Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Create New Form of Matter

soren100 writes "Yahoo News has a story about scientists creating a sixth form of matter. They are calling their new state of matter a 'fermionic condensate.' Somehow they got potassium atoms to form pairs similar to the 'Cooper pairs' that make superconducting possible. Maybe any quantum physicists around can tell us more about this, but it certainly sounds pretty revolutionary. The scientists are predicting that this will lead to 'room temperature solid' superconductors, which in turn will enable us to have better electricity generators, more efficient electric motors, and (our favorite) cheaper maglev trains."

82 of 448 comments (clear)

  1. Quandry by kinnell · · Score: 4, Funny
    Maybe any quantum physicists around can tell us more about this

    Maybe, but how will you tell the real quantum physicists from the myriad of armchair quantum physicists who think they know what it's all about.

    --
    If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
    1. Re:Quandry by Urkki · · Score: 5, Funny
      • Maybe, but how will you tell the real quantum physicists from the myriad of armchair quantum physicists who think they know what it's all about.

      Why, by making an observation of course! After that their quantum state collapses to just one state, either a real or an armchair quantum physicist.

      There are some experiments underway to use this to encrypt articles about quantum physics, so that only intended recipients can decrypt the text, even.
    2. Re:Quandry by R.Caley · · Score: 4, Funny
      How will you tell the real quantum physicists from the myriad of armchair quantum physicists who think they know what it's all about.

      The real quantum physicist will post a superposition of all possible comments with attached probabilities, so your browser will be able to randomly select which one to show you.

      If you are one of twins, your sibling will always see a comment presenting the precise opposite point of view. Unfortunatly, there is no way to use this phenomenon to get zero-ping time internet access.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    3. Re:Quandry by Urkki · · Score: 5, Insightful
      • This type of book does no good what-so-ever except spawn new breeds of armchair physicists.

      And this is bad because...? To put it bluntly, that's a bit elitist attitude, "if you can't understand this thing, you shouldn't even think about it, just go and do your daily work and pay your taxes so scientists get their grants and particle accelerators, don't bother your little brain with this stuff".

      Anything that makes layman more familiar with basic scientific research and principles and generally interested in those is good IMHO, even if they get it a bit wrong.
    4. Re:Quandry by PSandusky · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You can blame that on all those 'easy-to-read' books on quantum physics. I'm not quite sure, someone might let me know - what is the attraction of attempting to explain something as abstract as quantum physics to lay people.

      Considering that the majority of the people who read /. are likely not quantum physicists, this sounds an awful lot like flamebait. Really, there's no point in writing such things... they should just send their research to you, right? At least you understand it, unlike those of us "lay people" who aren't so enlightened. Bah, waste of paper, those books. Yup. Uh-huh. Yessir.

      What, precisely, is wrong with explaining science to the general populace? I would consider such a thing a laudable goal, regardless of discipline to be disseminated, not only because of the sheer enlightenment value, but also because a population taught to think scientifically and flexibly, as from exposure to the sciences, is far more difficult to manipulate than one that has no understanding of any of it!

      --
      "What's the use in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes?" --Fourth Doctor, "Robot"
    5. Re:Quandry by gilroy · · Score: 2
      Blockquoth the poster:

      I'm not quite sure, someone might let me know - what is the attraction of attempting to explain something as abstract as quantum physics to lay people.

      Other than the fact that it's cool and interesting in its own right? Or that the fruits of science aren't meant to be hoarded by the privileged few? How about because they are voters and it's in the best interest of the Republic that its citizens be informed as well as engaged? And that devices made possible by this discovery could someday be hugely important?

      My advisor used to feel that as long as he understood, his research had succeeded. I never got that.
    6. Re:Quandry by Noren · · Score: 2, Interesting
      "I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics." - Richard Feynman, Nobel Prize winner for his work on Quantum Electrodynamics.

      It is said that in order to teach a subject well you have to understand it well- this is likely one of the reasons it's so hard to teach or explain Quantum.

      When trying to explain a complex subject simply, there comes a point where the only way to simplify a subject further is to either miss the point entirely or to get something drastically wrong. Quantum mechanics really can't be well described without lots and lots of math- the point where further simplification makes the explanation wrong happens when the 'simplified' explanation is still very complicated and hard to understand.

