Slashdot Mirror


Stopping Light

Jon Abbott writes "NASA is reporting that physicists at Harvard University have managed to stop light altogether. The implications of this discovery are rather staggering -- quantum encryption and quantum computers might be just around the corner! " Well, I don't think this will mean any immediate changes - but it is a significant step.

243 comments

  1. All you have to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Is put CowboyNeal in front of the light beam. He would stop anything.

    1. Re:All you have to do by Bob+McCown · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      And if you shone the light just past him, maybe we'd get that neat light-bending effect that astronomers use to find planets.

    2. Re:All you have to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      " put CowboyNeal in front of the light beam. He would stop anything"


      I find that a MagLite shoved into ESR's colon is a more convincing display. Scientific observations show that the density of the light stopping matter there is never less that the equivalent of 150 linear meters of refined lead (Pb).
      On particularly good days when ESR is full of shit--that is to say, whenever he is writing-- the electromagnetic damping lead equivalence of ESR's lower bowel approaches 5000 meters of lead. These figures courtesy of the National Institutes of Standards and Technology. (NIST)

  2. Very, Very Slow Computers by waldoj · · Score: 4, Funny

    The implications of this discovery are rather staggering - quantum encryption and quantum computers might be just around the corner!

    Yeah...very, very, very slow quantum computers.

    ;)

    -Waldo Jaquith

    1. Re:Very, Very Slow Computers by redhatbox · · Score: 1, Funny


      See, I thought so too... then I came across this staggering news article from the Associated Press:

      Dateline: Slashdot

      In a shocking new development, computer researchers commonly referred to as "hackers" have made a disheartening discovery. Apparent claims by quantum physics researchers related to stopping light have been disproven. John L. Haxor, lead researcher for the team that disproved the claim, explains:

      You see, they didn't *actually* stop light. The software they were using to map the positions of discrete photons suffers from an "endless loop" condition. This causes the positional mapping of photon locations on their monitors to appear motionless.

      When asked for potential causes for this error, Mr. Haxor could only say:

      This situation clearly illustrates the danger of doing serious physics research while jacked up on Jolt colas and Marlboros. If we're gonna make any progress in this country, caffeine free diet Coke must be fully utilized by the research community.

      The errorneous research team could not be reached for comment.

    2. Re:Very, Very Slow Computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but I can't wait to be able to defrag those babies.

  3. Thats Nothing! by FortKnox · · Score: 1

    I was able to stop time!



    But only for a second...

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    1. Re:Thats Nothing! by daeley · · Score: 2

      There weren't a girl and a gold watch involved, were there?

      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    2. Re:Thats Nothing! by Evangelion · · Score: 1


      Nope, just him and his fingertips.

    3. Re:Thats Nothing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well i stopped it for almost an hour

      but nobody noticed it for obvious reasons

    4. Re:Thats Nothing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, all they had to do was redirect the light out into the Cambridge traffic. Anybody who's ever tried to drive and/or park in Cambridge knows that! Nothing moves!!

  4. Applications? by BlueOtto · · Score: 1

    What are the applications for pausing light? The article only spoke of applications for removing and creating light.

    1. Re:Applications? by MonkeyBot · · Score: 1

      There's all kinds of quantum parameters you could alter, and so you could do something like code data into the light's quantum parameters and be able to store HUGE amounts of data.
      You could also do cool shit like make light transistors for quantum computers--they wouldn't get that hot, and they'd move SCREAMINGLY fast.

    2. Re:Applications? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ultimate content protection - stopping you from reading the bits... :(

    3. Re:Applications? by tomson · · Score: 1

      you could do something like code data into the light's quantum parameters and be able to store HUGE amounts of data.

      Actually, it's been proven that you can only store a single classic bit in a qbit. At most, when both parties (sender and reciever) share two entangled qbits, you can send two classic bits using one qbit. But you'll destroy the entangled bits in the process.

      --
      I read slashdot for the articles.
    4. Re:Applications? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Let's just hope the RIAA doesn't get ahold of this.....

  5. Stopping light altogether? by InterruptDescriptorT · · Score: 2

    But what happens when light stops? It just doesn't sit there patiently for the next command, does it? I'm not a physics guy, but if light is energy, you just can't stop energy.

    Colour me confused.

    --
    Karma: Excellent Birds (mostly as a result of listening to Laurie Anderson)
    1. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Wire+Tap · · Score: 2, Informative

      you just can't stop energy.

      True, but you can contain it. Think of lead-acid batteries, flywheels, or any other energy storage device. The energy becomes somewhat of a potential (although in flywheels the energy is rotational), and can later be turned into useful energy.

      --

      Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains.

    2. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The energy of the light is stored in the spinning atoms. This energy causes them to change from a base quantum state to an excited state. When they shine the second laser on the atoms, the energy is released in the form of the original laser.

    3. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Masato · · Score: 3, Informative

      The energy itself isn't really "stopped", it's transformed into a different form. When the photons of light impact an atom, it leaves an imprint (in the form of a spin). So, each unique wavelength of light leaves a unique imprint which can then be fetched at a later date by another laser pulse (or so the article says) Hope that sheds some light on the subject. :P

    4. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Telastyn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From what I understand this is more akin to storage and retransmission.

      The energy itself I believe is lost, though the waveform of the light, and its pattern is stored in the arrangement/orientation of the atoms. Shining another light into the atoms causes the eminating light to be of the same waveform/pattern.

      A better analogy would be intercepting a streaming movie going across your network, waiting a while, and then re-transmitting it. You're not sending the same electrons, but you're sending the same bits.

    5. Re:Stopping light altogether? by FortKnox · · Score: 1

      but if light is energy

      Haven't had this discussion in years, so I, too, may be wrong. But IIRC Einstein proved that light is particles that moved like energy (in a waveform).

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    6. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Dances+with+Sheep · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My read is that it's just the information about the light that's stopping: wave amplitude and frequency. This information is imprinted on a non-moving medium (spin states of the atoms) and then released later when the atoms are excited: a wave released with the same properties of the incoming wave that was absorbed.

      I can't see what the technical reason is for saying dramatically that this information is "stored" and not "absorbed" - looks like it's just arguing about the spin [ :) ] of the story. I'm not a physics guy either and sometimes I think they try too hard to mystify and dramatize the terminology when it's moved from math to English (especially on "Isn't it a wonderful time to be alive"-NASA press releases).

    7. Re:Stopping light altogether? by DarkSkiesAhead · · Score: 2, Informative


      IIRC Einstein proved that light is particles that moved like energy (in a waveform).

      Sort of. It was shown that particles behave like waves and vice versa. Thus, since light is a wave it can also be thought of as a particle. We refer to this particle as a photon.

      However, it's not a particle in the same way as an electron or a cookie crumb. It has no mass and, thus, exists only in the form of energy.

    8. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Drakula · · Score: 1

      Actually, the energy, and photon, are stopped by the medium since the light is absorbed. The original photon itself is never restarted, just one that looks like it.

      --
      "It's comin' back around again..." -RATM
    9. Re:Stopping light altogether? by FortKnox · · Score: 1

      ohhh... k

      Thanks for clearin that up for me :-)

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    10. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so in other words, one block of matter used to "store" the light energy, can actually hold different states. say you had 255 different wavelengths to play with and store in there. you could store one in there, and have it represent 8 bits, all at once. right?

    11. Re:Stopping light altogether? by rhost89 · · Score: 1

      Look here for more information on wave & particle duality

      --
      I will bend your mind with my spoon
    12. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All your soapboxes are belong to us.

    13. Re:Stopping light altogether? by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 1

      or maybe a capacitor, that "stores" a voltage and then emits it when it's discharged.

    14. Re:Stopping light altogether? by naasking · · Score: 1

      nitpick: the energy is not lost (conservation). Perhaps you meant dissipated, or diffused.

    15. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ... Hope that sheds some light on the subject.
      *groan*
    16. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Eccles · · Score: 1

      What is this, sports-cliche time?

      >>you just can't stop energy.

      >True, but you can contain it.

      "You can't stop [], you can only hope to contain him..."

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    17. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Transcendent · · Score: 1

      A better analogy would be intercepting a streaming movie going across your network, waiting a while, and then re-transmitting it. You're not sending the same electrons, but you're sending the same bits.

      True.... you don't know for sure if it the same electron or photon being emmitted as the one that was originally fed into the bose-einstein condensate (the very very cold rubidium atoms which is actually a new state of matter), but the energy isn't really lost, it is simply held within the electron cloud (since the condensate is really one "large atom") of the condensate... then released once there is enough energy (which is given to it through the other lazer) to knock that photon out again...

    18. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the only one trying to mystify and dramatize the terminolorgy is the media.
      No serious physisist would try to convince you that the photon is stoped.
      Wasn't this story on slashdot like months ago anyway?

    19. Re:Stopping light altogether? by asobala · · Score: 1

      The energy itself I believe is lost

      Cool! Breaking the first law of thermodynamics at the same time, I believe ;-)

    20. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's grant-writing time, my good man ... for NASA all is possible. Just wait till cold-fusion runs nekked down Florida beaches.

    21. Re:Stopping light altogether? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then its not really "stopping light" in any more interesting a sense than any other process whereby photons are absorbed by atoms (e.g, standing in the sun, your clothes "stop light". Your clothes obviously don't store any states, but they do stop light. Especially black clothes. (Of course they re-emit the light energy as perhaps another photon of different wavelength or it is transferred into kinetic energy of particles, but the light is stopped)

      They way they put it made it sound a lot more exciting, as if they'd slowed down and suspended an individual photon or something.

