanics. And computer scientists, including me, are looking to understand how these technologies can be used to advance computing and cryptography.

In our regular lives, we are used to things existing in a well-defined state: A light bulb is either on or off, for example. But in the quantum world, objects can exist in a what is called a superposition of states: A hypothetical atomic-level light bulb could simultaneously be both on and off. This strange feature has important ramifications for computing.

The smallest unit of information in classical mechanics and, therefore, classical computers is the bit, which can hold a value of either 0 or 1, but never both at the same time. As a result, each bit can hold just one piece of information. Such bits, which can be represented as electrical impulses, changes in magnetic fields, or even a physical on-off switch, form the basis for all calculation, storage and communication in todays computers and information networks.

Qubits quantum bits are the quantum equivalent of classical bits. One fundamental difference is that, due to superposition, qubits can simultaneously hold values of both 0 and 1. Physical realizations of qubits must inherently be at an atomic scale: for example, in the spin of an electron or the polarization of a photon.

Another difference is that classical bits can be operated on independently of each other: Flipping a bit in one location has no effect on bits in other locations. Qubits, however, can be set up using a quantum-mechanical property called entanglement so that they are dependent on each other even when they are far apart. This means that operations performed on one qubit by a quantum computer can affect multiple other qubits simultaneously. This property akin to, but not the same as, parallel processing can make quantum computation much faster than in classical systems.

Large-scale quantum computers that is, quantum computers with hundreds of qubits do not yet exist, and are challenging to build because they require operations and measurements to be done on a atomic scale. IBMs quantum computer, for example, currently has 16 qubits, and Google is promising a 49-qubit quantum computer which would be an astounding advance by the end of the year. (In contrast, laptops currently have multiple gigabytes of RAM, with a gigabyte being eight billion classical bits.)

Notwithstanding the difficulty of building working quantum computers, theorists continue to explore their potential. In 1994, Peter Shor showed that quantum computers could quickly solve the complicated math problems that underlie all commonly used public-key cryptography systems, like the ones that provide secure connections for web browsers. A large-scale quantum computer would completely compromise the security of the internet as we know it. Cryptographers are actively exploring new public-key approaches that would be quantum-resistant, at least as far as they currently know.

Interestingly, the laws of quantum mechanics can also be used to design cryptosystems that are, in some senses, more secure than their classical analogs. For example, quantum key distribution allows two parties to share a secret no eavesdropper can recover using either classical or quantum computers. Those systems and others based on quantum computers may become useful in the future, either widely or in more niche applications. But a key challenge is getting them working in the real world, and over large distances.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article here: http://theconversation.com/how-quantum-mechanics-can-change-computing-80995.

More here:

How quantum mechanics can change computing – San Francisco … – San Francisco Chronicle

Physicists Use Lasers to Set Up First Underwater Quantum Communications Link – Gizmodo

As usual, weird art for weird physics (Image: JaredZammit/Flickr)

Quantum mechanics may force you to think some wild things about the way the Universe works, but it has some real applications. One of the theorys main quirks allows for a special kind of quantum link, one that can send incredibly secure messages or transmit data for quantum computing. Tests of these links exist on Earth, in space, and now, underwater.

Chinese scientists have already set up this quantum link between the ground and a satellite, and even quantum teleported a particle (which is not really teleportation). Given the importance of underwater communications like the fiber optics used to transmit telephone and internet data, one team reports that theyve now performed the crucial test required to set up an underwater quantum link without any cables.

The results are super preliminary, but confirm the feasibility of a seawater quantum channel, representing the first step towards underwater quantum communication, the researchers write in a study published this month in the journal Optics Express.

Whether there will ever be an application for such an underwater link remains to be seen. But if the researchers are successful in the difficult challenge of extending it past the ten feet they tested it, it could mean a new way to send quantum-encrypted messages between submarines or send data from quantum computers between locations separated by water.

Heres your quick quantum mechanics crash course: The tiniest units of matter like electrons and photons (individual units of light) can behave like both waves and particles at the same time. Each of these units properties are quantized, meaning the properties can only take on certain assigned values. Before you actually observe the properties, its impossible to tell what the value isyou just get a probability assigned to each of the possible options in a list called the wavefunction. Once you measure the system, the wavefunction collapses and the unit assumes the properties you observe.

The weird stuff kicks in when you entangle particles together, making them interact in a way that the particles must be described using the same list of probabilities. No matter how far apart the particles separate, they still seem to be aware of one another, such that observing the properties of one immediately causes the other particle to assume its corresponding property.

The Chinese scientists bestowed photons from a laser with different polarizations (the direction their waves travel perpendicularly to the photons forward motion) by passing the light through a series of crystal, filters, and mirrors. Their experiment then splits the beam, keeps one of the two entangled photons on one side, and passes the other one through a ten-foot-long tube containing one of several seawater samples.

It worked, according to the paper, and the researchers calculated that theyd successfully entangled the photons, even after passing one through the water-filled tube. It encourages us to look into a longer achievable communication distance, they write.

These results are a proof-of-concept, for surethe particle still travels through a tube and only over a few meters, a distance over which you might as well just verbalize the message out loud. Researchers have already entangled photons through space over a thousand kilometers.

One physicist was unsurprised, and another was skepitcal that the researchers would set up a much longer link, reports New Scientist. Because ocean water absorbs light, extending this is going to difficult, University of Missouri computer science professor Jeffrey Uhlmann told them. But another source said that maybe submarines could use such a channel to communicate securely.

But you wont know unless you try, I suppose.

[Optics Express via New Scientist]

More here:

Physicists Use Lasers to Set Up First Underwater Quantum Communications Link – Gizmodo

Quantum physics for babies a different bedtime story – CBC.ca

Chris Ferrie writes books about rocket science for babies.

The quantum theorist and alumnus of the Institute for Quantum Computing at the University of Waterloo describes himself as a “theorist by day, father by night.”

His latest publication Quantum Physics for Babies is the latest in his ‘Baby University’ series, and while the books don’t guarantee a PhD, Ferrie says he’s “just giving the seeds.”

His books, which explainconcepts like Newtonian physics and general relativity, are an attempt at breaking down scientific concepts to their basic levels. Not an easy task.

“In a large part that is the problem with science,” he said. “Being able to communicate what people work on after having studied for 15 years.”

“In many ways there’s a lot of work to be done that needs to bridge that gap.”

He sees his work as the “first steps,” introducing kids to concepts and terminology as early as possiblein the hopes that they will stay interested longer.

“When they see something that might be seen as the next step, they’re perhaps ready for it, or at least not afraid,” he said.

As far as his peers, he says there is not much differencebetween his worksand other baby books other than the subject matter. And with pages like “A is for Atom” and “B is for Black hole,” it’s not hard to see them being called upon at bedtime.

“I don’t see why [kids] should be able to say something like ‘hippopotamus’ or ‘giraffe,’ and not ‘electron,'” said Ferrie.

“I think ‘electron’ could be one of their first 10 words, why not?”

Ferries believes that the issue of students and kids shying away from math and science is largely a problem with the education system.

“At some point in their education they’ve fallen behind. There’s nothing in the education system that allows them to catch back up,” he said.

Ferrie argues that the only reason things look difficult and seem easier for some students is that certain people fall behind and others don’t. The system, he says, is geared to accommodate and acceleratethose who are keeping pace, not ensure people falling behind are helped to catch up.

Ferrie’s series ‘Baby University’ uses basic language to simplify concepts, introducing kids to science early. (Sourcebooks.com)

“If you’re being taught something at your level, then anybody can do it,” he said.

It’s an issue he thinks has been tackled incorrectly, with discussions about when children should be “introduced to science,”when really, he says, it’s been taken away.

“Children are naturally curious,” he said. “They’re little scientists.”

“We stifle that curiosity at some point and sort of force them into this archaic education system.”

As for the future, Ferrie hopes the diversity in children’s books will grow over the next year to include more than just the staples of zoo animals and cartoons.

“For every topic that exists in human intellectual endeavours, there should be a baby book for that.”

More stories from CBC Kitchener-Waterloo

Original post:

Quantum physics for babies a different bedtime story – CBC.ca

Quantum – Wikipedia

In physics, a quantum (plural: quanta) is the minimum amount of any physical entity involved in an interaction. The fundamental notion that a physical property may be “quantized” is referred to as “the hypothesis of quantization”.[1] This means that the magnitude of the physical property can take on only certain discrete values.

For example, a photon is a single quantum of light (or of any other form of electromagnetic radiation), and can be referred to as a “light quantum”. Similarly, the energy of an electron bound within an atom is also quantized, and thus can only exist in certain discrete values. The fact that electrons can only exist at discrete energy levels in an atom causes atoms to be stable, and hence matter in general is stable.

Quantization is one of the foundations of the much broader physics of quantum mechanics. Quantization of the energy and its influence on how energy and matter interact (quantum electrodynamics) is part of the fundamental framework for understanding and describing nature.