  2. Not to mention by Photar · · Score: 2, Funny

    Being able to do that cool thing where you take a metal toy and then put a magnet under the desk and make it move around, you know that thing, now you can do it through walls.

    --
    He who knows not and knows he knows not is a wise man. He who knows not and knows not he knows not is a fool.
  3. Maglevs? More like... by rtz · · Score: 4, Funny

    more efficient electric motors, and (our favorite) cheaper maglev trains.

    Maglevs are cool, but the real slashdotter wants to know how it will help build space elevators.

    1. Re:Maglevs? More like... by extra88 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wired Tired Expired
      space elevator maglev flying cars

  4. Re:Sixth form of matter? by pegasustonans · · Score: 4, Informative

    "The new matter form is called a fermionic condensate and it is the sixth known form of matter -- after gases, solids, liquids, plasma and a Bose-Einstein condensate, created only in 1995." Come on people, RTFA already... :)

    --
    And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
  5. Practical application by wan-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The article seems to highly stress the practical application of this new form of matter. Doesn't this seem too optimistic or unrealistic? If it's a new form of matter, surely there must be properties which even researchers are unsure about. What are the safety and health issues involved in using this in 'practical applications'?

    1. Re:Practical application by danila · · Score: 4, Interesting
      First of all, let me just say that in some way they are correct, since we can expect their work to eventually have some practical applications. But this is not terribly relevant today. What is relevant is that scientists are forced by our society to lie about these uses to get public support and public funding. Read any press releas? and it will claim the invention/discovery will help fight terrorism, fight SARS, bring fusion to reality, save people from falling skyscrapers, save soldiers' lives in the battlefield, or at least create faster computers and more effective batteries.

      Here is a relevant quote from the adorable Feynman:
      I would like to add something that's not essential to the science, hut something I kind of believe, which is that you should not fool the layman when you're talking as a scientist. I am not trying to tell you what to do about cheating on your wife, or fooling your girlfriend, or something like that, when you're not trying to be a scientist, but just trying to be an ordinary human being. We'll leave those problems up to you and your rabbi. I'm talking about a specific, extra type of integrity that is not lying, but bending over backwards to show how you're maybe wrong, that you ought to have when acting as a scientist. And this is our responsibility as scientists, certainly to other scientists, and I think to laymen.

      For example, I was a little surprised when I was talking to a friend who was going to go on the radio. He does work on cosmology and astronomy, and he wondered how he would explain what the applications of this work were. "Well," I said, "there aren't any." He said, "Yes, hut then we won't get support for more research of this kind." I think that's kind of dishonest. If you're representing yourself as a scientist, then you should explain to the layman what you're doing--and if they don't want to support you under those circumstances, then that's their decision.
      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    2. Re:Practical application by infolib · · Score: 3, Informative

      The article seems to highly stress the practical application of this new form of matter.

      That is to say the least. It talks about superconductors for maglev trains etc. but in reality the new form of matter is a small blob of gas hanging trapped by lasers in a vacuum chamber. The only connection is that these studies may help us develop better theories about how superconductors work. (The current theories on high-temp superconductors are quite weak). A less popular introduction to Jins work is here, but it's not quite recent.

      What are the safety and health issues involved in using this in 'practical applications'?

      None. There are no practical applications yet, and when you look at the experiment it's just a submillimeter blob of potassium. The moment someone disturbs the experiment it will disintegrate and fill the vacuum chamber with very dilute potassium gas. Potassium can be dangerous, but there's a thousand times more in the bin they take it from, and I'm not worried about that at all.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
    3. Re:Practical application by osgeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      scientists are forced by our society to lie about these uses to get public support and public funding

      Don't let them off that easily. They're part of a broken system whose causes can be found all over our society.

      - We have a public that's incredibly ignorant of science... which is a compliment, considering that they're mostly just stupid.
      - We have ignorant politicians elected by that ignorant/stupid public who don't understand science well enough to know how we should be spending public funds.
      - And back to the Scientists: We have a Scientific community with members who lie their asses off like a bunch of whores for money. No one "forces" them to lie, they do it of their own volition.
      - Finally, we have supporters of Science in the public who make excuses for poor ethical behavior by saying "scientists are forced by our society to lie".