  6. Last year by 0xB · · Score: 5, Informative

    And here's the story from when it was news, last year.

    --
    0xB
    1. Re:Last year by 0xB · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      0xB
    2. Re:Last year by CTalkobt · · Score: 1

      It's not that it's a year old - it's just that somebody actually figured out how to stop time based upon this and is now posting it to slashdot...

      Wait...

      That didn't make sense...

      --
      There's a gorilla from Manilla whose a fella that stinks of vanilla and has salmonella.
    3. Re:Last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That's nothing. NBC revealed today that it was the fire, not the impact, that caused the WTC to collapse; you may remember hearing this theory, oh, every day for nearly a month after the fucking attacks!

      I know they've shipped Brokaw off to Israel, but there has to be someone there who can keep track of stories without getting distracted by the shiny 3D animations.

  7. slow glass... by cowtamer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There was an old sci-fi story about "slow glass" where people would let these light-storing windows in interesting places and then sell them.

    This really sounds like a cool way of storing holographic data (which means storing a LOT of information in a small space)

    1. Re:slow glass... by stoolpigeon · · Score: 2

      yeah-- that was an awesome short story. I read it in an anthology I think.

      The guy looks at the various pieces that have been out in the woods, etc. for various periods of time.

      All the while watching the family of the guy selling the glass- through the front window of their house.

      That's the one right?

      I would love to know the title and the author. Very, very good story.

      .

      --
      It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    2. Re:slow glass... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi,

      The Light of Other Days by Bob Shaw. It appeared in Analog in 1966.

      A search on Google shows an updated version by non other than Aurthur C. Clarke.

      http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/nonfiction/otherda ys .htm

    3. Re:slow glass... by Seth+Finkelstein · · Score: 2
      The first story was Light Of Other Days

      The various "Slow Glass" stories are a series written by Bob Shaw

      Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)

    4. Re:slow glass... by WinPimp2K · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Light of Other Days"
      Bob Shaw
      First came out in '66

      Still gives me a lump in my throat just thinking about it.

      --

      You either believe in rational thought or you don't
    5. Re:slow glass... by bonk · · Score: 1

      We had this conversation in the other slashdot article about stopping light...

      --
      I hope to die peacefully in my sleep like grandpa, not screaming like his passengers.
    6. Re:slow glass... by lonesome+phreak · · Score: 1

      I loved that book. I especially like the suprise ending, with the methane based creatures that was completely unexpected. I re-read that one part half a dozen times. And the whole pulling people out of history by copying their brain...awesome.

      --
      Maybe we DID take the blue pill. You wouldn't remember anyway.
    7. Re:slow glass... by FurryFeet · · Score: 1

      If you want the read the story, it is online.
      Right here

    8. Re:slow glass... by wjr · · Score: 1

      Bob Shaw. Light of Other Days. It's most commonly seen as a short story, but also appeared as the centrepiece in a novel called (big surprise) "Slow Glass".

    9. Re:slow glass... by jeff's+cape+shop · · Score: 1

      erm, what book is this? - i take it not the one about slow glass.. ?

  8. seems like... by ultramk · · Score: 5, Funny
    --
    You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
  9. whoa! by TheCyko1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    wow... so they finally found the light switch... -Cyko

    --
    This message was brought to you by the death of 30 brain cells.
    1. Re:whoa! by kerrbear · · Score: 2
      wow... so they finally found the light switch...

      Hey, I just managed to stop light by shining my flashlight at the wall. When I looked on the other side of the wall- NO LIGHT WAS COMING THROUGH!

  10. Maybe now I can... by MonkeyBot · · Score: 1

    ...stop that damn beam of light that hits my eyes every friggin' morning at 6:30am.

  11. They did NOT stop light! by forand · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ok this is just a point of fact: they did not stop light! They stored the information contained initially in a light wave in a new medium that they had control over, then were able to stimulate the medium to get it to re-emit.

    1. Re:They did NOT stop light! by -=OmegaMan=- · · Score: 1

      I didn't run that red light, my car did! I was merely along for the ride! ;p

      --

      This sig is xenon coated, and will glow red when in the presence of aliens

    2. Re:They did NOT stop light! by MonkeyBot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They stored the information AND the energy associated with light, didn't they? The medium absorbed the energy and the information associated with the photons in one side of the medium, then re-emited it out of the other side (albeit with stimulation), so how is that not stopping it?
      Either the photons stopped, or they are floating around in the imaginary universe you live in (just kidding).
      Just because you are storing it in a different form doesn't mean you aren't stopping it. Yeah, they may not be the exact same photons, but since photons are massless particles anyways, it's hard to define the Newtonian definition of "stopping" and "going."

    3. Re:They did NOT stop light! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's been awhile since my quantum mechanics classes but I believe that storing all the quanum properties of a photon and imprinting them onto another is essintially the same thing as stopping and starting it.

      Since a particle or photon is defined as the sum of all of its properties, if you are able to create another instance of the photon that has all of those properties, you've managed to duplicate the photon. It is, for all intents and purposes, the _same_ photon.

      Fortunately, no two quantum particles can share the same properties. So as soon as you, form your duplicate, the original ceases to exist. (Technically, the uncertainty princple says that it ceased to be the same particle as soon as you started measuing the properties in the first place.)

      Back when I heard about teleportation experiments they were doing just that. A photon's quantum properties were measured and imparted them to another photon some distance away. According the quantum mechanics, the photon teleported.

      It sounds like a similar process may be happening here.

    4. Re:They did NOT stop light! by Monte · · Score: 1

      They stored the information AND the energy associated with light, didn't they?

      No, I don't think so (although I could be very mistaken, I know little about quantum physics. Or any other for that matter). From the story:

      "Freeing such a stored pulse is easy: another laser beam directed through the chamber can release it."

      Which makes me believe they've discovered a way to "record" light, rather than "stop" it. If they had a gadget they should shine a laser into, shut the laser off and put it in a closet, then next week press a button on the gadget (sans any laser) and ZINGO! out comes a coherent beam: that would be "stopping light".

      If I'm misunderstanding this I'd appreciate any illumination (snort) that could be spared.

    5. Re:They did NOT stop light! by Drakula · · Score: 1

      Your are right that the result is essentially stopped light but you have something a little wrong.

      Photons are bosons. Two bosons *can* have the same properties. Since the photon that is emitted by the medium has the same properties it appears that the light was actually stop by the medium. The inability to disguish between two photons in the same state is what makes it appear that the light has stopped.

      Fermions, such as electrons, cannot be in thesame exact state at the same time. The reason for this comes from the Pauli exclusion principle not the uncertainty principle.

      The teleportation effect has to do with entanglement of photons, which is something I know little about but the process is very different.

      Hopefully I haven't made any mistakes here, please correct me if I have.

      --
      "It's comin' back around again..." -RATM
    6. Re:They did NOT stop light! by inburito · · Score: 2

      the question really is: how do you define light?

      simple answer: electromagnetic waves.
      more fundamental answer: energy

      What did these scientists do? They directed a light into a cell of rubidium gas. As light goes through this gas it constantly excites atoms and these atoms lose their excited state a moment later and re-emit the pulse that originally excited them. This goes on constantly. So in a sense you can call this normal behaviour of light. This is also why light slows down in any material.

      Now what happened was that they froze this process and later could restart it. So in a sense they really did stop light. As light is nothing but energy to begin with it really is not even recording. By recording you're saving information about something. In this case you're storing the actual energy in the excited states of atom. In a sense the light is hibernating..

      The button in your hypothetical gadget in this case is nothing but a trigger for a laser beam that causes the atoms to release their stored energy and thus release the "stopped" light.

    7. Re:They did NOT stop light! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be very careful of your criticism. The semantics to describe what they actually did don't exist. Terms like stop and go are relevant in known contexts. The term 'stop' might be relevant in this context...it may not. Don't be so quick to judge something you don't understand, how could you this is the first time it has happened. Wow, what an amazing age in which we live.

      Skip019283

    8. Re:They did NOT stop light! by Genady · · Score: 1

      YEAH! So like...

      %light = { properties => 'something' };

      $condensate = (\%light);

      print $condensate->{properties} . "\n";

      --


      What if it is just turtles all the way down?
    9. Re:They did NOT stop light! by budgenator · · Score: 2

      I am not a quantum mechanic but it has to be said that we do not know what light or anything is. All we know about light is that it is a thingy that displays certain properties such as mass, energy, velocity, position, spin, quantum number ect. Sort of like the blind men describing an elephant, the guy examining the trunk sees something very different from the one examining the tail.

      So What is a particle? It's a thing that has specific and unique properties, therfore when two things aquire the exact same properties, they have become one particle! If you make liquid hellium out of a specific isotope, and cool it to a certian temperature, all of the individual atoms aquire the exact same quantum properties and become one particle. That means that we can make a quantum partical that is big enough to physicaly see with the naked eye. One warning, if you ever actualy understand quantum mechanic, your mental state would be indistingishable from insanity.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    10. Re:They did NOT stop light! by Drakula · · Score: 1

      A few points:

      1) Light has zero mass.

      2) All quantum mechanics tries to do is describe how these thingies interact, not what there appearance is.

      3) A particle does not necessarily have unique properties. As I said previously, two bosons can have the exact same properties and still be different particles. They *appear* to be the same particle because they have the identical properties and are therefore indistinguishable (sp) from each other.