The word quantum comes from the Latin quantus, meaning “how great”. “Quanta”, short for “quanta of electricity” (electrons), was used in a 1902 article on the photoelectric effect by Philipp Lenard, who credited Hermann von Helmholtz for using the word in the area of electricity. However, the word quantum in general was well known before 1900.[2] It was often used by physicians, such as in the term quantum satis. Both Helmholtz and Julius von Mayer were physicians as well as physicists. Helmholtz used quantum with reference to heat in his article[3] on Mayer’s work, and the word quantum can be found in the formulation of the first law of thermodynamics by Mayer in his letter[4] dated July 24, 1841. Max Planck used quanta to mean “quanta of matter and electricity”,[5] gas, and heat.[6] In 1905, in response to Planck’s work and the experimental work of Lenard (who explained his results by using the term quanta of electricity), Albert Einstein suggested that radiation existed in spatially localized packets which he called “quanta of light” (“Lichtquanta”).[7]

The concept of quantization of radiation was discovered in 1900 by Max Planck, who had been trying to understand the emission of radiation from heated objects, known as black-body radiation. By assuming that energy can only be absorbed or released in tiny, differential, discrete packets he called “bundles” or “energy elements”,[8] Planck accounted for certain objects changing colour when heated.[9] On December 14, 1900, Planck reported his findings to the German Physical Society, and introduced the idea of quantization for the first time as a part of his research on black-body radiation.[10] As a result of his experiments, Planck deduced the numerical value of h, known as the Planck constant, and could also report a more precise value for the AvogadroLoschmidt number, the number of real molecules in a mole and the unit of electrical charge, to the German Physical Society. After his theory was validated, Planck was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for his discovery in 1918.

While quantization was first discovered in electromagnetic radiation, it describes a fundamental aspect of energy not just restricted to photons.[11] In the attempt to bring experiment into agreement with theory, Max Planck postulated that electromagnetic energy is absorbed or emitted in discrete packets, or quanta.[12]

The adjective “quantum” is frequently used in common parlance to mean the opposite of its scientific definition. A “quantum leap” has been used colloquially since the 1950s to imply a large change, as opposed to the smallest possible change.[13][14] It is also used in a range of pseudoscientific beliefs (quantum mysticism), where the adjective is used to imply that a paranormal event is a consequence of quantum physics.[15][16]

Go here to read the rest:

Quantum – Wikipedia

Stephen Colbert Gets a Lesson on Quantum Physics from Brian … – Patheos (blog)

Physicist Brian Greene appeared on The Late Show the other night to discuss the famous double-slit experiment which just celebrated its 90th anniversary. He also helped Stephen Colbert conduct a lesson on quantum physics that involves liquid nitrogen, levitation, and magnets.

Dont ask me to explain whats going on. But your kids will enjoy watching it.

Maybe the most important thing Greene said was at the beginning of the segment. Colbert asked if scientists have been affected by the current administration. Greenes response?

Its utterly awful For more than 50 years, science has driven innovation, prosperity look, if you want to make America great again, you make America smart, you make America think, and you keep America at the frontier of science.

Heres to Colbert bringing more scientists on his show. Its way more interesting than most of the actors.

See the original post:

Stephen Colbert Gets a Lesson on Quantum Physics from Brian … – Patheos (blog)

Physics4Kids.com: Modern Physics: Quantum Mechanics

If you apply this idea to the structure of an atom, in the older, Bohr model, there is a nucleus and there are rings (levels) of energy around the nucleus. The length of each orbit was related to a wavelength. No two electrons can have all the same wave characteristics. Scientists now say that electrons behave like waves, and fill areas of the atom like sound waves might fill a room. The electrons, then, exist in something scientists call “electron clouds”. The size of the shells now relates to the size of the cloud. This is where the spdf stuff comes in, as these describe the shape of the clouds.

Look at the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in a more general way using the observer effect. While Heisenberg looks at measurements, you can see parallels in larger observations. You can not observe something naturally without affecting it in some way. The light and photons used to watch an electron would move the electron. When you go out in a field in Africa and the animals see you, they will act differently. If you are a psychiatrist asking a patient some questions, you are affecting him, so the answers may be changed by the way the questions are worded. Field scientists work very hard to try and observe while interfering as little as possible.

Read the original here:

Physics4Kids.com: Modern Physics: Quantum Mechanics

Telecommunications, Meet Quantum Physics – Electronics360

Based in Detroit, Michigan, Americas capital for electric-vehicle manufacturing, Electric & Hybrid Vehicle Technology Expo highlights advances right across the powertrain. From passenger and commercial vehicles to off-highway industrial vehicles, this manufacturing and engineering event showcases the latest innovations across a vast range of vehicles. Running concurrent to the exhibition is the Electric & Hybrid Vehicle Technology Conference, which attracts technical leaders and executives from global technology companies to reveal what is driving demand, and shaping novel technologies and new innovations at the cutting edge.

The wide-ranging sessions cover performance vehicle technology transfer, technology transfer from aerospace to EV, technologies for improving efficiency and performance of H/EVs, the impact of autonomous driving features, 48V and low-voltage mild-hybrid architectures (including energy storage design considerations), electric and hybrid bus development, the commercial and vocational electric vehicle sector, P0-P4 architectures and more.

Since 2010 this dual event has experienced exponential growth achieving a sell-out exhibition and record attendance year on year, and bringing in some of the leading names as exhibitors, speakers, delegates and visitors, including Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, American Airlines, Hyundai, Ford, Valeo, BorgWarner, NovaBus, Chrysler, NASA, GM and many more.

Electric & Hybrid Vehicle Technology Expo is attended by industry leaders, businesspeople, technicians, consultants, and research and development professionals, all looking for greater efficiency, safety, and cost reduction.

Visit link:

Telecommunications, Meet Quantum Physics – Electronics360

How quantum trickery can scramble cause and effect – Nature.com

Albert Einstein is heading out for his daily stroll and has to pass through two doorways. First he walks through the green door, and then through the red one. Or wait did he go through the red first and then the green? It must have been one or the other. The events had have to happened in a sequence, right?

Not if Einstein were riding on one of the photons ricocheting through Philip Walther’s lab at the University of Vienna. Walther’s group has shown that it is impossible to say in which order these photons pass through a pair of gates as they zip around the lab. It’s not that this information gets lost or jumbled it simply doesn’t exist. In Walther’s experiments, there is no well-defined order of events.

This finding1 in 2015 made the quantum world seem even stranger than scientists had thought. Walther’s experiments mash up causality: the idea that one thing leads to another. It is as if the physicists have scrambled the concept of time itself, so that it seems to run in two directions at once.

In everyday language, that sounds nonsensical. But within the mathematical formalism of quantum theory, ambiguity about causation emerges in a perfectly logical and consistent way. And by creating systems that lack a clear flow of cause and effect2, researchers now think they can tap into a rich realm of possibilities. Some suggest that they could boost the already phenomenal potential of quantum computing. A quantum computer free from the constraints of a predefined causal structure might solve some problems faster than conventional quantum computers, says quantum theorist Giulio Chiribella of the University of Hong Kong.

What’s more, thinking about the ‘causal structure’ of quantum mechanics which events precede or succeed others might prove to be more productive, and ultimately more intuitive, than couching it in the typical mind-bending language that describes photons as being both waves and particles, or events as blurred by a haze of uncertainty.

And because causation is really about how objects influence one another across time and space, this new approach could provide the first steps towards uniting the two cornerstone theories of physics and resolving one of the most profound scientific challenges today. Causality lies at the interface between quantum mechanics and general relativity, says Walther’s collaborator aslav Brukner, a theorist at the Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information in Vienna, and so it could help us to think about how one could merge the two conceptually.

Causation has been a key issue in quantum mechanics since the mid-1930s, when Einstein challenged the apparent randomness that Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg had installed at the heart of the theory. Bohr and Heisenberg’s Copenhagen interpretation insisted that the outcome of a quantum measurement such as checking the orientation of a photon’s plane of polarization is determined at random, and only in the instant that the measurement is made. No reason can be adduced to explain that particular outcome. But in 1935, Einstein and his young colleagues Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen (now collectively denoted EPR) described a thought experiment that pushed Bohr’s interpretation to a seemingly impossible conclusion.

The EPR experiment involves two particles, A and B, that have been prepared with interdependent, or ‘entangled’, properties. For example, if A has an upward-pointing ‘spin’ (crudely, a quantum property that can be pictured a little bit like the orientation of a bar magnet), then B must be down, and vice versa.

Both pairs of orientations are possible. But researchers can discover the actual orientation only when they make a measurement on one of the particles. According to the Copenhagen interpretation, that measurement doesn’t just reveal the particle’s state; it actually fixes it in that instant. That means it also instantly fixes the state of the particle’s entangled partner however far away that partner is. But Einstein considered this apparent instant action at a distance impossible, because it would require faster-than-light interaction across space, which is forbidden by his special theory of relativity. Einstein was convinced that this invalidated the Copenhagen interpretation, and that particles A and B must already have well-defined spins before anybody looks at them.

Measurements of entangled particles show, however, that the observed correlation between the spins can’t be explained on the basis of pre-existing properties. But these correlations don’t actually violate relativity because they can’t be used to communicate faster than light. Quite how the relationship arises is hard to explain in any intuitive cause-and-effect way.

But what the Copenhagen interpretation does at least seem to retain is a time-ordering logic: a measurement can’t induce an effect until after it has been made. For event A to have any effect on event B, A has to happen first. The trouble is that this logic has unravelled over the past decade, as researchers have realized that it is possible to imagine quantum scenarios in which one simply can’t say which of two related events happens first.

Classically, this situation sounds impossible. True, we might not actually know whether A or B happened first but one of them surely did. Quantum indeterminacy, however, isn’t a lack of knowledge; it’s a fundamental prohibition on pronouncing on any ‘true state of affairs’ before a measurement is made.

Brukner’s group in Vienna, Chiribella’s team and others have been pioneering efforts to explore this ambiguous causality in quantum mechanics3, 4. They have devised ways to create related events A and B such that no one can say whether A preceded and led to (in a sense ’caused’) B, or vice versa. This arrangement enables information to be shared between A and B in ways that are ruled out if there is a definite causal order. In other words, an indeterminate causal order lets researchers do things with quantum systems that are otherwise impossible.