      The answer to most of these problems is "education". Education, education, education. Besides the defense of our borders, it's the one thing that our government absolutely must provide: a solid education for every member of our society.

    4. Re:Practical application by gotan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't let them off that easily.

      Whoa, wait a moment here, it's now accepted and good behavior of corporations to lie to get at your money. They lie about their products to get money from their customers, they lie about their business perspectives (as much as they are allowed to) to get money from shareholders, and they lie, bitch and whine to politicians (e.g. lobbying) to get laws bend their way and be subsidized. Aparently everyone has accepted that, at least i didn't hear outcries of public rage about it, the people even expect to be lied to and think it's good business style.

      I don't like it either but that's how things are now, and unless you think that a few honest scientists can fundamentally change the way the population is thinking you might go a little easier on them. The result of being honest with the future perspective of their research would probably be that funding goes to other projects headed by someone whithout any qualms to tell bold lies. Of course the system is bad and tends to bring the biggest assholes to the top (see politics where the process has worked for a longer time to see the results). I can live with a scientist that doesn't tell the whole truth (maybe by omitting the point that all those fancy products are to be expected at least 20 years from now), it's better than someone blatantly lying and just presenting works of his imagination as experimental results (yeah, that happened, everyone thought the guy was just great unless someone found the same diagram explaining totally different facts, until then there were only a few puzzled scientists who couldn't reproduce any of his research).

      We need that basic science and we have to look farther into the future than the next business quarter or even the next two years. It's fine to have industrial funding, but you'll only get that for technologies that go into a marketable product in the next 3 years. We'd never have gotten semiconductor-technology if science were only dependant on such industrial funding, we'd be building better and better relay switches by now and computers would be prohibitively expensive, let alone digital watches.

      It's the job of our politicians to secure our future by funding such basic science now, but those politicians fail to see anything that's beyond their term of office (see education systems worldwide). At least it's not politicians who decide which project gets funding and which doesn't, it's usually other scientists who assign parts of the total "science budget" to specific projects. Thos other scientists have quite a good grasp how long this project will take to yield any marketable results, but they know as well, that it'll probably be worth it (you never can say for sure, maybe we all get hit by a huge asteroid and should have put everything into an effort to get a foothold on mars, who can say).

      I think these new materials give us a great chance for better understanding of high-temperature superconducting materials, and, hell, they found a totally new form of matter, we don't even know what we could use it for.

      --
      "By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
  6. Re:Sixth form of matter? by R.Caley · · Score: 4, Funny
    Okay, what was the fifth?

    Clinton took it.

    --
    _O_
    .|<
    The named which can be named is not the true named
  7. i was promised maglevs! by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the 21st century's version of the 20th's "i was promised rocket cars!" will be "i was promised maglevs!"

    maglevs always seem to be just around the corner... perpetually...

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  8. Animal experiments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    All the drugs, food supplements and practically anything that people digest, wear or spread on their skin has been tested on animals.

    You militant assholes should refuse medical help when the cops beat you up next time.

  9. Connective tissue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Lets see... ...
    They cooled potassium gas to a billionth of a degree C above absolute zero or minus 459 degrees F -- which is the point at which matter stops moving. ...

    Step 1. Freeze until cold cold cold (like a regular superconductor)
    Step 2. ???
    Step 3. Have a room temperature superconductor
    Step 4. PROFIT!!!!

    Ok, seriously... Whats to say that you can't get any kind of matter to act like superconductors at a low enough temperature?

    And while I'm at it:
    Imagine a beowulf clust.....

    1. Re:Connective tissue by caluml · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you freeze your room to a billionth of a degree C, then you can truly claim to have a room temperature semiconductor.

    2. Re:Connective tissue by Dashing+Leech · · Score: 4, Funny

      A billionth of a degree C? Then you could almost freeze water, but I don't think it'd superconduct. On the other hand, more fingers. If you freeze it to a billionth of a degree K, that might suffice.

    3. Re:Connective tissue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It said a billionth of a degree C above absolute zero. Scalawag.

  10. Superconductor hype by squaretorus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Presentation of this story suggests that this work is a step towards room temp superconductors. While this may be true, I suspect it is no more true of this that any other significant development of our understanding of that wierd stuff we call 'quantum'.