      4) Atoms are made of particles. The Bose-Einstein condensate you describe is made of many atoms. Although they are all in the same state, they are still many particles and they just react in unison to external stimuli. You could actually probe each individual atom but you could never tell any one atom apart from the others since they all "look" alike.

      5) We indirectly see quantum particles all the time. However, our interaction with them is completely classical on our scale. Therefore calling them quantum particles doesn't make much sense. A baseball is made of quantum particles and can be seen by the naked eye. However, it behaves classically and I don't believe anyone woul call it a quantum particle.

      6) Absolutely true, no one truly understands the meaning of quantum mechanics. However, it is possible to understand the machinery of the theory and apply it to problems. Understanding how the results come about is not the same thing as understanding why the theory is correct, besides its mathematical correctness etc.

      Thanks for your time...

      --
      "It's comin' back around again..." -RATM
  12. Fun with photons and your mom's jewellry! by El+Jynx · · Score: 1

    An interesting one, although I remember /. posting the comment before. The concept really gets into gear, though, when you consider the guys who have been creating optical computers using a diamond spinning at very high speeds (they are able to perform calculations by creating minuite variations in the speed of the spinning crystal). If you can make a calculation, flash it to your new 'hard disk' (or rather, gas-light tank) and beam it out again whenever you need it, all at the speed of light and no resistance if done in a vacuum, then you get very energy-efficient, relatively easy/cheap to build computers. I don't know what their speeds would be compared to today's computers - probably lower, since electronics is quite a few generations ahead in development - but the potential is enough to be interesting.

    - Jynx

    --
    A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it well worth the effort.
  13. I Own This Patent by SlipJig · · Score: 1

    I'm able to stop light with my bare hands (or at least scatter and reflect it ;)

    --
    Read my keyboard review.
  14. Great by sharkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    It was not destroyed or absorbed, but rather stored -- ready to emerge intact at the scientists' bidding.

    I can just see physicists getting calling people into the lab, turning out the lights and commanding, "Let There Be LIGHT!!!" at every available opportunity

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    1. Re:Great by k2enemy · · Score: 1
      I can just see physicists getting calling people into the lab, turning out the lights and commanding, "Let There Be LIGHT!!!" at every available opportunity

      i can already do that trick in my office. with the lightswitch.

  15. My Town has tons of theses. by BiggestPOS · · Score: 5, Funny

    They tend to call them "Red Lights" though. I wanna transporter, now.

    --
    What, me worry?
  16. Erm... by daeley · · Score: 2

    Wasn't this story just on /. a few weeks ago?

    --
    I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    1. Re:Erm... by daeley · · Score: 2
      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    2. Re:Erm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I KNEW IT! There really are no new stories, just rehashed paraphrases of previous slashdot articles!

  17. If the computer uses a mist to store data... by Teancom · · Score: 2

    it lends a whole new meaning to breaking something by "letting the smoke out".

    :-)

  18. We have those... by BlindSpot · · Score: 1

    In fact, there are several stopping lights at intersections just blocks from my house!

  19. Warm Vapors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >>Walsworth's group used warm rubidium vapors to pause their laser beam

    I've noticed that occasionally somone will use warm and silent vapors to pause conversation in the elevator.

    white dude

  20. this is what happens by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 2

    Light isnt actually stopped it is absorbed by the atoms in the medium.

    So those atoms go on a higher energy state, as a result of the light they have absorbed.

    When they shine another laser on the medium the atoms emit the energy they had previously absorbed, in the form of the same kind of light that came in.

  21. Shouldn't it be pausing light? by FXSTD · · Score: 1

    After stopping light is pretty easy, it's the pausing that tuff.

  22. Nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Stop light? This is nothing new. We have stop lights at every major intersection.

  23. Hasn't this been done already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't this done not too long ago? Using a relatively similar method?

  24. More Information by propstoalldeadhomiez · · Score: 1, Informative

    There's an explanation of why stopping light could lead to advances in quantum computing here.

    There's also some news about it here at Harvard's site. Also, there's an article here in Scientific American about this.

    Didn't this all happen last year, too? Why is it just news now?

    --

    Jack Buck (1924-2002)
    Darryl Kile (1968-2002)
  25. A little outdated are we? by cicci0 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I must have read a story like this at least 4 times in the last year. Here's an example - http://hackensackhigh.org/light.html Looks like one of the monkeys at /. was playing with his bannana

  26. This is old OLD news by HanzoSan · · Score: 2

    They stopped light last year. Theres even a guy whos trying to rewind light.

    This is just old news, The way light was stopped before was they used extreme cold to slow light down until it stopped.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:This is old OLD news by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 2
      This was, by far, the best post in this discussion.


      Of course, it's going to be even funnier when somebody gives it an 'informative' mod...

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
  27. Implications for Solar Power by Niherlas · · Score: 0, Insightful

    So here's an interesting thought.

    We can stop and "store" light.

    So play blue-sky sci-fi author for a moment. Enormous dirigibles floating above the cloud layer, absorbing and storing light until "full", then coming to ground and offloading the light they've "mined" into solar cells (which no longer have to be laid out in flat arrays covering enormous fields) for conversion into electricity.

    Hasn't that always been one of the problems, after all? There's plenty of bright, uninterrupted light available in the upper atmosphere, but the thought was always to convert it to electricity *up there* and somehow transmit the energy to ground level.

    Maybe we'll just be able to mine the light.

    Scary.

    --
    -- Niherlas
    1. Re:Implications for Solar Power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      as far as i can see from the article, its not
      energy being stored and re-transmitted, its
      only the information in the light.

      or am i wrong? please clarify...

    2. Re:Implications for Solar Power by bloggins02 · · Score: 1

      Sounds good, one problem though:

      They didn't store the energy of the photons, they stored and retransmitted the information from the original light source.

      What you are talking about is finding a way to store huge amounts of energetic photons in such a way that they are in some sort of "stasis" until they need to be released again. Sorry to say, but this definitely HASN'T been done.

      Now, if you were to find a way in which we could have photons strike a large group of atoms (thereby driving them to their next highest energy state) but then somehow keep them from returning to their natural state by releasing another photon until we wanted them to, then we might have something. Photonic batteries anyone?

      Anyway, don't hold your breath. But hey, if you want to get started on it, please be my guest, maybe I can bum a few billion bucks off of you in 40 years :)

    3. Re:Implications for Solar Power by Monte · · Score: 1

      From what I read in the article you need (at least) as much power to "release" the light as you "stored" in the first place. The interesting thing is that all the information about the incoming light was stored, not that you could "save" some light and "let it out" later.

    4. Re:Implications for Solar Power by volsung · · Score: 2

      Actually, the biggest problem is the conversion of sunlight to a more useful form of energy. Photovoltaics suck big time in the cost and efficiency departments. Places with no shortage of sunlight (like Arizona) can't use solar power for even a modest fraction of their power generation needs.

    5. Re:Implications for Solar Power by Niherlas · · Score: 1

      Good replies. I did comment that I was playing "blue-sky sci-fi author" - take one little development and run with it. But it's good to see the serious consideration.

      --
      -- Niherlas
  28. I'm not impressed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll be impressed when they can slow light down in a bose-einstein condensate, stop it, and then make it move backwards...

  29. This really is vaporware!!! by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 5, Funny
    From the article Walsworth and Hau used vapors (rubidium and sodium) to pause light. Will the insides of quantum computers be vaporous as well?
    So it truly is vaporware!

    --
    And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
  30. I wonder what the information density is by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 2

    could this be used for really high density portable storage?

    Would shaking the storage container make atoms discharge and ruin the whole thing?

    1. Re:I wonder what the information density is by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      I would think that it would be finit because you can only use one photon per atom....though it would be in the trillions for one cubic centemeter of matter....but that would be trillions of bits....imagin the digital photograph applications!!!! you would not need to translate photons to electrons to signals to pixils, you can get a digital picture but it would be a sharp and clear as a traditional photo!!! how cool is that?

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  31. Re:What's with the throwaway lines? by Jon+Abbott · · Score: 2


    What's worse is that he removed the end of my story submission to make room for the quip. FWIW, this is how the original story submission went:

    Jon Abbott writes "NASA is reporting that physicists at Harvard University have managed to stop light altogether . The implications of this discovery are rather staggering -- quantum encryption and quantum computers might be just around the corner! <coffee-talk>Discuss.</coffee-talk>"

  32. OOOoooooo.... by NanoGator · · Score: 2

    Do you have any idea how many atoms you can fit in something the size of a CD? That's a lot of data to store MP3's on!

    --
    "Derp de derp."
    1. Re:OOOoooooo.... by Takeel · · Score: 2, Funny

      You misspelled "porn."

  33. lot more than quantum... by jeffy124 · · Score: 1

    stopping light can actually be used for information storage -- ie hard disks. Doing so would increase the amount of storage space incredibly (less space needed for data), reliability would go up (ie, less chance of disk failure), and data transfer speed would finally match CPU speed (no more RAID arrays, and maybe even no more I/O caching).

    --
    The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
    1. Re:lot more than quantum... by delta407 · · Score: 1

      Reliability would not go up. Think about this: what happens when you read the data back? Well, you'd have to make the light move again. Great, but what happens when you read it again? There's no more stored light, so there's nothing you could get out of this.

      You could, of course, read it and re-write it. But, this, too, has problems with it -- you need lasers to do all your dirty work, so you're still limited by the speed of the switching electronics on them. Hmm...

