You may have encountered the popular claim that \( 0.999... = 1 \), where the three dots signify that the decimal continues forever. This is a somewhat weird claim, since it would mean that mathematics is broken. There should be no way for two different numbers to have the same value. What makes it weirder is that this is quite popular claim. I've even seen mathematicians say that it's true! But is it though? One popular proof is to first denote \( S = 0.999...\) and then multiply by \(10\) to get \( 10S = 9.999...\) and subtract \( S \) from it, to get \( 10S - S = 9.000...\) and finally dividing by \(9\) yields \( S = 1.000... = 1 \) and we see that \(0.999... = 1\)! However, there's a problem. This short derivation is not strictly speaking correct. It is veeeery close to being correct, and to see why let's look at finite decimals first. Let's say that \(S = 0.999\) (note that this is not the same as \(S = 0.999...\) ). Let's do the same trick as ...
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
Bose and Einstein, nanosized
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
-
Around two weeks ago I heard about a very interesting article called "Bose-Einstein Condensation in a Plasmonic Lattice." I must admit, the first time I heard about it, I knew what all those words meant separately, but together it was some mumbo jumbo that made no sense to me. What exactly is condensing? Don't these condensates exist only at extremely low temperatures? And what do plasmons have to do with this?
Reading the abstract didn't help at all. Going through the whole article, I understood maybe half of it. But apparently they had done something great, and it was going to be published in Nature Physics!
By chance, I happened to be in contact with one of the authors and he explained everything to me in a way that I finally got what they were doing. And it really was something great.
First of all, what is a Bose-Einstein condensate? About a century ago, Indian scientist Satyendra Nath Bose sent an article to Albert Einstein, humbly asking for his opinion (and for some translation help). Einstein agreed with Bose's theory, translated it to German and sent it to the journal Zeitschrift für Physik.
Bose had derived Planck's law by assuming that the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution doesn't hold for certain particles, which essentially means that he assumed that photons with the same energy are indistinguishable from each other.
Think about it. If we have two coins, let's say ten cents and fifty cents, and they are thrown in the air so that you can only see the outcome of the flip. Then, there are four possible outcomes: both are heads, both are tails, ten is heads and fifty is tails, or the other way around. But if we have two similar coins, so you can't tell them apart, there are only three possible outcomes: both are heads, both are tails, and one is heads while the other is tails.
In the first scenario, the probability of getting both heads is 1/4, but in the latter, it's 1/3! If the effect of indistinguishability is so great for a small system, then what about physical systems with 10^23 particles per mole?
Einstein realized the implications of this and extended Bose's ideas to matter. Their efforts resulted in the concept of Bose gas, governed by Bose-Einstein statistics. He further proposed that cooling certain atoms to a very low temperature would cause them all to drop down to the ground state, resulting in a new form of matter, known as the Bose-Einstein condensate.
It took almost a century of efforts to confirm the existence of this new state of matter, because of the extremely low temperatures involved. The confirming study in 1995 achieved a temperature of only 170 nK! They measured the velocity distribution of the particles, like in the below picture, where the rising peak indicates that a condensate is forming.
Velocity-distribution for a traditional BEC made up of rubidium atoms.
Bose-Einstein condensates have many peculiar properties, one of the most interesting being that you can describe the whole system with a wave function of a single particle. This is because all of the particle are in the same state.
Now, getting back to the present. When we talk about Bose-Einstein condensation in a plasmonic lattice, what is actually condensing? It's photons, believe it or not.
Then again, how do you achieve condensation of photons? You need to push them to the lowest energy state, but it's not like you can cool them down with liquid helium. And what exactly would be the lowest energy state for a particle that is made up entirely of energy?
This is where the plasmonic lattice comes to play, because it limits the lowest possible energy of the light that is coupled to it. If the photons somehow lose energy in the lattice, there is a certain point after which they will not be allowed to do so. There exists a ground state in this confining system!
The last problem to tackle is that you need a way to reduce the energy of the photons, without losing the photons in the process. This is a rather tricky problem, but there is a simple solution: add some laser dye into the lattice. The dye is able to absorb and re-emit the photons, but because the efficiency of this process is not 100 %, the light ends up losing energy.
Now, the photons can fall down to the ground state of the system and it's possible to achieve a Bose-Einstein condensate made entirely of light. This kind of condensate has many intriguing properties, but maybe I will talk about that in detail in some other post.
Maybe the coolest thing about all this is that the condensate exists inside a nanophotonic device, which can be fitted on a glass plate the size of a microscope slide. Not to mention that it can be done in room temperature, unlike traditional matter based condensates.
Quite importantly, this research shows that particles don't need to reach the lowest possible energy state for them to form a condensate. It's enough to just have them all confined in a single energy, and that can be anything. However, for matter particles the temperature causes a huge spread in their energies, so in practice matter condensates have to be cooled anyways.
Below is a brilliant video by the researchers at Aalto University, explaining the research in their own words. It's certainly worth checking out!
You may have encountered the popular claim that \( 0.999... = 1 \), where the three dots signify that the decimal continues forever. This is a somewhat weird claim, since it would mean that mathematics is broken. There should be no way for two different numbers to have the same value. What makes it weirder is that this is quite popular claim. I've even seen mathematicians say that it's true! But is it though? One popular proof is to first denote \( S = 0.999...\) and then multiply by \(10\) to get \( 10S = 9.999...\) and subtract \( S \) from it, to get \( 10S - S = 9.000...\) and finally dividing by \(9\) yields \( S = 1.000... = 1 \) and we see that \(0.999... = 1\)! However, there's a problem. This short derivation is not strictly speaking correct. It is veeeery close to being correct, and to see why let's look at finite decimals first. Let's say that \(S = 0.999\) (note that this is not the same as \(S = 0.999...\) ). Let's do the same trick as ...
It's that time of the year again, the time to look back on what was accomplished. I couldn't find the time or the energy to write this sooner, and I kind of left this to the last minute. But well, here it is now, the photonics news that really caught my eye this year: OSA Photo Contest winner Here is the photo that won this years annual OSA Photo Contest! Shot by Tobias Tieß from Leibniz-IPHT, Germany, the photo features a glass cup filled with fluoresciing liquid and a UV-laser is coupled into the handle of the cup. Quite nice effect, I must say. The rest of the contestants can be found here . Nobel prize The Nobel prize in physics was awarded "for groundbreaking inventions in the field of laser physics," To Donna Strickland, Gerad Mourou and Arthur Ashkin. I made a whole post on this, which you can find here for more info. SI system redefinition The SI system underwent a major overhaul! Or to be more precise, it was decided that it will be o...
Another year, another review. 2019 was quite a wild year for me, and whew, what a decade it has been! It's hard to imagine that at the beginning of the decade, I was still in high school. In chronological order, starting from 2010: I graduated from high school, served in the army, moved across the country, got my BSc, met five Nobel laureates, started a scicomm platform, got my MSc, moved abroad for work, moved back, got my PhD, got married, moved again across the country, and got a postdoc position. I don't think there will be another decade quite like this one for me! What was your year/decade like? Share in the comments! The winner of this years OSA photography contest, by Dr. Pascale Müller and Prof. Dr. Dan Curticapean: the cross section of a bean, imaged with a scanning electron microscope and digitally colored. Anyway, let's get to the sciencey stuff; here are the news that caught my eye from the past year: Nobel prize in physics This years Nobel prize...
Comments
Post a Comment