The trick they use involves creating a special type of quantum ‘superposition’. Superpositions of quantum states are well known: a spin, for example, can be placed in a superposition of up and down states. And the two spins in the EPR experiment are in a superposition in that case involving two particles. It’s often said that a quantum object in a superposition exists in two states at once, but more properly it simply cannot be said in advance what the outcome of a measurement would be. The two observable states can be used as the binary states (1 and 0) of quantum bits, or qubits, which are the basic elements of quantum computers.

The researchers extend this concept by creating a causal superposition. In this case, the two states represent sequences of events: a particle goes first through gate A and then through gate B (so that A’s output state determines B’s input), or vice versa.

In 2009, Chiribella and his co-workers came up with a theoretical way to do an experiment like this using a single qubit as a switch that controls the causal order of events experienced by a particle that acts as second qubit3. When the control-switch qubit is in state 0, the particle goes through gate A first, and then through gate B. When the control qubit is in state 1, the order of the second qubit is BA. But if that qubit is in a superposition of 0 and 1, the second qubit experiences a causal superposition of both sequences meaning there is no defined order to the particle’s traversal of the gates (see ‘Trippy journeys’).

Nik Spencer/Nature

Three years later, Chiribella proposed an explicit experimental procedure for enacting this idea5; Walther, Brukner and their colleagues subsequently worked out how to implement it in the lab1. The Vienna team uses a series of ‘waveplates’ (crystals that change a photon’s polarization) and partial mirrors that reflect light and also let some pass through. These devices act as the logic gates A and B to manipulate the polarization of a test photon. A control qubit determines whether the photon experiences AB or BA or a causal superposition of both. But any attempt to find out whether the photon goes through gate A or gate B first will destroy the superposition of gate ordering.

Having demonstrated causal indeterminacy experimentally, the Vienna team wanted to go further. It’s one thing to create a quantum superposition of causal states, in which it is simply not determined what caused what (that is, whether the gate order is AB or BA). But the researchers wondered whether it is possible to preserve causal ambiguity even if they spy on the photon as it travels through various gates.

At face value, this would seem to violate the idea that sustaining a superposition depends on not trying to measure it. But researchers are now realizing that in quantum mechanics, it’s not exactly what you do that matters, but what you know.

Last year, Walther and his colleagues devised a way to measure the photon as it passes through the two gates without immediately changing what they know about it6. They encode the result of the measurement in the photon itself, but do not read it out at the time. Because the photon goes through the whole circuit before it is detected and the measurement is revealed, that information can’t be used to reconstruct the gate order. It’s as if you asked someone to keep a record of how they feel during a trip and then relay the information to you later so that you can’t deduce exactly when and where they were when they wrote it down.

As the Vienna researchers showed, this ignorance preserves the causal superposition. We don’t extract any information about the measurement result until the very end of the entire process, when the final readout takes place, says Walther. So the outcome of the measurement process, and the time when it was made, are hidden but still affect the final result.

Other teams have also been creating experimental cases of causal ambiguity by using quantum optics. For example, a group at the University of Waterloo in Canada and the nearby Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics has created quantum circuits that manipulate photon states to produce a different causal mash-up. In effect, a photon passes through gates A and B in that order, but its state is determined by a mixture of two causal procedures: either the effect of B is determined by the effect of A, or the effects of A and B are individually determined by some other event acting on them both, in much the same way that a hot day can increase sunburn cases and ice-cream sales without the two phenomena being directly causally related. As with the Vienna experiments, the Waterloo group found that it’s not possible to assign a single causal ‘story’ to the state the photons acquire7.

Some of these experiments are opening up new opportunities for transmitting information. A causal superposition in the order of signals travelling through two gates means that each can be considered to send information to the other simultaneously. Crudely speaking, you get two operations for the price of one, says Walther. This offers a potentially powerful shortcut for information processing.

An indeterminate causal order lets researchers do things with quantum systems that are otherwise impossible.

Although it has long been known that using quantum superposition and entanglement could exponentially increase the speed of computation, such tricks have previously been played only with classical causal structures. But the simultaneous nature of pathways in a quantum-causal superposition offers a further boost in speed. That potential was apparent when such superpositions were first proposed: quantum theorist Lucien Hardy at the Perimeter Institute8 and Chiribella and his co-workers3 independently suggested that quantum computers operating with an indefinite causal structure might be more powerful than ones in which causality is fixed.

Last year, Brukner and his co-workers showed9 that building such a shortcut into an information-processing protocol with many gates should give an exponential increase in the efficiency of communication between gates, which could be beneficial for computation. We haven’t reached the end yet of the possible speed-ups, says Brukner. Quantum mechanics allows way more.

It’s not terribly complicated to build the necessary quantum-circuit architectures, either you just need quantum switches similar to those Walther has used. I think this could find applications soon, Brukner says.

The bigger goal, however, is theoretical. Quantum causality might supply a point of entry to some of the hardest questions in physics such as where quantum mechanics comes from.

Quantum theory has always looked a little ad hoc. The Schrdinger equation works marvellously to predict the outcomes of quantum experiments, but researchers are still arguing about what it means, because it’s not clear what the physics behind it is. Over the past two decades, some physicists and mathematicians, including Hardy10 and Brukner11, have sought to clarify things by building ‘quantum reconstructions’: attempts to derive at least some characteristic properties of quantum-mechanical systems such as entanglement and superpositions from simple axioms about, say, what can and can’t be done with the information encoded in the states (see Nature 501, 154156; 2013).

The framework of causal models provides a new perspective on these questions, says Katja Ried, a physicist at the University of Innsbruck in Austria who previously worked with the University of Waterloo team on developing systems with causal ambiguity. If quantum theory is a theory about how nature processes and distributes information, then asking in which ways events can influence each other may reveal the rules of this processing.

And quantum causality might go even further by showing how one can start to fit quantum theory into the framework of general relativity, which accounts for gravitation. The fact that causal structure plays such a central role in general relativity motivates us to investigate in which ways it can ‘behave quantumly’, says Ried.

Most of the attempts to understand quantum mechanics involve trying to save some aspects of the old classical picture, such as particle trajectories, says Brukner. But history shows us that what is generally needed in such cases is something more, he says something that goes beyond the old ideas, such as a new way of thinking about causality itself. When you have a radical theory, to understand it you usually need something even more radical.

See the original post:

How quantum trickery can scramble cause and effect – Nature.com

Why can’t quantum theory and relativity get along? – Brantford Expositor

There are many popular memes on the Internet that have to do with differing perceptions.

They have multiple photos captioned: What I think I do; What my friends think I do; What my mother thinks I do; and, finally, What I really do.

The pictures usually show wildly differing perceptions of the same job. This also appears to be the case with science. There is often a vast gulf between what people think about science and what it truly is.

Most people tend to think of science as the queen of the intellectual disciplines – always sure and precise, having all the answers to any conceivable question. Sadly, nothing could be further from the truth. Even science itself recognized this as truth with the division between theoretical and practical sciences.

If science is the queen of intellectual disciplines, Physics is the king of science. It is the fundamental investigation into how the world around us works. It includes chemistry, biology, mechanics and just about anything else you can think of. Physics stands astride of science like a Colossus, proud, sure and confident. But this is only a faade. There is a fundamental contradiction inside physics that has defied explanation for the past 100 years. And we are, even now, only beginning to glimpse some faint ideas about how this contradiction can be resolved.

In physics, there are two theories that form the basis for our understanding of the universe. Quantum physics that has explained how matter is constructed and why it behaves the way that it does. Most nuclear physics deals almost exclusively with quantum physics.

On the other end of the spectrum of physics knowledge is relativity. One man, Albert Einstein, whose very name has become another way of saying genius, was responsible for this wonderful theory that is master of everything large. It deals with the structure of the universe, the nature of gravity and explains space and time. It is a theory that has stood every test that has been put to it and it has never failed to produce the expected results or even a slight deviation from the expected results.

Both quantum theory and relativity are two of the most successful theories that we have ever had. The problem is that they don’t play well together. That’s right, two theories that are as close to reality as we have ever come are not compatible with each other. Doesn’t make sense, does it? When you try to apply relativity to the very small scales of the atomic realm, suddenly the mathematics does not make sense any more. Quantities become infinite and predictions go wildly astray.

How is this possible?

If I could answer that question, I would be preparing my speech for my Nobel Prize ceremony. The thing that makes this amazing is that each theory is so close to describing reality that it is almost inconceivable that it could be incorrect. If either or, indeed, both theories are wrong, it will bring about a complete revolution in our understanding of reality.

Some years ago, I visited CERN in Geneva just a couple of months before its discovery of the Higgs particle that controls the mass of matter. CERN is the world’s largest scientific apparatus and is designed to smash atoms together at almost the speed of light and then analyze the pieces to understand how matter works. I managed to have lunch in the cafeteria there with some of the scientists working on this marvellous machine. Sitting not too far away were at least two Nobel Prize winners who were doing work at CERN.

The conversation took an interesting turn when I asked them what would happen if the machine did not find evidence of the Higgs particle. The fellow I was talking to got a faraway look in his eyes and said; “Then physics would become very interesting. Something unexpected means that we don’t understand it all and we would have to become very creative to figure out what is going on because everything else fits our current theories.”

Nobel laureate Richard Feynman agreed with this assessment when he said that physics required a great deal of imagination, but imagination in a straitjacket. This means that you cannot imagine anything you like. What you theorize must also conform to everything we already know. In other words, any new theory must not only explain the new phenomena, but must still provide an explanation for all the old phenomena as well, or, at the very least, not be incompatible with what we observe.

This is the situation for modern physics. We have two incredibly detailed and effective theories of how various parts of nature work, and they are not compatible.