      Basically, without some serious work being done, this can't become the mass storage revolution we're all hoping for.

    2. Re:lot more than quantum... by jeffy124 · · Score: 1

      well, i never said all that was going to be easy (or cheap for that matter). I was actually refering to reliability in terms of how current hard disks risk failure from the movements required for the disk arm, platters, etc. With stopped-light disks, most of that movement is eliminated and given to hard-wired components (which also risk failure, just not as badly as current hd's).

      --
      The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
    3. Re:lot more than quantum... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you need ASM to build a C compiler. eventually, maybe we can build optically controlled lasers, but for tomorrow, we'll have to stick to the "slow" electronic ones. (in *your* lifetime at least. =p)

  34. p=mv by loydcc · · Score: 3, Interesting
    If the momentum of the particle nature of light is true then it's mass must be infinate if velocity is zero. But that doesn't say anything about it's wave nature. Since the light is stopped we know it's momentum. So we can't know it's position. Since the light is contained in an area we know it's approximate position but not it's certain position. Therefore the light is not actually stopped as position has some wiggle room. Which ipmlies a change in position over time.

    I just don't believe they stopped the light.

    1. Re:p=mv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incorrect formula for momentum of light. Only applies to particles with mass.

      On top of that, you're mangling the uncertainty principle. Uncertainty in position merely means there is a probability distribution as to where the particle is, not that its moving and we don't know where.

    2. Re:p=mv by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 2

      Not quite (as somebody pointed out, p=mv isn't correct for photons, or, for that matter, when v gets up to a significant fraction of c). However, what is correct is that, because photons are massless, they cannot move at a speed less than c -- A photon is always travelling at 3e8 m/s. So you're right in thinking that they didn't stop the photons (which is certainly what 'stopping light' implies.)

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    3. Re:p=mv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sigh... People always quote "p=mv" and "E=mc^2" when making silly arguments, to pretend like they know physics. The first is a nonrelativistic relation, utterly irrelevant for anything moving near the speed of light. The latter is only partially true; it's the *rest energy*. The correct formula in general is E^2 = m^2 c^4 + p^2 c^2. For light this gives you E = pc since light is massless. Relativistically, we have p = mv/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) for particles with mass. For light, we have p = hf/c, where f is the frequency.

      Now that we have that out of the way: yes, Heisenberg uncertainty tells us Delta(p)Delta(q)>=h/(4pi) for uncertainties in position q and momentum p. This is valid in general, including for light. But when they say they "stopped" light, they mean that it has somehow been encoded within an atomic system - so Delta(p) is not exactly zero. Keep in mind that h is pretty tiny, so we can know position and momentum pretty well even for very small objects.

    4. Re:p=mv by maaleron · · Score: 1

      Not quite. A photon travels at 3e8 m/s in a vacuum. However, in any other material it travels slower. It's this property that allows us to do the fancy tricks in say, fiber optics.

    5. Re:p=mv by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 2
      Nope. The average speed of photons propagating through a material is slower than 3e8 m/s, but the photons themselves always travel at that speed. (Remember, to a photon, even the densest materials look like a vacuum with an occasional particle.)


      When we say that light 'slows down' in a material, what is happenning is that the photons are hitting the atoms inside and being absorbed/reemmitted - not always in the same direction, and not instantaneously. Thus, the forward progress of the 'light pulse' is slowed, but not the photons themselves.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
  35. The military most likely will use this by HanzoSan · · Score: 1

    For PSY - Ops, most likely for holograms to confuse and disorient enemies. Kinda like that machine the holodeck from startrek

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:The military most likely will use this by 0xB · · Score: 1

      The massive lasers - two for each molecule - will be a bit of a giveaway though.

      --
      0xB
  36. makes you wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do the slashdot editors _even_ read the site? This is old news!

  37. Liar! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They did not (and never will) be able to slow down light. What they DID do is much like (okay, the same thing as) having a beam of light reflect between two perfectly reflective, clear and parallel mirrors. The photon that is re-emitted by an excited atom is not the same photon that entered the atom as they have differing vectors (which is a fundamental attribute of a particle).

    1. Re:Liar! by delta407 · · Score: 2, Informative

      We've known that light can slow down since 1850. The speed of light does change when traveling through various things, depending on its index of refraction. So, you are not correct -- light can be and is slowed down easily.

  38. Re:What's with the throwaway lines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I guess that's almost as lame as some antiquated checkbook program on SourceForge.

    You're a stupid fucking loser.

  39. The worst part about this story by sllort · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is not that it's a year old Slashdot repeat; we're used to that. The problem is that the whole "stopping light" headline that all the mainstream journalists (who should know better) carry on it is baloney.

    If a photon (light) hits an atom (matter), causing it's electrons to move to a more excited energy level, I defy you to "show me the light". You can't. You can show me a really excited electron, and if you're really clever like these folks at Harvard you can even get that atom to release the exact same light with the exact same waveform, but you haven't stopped light.

    It's annoying. How hard is it to say you've "trapped" light?

    1. Re:The worst part about this story by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      oh wait, never mind, I was going to say that you can do it with lasers, but that was the bose-einstein condensate

      :-p

      though I do think that they stoped light with lasers...just can't seem to find the story.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    2. Re:The worst part about this story by Lupus+Rufus · · Score: 1

      The problem is that nothing in quantum physics really "exists" per se. Quantum physics is a mathematical system for describing the bizarre things that have been observed in experiment, such as how photons act like particles in some experiments and like waves (less definite objects) in others. If two photons have the same quantum properties (frequency, direction) then according to theory, they might as well be the same photon, for quantum physics has no way to distinguish two such similar photons. The point being, if the photons look the same, they are the same (in theory).

      --

      Aren't you dead?

    3. Re:The worst part about this story by 56ker · · Score: 1

      I think someone should come up with a word for : I've seen it on the web somewhere - but I just can't find it anymore - it exists I tell you! :o)

  40. Tiwice Before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
  41. That explains it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, that article explains the traffic problems on Mass. Ave. If they would stop messing with the traffic lights I might be able to get around.

  42. It's not a throwaway line. by jcsehak · · Score: 3, Interesting


    He means that it won't mean any significant changes in how we build computers--that is, quantum comptuers are still a ways away. But it is a VERY significant step. If you read the article, they explain how they stopped a laser beam and turned it into information, stored in the up-and-down patterns of the vapor's atom's spin axes.

    I mean, you don't have to be a scientist to imagine the possibilities of a vaporous hard drive, with a huge capacity, that gets written to by a laser that changes the state of the atoms within. Drool...

    And the best part is no more annoying spinning noise!

    --

    c-hack.com |
    1. Re:It's not a throwaway line. by nomadic · · Score: 2

      Well, I think his point is that this is an incredibly complex and esoteric subject, and to make vague pronouncements on it is a little pompous. I mean, maybe he does have an advanced degree in physics with a concentration in quantum mechanics, but if so why not tell us exactly why it won't result in advances anytime soon?

    2. Re:It's not a throwaway line. by Warped-Reality · · Score: 1


      I mean, you don't have to be a scientist to imagine the possibilities of a vaporous hard drive, with a huge capacity, that gets written to by a laser that changes the state of the atoms within. Drool..


      Wouldn't it be hard to read off of said hard drive? How would you know which atoms hold which data if the particles in the vapor are floating around, mixing with each other?

      --
      This is not the greatest sig in the world, no. This is just a tribute.
    3. Re:It's not a throwaway line. by jcsehak · · Score: 2

      We won't see any changes in products today for the simple reason that it takes years for any technology to move from the lab to your bedroom.

      How would you know which atoms hold which data if the particles in the vapor are floating around, mixing with each other?

      Beats me. All I know is that the article said that they shone a laser into the vapor, the beam got converted into information stored in the atom's spin axes, and they later used this information to shoot another laser beam with identitcal qualities, effectively pausing a beam of light. HOW they did it is way beyond me. As far as I know, it was magic, and anyone who uses a computer with that technology will have to make an Intelligence check every time they boot up and look at pr0n. But then again, we already do that anyway (and fail)...

      --

      c-hack.com |
  43. Things are going to change...very soon by Orangedog_on_crack · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are a handful new (or at least vastly improved) technologies that will be developed and put into use in the near future that will rival the changes ushered in by the developement of the microchip. This could happen much sooner than most people think, maybe as soon as 4 or 5 years. Quantum computing will be one. It will be crude and a lot of people will look upon it the same the that the Altair or the GUI developed by Werox PARC, but advances will happen fast once things get moving. Nanotechnology will be another. Tiny machines that can clean out clogged arteries will be "neat" but this will really be useful in materials developement. Once we can custom build materials at the atomic level, things will get interesting in a hurry. Being able to stop light is something that sounds pretty obscure, but then so was a little hunk of silicon Bell Labs touted 50 some years ago. I've talked to some people who were working in the electronics industry when the transistor was first talked about. A lot of them at the time thought "Well, that's neat, but that thing will never be able to handle any serious current. Intel made a real gamble in the 70's with their little "calculator-on-a-chip", the microprocessor, that they made in the hopes of selling it to a Japanese calculator manufacturer. It will be interesting to see what comes down the road from what these people did with stopping light.

  44. Discover Magazine by Mondrames · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    The most recent edition of Discover has an article on quantum encryption using single photons.