    I really dont see superconductors becoming feasable at room temperatures anytime soon (i.e. 100 years) unless we all decide we actually like it when our rooms are well below freezing.

    New forms of matter are interesting - but that they are found only at a billionth of a degree above absolute zero is no more interesting to me than the fact that we can build a fridge able to get stuff down to those temperatures in the first place. I'd be scared if we didn't find some spooky stuff going on!

    1. Re:Superconductor hype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well that's not exactly true. It's at the extremes that it is simplest to see where our models break down, so we might learn more, adjust our thinking, an make the incremental improvements to what we know well.

      I think room tempeture superconducting is probably outside the scope of possible. But that doesn't mean I don't think there are tangible rewards to be had from double checking, even if my guesses are ultimately vindicated.

      In a way, I lament those who share your lament. Denis Miller (I'm morbidly curious at times) thinks Mars rovers, and NASA in general are a waste of money. What's ironic is he says this on a program bounce off a satellite; proving, once again, it doesn't hurt to have an education to go together with a vocabulary.

    2. Re:Superconductor hype by danila · · Score: 4, Informative
      Here is a quote from a great E2 writeup by wheloc:
      The fun thing about bosons is that any collection of things which acts sortta like a particle, and who's spins sum to some integer value, will act like a boson. If, for example, you get two electrons traveling together and reduce their temperature sufficiently under the right conditions they will begin to act like a single particle. If one has a spin of +1/2 and the other has a spin of -1/2 then the composite "particle" will have a total spin of 0, effectively making it a boson (this special type of boson is called a "Cooper pair"). Fermions bump into each other, bosons do not. Resistance in a wire (as in Ohm's Law) is caused by electrons bumping into each other. If all the electrons form Cooper pairs then this no longer happens, and electricity can flow through a material much better. This is the principle behind superconductivity.


      Apparently, what these guys did was closely related to forming Cooper pairs. When they found out other things related to this, we might be able to understand how to create these pairs at +25C. Right now one of the requirements seems to be to cool down the fermions, but if we find a way around...
      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    3. Re:Superconductor hype by Bananenrepublik · · Score: 3, Informative

      If one has a spin of +1/2 and the other has a spin of -1/2 then the composite "particle" will have a total spin of 0
      This part is bogus, spin addition is more complicated than that. Whether you get a spin 0, 1/2 or 1 composite particle depends on the proper superposition of pair states. You can get an integer spin particle by combining two half-integer spin particles.

      WRT the article, I don't see why they talk about having created a new state of matter. This is wrong, a claim only made up to attract attention. Superfluid Helium II is a Bose-Einstein-condensate of Helium 3, which has a half-integer spin -- exactly the same thing. There is one interesting difference, though: they managed to pick fairly heavy atoms, Potassium is much heavier than Helium.

      Disclaimer: I'm a graduate student in physics.

    4. Re:Superconductor hype by puppet10 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'll let Weimann (researcher at JILA, Joint Institute for Laboratory Astrophysics, his group was the first to create a BEC) do my talking for me since I only have an overview understanding of the topic:

      "Although superfluid helium exists in conditions much warmer than the Bose-Einstein condensate that the Colorado researchers made, it is widely considered a Bose-Einstein condensate, even though it is in a very different sort of system than Einstein was talking about."[1]

      Additionally in a Bose condensed gas strong interactions in the fluid state are eliminated making the system easier to understand and measure its properties.[2, 3]

      So while it may be arguable whether its a new state of matter, based on how different the state is from a superfluid state, it is important because it makes the study of these systems in detail possible by eliminating many confounding interactions.[2]

      --
      -------- This space intentionally left blank --------
  11. Re:Maglev in U.S. by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 4, Funny

    I believe there's a monorail in Springfield, Illinois. It's well documented; I thought everyone knew about it?

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
  12. Re:Maglev in U.S. by line.at.infinity · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, there aren't that many overseas, none of them are long or cost-effective. Some amusement parks have it (Disney World's "Train of Tomorrow,"). IIRC there's one in Osaka, Japan, but it runs wicked slow due to safety concerns.

  13. Un-scientific questions by CGP314 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So... quantum whatever... can I touch it? Without massive pain? What's it feel like?

    --
    In London? Need a Physics Tutor?