It would seem that physics is indeed “interesting again.”

Tim Philp has enjoyed science since he was old enough to read. Having worked in technical fields all his life, he shares his love of science with readers weekly. He can be reached by e-mail at: tphilp@bfree.on.ca or via snail mail c/o The Expositor.

Brantford Expositor 2017

Read this article:

Why can’t quantum theory and relativity get along? – Brantford Expositor

Payments Innovation – A Quantum World Of Payments – Finextra (blog)

In nature, change is constant and inevitable. It is also fairly slow and mainly evolutionary. At the macro level, everything looks very logical, guided by the basic scientific laws of physics, chemistry and biology. We are comfortable with changes that we can observe and measure. We feel that we are in full control of predicting future movements, through elegant mathematical modeling and good enough approximations. The world of macro physics is full of order that is guided by clear scientific standards.

By digging deeper into the area of subatomic particles and quantum physics, things start to look blurry, counter-intuitive and completely unexpected. Old silos of physics, chemistry and biology, as distinct scientific disciplines, start to disappear. We cant clearly observe and freely measure any process, without danger of ruining and completely skewing the results of the very same measurement. We feel amazed and fascinated by the apparent chaos, but also confused and often scared by our inability to comprehend and predict whats next. Thats the domain reserved only for the fearless and most curious minds. Imagination and intuition rule this world, without clear standards and without obvious order.

The physics reality of payments

In the world of payments, I see similar patterns. The traditional payments are ruled by established standards and are protected by clear rules, regulations and relatively high barriers to entry. These sometimes rigid Newtonian laws of payments industry were established over several decades by payment networks like Visa, Mastercard, etc. Traditional FIs feel very comfortable here since they know how to play by the rules and they excel at it. Thats why we enjoy pretty good safety and security of in-store payments today. The standards like EMV, ISO 8583, ISO 20022, PCI DSS are just some of the examples illustrating the point. However, today some of these standards (not all) start to feel old and somewhat inefficient in dealing with some of the demands of the modern payments trends.

On the other hand, in the payments innovation space, we feel like operating inside the subatomic world and space of the payment industry. Similar to the world of quantum physics, frequently, there are no clear rules, and imagination and intuition are often required to be relied on in order to invent and launch new services and products. Disruption of the old business models is ultimately at stake. The new business models are often not easily understood by payment traditionalists. As such, the payments innovation space is opportunistic and exciting, wide open for creative players, but at the same time, it is full of risks for potential investors and incumbents, which are faced with the inability to clearly distinguish winners from losers early enough.

Take online payments as an example there is no clear standard here. It represented the Wild West of the payments industry in the last couple of decades. It is a space that is still filled with significant security risks and friction. Agile and nimble FinTechs may thrive in such an environment, feeling free to experiment, unbound by any of the regulations and unconstrained by a traditionalist mindset. No wonder that incumbent FIs together with Visa and Mastercard have been somewhat marginal players here, despite their ability to rule the world of physical POS payment rails for over half a century now.

Blockchain is an even better example of the financial industrys quantum world. It feels directionless, void of any clear standards and rules, combined with quirky and muddy explanations of underlying consensus-reaching algorithms. It is a fertile ground for buzzwords and skilled snake oil type salesmen, further amplifying the inherent sense of confusion and unpredictability. Despite all of the hype and attention, however, blockchains disruptive potential has not been realized in real life so far. Key questions still galore: which blockchain platform to choose? Are the empirics behind the various consensus recipes trustworthy enough and mathematically provable? How do we deal with inherent scalability challenges for real-time payments? The quest for suitable use cases still continues, but it is starting to feel like we are quickly approaching the point where the whole blockchain movement may need to detach itself from the original (traditionalist) route and creatively explore some of the unusual paths and back roads, to be able to deliver promised breakthrough innovations.

It should be obvious by now, that the two worlds of payments traditional and innovation are not compatible. How do we move forward then?

What can be done?

Lets go back to the physics field for potential inspiration and guidance. Physicists clearly recognized the chasm and impedance mismatch between traditional and quantum science and are patiently working together to bridge the incompatible views. The relentless pursuit of the (still elusive) theory of everything in physics is underway, with many colliding theories in existence, but with everybody marching toward the same important goal here. Physicists on all sides of the scientific spectrum clearly understand the need for healthy open-minded collaboration toward final convergence and harmonization of all of their existing incompatible views. Although it may not be obvious, they are in my opinion perfect example of agile innovators, not afraid to try any promising theory, challenge it and pivot if required or adopt and build on it. They are also brutal realists, well aware that their goal of ultimate convergence can only be enabled by solid standardization along the way.

Now, back to payments again. The good news is that standardization in the payments space is not limited, in any way, by our ability to understand unpredictable laws of the subatomic world, but purely by the willingness of all involved players to systematically collaborate and create necessary standards that enable progress. Nimble and agile FinTechs may feel they are more adept to play in chaotic innovation space, but it is in their best interest to realize as soon as possible that they shall enable their offerings for easy integration with the incumbents, in order to be seriously considered as future partners. Incumbents, on the other hand, must realize that they cant keep protecting their current business models forever, and shall become open-minded toward emerging payment innovations.

In online payments, for example, the upcoming W3C Payment Request and W3C Payment App standard APIs will enable direct communication between online merchants and the providers of online payment app browser plug-ins. Will both merchants and FIs recognize the potential of this standard and seize this opportunity? It can clearly give innovative FIs a chance to painlessly establish themselves as natural online payment providers for their current customers. It also enables merchants to integrate only with 1 standard API for initiation of online payments and thus eliminate the need for multiple Pay With buttons on their checkout pages, each involving costly integration with a different set of APIs today. This is a huge opportunity and a clear candidate for theory of everything in the field of online payments. The process of online payment space standardization may likely expose PayPal as obsolete and unnecessary, after several decades of ruling the same space. Since this clearly benefits online merchants and FIs, I hope they will start collaborating intensely in 2017.

In the blockchain space, FinTechs must recognize that lack of standards, lack of clarity on the underlying consensus mechanisms and lack of scalability for real-time payments seriously impedes the adoption of their incompatible platforms. In my opinion, the set of common industry-standard APIs for blockchain is long overdue and initiating work must be the next biggest priority for the blockchain community in 2017. Why not again use W3C as a natural and neutral facilitator for this standardization? One day, the FIs should ultimately be able to experiment efficiently by plugging in blockchain platform A, then plug in blockchain platform B, in order to evaluate and compare, without the need to completely rewrite their application code. Further, the required scalability for real-time payments is hard to deliver elegantly using any of the current blockchain platforms. Here, openness to new ideas which might be radically different than the current mainstream thinking is clearly needed.

Will future deliver tangible solutions for some of these challenges? No crystal ball here, but I personally feel pumped up and am enthusiastically looking forward to our collective quest for the much needed theory of everything and standardization for every amazing sub-field of payments.

Go here to see the original:

Payments Innovation – A Quantum World Of Payments – Finextra (blog)

Berkeley Lab Intern Finds Her Way in Particle Physics – Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Intern Katherine Dunne with mentor Maurice Garcia-Sciveres. (Credit: Marilyn Chung/Berkeley Lab)

As a high school student in Birmingham, Alabama, Berkeley Lab Undergraduate Research (BLUR) intern Katie Dunne first dreamed of becoming a physicist after reading Albert Einsteins biography, but didnt know anyone who worked in science. I felt like the people who were good at math and science werent my friends, she said. So when it came time for college, she majored in English, and quickly grew dissatisfied because it wasnt challenging enough. Eventually, she got to know a few engineers, but none of them were women, she recalled.

She still kept physics in the back of her mind until she read an article about The First Lady of Physics, Chien-Shiung Wu, an experimental physicist who worked on the Manhattan Project, and later designed the Wu experiment, which proved that the conservation of parity is violated by weak interactions. Two male theorists who proposed parity violation won the 1957 Nobel Prize in physics, and Wu did not, Dunne said. When I read about her, I decided that thats what I want to do design experiments.

Katie Dunne, left, and mentor Maurice Garcia-Sciveres. (Credit: Marilyn Chung/Berkeley Lab)

So she put physics front and center, and about four years ago, transferred as a physics major to the City College of San Francisco. With Silicon Valley nearby, there are many opportunities here to get work experience in instrumentation and electrical engineering, Dunne said. In the summers of 2014 and 2015, she landed internships in the Human Factors division at NASA Ames Research Center in Mountain View, where she streamlined the development of a printed circuit board for active infrared illumination.

But it wasnt until she took a class in modern physics when she discovered her true passion particle physics. When we got to quantum physics, it was great. Working on the problems of quantum physics is exciting, she said. Its so elegant and dovetails with math. Its the ultimate mystery because we cant observe quantum behavior.

When it came time to apply for her next summer internship in 2016, instead of reapplying for a position at NASA, she googled ATLAS, the name of a 7,000-ton detector for the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Her search drummed up an article about Beate Heinemann, who, at the time, was a researcher with dual appointments at UC Berkeley and Berkeley Lab and was deputy spokesperson of the ATLAS collaboration. (Heinemann is also one of the 20percent of female physicists working on the ATLAS experiment.)

When Dunne contacted Heinemann to ask if she would consider her for an internship, she suggested that she contact Maurice Garcia-Sciveres, a physicist at Berkeley Lab whose research specializes in pixel detectors for ATLAS, and who has mentored many students interested in instrumentation.