    Basically they shoot a laser through a heavy filter, emitting only one photon. The Sender and Receiver exchange pads including what group of spins(Horizontal/Vertical, or the diag's) on each photon contains information. An Evesdropper has a 50% chance of guessing which one, and retransmiting that. The article state that on average 25% of the photons would be incorrect if your conversation was being intercepted due to wrong guesses by the snooper.
    Pretty Neat - but they say it'll be at least 10 years for something that consumers can plug into a wall...

  45. Not Exactly... by meggito · · Score: 1

    It seems the scientists didn't really stop light, but rather imprinted it onto atoms, and them by shining another laser through they could repricate the original light. Now, this is quite useful but not the same thing as stopping light alltogether. For example, this couldn't be done in a vacuum such as space just because there are no (or very few) atoms to imprint upon.

    As for quantum computing this is a big step. They have basically discovered how to imprint something onto atoms, each of which could be a bit (or trit or more, depending on how they implement it) so basically you have an immense ammount of storage in a very small space. Between this and the speed of light that signals would be sent with, you would have a very fast computer with enormous ammounts of memory.

    Oh, and as for portable storage, a floppy disk will be able to hold terrabytes of information.

  46. Hypothetically... by bucktug · · Score: 1

    If someone wanted to transport a highly sensitive document over the world without using a network. I could see light waves being a highly secure medium. Send 4 encrypted "bottles of light" to the destination... and have each one of the bottles be 1/4 of the information. If someone steals on of the 4 bottles... or if one of them is damaged... no message is recieved at the other end.

    Granted the machinary that would pick up a half meter of light from a "bottle of light" would have to do a lot of quick calculation... unless they released it slowly... like their previous experiments to get light to move at a bicycles pace.
    The nice thing about light as a storage medium is that the molocules would be infinely close in proximity of one another. If a given the burst technology existed I guess the only thing slowing this down would be the pulse rate that could be achieved from a laser source. I could imagine a line of light, no longer than a football field that contains more information than the current internet.

    --Turvey

    --
    I had a flame... but she had a fire.
  47. Time Travel ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...And now we can accidentally bumb our head against the toilet bowl and come up with an idea of a flux capacitor...that makes time-travel possible :)

  48. Great news for quantum computing by laertes · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've noticed a couple of people wondering why this discovery important. Some other people know that it is useful for quantum computing, but they don't know how it would be useful. I'll see if I can help.

    The most common way qubits are stored in quantum computers is as spin, which can be thought of as angular momentum, quantum-style. The particle usually used for this task is the electron. So, now we've got the qubit stored as spin, but how do we get the different particle's spin states to interact? If we can't get them to interact, we can't do any computation, so this is a very important question.

    The most successful quantum computers (those with 7 qubits) so far use Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) to make the qubits interact. This has it's problems, and would not be appropriate for a real quantum computer. So, to make a real (ie. Desktop) QC, we need something better.

    This story talks about a method of turning information stored in light (as amplitude, IIRC) into spin. This sort of translation is exactly what is needed to make quantum computers work. An example QC could use a bunch of atom's as the memory system, with all of the qubits encoded as spin on the electrons orbiting the atoms. The CPU would be a bunch of optical components (beam splitters, polarizers, mirrors, etc.) that operate kind of like transistors. And the wires would just be fiber optics. Now, this is a little simplified, because it assumes we can make atomic scale optical components, but I am confident that it will happen soon.

    Hope this helps some people understand why this is Stuff that matters.

    --

    Yes, I'm still a junky. Are you still a bitch?
    1. Re:Great news for quantum computing by naasking · · Score: 1

      We do currently have molecular-scale optical waveguides, so the tech in this area is not that far off.

  49. Could you and your friends be referred to as ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ClockStoppers, could we?

  50. Fine, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can they synchronize the stop LIGHTS in Harvar Square so they at least maximize the traffic flow? Jeez that burns me up each time I see it.

    tone

  51. news: physicists build a stop light! by augros · · Score: 1

    forget about quantum computer applications - what i want to know is how long will it be before we can catch daylight, in say a chamber on my roof, and re-emit in via lamp-like gizmos in my house at night. i *really* look forward to tossing all my incandescent and florescents out the window. that'll put the "happy light" people out of business. hey! flashlights without batteries or bulbs!

    1. Re:news: physicists build a stop light! by tperi · · Score: 1

      Why do that, when we could do this: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/9357/

  52. Doesn't it mean the opposite? by gralem · · Score: 1

    Couldn't this actually mean there would be a way to crack any quantum encryption scheme? Wouldn't this mean that you could examine light without the impact of the heisenberg uncertainty principle, therefore see the attributes of the light? Then you record the quantum attributes of each photon and recreate all possible messages that could be sent by the encryption. The presumption, of course, is that with sufficiently slow photons the uncertainty principle will no longer apply.

  53. Immediately useful applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In other news, this exciting, "light-stopper" technology will be used in filming the upcoming movie "The Matrix II".
    Just imagine it. An agent shoots Neo with a laser pistol, and it stops in midair, allowing Keanu to easily dodge it. This will cut the special effects costs in half!

  54. How I learned to love the bomb sorta by Graymalkin · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is the four thousandth time this article has been posted here and it is still doesn't follow. Nobody is freezing photons, they're just getting them stuck in the middle of some molecules so they have to wait for another laser to be able to knock the photons loose again. Stopping photons is not the same as trapping them.

    --
    I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    1. Re:How I learned to love the bomb sorta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh thats completely incorrect, these photons are not being traped either.

    2. Re:How I learned to love the bomb sorta by lkaos · · Score: 2

      That's the problem with quantum mechanics. The mechanisms are so odd, that many words used to describe it give a false idea of what is actually happening. Light is being slowed most certainly, to the point where one could say that it is stopped. Remember though, light does not have mass, so it is not analogous to slowing down a baseball until its caught.

      Likewise, thinking of it in terms of an atom absorbing the photon is incorrect. It's not the same as dropping a bit of dye into a glass of water, where the water absorbs the photon. It's also not a trap for the photon.

      The first thing in understanding quantum mechanics is to first accept that atoms have no real-world counterpart. One cannot imagine an atom or subatomic particles as we imagine physical objects.

      Its whacky stuff.

      --
      int func(int a);
      func((b += 3, b));
  55. I'm a bit spooked out by CrazyJim0 · · Score: 1

    By the picture in the article.
    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/ images/sto plight/qubits_med.gif

    WTF is that supposed to represent? A bunch of frowny 1 and 0 guys mad at some happy guy who has a 1 and a 0?

    1. Re:I'm a bit spooked out by Vancouverite · · Score: 1

      A Qubit (or Quantum Bit) is a mix of all states. The image shows one qubit as a mix of 0 state (black) and 1 state (white).

      --
      We are the Music Makers, and We are the Dreamers of Dreams...
    2. Re:I'm a bit spooked out by Sycle · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's a pretty stupid, unhelpful image for what's supposed to be a serious topic.

      But I found a diagram that explains it much better. (bottom left frame)

  56. Quantum Computing with Perl by medcalf · · Score: 4, Funny

    my @quanta;

    @quanta=;

    foreach $quanta (@quantum)
    {
    warn "DAMN! destroyed my data by reading it again!\n";
    }

    --
    -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    1. Re:Quantum Computing with Perl by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

      Even better:

      my %quanta;

      $quanta($key} = $value ;

      if (exists($quanta{$key})) { #Always true because if you observe it, it must exist?

      print $quanta{$key}, "\n"; #Oops! fails because you observed it before you printed it!

      print $quanta{$key}, "\n"; # Now it works!

      }
      or

      while(($key, $value) = each(%quanta)) {

      #do something

      } #never exists as new key/value pairs spring into existence/disappear into nothingness when you examine the hash.

      Autovivication with a vengence!!

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  57. Light wasn't stopped. Misleading headline. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Slashdot and articles in general on the net are so misleading when it comes to anything related to physics. Where do you people come from? Leave the physics to physicist. Anyway, they didn't "stop" light. This is nothing more than a simple setup (in theory) that's based on what any grad physics student must do (time dependant pertubation theory). The light perturbs the spin 1/2 states of the Rb with off diagonal matrix elements that mix states. The polarization of the light with respect to the Rb is also very important. The physics going on here is what you could call Rabi flops. It's a simple time dependant pertubation theory problem that is exactly solvable and can be reduced to two by two subspaces. As far as the physics goes, they've done nothing all that new or exciting. The only advances they've made are perhaps technical advances in setting things up.

  58. Re:Doesn't it mean the opposite? No, it doesn't by Vancouverite · · Score: 1
    If you read the article, this is touched on.
    Quantum communication might someday be used for sending ultra-secure messages. One of the quintessential traits of the quantum world is that observing a system actually alters that system's properties. In other words, it would be impossible to "touch" a quantum message without leaving "fingerprints."

    "So there's no way to intercept messages, break the code, send them on, and have the receiver not know about it," Walsworth says.

    Also, you don't actually get to examine the photons. The information about the photons is stored in the spin state of the atoms involved in 'stopping' the light. In effect, the photons no longer exist as separate, discrete particles. And these atoms are still affected by the quantum
    effects of examining them. If you examine them, you change their state, and so the state of the stored light.
    --
    We are the Music Makers, and We are the Dreamers of Dreams...
  59. best possible application of this discovery- by slhack3r · · Score: 1

    finally! light sabres are right around the corner!

  60. stopped light by lichtner · · Score: 1

    Light actually stops all the time. The remarkable thing in this case was that although the laser beam was completely absorbed by the atoms, they were able to make the atoms spit it back out again. Basically it works so neatly because the atoms are so 'cold' that they never collide with each other and therefore do not cause the photons to be ejected at random times. The really remarkable discovery would be how to keep things so cold that they behave quantum-mechanically, but without having big tanks of liquid helium (and worse.)