    American Weblog in London

    1. Re:Un-scientific questions by Snosty · · Score: 3, Funny

      So... quantum whatever... can I touch it? Without massive pain? What's it feel like?
      --
      In London? Need a Physics Tutor?


      You're the damn physics tutor, you tell me.

  14. Re:Sixth form of matter? by squaretorus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Its the Bose-Einstein condensate - and may I point out what a SHIT name this is for a form of matter.

    When you're naming a star, a hurricane, or a child you know you have a good chance of some more coming along later - so hell - John or Mary will do nicely.

    But with forms of matter I think they missed a trick. Plasma is a pretty cool name after all. I would have thought a few minutes spent searching for the phone number for Douglas Adams and a quick "Hey - Doug - can I call you Doug - No? - Okay - Mr Adams - You were joking? - cool - very funny - ANyway - we have a new form of matter - and we can only think up really shit scientificy names for it - any chance of you coming up with some options we can present to the board? - None of your stupid numbers or shit - a proper kick ass name .... etc... etc.... etc...

  15. Look at Europe, Asia by nniillss · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You can order a maglev from Siemens, Germany, at any time. Provided you have a deep pocket.

  16. Re:Maglev in U.S. by TehHustler · · Score: 2, Informative

    The only one I can think of here in the UK is the one between Birmingham Airport and the Birmingham Exhibition Centres, if its still there, that is. I remember it about 10 years ago, maybe more.

    --

    TheHustler
    http://www.elmarko.org/ - Useless bilge
    http://www.asylum-games.co.uk/ - Co-Founder
  17. A more in depth article on the subject by Guy_Warwick · · Score: 5, Informative

    Deborah Jin the team leader gives more of an idea of her work in this article. http://physicsweb.org/article/world/15/4/7

  18. Arguable by tacocat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not a Quantum Physicist by any stretch, just a Materials Engineer. But it seems to me that the condensates have a small issue about them. They seem to hold an extremely narrow definition of a material.

    Considering solid, gases, liquids, and even plasmas, they all have a range of environmental factors within which they can exist and have some level of application/interaction to the rest of the newtonian universe. I'm not disputing that they are able to get all these little bits together, but at a billionth of a fraction above absolute zero? That's going to make for a pretty cold ride on the maglev

  19. Re:Sixth form of matter? by orius_khan · · Score: 2, Funny

    Actually they DID call up Douglas Adams and ask him for a name to give their new form of matter, but the only reply he would give is "I'm fucking dead!"

    I think they picked the lesser of two evils when went with "Bose-Einstein condensate"...

    --
    Sometimes the best solution to morale problems is just to fire all the unhappy people.
  20. The original press release by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 4, Informative
    From Colorado University, the original press release is here.

    If you want the actual paper, and have access to the journal, it's published on the online version of Physics Review Letters Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 040403 (2004)

    abstract here for those with access.

  21. This is news?! :-) by ylodi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Croatian scientist Danijel Djurek discovered superconducting ceramic that works reliably at room temperature. Danijel says that current will flow without resistance through the material, which is a mixture of lead, lead carbonate, and silver oxides. Here is article in today's croatian daily paper (sorry, there is no translation). Old news on you.com.au.

  22. Sensationalism at its best by nniillss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While it's impossible to tell from this shitty article what was actually observed, it's clear that this super-low-temperature experiment has nothing to do with high-Tc superconductivity. At least not more than a million previous experiments; a more likely candidate would have been experiments done long ago on superfluid 3He.

  23. Re:Sixth form of matter? by jochietoch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Frankly, I wish they would stop claiming every phase transition to form 'the n-th state of matter'. There are literally hundreds of phase transitions in nature, especially at low temperatures. If you start calling every sector of the phase diagram 'a New State Of Matter (tm)' on an equal footing with gases, liquids and solids, you can't stop at Bose-Einstein condensates and these fermionic condensates. What about superconducting metals, vortex lattices, liquid crystals, flowing sand, and what have you. All New Forms Of Matter. That is to say, it's completely arbitrary. Sure it's cool what these guys have done, but they deliberately misrepresent their result to make a catchy headline. A scientist has a responsibility not to do that.