Garcia-Sciveres invited Dunne to a meeting so she could see the kind of work that they do. I could tell I would get a lot of hands-on experience, she said. So she applied for her first internship with Garcia-Sciveres through the Community College Internship (CCI) program which, like the BLUR internship program, is managed by Workforce Development & Education at Berkeley Lab and started to work with his team on building prototype integrated circuit (IC) test systems for ATLAS as part of the High Luminosity Large Hadron Collider (HL-LHC) Project, an international collaboration headed by CERN to increase the LHCs luminosity (rate of collisions) by a factor of 10 by 2020.

A quad module with a printed circuit board (PCB) for power and data interface to four FE-I4B chips. Dunne designed the PCB. (Credit: Katie Dunne/Berkeley Lab)

For the ATLAS experiment, we work with the Engineering Division to build custom electronics and integrated circuits for silicon detectors. Our work is focused on improving the operation, testing, and debugging of these ICs, said Garcia-Sciveres.

During Dunnes first internship, she analyzed threshold scans for an IC readout chip, and tested their radiation hardness or threshold for tolerating increasing radiation doses at the Labs 88-Inch Cyclotron and at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory. Berkeley Lab is a unique environment for interns. They throw you in, and you learn on the job. The Lab gives students opportunities to make a difference in the field theyre working in, she said.For the ATLAS experiment, we work with the Engineering Division to build custom electronics and integrated circuits for silicon detectors. Our work is focused on improving the operation, testing, and debugging of these ICs, said Garcia-Sciveres.

For Garcia-Sciveres, it didnt take long for Dunne to prove she could make a difference for his team. Just after her first internship at Berkeley Lab, the results from her threshold analysis made their debut as data supporting his presentation at the 38th International Conference on High Energy Physics (ICHEP) in August 2016. The results were from her measurements, he said. This is grad student-level work shes been doing. Shes really good.

Katie Dunne delivers a poster presentation in spring 2017. (Credit: Marilyn Chung/Berkeley Lab)

After the conference, Garcia-Sciveres asked Dunne to write the now published proceedings (he and the other authors provided her with comments and suggested wording). And this past January, Dunne presented Results of FE65-P2 Stability Tests for the High Luminosity LHC Upgrade during the HL-LHC, BELLE2, Future Colliders session of the American Physical Society (APS) Meeting in Washington, D.C.

This summer, for her third and final internship at the Lab, Dunne is working on designing circuit boards needed for the ATLAS experiment, and assembling and testing prototype multi-chip modules to evaluate system performance. She hopes to continue working on ATLAS when she transfers to UC Santa Cruz as a physics major in the fall, and would like to get a Ph.D. in physics one day. I love knowing that the work I do matters. My internships and work experience as a research assistant at Berkeley Lab have made me more confident in the work Im doing, and more passionate about getting things done and sharing my results, she said.

Goherefor more information about internships hosted by Workforce Development & Education at Berkeley Lab, or contact them ateducation@lbl.gov.

This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists (WDTS) under the Community College Internship (CCI) program.

Follow this link:

Berkeley Lab Intern Finds Her Way in Particle Physics – Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Physicists make quantum leap in understanding life’s nanoscale … – Phys.Org

June 27, 2017 UQ’s Mr Nicolas Mauranyapin, Professsor Warwick Bowen and Dr Lars Madsen. Credit: University of Queensland

A diagnostic technique that can detect tiny molecules signalling the presence of cancer could be on the horizon.

The possibility of an entirely new capability for detecting cancer at its earliest stages arises from University of Queensland physicists applying quantum physics to single molecule sensing for the first time.

Australian Research Council Future Fellow Professor Warwick Bowen said the research reported in Nature Photonics this week demonstrated how quantum technologies could revolutionise the study of life’s “nanoscale machinery, or biological motor molecules”.

“Motor molecules encode our genetic material, create the energy our cells use to function, and distribute nutrients at a sub-cellular level,” Professor Bowen said.

“Unlike methods currently available, the technique helps us observe the behaviour of single biomolecules without large-label particles or damaging light intensities.”

PhD student Nicolas Mauranyapin said motor molecules drove all of life’s primary functions, but scientists did not yet completely understand their workings.

“Our research opens a new door to study motor molecules in their native state, at the nanoscale,” Mr Mauranyapin said.

Project researcher Dr Lars Madsen said the project applied techniques used to detect gravitational waves from black holes in outer space to the nanoscale super small world of molecular biology.

“The techniques required to detect extremely faint signals produced by distant black holes were developed over decades,” Dr Madsen said.

“Our research translates this technological development over to the biosciences and offers the possibility of a new biomedical diagnostics technique capable of detecting the presence of even a single cancer marker molecule.”

Researchers from five countries – Australia, New Zealand, Denmark, France and Pakistan were involved in the project.

It is funded by the United States Air Force Office of Scientific Research, which aims to use the technique to help understand stress on pilot behaviour at the sub-cellular level.

The project is part of the University of Queensland Precision Sensing Initiative, a joint initiative of the schools of Mathematics and Physics and of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering.

It was supported by the ARC Centre of Excellence for Engineered Quantum Systems, which aims to develop next-generation quantum technologies for future Australian industries.

Explore further: UQ, partners taking computing out of this world

More information: N. P. Mauranyapin et al. Evanescent single-molecule biosensing with quantum-limited precision, Nature Photonics (2017). DOI: 10.1038/nphoton.2017.99

University of Queensland researchers have partnered with global technology leader Lockheed Martin to develop next generation computers for aerospace applications.

A new nanoscale sensor has been developed that can help detect cytokinesmolecules that play a critical role in cellular response to infection, inflammation, trauma and disease.

(Phys.org)A team of Australian scientists has developed a powerful microscope using the laws of quantum mechanics to probe the inner workings of living cells.

Next-generation sensors to be used in fields as diverse as mineral exploration and climate change will be turbo boosted thanks to University of Queensland and University of Sussex research.

A team of theoretical physicists has proposed a way to simulate black holes on an electronic chip. Additionally, the technology used to create these lab-made black holes may be useful for quantum technologies. The researchers …

Quantum mechanics rules. It dictates how particles and forces interact, and thus how atoms and molecules workfor example, what happens when a molecule goes from a higher-energy state to a lower-energy one. But beyond the …

A diagnostic technique that can detect tiny molecules signalling the presence of cancer could be on the horizon.

A new strategy for sending acoustic waves through water could potentially open up the world of high-speed communications activities underwater, including scuba diving, remote ocean monitoring, and deep-sea exploration.

Deep within solids, individual electrons zip around on a nanoscale highway paved with atoms. For the most part, these electrons avoid one another, kept in separate lanes by their mutual repulsion. But vibrations in the atomic …

At the moment they come together, the individual grains in materials like sand and snow appear to have exactly the same probability of combining into any one of their many billions of possible arrangements, researchers have …

An international team of researchers, working at the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and UC Berkeley, fabricated an atomically thin material and measured its exotic and durable …

Using an off-the-shelf camera flash, researchers turned an ordinary sheet of graphene oxide into a material that bends when exposed to moisture. They then used this material to make a spider-like crawler and claw robot that …

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

See the original post here:

Physicists make quantum leap in understanding life’s nanoscale … – Phys.Org

Google to Achieve "Supremacy" in Quantum Computing by the End of 2017 – Big Think

Google to Achieve “Supremacy” in Quantum Computing by the End of 2017

Racism is a Disease That Everyone Suffers From, Says ‘Racists Anonymous’

Ketamine is Helping Alleviate DepressionFast

9-qubit quantum processor. Credit: Julian Kelly/Google.

In theory, quantum computers could be vastly superior to regular or classical computers in performing certain kinds of tasks, but its been hard to build one. Already a leader in this field, Google is now testing its most powerful quantum chip yet,a 20-qubit processor,which the company looks to more than double in power to 49 qubits by the end of 2017.

Google’s qubit devices are built on integrated circuits and can perform calculations using the physics of quantum mechanics.Qubits(or quantum bits) are units of quantum information that can be a mix of 0 and 1at the same time,making them better suited than classical bits for encoding large amounts of data.

Last year, Google actually released a plan on how it will achieve what it called quantum supremacy – getting quantum computers to do something the classical computers cannot, like factoring very large numbers. The paper says that if the processors manage to get to 50 qubits, quantum supremacy would be possible.

One big issue for Google to resolve – figuring out how to simulate what randomly arranged quantum circuits would do. Even a small difference in input into such a system would produce extremely different outputs, requiring a great amount of computing power that doesnt currently exist.

Theyre doing a quantum version of chaos, is how Simon Devitt from the RIKEN Center for Emergent Matter Science in Japan described Googles challenge. The output is essentially random, so you have to compute everything.

Computational difficulties aside, Google and other companies like IBM are moving along quicker than expected in their development. While they figured out the science necessary to create the qubits, the next challenges lie in scaling down their systems and reducing error rates.

The engineer Alan Ho from Googles quantum AI lab revealed that his teams current 20-qubit system has the error measure also known as two-qubit fidelity of 99.5%. The goal for the 49-qubit system would be to reach 99.7% fidelity.

It might take until 2027 until we get error-free quantum computers, according to Ho, meaning that usable devices are still some time away.

For more on how quantum computing works, check out this video:


What the World Will Look Like 4C Warmer

Were the Ancient Egyptians Black or White? Scientists Now Know

Here’s When Machines Will Take Your Job, as Predicted by AI Gurus

The Mystery of the Bermuda Triangle May Finally Be Solved

See more here:

Google to Achieve "Supremacy" in Quantum Computing by the End of 2017 – Big Think

DOE Launches Chicago Quantum Exchange – HPCwire (blog)

While many of us were preoccupied with ISC 2017 last week, the launch of the Chicago Quantum Exchange went largely unnoticed. So what is such a thing? It is a Department of Energy sponsored collaboration between the University of Chicago, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, and Argonne National Laboratory to facilitate the exploration of quantum information and the development of new applications with the potential to dramatically improve technology for communication, computing and sensing.