  61. Sure. by msm1th · · Score: 5, Funny

    Slashdot is so silly sometimes it makes my head hurt.

    Headline: Physicists Stop Light
    Slashdot: The implications for quantum computing are staggering!

    Headline: Transparent Aluminum Invented
    Slashdot: The implications for case mods are staggering!

    Headline: Secret of Time Travel Discovered
    Slashdot: Yay! We don't have to wait 2 years to see the rest of [insert name of trilogy]!

    Headline: Scientists Cure Cancer
    Slashdot: The implications for quantum computing are staggering!

    Headline: Terrorists Nuke South Dakota
    Slashdot: The implications for quantum computing are staggering!

  62. Not Stopped For So Long... by muerte24 · · Score: 2, Informative
    before everyone gets all excited, please keep in mind that the light pulse could only be stopped for something on the order of 100ms. the information about the light pulse is stored in the spin state of the atoms, which are told to release the information by another, perpendicular, laser beam.

    but this phase information is quickly lost as the atoms move around in a thermal equilibrium. think about it as sky-writing. the information is written there, but as the particles move around the infomatino is quickly lost.

    most of these experiments have been done with UltraCold atom clouds, and the most recent ones (presented at DAMOP last year) were done in Bose-Einstein Condensates.

    due to the very short "coherence time", this phenomena is most likely not very useful for quantum computing.

    the buzzwords to look for when it comes to quantum computers (i.e. the things most likely to work) are "trapped ions" and "optical lattices". i promise, one of those two will be used in the first functional quantum computer.

    muerte

    1. Re:Not Stopped For So Long... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "infomatino" ???

      That's it! The fundamental particle in quomputing!!

  63. Groundbreaking!! ...or not! by dbretton · · Score: 2

    Is this really news, or hasn't this been done...

    before?

    or before?

    -D

  64. An AWESOME Weapon..... by CDWert · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I have long thought , and am probably no the only one, that a light storage device could make for an awesome weapon.

    Consider a Sphere, 2 way mirrored, on the inside, you put light in, what happens ? It bounces around, indefinatley , well as indefinatley as the quality of your reflective surface.

    Now think of charging this for say months wit a high powered laser.

    Only to brop and break the sphere. releasing ALL the stored light at once.

    Now before you go on ranting how the reflective surface, photons etc. I know but I have wondered if there isnt a way to overcome this, this group may just have the answer.

    "Launch Photon Torpedoes" may not be as far off as we think........

    --
    Sig went tro...aahemmm.....fishing........
    1. Re:An AWESOME Weapon..... by edremy · · Score: 4, Informative
      Ain't gonna happen.

      Assume you make an incredibly good mirror: it's 99.999999% reflective. (How you're going to manage to do this while still pumping light in from the outside is unclear- 1/2 silvered mirrors are exactly that.) No mirror is even close to this value, BTW- the best around can do about 99.99% or so.

      Assume you have a 1 m diameter ball. Light travels 300,000 km/sec: 3e8 m/s. Thus, you get 3e8 collisions with the mirror every second. Total saved light= 0.99999999^3e8 ~= 0.05. In other words, after 1 second only 5% of the light remains.

      "Photon torpedoes" supposedly use matter-antimatter as a power source: pure mass-&gt energy conversion- why bother with light at all?

      Eric

      --
      "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
    2. Re:An AWESOME Weapon..... by Fiver-rah · · Score: 1
      Uh, this awesome weapon already exists, and it is called ... a laser. In a laser, you have a mirrored cavity. Electromagnetic radiation (light waves) are created by creating excited states, through pumping by some means. Sometimes this pumping occurs by electric current. But, for instance, the Titanium Sapphire laser is pumped by an Argon-Ion laser.

      Not particularly effective as a battle-weapon, no.

      --
      Read Bujold. Free (as in
  65. Photon mass? by volcanic_god · · Score: 1

    So did the damn thing have rest mass or not?

    =)

  66. easy read, but inaccurate in part by CrazyDwarf · · Score: 1

    I really liked that this article was written to explain what was being done so that just about anyone would understand it. The Star Trek reference was, however, inaccurate. From this article, it sounds like they make a duplicate of Kirk using something similar to light. This is not how the transporter works.

    We have some evidence of the inner workings of transporters, but not much. They employ Heisenberg compensators, pattern buffers, phase transition coils, Biofilters, matter streams, confinement beams, and matter-energy converters, and phased matter. As for what they do, we know that you are conscious during transport (Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, "Realm of Fear" [TNG]), but can also be held in stasis ("Day of the Dove" [TOS], "Relics" [TNG]). Further, while in transport, you appear whole to yourself.
    I hypothesize that the Annular Confinement Beam first locks onto, then disassembles the subject into phased matter, via the phase transition coils, causing it to take on a very energy-like state somewhat akin to plasma, called phased matter. The matter stream is then fed into the pattern buffer, piped through wave-guide conduits to one of the beam emitters on the hull of the starship, and then relayed to a point on the ground where the ACB reconstructs the subject.

    This was taken from Transporters, Replicators and Phasing FAQ by Joshua Bell.

    --
    It's easy to stand out when the general level of competence is so low.
    1. Re:easy read, but inaccurate in part by Oswald · · Score: 1
      Exactly right, and the implications are chilling. Algis Budrys wrote Rogue Moon in the 1950's; it might be considered the definitive treatment of the subject.

      The problem is the deconstruction (read obliteration) of your body necessary to "record" you. While the person who emerged from the "teleporter" at the destination would feel exactly like they were you because they would have your make-up and your memories, the fact is that you are dead.

  67. Third, or fourth time.... by pyxl · · Score: 1

    that this story has been posted on slashdot as reported by various publications. *sigh*

    --


    Given enough hydrogen, just about anything is possible.
  68. Improbable by mikosullivan · · Score: 2, Funny
    From the article: And nothing is certain -- only probable or improbable.

    Damn, it seems we're getting close to the Improbability Drive.

    "That's a good name --- ground! I wonder if it will be friends with me?" Thud!

    --
    Miko O'Sullivan
  69. Good one! by PhysicsGenius · · Score: 1

    nt

  70. Old hat by Hal-9001 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This was published in Nature over a year ago (25 January 2001 to be precise). This article (PDF format) is a nonspecialist introduction to this work, and this article (PDF format) is the peer-reviewed research article from Nature.

    --
    "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
  71. Great Way to Keep the Kids Quiet by MonkeyInTree · · Score: 2, Funny

    The Smith family (complete with mom, dad and 2 children) is taking a 4-hour trip to Grandma's... Kid 1: Mom, are we there yet? Mom: No (Repeat 15x) Kid 2: How long's it going to be? Dad: Ok kids, if you don't keep quiet back there I'll split you up into an uncountable number of atomic particles and stow you away in your Ronald McDonald sippy cup until we get there! Kid 1: ... Kid 2: ...

  72. Quantum Computing and Digital Copyright by russotto · · Score: 1

    Since quantum computers aren't, strictly speaking, "digital", quantum devices aren't subject to the DMCA and CBDTPA. Anyone want to build a quantum DVD player? As a bonus, you can brute-force the title key really quickly. P.S. don't tell Sen Hollings or he'll close the loophole.

  73. Military Applications... Pulse Laser Cannons/Guns by neo · · Score: 1

    This technology has been hinted at for years in Science Fiction. You have Laser Guns which hold Laser "shots" in stasis and then release them when you pull a trigger. Rotating through several chambers, you eventually finish your magazine and require a new one... like needing more ammo. So each clip would hold X amount of laser shots.

    The inclusion of Quantum Mechanics means that you could store the charge somewhere else. So you have a laser cannon/gun here, with the paired molecules being in another location, with a recharger. The recharger would be massive in order to produce the amount of energy required to produce repeated firing weapons, but the actual statis field appears to have very modest size requirements. Essentially you have a machine reloading laser bursts in a ammunition factory.

    Imagine a laser handgun being powered by a nuclear reactor for example, able to release a full load at the pull of a trigger.

  74. they were warned! by laserweasel · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Their mothers TOLD them that if they kept it up, they'd go blind? Did they listen? Nooo...

    --
    ["Marge, I agree with you - in theory. In theory, communism works. In theory." - Homer]
  75. Hello!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Hey! 100ms is a long time even by today's standards. Where have you been?

  76. Terrorists Nuke South Dakota by Rupert · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... not many Slashdotters killed.

    [cf. Small Earthquake in Peru for the humor impaired moderators]

    --

    --
    E_NOSIG
    1. Re:Terrorists Nuke South Dakota by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 1
      Hmmm ... time to petition North Dakota's Senators to join Canada, eh?

      I don't know those hoser's down there, eh?

      --
      Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
  77. What about astro-physics? by scottennis · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know if this has implications for astro-physicists? I mean, could something like this happen naturally, maybe even frequently in the early stages of the universe.
    Perhaps the light we're seeing from distant objects in the universe was stopped and then released again naturally.
    Wouldn't this distort the measurements we rely on for calculating the age of the universe?

  78. Bah by cje · · Score: 2

    You might be surprised how many Slashdotters are in South Dakota.

    --
    We're going down, in a spiral to the ground
    1. Re:Bah by Rupert · · Score: 2

      Well, since there are fewer /.ers than South Dakotans (by a factor of almost 2), I suppose all of them could be there.