  24. Re:Sixth form of matter? by mainframemouse · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Bose-Einstein condensate" was created in 1995, Douglas Adams was very much alive and kicking.

  25. HIgh Tc by geordieboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think this is possibly a big step towards room temperature superconductivity. The point is that in normal (even high Tc) superconductors, the forces between the cooper pairs are rather weak, hence the need to cool to at least 70K or so to get the effect. In this fermionic stuff, the force is a little stronger (at least, this is claimed in the article). Thus it may be possible to design a material which uses the same principle as the fermionic gas but in the form of a solid material at say 300K (just as high Tc superconductors are essentially solid B-E condensates, more or less).
    BTW, I'm a cosmologist, not a condensed matter person, so I could be talking out of my arse.

    --
    The world is everything that is the case
  26. Maglev trains are nice but... by timepilot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Okay, I'm all for more efficient generators and maglev trains, but I'd really like to see transporters, warp drive, photon torpedos or at the very least a good tricorder.

    Any chance the *next* form of matter can help here?

  27. The Original Article by narftrek · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here's the original (and official in my book) article.
    I read this yesterday and thought to myself "wow this would make a great /. article." Lo and behold it shows up here. Damn work for blocking non .gov addresses!!

  28. Cooper Pairs by verloren · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm sure there's a superconductor engineer reading this somewhere, but in the meantime I'll point out that we don't really know what causes superconductivity. Cooper pairs are a good theory, but haven't been proven to be the cause. So coming up with a substance that is similar to a thing that might cause superconductivity is hopeful, but let's not get carried away.

    Cheers, Paul

  29. You're thinking of monorails by jeti · · Score: 2, Informative


    You're thinking of monorails.
    This is a maglev.
    It routinely does 267 mph.

  30. question is... by plams · · Score: 2, Funny

    does it matter? or does it anti-matter?

  31. Heisenberg says... by nacturation · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why, by making an observation of course! After that their quantum state collapses to just one state, either a real or an armchair quantum physicist.

    The problem is that you'll either be able to read what they wrote, or determine how intelligent the post is -- but by knowing one, the other is forever lost. Quite the quantum quandry!

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  32. Brrrr by CrabbMan · · Score: 2, Funny

    Seeing as this form of matter only exists at billionth of a degree C above absolute zero, I can see this as being useful only for New York trains in the winter. . .

  33. I used to have a room temperature superconductor by panurge · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I actually had part of a sample on my desk at one point in the early 90s. It was about 3/4 of a turn from an experimental helix, and the reason that it was 3/4 of a turn was that when the current had been put through the helix it had abruptly stopped superconducting and broken up. As I understand it, this is the big problem with superconductors: the runaway thermal destruction the moment the combination of temperature and field strength exceeds the superconducting envelope.

    It's interesting how all the big ideas of the 1940s and 1950s have come to nothing: no people walking around on the Moon or Mars, no widespread personal jet aircraft, no fusion reactors, nuclear power limited by safety concerns and the availability of cooling water, limited use of superconducting magnets, lasers being used in CD players rather than as enormous weapons. Fifty years later, most research seems to be into making things smaller and smaller, or making tiny quantities of exotic things (as in this case.) Surely the remaining proponents of the Big Ideas should have learned to stay quiet by now?

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  34. Trying to understand what occurs... by GameGod0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ok, so we've got Potassium atoms forming Coopers pairs. In a normal Superconductive state, Coopers pairs are electrons which have opposite spin, thus resulting in a net spin of 0. Because this is a whole integer spin, they behave like bosons (according to Bose-Einstein statistics) rather than fermions. In short, they behave more like photons than electrons.

    Now, according to this more informative article that someone already linked to,

    "Interestingly, the constituents of matter - protons, neutrons and electrons - are all fermions, whereas a composite particle, such as an atom, is a boson if the total number of protons, neutrons and electrons is even, and a fermion if the total number is odd."

    Is it that simple to make a whole atom behave like a boson? Weird.

    (One more thing... According to somewhere on Wikipedia, a proton's spin is 1/2... So if you have (-?)1/2 spin from the proton, and (?-)1/2 spin from the electron in a Hydrogen atom, how DOESN'T it behave like a boson?)