The new hub will be within within the Institute for Molecular Engineering (IME) at UChicago. Quantum mechanics, of course, governs the behavior of matter at the atomic and subatomic levels in exotic and unfamiliar ways compared to the classical physics used to understand the movements of everyday objects. The engineering of quantum phenomena could lead to new classes of devices and computing capabilities, permitting novel approaches to solving problems that cannot be addressed using existing technology.

Lately, it seems work on quantum computing has ratcheted up considerably with IBM, Google, D-Wave, and Microsoft leading the charge. The Chicago Quantum Exchange seems to be a more holistic endeavor to advance the entire quantum research ecosystem and industry.

The combination of the University of Chicago, Argonne National Laboratory and Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, working together as the Chicago Quantum Exchange, is unique in the domain of quantum information science, said Matthew Tirrell, dean and Founding Pritzker Director of the Institute for Molecular Engineering and Argonnes deputy laboratory director for science. The CQEs capabilities will span the range of quantum information, from basic solid state experimental and theoretical physics, to device design and fabrication, to algorithm and software development. CQE aims to integrate and exploit these capabilities to create a quantum information technology ecosystem.

According to the official announcement, the CQE collaboration will benefit from UChicagosPolsky Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation, which supports the creation of innovative businesses connected to UChicago and Chicagos South Side. The CQE will have a strong connection with a major Hyde Park innovation project that wasannounced recentlyas the second phase of the Harper Court development on the north side of 53rd Street, and will include an expansion of Polsky Center activities. This project will enable the transition from laboratory discoveries to societal applications through industrial collaborations and startup initiatives.

Companies large and small are positioning themselves to make a far-reaching impact with this new quantum technology. Alumni of IMEs quantum engineering PhD program have been recruited to work for many of these companies. The creation of CQE will allow for new linkages and collaborations with industry, governmental agencies and other academic institutions, as well as support from the Polsky Center for new startup ventures.

IMEs quantum engineering program is already training a new workforce of quantum engineers to meet the need of industry, government laboratories, and universities. The program now consists of eight faculty members and more than 100 postdoctoral scientists and doctoral students. Approximately 20 faculty members from UChicagos Physical Sciences Division also pursue quantum research.

Link to University of Chicagoarticle: https://news.uchicago.edu/article/2017/06/20/chicago-quantum-exchange-create-technologically-transformative-ecosystem

Feature image: Courtesy of Nicholas Brawand

Read the original post:

DOE Launches Chicago Quantum Exchange – HPCwire (blog)

Atomic imperfections move quantum communication network closer … – Phys.Org

June 23, 2017 Single spins in silicon carbide absorb and emit single photons based on the state of their spin. Credit: Prof. David Awschalom

An international team led by the University of Chicago’s Institute for Molecular Engineering has discovered how to manipulate a weird quantum interface between light and matter in silicon carbide along wavelengths used in telecommunications.

The work advances the possibility of applying quantum mechanical principles to existing optical fiber networks for secure communications and geographically distributed quantum computation. Prof. David Awschalom and his 13 co-authors announced their discovery in the June 23 issue of Physical Review X.

“Silicon carbide is currently used to build a wide variety of classical electronic devices today,” said Awschalom, the Liew Family Professor in Molecular Engineering at UChicago and a senior scientist at Argonne National Laboratory. “All of the processing protocols are in place to fabricate small quantum devices out of this material. These results offer a pathway for bringing quantum physics into the technological world.”

The findings are partly based on theoretical models of the materials performed by Awschalom’s co-authors at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Budapest. Another research group in Sweden’s Linkping University grew much of the silicon carbide material that Awschalom’s team tested in experiments at UChicago. And another team at the National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology in Japan helped the UChicago researchers make quantum defects in the materials by irradiating them with electron beams.

Quantum mechanics govern the behavior of matter at the atomic and subatomic levels in exotic and counterintuitive ways as compared to the everyday world of classical physics. The new discovery hinges on a quantum interface within atomic-scale defects in silicon carbide that generates the fragile property of entanglement, one of the strangest phenomena predicted by quantum mechanics.

Entanglement means that two particles can be so inextricably connected that the state of one particle can instantly influence the state of the other, no matter how far apart they are.

“This non-intuitive nature of quantum mechanics might be exploited to ensure that communications between two parties are not intercepted or altered,” Awschalom said.

Exploiting quantum mechanics

The findings enhance the once-unexpected opportunity to create and control quantum states in materials that already have technological applications, Awschalom noted. Pursuing the scientific and technological potential of such advances will become the focus of the newly announced Chicago Quantum Exchange, which Awschalom will direct.

An especially intriguing aspect of the new paper was that silicon carbide semiconductor defects have a natural affinity for moving information between light and spin (a magnetic property of electrons). “A key unknown has always been whether we could find a way to convert their quantum states to light,” said David Christle, a postdoctoral scholar at the University of Chicago and lead author of the work. “We knew a light-matter interface should exist, but we might have been unlucky and found it to be intrinsically unsuitable for generating entanglement. We were very fortuitous in that the optical transitions and the process that converts the spin to light is of very high quality.”

The defect is a missing atom that causes nearby atoms in the material to rearrange their electrons. The missing atom, or the defect itself, creates an electronic state that researchers control with a tunable infrared laser.

“What quality basically means is: How many photons can you get before you’ve destroyed the quantum state of the spin?” said Abram Falk, a researcher at the IBM Thomas J. Watson Resarch Center in Yorktown Heights, N.Y., who is familiar with the work but not a co-author on the paper.

The UChicago researchers found that they could potentially generate up to 10,000 photons, or packets of light, before they destroyed the spin state. “That would be a world record in terms of what you could do with one of these types of defect states,” Falk added.

Awschalom’s team was able to turn the quantum state of information from single electron spins in commercial wafers of silicon carbide into light and read it out with an efficiency of approximately 95 percent.

Millisecond coherence

The duration of the spin statecalled coherencethat Awschalom’s team achieved was a millisecond. Not much by clock standards, but quite a lot in the realm of quantum states, in which multiple calculations can be carried out in a nanosecond, or a billionth of a second.

The feat opens up new possibilities in silicon carbide because its nanoscale defects are a leading platform for new technologies that seek to use quantum mechanical properties for quantum information processing, sensing magnetic and electric fields and temperature with nanoscale resolution, and secure communications using light.

“There’s about a billion-dollar industry of power electronics built on silicon carbide,” Falk said. “Following this work, there’s an opportunity to build a platform for quantum communication that leverages these very advanced classical devices in the semiconductor industry,” he said.

Most researchers studying defects for quantum applications have focused on an atomic defect in diamond, which has become a popular visible-light testbed for these technologies.

“Diamond has been this huge industry of quantum control work,” Falk noted. Dozens of research groups across the country have spent more than a decade perfecting the material to achieve standards that Awschalom’s group has mastered in silicon carbide after only a few years of investigation.

Silicon carbide versatility

“There are many different forms of silicon carbide, and some of them are commonly used today in electronics and optoelectronics,” Awschalom said. “Quantum states are present in all forms of silicon carbide that we’ve explored. This bodes well for introducing quantum mechanical effects into both electronic and optical technologies.”

Researchers now are beginning to wonder if this type of physics also may work in other materials, Falk noted.

“Moreover, can we rationally design a defect that has the properties we want, not just stumble into one?” he asked.

Defects are the key.

“For decades the electronics industry has come up with a myriad of tricks to remove all the defects from their devices because defects often cause problems in conventional electronics,” Awschalom explained. “Ironically, we’re putting the defects back in for quantum systems.”

Explore further: Exceptionally robust quantum states found in industrially important semiconductor

More information: “Isolated Spin Qubuits in SiC with a High-Fidelity Infrared Spin-to-Photon Interface,” Physical Review X (2017). journals.aps.org/prx/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevX.7.021046

Harnessing solid-state quantum bits, or qubits, is a key step toward the mass production of electronic devices based on quantum information science and technology. However, realizing a robust qubit with a long lifetime is …

A discovery by physicists at UC Santa Barbara may earn silicon carbide — a semiconductor commonly used by the electronics industry — a role at the center of a new generation of information technologies designed to exploit …

Quantum computersa possible future technology that would revolutionize computing by harnessing the bizarre properties of quantum bits, or qubits. Qubits are the quantum analogue to the classical computer bits “0” and “1.” …

An electronics technology that uses the “spin” – or magnetization – of atomic nuclei to store and process information promises huge gains in performance over today’s electron-based devices. But getting there is proving challenging.

For 60 years computers have become smaller, faster and cheaper. But engineers are approaching the limits of how small they can make silicon transistors and how quickly they can push electricity through devices to create digital …

Entanglement is one of the strangest phenomena predicted by quantum mechanics, the theory that underlies most of modern physics. It says that two particles can be so inextricably connected that the state of one particle can …

(Phys.org)In the late 1800s when scientists were still trying to figure out what exactly atoms are, one of the leading theories, proposed by Lord Kelvin, was that atoms are knots of swirling vortices in the aether. Although …

An international team led by the University of Chicago’s Institute for Molecular Engineering has discovered how to manipulate a weird quantum interface between light and matter in silicon carbide along wavelengths used in …

New research by physicists at the University of Chicago settles a longstanding disagreement over the formation of exotic quantum particles known as Efimov molecules.

Researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Ames Laboratory discovered that they could functionalize magnetic materials through a thoroughly unlikely method, by adding amounts of the virtually non-magnetic element scandium …

Researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the University of Colorado Boulder have demonstrated a new mobile, ground-based system that could scan and map atmospheric gas plumes over kilometer …

In experiments at the Department of Energy’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, scientists were able to see the first step of a process that protects a DNA building block called thymine from sun damage: When it’s hit with …

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

How many times is Phys.org going to repeat this fallacy ?