      Actually there seem to be a lot of Minnesotan /.ers in comparison to the amount of high tech in the state. Or maybe I just notice it because I live here.

      I smell a poll. Is CowboyNeal reading?

      --

      --
      E_NOSIG
  79. Dark Room by nnnneedles · · Score: 1

    I suppose a really dark room was involved in this experiment?

    --
    Will code a sig generator for food
  80. The light is stopped by ShooterNeo · · Score: 1

    What do you mean, the light is just being "stored" and retransmitted. It IS stopped. The energy that makes the light is STILL THERE, stored in the atoms energy states. When you stimulate it with another beam, that releases the same energy. Also, you CANNOT make copies of quantum states, thus by definition when you "start" up the light again you are getting the ORIGINAL started up again.

    As for potential uses, true quantum computers could do far more than merely let FBI thugs read your encryped email and discover you've been downloading copyrighted porn(which they knew anyway...with no job and no girlfriend, its not hard to work out)

    No, "buildable" quantum computers (and no, this does NOT mean desktops. The nature of the components required I suspect will lead to most quantum computers being extremely expensive and run by a select few. Might be some kind of timesharing scheme. Remember, to store these quantum states you have to keep the parts EXTREMELY cold to minimize thermal noise from interfering. No private individual will be able to own their own liquid helium and laser cooling system unless they are very wealthy, just like private individuals cannot own spacecraft without extreme wealth)

    Anyway, buildable quantum computers could finally allow for true artificial intelligence, which I believe will change the world beyond all recognition. Read The Singularity, and consider the implications of an AI being able to learn and expand at exponential rates, no longer limited by what we humans are held by.

  81. Actual quantum Computing with Perl by hawkestein · · Score: 5, Informative

    I know you were joking, but you really can do Quantum computing with Perl

    --
    -- Will quantum computers run imaginary-time operating systems?
  82. Re:What's with the throwaway lines? by vipw · · Score: 2

    i hate to be a dick, but i have to agree with this guy. kind of reminds me of the reaction to the "jump to conclusions" mat in Office Space.

  83. Brick wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DUH!

  84. Cheap way to stop light by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anybody can stop light with a good window blind.

  85. Link for it slow glass... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.scifi.com/scifiction/classics/classics_ archive/shaw/shaw1.html

  86. So does this mean Transporters are viable? by worldthinker · · Score: 0

    Could it be the Tech of Trek is around the corner too?

  87. What they didn't explain... by MouseR · · Score: 2

    ...is how they release it? Anyone has clues?

    They can absorb light into a container, alter the qubits (how?), and then, how do they send it off again? Opening a quvalve?

    Some quEstions require quAnswers.

    These bozos need to document a bit more if I'm to build one myself (ok... maybe I'm optimistic).

  88. thanks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no text

  89. DMCA Violation? by lynx_user_abroad · · Score: 3, Funny
    "Suppose you have some information encoded in atoms," says Walsworth. "You could map that information onto light, send it over to some other group of atoms, and imprint the information there."

    In other news, the RIAA filed suit today against God for failing to include Digital Rights Management technology with each atom, in violation of the SSSCA, and for providing an anti-circumvention mechanism within His "Laws of Physics" prodict.

    "This will destroy the music industry as we know it!" exclaimed an unnamed music industry representative, "Evil Hackers will be able to use this technology to pirate music off of even protected CD's, because they're all made of atoms!"

    God was contacted for comment on these developments, but apparently prefers only to listen, and not reply.

    --

    The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.

  90. Re:What's with the throwaway lines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Discuss.

    And you're admitting that that was on the end of your post?? Hemos did you a big favor.

    Dude, that was really, really lame.
    Not a Mike Myers fan, eh?
  91. Doesn't this violate the DMCA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously everyone at Harvard should be arrested. Because they have trapped light it is obvious that they intend to use this tool to trap the light of all the fiber optic transmissions and thus spy on everyone. Furthermore it is quite obvious they plan to send all their DVDs and MP3s in this new Trapped Light Format thus aiding causing Quintillion dollars in lost revenue for the MPAA and RIAA. Someone call the National Guard these guys are really modern day entertainment media terrorists!!!

    Jack Valenti
    Hilary Rosen

  92. The Ultimate Goal by elton247 · · Score: 1

    We are closer then ever to light sabers!

    --
    How strange it is to be anything at all
  93. Quantum Computer right around the corner? by TheGoatseMan · · Score: 0

    Good, now I can play counter strike without the lag.

  94. stopping light - so? by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 2

    I've been doing that for years. Ever since I learned how to use the light swtich.

  95. Stopping or Changing the SPEED of light by mtaylor007 · · Score: 1

    I can't help but wonder how this affects the Big Bang theory. This theory is based almmost solely (I'm sure that I am over simplifying here) on the basis of a consistantly observed "Red Shift" in astonomical bodies.

    If all distant bodies are Red Shifting, then they must have come from a discreet place an been imparted with a great momentum, and thus a Big Bang. But this whole thing is based on Red Shift which is calculated by using a FIXED speed of light. All this research in slowing light would seem to complicate that theory to the point of unmanagability.

    1. Re:Stopping or Changing the SPEED of light by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2

      AFAIK light always goes at the same speed, but it takes longer to get through certain media than others - this is because it doesn't go in a straight line (and why when someone quotes the speed of light they use the speed of light in a vacuum as a reference).

      Light isn't 'stopped' in the sense that it hangs there waiting for something to happen (which doesn't make sense if my (limited) understanding of physics is even close to correct), it's simply absorbed into another particle then that particle emits light some indeterminate time later.

      btw. Not all galaxies have a red shift. Andromeda has a blue shift (it's coming towards us apparently).

  96. quantum computers by jedie · · Score: 1

    I think i was in the 3rd grade of humaniora (14 y.o) when my physics teacher gave me some extra homework cos I was talaking too much. I had to write a small essay on 'quantum teleportation'. I had completely no idea what it meant (neither did he, the whole idea was that the task was informative for the both of us -- he was a clever man indeed) well anyway, I started reading about it on the internet, and read that in a university in switserland (if I recall coreectly) they could teleport atoms. I found this very exhilirating, cos they also mentioned on thei rsite the applications for this, such ass mass transport, zero-time transport to other universes, super fast networks AND quantum computers. Okay my story is getting longer than I had wanted, but what I mean to say is: every day I read somewhere that quantum computers are just around the corner. Why can't they just cut the bullshit until they actually have it. This is something remakably irritating about /. (no offence to the readers/moderators/posters). Quit posting about 'they are working on '... It's kinda depressing to see all that cool stuff, and being kept reminded of it... I get kinda unrestful ;)

    --
    "The majority is always sane, Louis." -- Nessus
    http://slashdot.jp
  97. On other news by ahde · · Score: 2

    someone else has just discovered how to let light in. It is not know yet if their product's name will be contested by Microsoft Corp.

  98. DAMN! by leftsaidfred · · Score: 1


    How come we have the technology for scientists to "stop" light but can't stop Cher from making more records?

  99. Light? by TheGoatseMan · · Score: 0

    Light? Where can I download this game at?

  100. Bose Einstein Condensates by pdp11e · · Score: 2, Informative

    The article mentions experiment from 1999 where light was slowed to the "bicycle speed". This was accomplished by shining light trough "Bose-Einstein" condensate. Bosons are particles with integer spin (e.g. photons). In 1924 it was predicted that an ensemble of bosons could, under certain conditions, undergo a phase transition. This is analogue to vapor condensation or crystallization of liquid. In order to create Bose-Einstein condensate it is necessary to achieve temperatures less than one millionth of a degree above absolute zero. First successful experiment was performed in 1995 utilizing laser cooling. One of the properties of BE condensate is that the light propagates trough it with speed that is 20-million-fold slower than a speed of light in vacuum.
    The article is not very informative about actual physics involved in the newest experiment. However there is a nice description at: http://www.aip.org/physnews/update/521-1.html.
    Also there is a an interesting site about Bose-Einstain condensation at

    http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/bec/index.h tm l,
    with some nifty Java applets

  101. What's it look like? by crawdaddy · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one interested in seeing what light looks like when it's stopped? What about when it's passing at the speed of a bicycle in a dark or foggy room?

  102. Conservation of Energy anyone? by Genady · · Score: 1

    What really chaps my hide about this story is all the discussion of destrution of light. You *CAN'T* Destroy light (well unless maybe you hit it with an antiparticle) you merely transform the photon into another form of energy, such as say exciting an electron, or heating the black asphault as described in the article. No one creates or destroies light, they just convert photons from one form of energy to another.

    --


    What if it is just turtles all the way down?
  103. Implications are staggering! by sgage · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Palestinian-Israeli conflict will be resolved, global warming reversed, and world hunger ended. I am definitely staggered.

    (having one of those days when these sorts of breakthroughs seem ever so slightly irrelevant to the future of life on Earth - could you tell?)

  104. Why are these headlines so misleading? by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Next they reduced the intensity of the signal laser until the polariton was 100% atomic. There were no photons left inside the chamber.

    There were no photons, people. They didn't stop light. Halted light would mean there are photons in there, moving at exactly zero meters per second. There were no photons left.

    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
  105. Yay... by l0ckj4w · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Now I can dance around naked and sacrifice goats whenever I want!

  106. Been waiting fro this one a long time by MadFarmAnimalz · · Score: 2

    One step closer to a working light saber. Thank you Harvard!