The distance of this influence is definitely limited by decoherence, i.e. the tendency of vacuum fluctuations (which manifest itself like the CMB radiation and thermal noise) to disrupt the entangled state (i.e. to desynchronize pilot waves of entangled objects). Inside the diamond or silicon carbide (which is similar to diamond in many extents) the strength of bonds between atoms is so high, that the effects of thermal vibrations are diminished, which makes these materials perspective systems for storage of spin and another states of atoms. I just don’t think, that these states are quantized, because they require many quanta of energy (more than 10.000 photons) for switching their spin state. IMO they’re rather close to classical systems of storage information within laser pulses, like the layers of dyes etc.. The another question whether the speed of this influence is infinite is also disputable, despite that we have indicia, in pure quantum system it gets actually superluminal.

Entanglement is two photons created at the source with opposite spins which sum to zero. There is no such thing as spooky action at a distance, full stop.

Math can only describe observations of reality, statements describing false or non existent observations can only be described as click bait 🙂

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

See the article here:

Atomic imperfections move quantum communication network closer … – Phys.Org

In 1928, One Physicist Accidentally Predicted Antimatter – Popular Mechanics

Getty Mark Garlick/Science Photo Library

In the first quarter of the 20th century, it was an intense time to be a physicist. It seemed like every day someone was coming out with a new theory that completely revolutionized our understanding of the universe. In 1905 Einstein published his Theory of Special Relativity, which changed the way physicists thought about space and time. Ten years later, Einstein published his Theory of General Relativity, which was even more revolutionary. OK so it was a lot of Einstein, but still.

Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

At about the same time, a group of physicists were beginning to study very tiny particles like electrons, as well as the weird things that can happen with light. They began to develop a theory called quantum mechanics, which contains the idea that at the smallest level, measurements of position, momentum, energy, and other quantities are uncertain.

Many physicists spent their entire careers trying to unify these two titans of 20th century physics. In 1928, one man finally succeeded, and in the process, managed to predict the existence of antimatter. As PBS Space Time explains:

Physicists trying to unite relativity and quantum mechanics had a bit of a problem. One of the key ideas of relativity is that time and space are relative, and everything depends on where you are and how fast you’re moving. But that idea doesn’t show up anywhere in quantum mechanics.

British Physicist Paul Dirac decided to fix this problem by combining Einstein’s famous E=mc2 equation with Schroedinger’s equation from quantum mechanics. What he got could only be described as an ugly mess. But Dirac saw a way to fix it.

Paul Dirac in 1928.

Getty Science Source

However, his solution was a bit strange. In order for the math to work, he needed to add in an extra type of electron, with negative energy. Nobody knew what this was or even what it meant, but it made the end result so simple and elegant that Dirac just knew it was true.

Only a few years later, observations of cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere discovered the first antimatter particles, confirming Dirac’s hypothesis. He showed that relativity and quantum mechanics could be combined after all, creating a completely new branch of physics: quantum field theory.

Source: PBS Space Time

See the article here:

In 1928, One Physicist Accidentally Predicted Antimatter – Popular Mechanics

Physicists settle debate over how exotic quantum particles form – Phys.Org

June 23, 2017 by Carla Reiter Here 3 symbolizes an Efimov molecule comprised of three atoms. While all 3s look about the same, research from the Chin group observed a tiny 3 that is clearly different. Credit: Cheng Chin

New research by physicists at the University of Chicago settles a longstanding disagreement over the formation of exotic quantum particles known as Efimov molecules.

The findings, published last month in Nature Physics, address differences between how theorists say Efimov molecules should form and the way researchers say they did form in experiments. The study found that the simple picture scientists formulated based on almost 10 years of experimentation had it wronga result that has implications for understanding how the first complex molecules formed in the early universe and how complex materials came into being.

Efimov molecules are quantum objects formed by three particles that bind together when two particles are unable to do so. The same three particles can make molecules in an infinite range of sizes, depending on the strength of the interactions between them.

Experiments had shown the size of an Efimov molecule was roughly proportional to the size of the atoms that comprise ita property physicists call universality.

“This hypothesis has been checked and rechecked multiple times in the past 10 years, and almost all the experiments suggested that this is indeed the case,” said Cheng Chin, a professor of physics at UChicago, who leads the lab where the new findings were made. “But some theorists say the real world is more complicated than this simple formula. There should be some other factors that will break this universality.”

The new findings come down somewhere between the previous experimental findings and predictions of theorists. They contradict both and do away with the idea of universality.

“I have to say that I am surprised,” Chin said. “This was an experiment where I did not anticipate the result before we got the data.”

The data came from extremely sensitive experiments done with cesium and lithium atoms using techniques devised by Jacob Johansen, previously a graduate student in Chin’s lab who is now a postdoctoral fellow at Northwestern University. Krutik Patel, a graduate student at UChicago, and Brian DeSalvo, a postdoctoral researcher at UChicago, also contributed to the work.

“We wanted to be able to say once and for all that if we didn’t see any dependence on these other properties, then there’s really something seriously wrong with the theory,” Johansen said. “If we did see dependence, then we’re seeing the breakdown of this universality. It always feels good, as a scientist, to resolve these sorts of questions.”

Developing new techniques

Efimov molecules are held together by quantum forces rather than by the chemical bonds that bind together familiar molecules such as H2O. The atoms are so weakly connected that the molecules can’t exist under normal conditions. Heat in a room providing enough energy to shatter their bonds.

The Efimov molecule experiments were done at extremely low temperatures50 billionths of a degree above absolute zeroand under the influence of a strong magnetic field, which is used to control the interaction of the atoms. When the field strength is in a particular, narrow range, the interaction between atoms intensifies and molecules form. By analyzing the precise conditions in which formation occurs, scientists can infer the size of the molecules.

But controlling the magnetic field precisely enough to make the measurements Johansen sought is extremely difficult. Even heat generated by the electric current used to create the field was enough to change that field, making it hard to reproduce in experiments. The field could fluctuate at a level of only one part in a milliona thousand times weaker than the Earth’s magnetic fieldand Johansen had to stabilize it and monitor how it changed over time.

The key was a technique he developed to probe the field using microwave electronics and the atoms themselves.

“I consider what Jacob did a tour de force,” Chin said. “He can control the field with such high accuracy and perform very precise measurements on the size of these Efimov molecules and for the first time the data really confirm that there is a significant deviation of the universality.”

The new findings have important implications for understanding the development of complexity in materials. Normal materials have diverse properties, which could not have arisen if their behavior at the quantum level was identical. The three-body Efimov system puts scientists right at the point at which universal behavior disappears.

“Any quantum system made with three or more particles is a very, very difficult problem,” Chin said. “Only recently do we really have the capability to test the theory and understand the nature of such molecules. We are making progress toward understanding these small quantum clusters. This will be a building block for understanding more complex material.”

Explore further: Exotic, gigantic molecules fit inside each other like Russian nesting dolls

More information: Jacob Johansen et al. Testing universality of Efimov physics across broad and narrow Feshbach resonances, Nature Physics (2017). DOI: 10.1038/nphys4130

University of Chicago scientists have experimentally observed for the first time a phenomenon in ultracold, three-atom molecules predicted by Russian theoretical physicist Vitaly Efimov in 1970.

An exotic physical effect based on the attraction among three particles has a similar universality to that of common two-body interactions, Yusuke Horinouchi from the University of Tokyo and Masahito Ueda from the RIKEN Center …

An international team of physicists has converted three normal atoms into a special new state of matter whose existence was proposed by Russian scientist Vitaly Efimov in 1970.

When a two-body relation becomes a three-body relation, the behaviour of the system changes and typically becomes more complex. While the basic physics of two interacting particles is well understood, the mathematical description …

Some years ago, Rudolf Grimm’s team of quantum physicists in Innsbruck provided experimental proof of Efimov states a phenomenon that until then had been known only in theory. Now they have also measured the second Efimov …

(Phys.org) Chemical reactions drive the mechanisms of life as well as a million other natural processes on earth. These reactions occur at a wide spectrum of temperatures, from those prevailing at the chilly polar icecaps …

Researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the University of Colorado Boulder have demonstrated a new mobile, ground-based system that could scan and map atmospheric gas plumes over kilometer …

(Phys.org)In the late 1800s when scientists were still trying to figure out what exactly atoms are, one of the leading theories, proposed by Lord Kelvin, was that atoms are knots of swirling vortices in the aether. Although …

New research by physicists at the University of Chicago settles a longstanding disagreement over the formation of exotic quantum particles known as Efimov molecules.

In experiments at the Department of Energy’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, scientists were able to see the first step of a process that protects a DNA building block called thymine from sun damage: When it’s hit with …

Elemental metals usually form simple, close-packed crystalline structures. Though lithium (Li) is considered a typical simple metal, its crystal structure at ambient pressure and low temperature remains unknown.

In an arranged marriage of optics and mechanics, physicists have created microscopic structural beams that have a variety of powerful uses when light strikes them. Able to operate in ordinary, room-temperature environments, …

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

See the rest here:

Physicists settle debate over how exotic quantum particles form – Phys.Org

Quantum thermometer or optical refrigerator? – Phys.Org

June 22, 2017 Artist’s rendering of a quantum thermometer. Credit: Emily Edwards/JQI

In an arranged marriage of optics and mechanics, physicists have created microscopic structural beams that have a variety of powerful uses when light strikes them. Able to operate in ordinary, room-temperature environments, yet exploiting some of the deepest principles of quantum physics, these optomechanical systems can act as inherently accurate thermometers, or conversely, as a type of optical shield that diverts heat. The research was performed by a team led by the Joint Quantum Institute (JQI), a research collaboration of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the University of Maryland.

Described in a pair of new papers in Science and Physical Review Letters, the potential applications include chip-based temperature sensors for electronics and biology that would never need to be adjusted since they rely on fundamental constants of nature; tiny refrigerators that can cool state-of-the-art microscope components for higher-quality images; and improved “metamaterials” that could allow researchers to manipulate light and sound in new ways.

Made of silicon nitride, a widely used material in the electronics and photonics industries, the beams are about 20 microns (20 millionths of a meter) in length. They are transparent, with a row of holes drilled through them to enhance their optical and mechanical properties.

“You can send light down this beam because it’s a transparent material. You can also send sound waves down the beam,” explained Tom Purdy, a NIST physicist who is an author on both papers. The researchers believe the beams could lead to better thermometers, which are now ubiquitous in our devices, including cell phones.

“Essentially we’re carrying a bunch of thermometers around with us all the time,” said JQI Fellow Jake Taylor, senior author of the new papers. “Some provide temperature readings, and others let you know if your chip is too hot or your battery is too cold. Thermometers also play a crucial role in transportation systemsairplanes, carsand tell you if your engine oil is overheating.”

But the problem is that these thermometers are not accurate off the shelf. They need to be calibrated, or adjusted, to some standard. The design of the silicon nitride beam avoids this situation by relying on fundamental physics. To use the beam as a thermometer, researchers must be able to measure the tiniest possible vibrations in the beam. The amount that the beam vibrates is proportional to the temperature of its surroundings.

The vibrations can come from two kinds of sources. The first are ordinary “thermal” sources such as gas molecules buffeting the beam or sound waves passing through it. The second source of vibration comes purely from the world of quantum mechanics, the theory that governs behavior of matter at the atomic scale. The quantum behavior occurs when the researchers send particles of light, or photons, down the beam. Struck by light, the mechanical beam reflects the photons, and recoils in the process, creating small vibrations in the beam. Sometimes these quantum-based effects are described using the Heisenberg uncertainty relationshipthe photon bounce leads to information about the beam’s position, but because it imparts vibrations to the beam, it adds uncertainty to the beam’s velocity.

“The quantum mechanical fluctuations give us a reference point because essentially, you can’t make the system move less than that,” Taylor said. By plugging in values of Boltzmann’s constant and Planck’s constant, the researchers can calculate the temperature. And given that reference point, when the researchers measure more motion in the beam, such as from thermal sources, they can accurately extrapolate the temperature of the environment.

However, the quantum fluctuations are a million times fainter than the thermal vibrations; detecting them is like hearing a pin drop in the middle of a shower.

In their experiments, the researchers used a state-of-the-art silicon nitride beam built by Karen Grutter and Kartik Srinivasan at NIST’s Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology. By shining high-quality photons at the beam and analyzing photons emitted from the beam shortly thereafter, “we see a little bit of the quantum vibrational motion picked up in the output of light,” Purdy explained. Their measurement approach is sensitive enough to see these quantum effects all the way up to room temperature for the first time, and is published in this week’s issue of Science.

Although the experimental thermometers are in a proof-of-concept phase, the researchers envision they could be particularly valuable in electronic devices, as on-chip thermometers that never need calibration, and in biology.

“Biological processes, in general, are very sensitive to temperature, as anyone who has a sick child knows. The difference between 37 and 39 degrees Celsius is pretty large,” Taylor said. He foresees applications in biotechnology, when you want to measure temperature changes in “as small an amount of product as possible,” he said.

The researchers go in the opposite direction in a second proposed application for the beams, described in a theoretical paper published in Physical Review Letters.

Instead of letting heat hit the beam and allow it to serve as a temperature probe, the researchers propose using the beam to divert the heat from, for example, a sensitive part of an electromechanical device.

In their proposed setup, the researchers enclose the beam in a cavity, a pair of mirrors that bounce light back and forth. They use light to control the vibrations of the beam so that the beam cannot re-radiate incoming heat in its usual direction, towards a colder object.

For this application, Taylor likens the behavior of the beam to a tuning fork. When you hold a tuning fork and strike it, it radiates pure sound tones instead of allowing that motion to turn into heat, which travels down the fork and into your hand.

“A tuning fork rings for a long time, even in air,” he said. The two prongs of the fork vibrate in opposite directions, he explained, and cancel out a way for energy to leave the bottom of the fork through your hand.

The researchers even imagine using an optically controlled silicon nitride beam as the tip of an atomic force microscope (AFM), which detects forces on surfaces to build up atom-scale images. An optically controlled AFM tip would stay cooland perform better. “You’re removing thermal motion, which makes it easier to see signals,” Taylor explained.

This technique also could be put to use to make better metamaterials, complex composite objects that manipulate light or sound in new ways and could be used to make better lenses or even so-called “invisibility cloaks” that cause certain wavelengths of light to pass through an object rather than bouncing from it.

“Metamaterials are our answer to, ‘How do we make materials that capture the best properties for light and sound, or for heat and motion?'” Taylor said. “It’s a technique that has been widely used in engineering, but combining the light and sound together remains still a bit open on how far we can go with it, and this provides a new tool for exploring that space.”

Explore further: Fundamentally accurate quantum thermometer created

More information: “Quantum correlations from a room-temperature optomechanical cavity” Science (2017). science.sciencemag.org/cgi/doi/10.1126/science.aag1407

Xunnong Xu et al. Cooling a Harmonic Oscillator by Optomechanical Modification of Its Bath, Physical Review Letters (2017). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.223602

Better thermometers might be possible as a result of a discovery at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), where physicists have found a way to calibrate temperature measurements by monitoring the tiny …

What do ships, bats and torpedoes have in common? They navigate by emitting sound waves and listening where those get absorbed or reflected. Humans do the same with light waves, except that they rely on external sources like …

Interconnecting different quantum systems is important for future quantum computing architectures, but has proven difficult to achieve. Researchers from the TU Delft and the University of Vienna have now realized a first …

Invisible to the human eye, terahertz electromagnetic waves can “see through” everything from fog and clouds to wood and masonryan attribute that holds great promise for astrophysics research, detecting concealed explosives …

Researchers working at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have developed a “piezo-optomechanical circuit” that converts signals among optical, acoustic and radio waves. A system based on this design …

For the first time, researchers at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), in collaboration with a team from the University of Vienna, have managed to cool a miniature mechanical object to its lowest possible energy …

In an arranged marriage of optics and mechanics, physicists have created microscopic structural beams that have a variety of powerful uses when light strikes them. Able to operate in ordinary, room-temperature environments, …

Screens on even the newest phones and tablets can be hard to read outside in bright sunlight. Inspired by the nanostructures found on moth eyes, researchers have developed a new antireflection film that could keep people …

Scientists have solved a decades-old puzzle about a widely used metal, thanks to extreme pressure experiments and powerful supercomputing.

At EPFL, researchers challenge a fundamental law and discover that more electromagnetic energy can be stored in wave-guiding systems than previously thought. The discovery has implications in telecommunications. Working around …

Traditional cameraseven those on the thinnest of cell phonescannot be truly flat due to their optics: lenses that require a certain shape and size in order to function. At Caltech, engineers have developed a new camera …

(Phys.org)A team of researchers at Universite Paris-Diderot has uncovered the reason for wobbling of wheeled suitcases. In their paper published in Proceedings of the Royal Society A, the group explains the physics behind …

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Read this article:

Quantum thermometer or optical refrigerator? – Phys.Org

How quantum physics could revolutionize casinos and betting if you can understand it – Casinopedia

By Ivan Potocki, ContributorPublished: June 22, 2017 07:01 EST

Many of the answers to lifes great questions have been laid at the door of the mega-brained scientists who specialise in quantum physics. Is there evidence of a god? How did the universe begin?

But what about using the theories to revolutionize how we play casinos?

A team of scientists from China and Bristol has come up with the idea of a gambling protocol that doesnt depend on the integrity of the participants. Instead, this new protocol is founded on the idea of rationality the rational notion that both parties will make decisions they perceive give them the best winning chances.

This new protocol is based on the mix of game theory and quantum mechanics, and scientists believe it could find its application in casinos and lotteries sometime in the future.

It is nearly impossible for two players to gamble, putting something of value on the line, without having a third party supervising the game because of the temptation to bend the rules or cheat. This third party is necessary to make sure everything is fair, and everyone keeps their end of the bargain. However, it seems that quantum mechanics has a solution that would remove the need for the third party altogether.

The idea of quantum gambling revolves around the concept of a theoretical machine constructed between two participating players. The machine works based on two important principles: quantum superposition and Heisenbergs uncertainty principle.

The uncertainty principle is a bit hard to understand for people not familiar with quantum mechanics, but it basically states that observing a particle will create changes in its behavior. Quantum superposition means that the particle can be in the two different states at once.

If this sounds confusing, thats because it is.

But, the gist of it all is, it would create a situation where one player knows the state of two particles on his or her side but doesnt know if the states will change by the time they reach the other player. The other player has an option to try and guess the state of the particle hes been sent, or ask for a different one.

In theory, this would create an environment where both players need to adhere to the best strategy, creating Nash equilibrium.

In this situation, they are playing a zero sum game, and there is no need for third parties to supervise the game. Although this idea only exists on paper at this time, scientists believe it can be used to develop a range of new gambling protocols based on quantum mechanics.

Read the original here:

How quantum physics could revolutionize casinos and betting if you can understand it – Casinopedia