    --
    Blearf. Blearf, I say.
  107. oh, goody by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    now I can blue screen XP at
    any speed up to and including the speed of
    light.

  108. Goes backwards too by beta21 · · Score: 1

    Yes not only did they stop light they made it go backwards!

    PLease don't post a stroy on mirrors now!

  109. Shh!!! Don't mention quantum encryption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We don't want Disney or the RIAA to get any ideas.

  110. geez.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wow... this is the THIRD time i've seen an article about this on slashdot....

  111. Secure ? Bah... by Oestergaard · · Score: 2


    Am I the only one who thinks it's strange that while we get told about all these fantastic things that can be done which weren't possible a year ago, people still say convincingly that "you can't get the state from the system without leaving finger prints" ?

    I'm sure we can't today. And I'm equally sure that someone is going to figure out a way to touch the system so insignificantly that the "reading" cannot be measured.

    Like when reading from a hard-drive: Of course the head will alter the state of the platter when passing by - it's just so insignificant that it doesn't matter, and it would probably be hard to measure if anybody tried.

    While this is fascinating and all, I just don't buy into the "can't cheat with this one". Many years ago, everyone agreed that you couldn't split an aton - which was natural, because "the atom" itself was a relatively new idea in itself at that time.

    I find it hard to believe that the progress stops here.

  112. Time Machine by Edward+Teach · · Score: 1

    I have a time machine in my bedroom. I have only been able to go forward in time 8-12 hours at a time. I lie down on it and poof, it is 8-12 hours later.

    --

    Setting his threshold to 5, Sparky eliminated most of the trolls on /.

    1. Re:Time Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that is quite possibly the worst joke ever.

  113. They need to apply this to windows ... by pyramid+termite · · Score: 2

    ... on New Year's Day. Millions of hungover people will thank them for stopping that godawful light ...

  114. stoping light... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this done...

    Xon Xoff or by hardware flow control...?

  115. Nothing new here... by Tessera · · Score: 1

    Exactly. You know, this has been going on forever; I hit an atom with a photon, and it becomes excited to a higher energy level. Then when it re-emits the photon, it is of the same frequency as before. Though like this story, it's not the same photon; but it has the same properties as the one that was absorbed. But hey, more media coverages means more grants in this "industry". I see where they're coming from with this one...

    --
    "The weak are always anxious for justice and equality. The strong pay no heed to either." - Aristotle
  116. Wow!!! I can run fast by CTalkobt · · Score: 1

    Faster than light that is.

    Geesh - Never thought I'd break any land-speed records. Now if I could only go faster than sound now...

    ( Somebody had to do it ).

    --
    There's a gorilla from Manilla whose a fella that stinks of vanilla and has salmonella.
  117. In related new by kireK · · Score: 1

    The city of Boston is suffering a complete blackout. All traffic lights are dead, completly stopping traffic in the area.

  118. Goddammit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    If a photon (light) hits an atom (matter), causing it's electrons to move to a more excited energy level, I defy you to "show me the light".

    It's "its", not "it's"!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

    :-)

    -joe

  119. NSA will just go NUTS over this by banking_intern · · Score: 1

    Since fiber optics are much "harder" to listen in on I bet the NSA is going to eat this invention up left and right.

  120. Stoping light is no big deal by Chayce · · Score: 1

    Now what is important is speeding it up. That is the basis for most sci-fi drives and possibly real space drives in the future.

    --"God may not play dice with the universe, but I vill" Einstien in the movie 'I.Q.'

    --
    I like replies better than Karma, even if they are flames, because that tells me I got someone thinking.
  121. A cloaking device? by baudbarf · · Score: 1

    I know very little about "quantum mechanics"; but it seems to me that this would bring us closer to building a cloaking device of some sort. If you think about it, cloaking is nothing but the bending of light around an object - and it seems to me that if you can pause light and store it in matter; then you can move that matter around to the other side and re-emit it(?)

    On the other hand, perhaps not, since it took two lasers and a lot of work to make this experiment happen.. I dunno.

    Wasn't the military trying to look into cloaking recently? I think I remember reading that.

    --
    You can run but you can't hide, except, apparently, along the Afghan-Pakistani border.
  122. actually ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, quantum energy states are ... er ... stopped !

  123. Re:p=mv/[1-(v/c)^2]^(1/2) by lkaos · · Score: 2

    Doesn't matter anyway though because such equations only apply to particles with mass. Since light travels at the speed of light, it cannot have momentum or mass.

    Einstein was a pretty smart guy...

    --
    int func(int a);
    func((b += 3, b));
  124. Mod up AC by lkaos · · Score: 2

    Said it better than I could...

    Always curious why people post good stuff AC.

    --
    int func(int a);
    func((b += 3, b));
  125. Quantum computer? old idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you hear about backprop based neural networks? Those based on descrete Lagrange formula. Generalize the formula to fileds, like optical fields and you get a best quantum computer you can imgagine today - the one, which can use adaptive fuzzy logic for self-organization and self-training. Don't you find this idea new? Hmm... I worked with such project back in 1991 in last days of Soviet Union. Who knows who would dictate the world which technologies should be exported or not if communists would not blow up the whole thing.

  126. Oh Joy! by U6H! · · Score: 1

    Applying this slowed light trick, we can now get an OC48 to cap at 56K. I'll bet Ameritech is hard at work trying to accomplish this at this very moment. Just think, it'll be like the good old ARPA net days in no time.

  127. Photon Torpedoes by Iron+Webmaster · · Score: 1
    I get this humongous laser and stop/collect all the light from it. Then I launch the collector at the Klingons/Iraqis or whomever is the bad guy this week.

    Or I keep the collector and switch it off after an hour letting all the photons to continue on their way towards the terrorist de jour.

    So when do we get slow glass?

  128. RI like this one better... by Alsee · · Score: 2

    Headline: Terrorists Nuke South Dakota
    Slashdot: The implications for case mods are staggering!

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  129. They stopped light? by erroneus · · Score: 2

    This is really old news and not even "technology." Following the examples in California and this ENRON thing, it's clear that stopping light isn't so much a technical marvel as it is poor management.

  130. Kids have done this for years!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trapping light and then releasing it later on? When I was a kid, I had a plastic toy dinosaur that would soak up light and then glow in the dark. Big deal.

    :-)

  131. Human Kind by Judecca · · Score: 1

    Its too bad that we're probably the worst thing that has ever happened to the planet, because as a species we do some really amazing things.

    When you sit down and thing about it, the fact that we take something like electrons, and shove them through a wire to create light, you have to wonder who came up wit this stuff.

    Our physisists can stop light, but we're still using fossil feuls to power our cars.

  132. No, it is not recording and retransmitting by hauer · · Score: 1

    Many of you said that this result is not revolutionary because it is just recording and retransmitting information which has been around for a long time. I am a quantum physicist and would like to offer some clarification in order to better see the difference.

    The keyword here is "quantum" information. Light (or any other particle or anything for that matter) carries a set of physical information (speed, position, energy, angular momentum, etc.). Heisengberg's rule however tells us that there is no way to measure all this information at the same time with arbitrary precision. Measuring one characteristics basically destroys the information about something else, therefore recording and retransmitting is always confined to a subset of the physical quantities.

    For those who know some physics: for example you can measure the x-component of the angular momentum but the very measurement loses _all_ information about the y-component of the angular momentum. The x-component of the retransmitted light's angular momentum might be identical to the original one's but the y-component necessarily differs.

    Therefore the challenge in stopping light is the following: you want to confine the information carried by light to a small region of space _without_ actually detecting that information. This is what has been achieved in these experiments: when one retransmits the light previously captured, it will carry the same quantum properties as the original incoming light.
    And this is definitely something very new.

    Tamas

  133. Physicists stop light.... by ignavus · · Score: 1

    Now I really can say that I work at the speed of light!

    --
    I am anarch of all I survey.
  134. quantum computers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i can just imagine them now.. all lit up like tron

  135. Stopping Light by Snover · · Score: 1
    NASA is reporting that physicists at Harvard University have managed to stop light altogether.
    And in other news, lawyers at Harvard University did the same thing by gathering together and being nice. Their explanation? Undecypherable legal jargon. (There's a good way for making ultra-secure communiques.)
    --

    [insert witty comment here]
  136. Wow !! stopping light... by Tha_Zanthrax · · Score: 1

    There is a really anoying streetlight right in front of my bedroomwindow. I could really use this technology !!! Wait a minute... I CAN stop light it's called a curtain. Nothing to see here, move along.

  137. Storage density doesn't look great by ScrewTivo · · Score: 1

    in this system, I wonder why. At least if I got these calcs right.

    Light at 186,000 mi/sec, then the 2 mile beam is about 1.07^-5 seconds. Running a system at 10 gigahrtz (10 billion bits/sec) you get 5.34^4 bits per mile.

    The 2 mile beam was stored in 10 cm so you get 1.08^5 bits in 10 cm or 1.08^4 bits cm. With 8 bits to a byte you get 1.35^3 bytes/cm

    Yielding 1.3Kb/cm.

    I would bet my 80gig hard drive does better.
    I must be missing something here.

  138. my first thoughts on the matter by yoinkslap · · Score: 0

    i havent yet read the article, will do after this, but my first thoughts are that if they have stopped light altogether, or at least slowed it almost infintismally, they would have had to have slowed down time to achieve it...

    or

    if they have managed to somehow slow down light, have they also accidentally slowed down time? my 2c. now i will go read.

    --
    Dont ask me...Im just the bass player.