  35. Fermion pairing was observed in superfluid He-3. by poszi · · Score: 2, Interesting
    These are nice experiments but definitly not "a scientific breakthrough in providing a new type of quantum mechanical behavior".

    Yes, fermions (particle with spin which is an odd multiple of 1/2) are different beasts than bosons (with integer spin) and fermions cannot form Bose-Einstein condensate but fermions can form pairs that are bosonic. It has been observed in many cases. Superfluid He-3 (which is fermionic) requires fermion pairing and it has been observed quite long ago (and given 1996 Nobel Prize in physics). So getting Bose-Einstein condensate from rubidium atoms is interesting research but this is not a breakthrough and not a "sixth state of matter". This is still Bose-Einstein condensate but made not from atoms but pairs of atoms.

    --

    Save the bandwidth. Don't use sigs!

  36. Superconductors by pmj · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've seen lots of posts saying "this has nothing to do with room temperature superconductors, but really cold gasses!" and whatnot.

    The point is that the pairing formation of these fermions is potentially related to the Cooper pairing in electrons (also fermions). While it obviously isn't going to lead directly to a high temperature superconductor, the better we understand the mechanism IN GENERAL, the easier it will be for materials scientists and other condensed matter physicists to start figuring out how to get the critical temperature of REGULAR, SOLID superconductors up.

    In that regard, this is big news.

    --
    Are you BioCurious?
  37. Re:Sixth form of matter? by Dashing+Leech · · Score: 2, Funny
    The fifth? You don't remember? Pink hair, spoke with an accent, she ran off with that bald taxi driver... saved the world. Sheesh, some people.

    That's the fifth element, you boron.

  38. Re:Too many references to superconductors by PSandusky · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These guys keep talking about superconductors but the fact remains that this is fundamental research with no real applications now or even in the near future.

    Oh, I'm sorry -- is this your field? Yes, now I understand. You are entirely qualified to discuss the viabilities of this research for the purposes of application now or down the road, you brilliant slashdotter, you.

    Just what makes that "fact?" Surely facts are universal -- so would I be getting a reflection of that if I went to a chemistry Ph.D. friend of mine (who happens to specialize in development of superconductors) and asked about honest prospects regarding applications?

    Smacks like "gotta tell them at least about some possible application to keep us funded"-talk.

    Smacks of "if it ain't instant gratification it's worthless"-talk to me, actually...

    --
    "What's the use in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes?" --Fourth Doctor, "Robot"
  39. Re:Too many references to superconductors by severoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ooh...this sort of comment makes me mad. There's no possible way anyone can know what will come out of any fundamental research tomorrow, a year from now, or ten years from now. Many, many conveniences of modern day life sprang forth from researches into the most arcane of topics.

    It especially gets me in this particular case, because we're talking about research that will likely bear as much fruit as the early 1900's physics research that later served as the foundation for the modern transistor.

    I shall not be as vainglorious as to assume I can say it better than it's already been said, so let's see what a few of the titans had to say on this...

    [T]he answer appears to us before the question.... Practical application is found by not looking for it, and one can say that the whole progress of civilization rests on that principle.... [P]ractical questions are most often solved by means of existing theories.... It seldom happens that important mathematical researches are directly undertaken in view of a given practical use: they are inspired by the desire which is the common motive of every scientific work, the desire to know and understand.
    --Jacques Hadamard, The Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field
    I have never done anything "useful." No discovery of mine has made, or is likely to make, directly or indirectly, for good or ill, the least idfference to the amenity of the world.... Judged by all practical standards, the value of my mathematical life is nil.
    --G. H. Hardy, Apology
    Hardy is speaking of his contributions in general, of which the search for prime numbers was significant, one of the most abstruse and abstract areas of pure mathematics one could name at the time of the research. Even this, however, in a mere 70 years yielded important practical applications in public key encryption.

    Bertrand Russell spent much of his time trying to find a definition of "number" in terms of pure logic, having found a flaw in Gottleb Frege's attempt to do the same. This was the purest of pure intellection and Russell himself would have hooted with laughter if you'd asked him about practical applications at the time. He even found himself wondering: "It seemed unworthy of a grown man to spend his time on such trivialities..."

    In fact, Russell's work eventually brought forth Principia Mathematica, a key development in the modern study of the foundations of mathematics. Among the fruits of that study have been, so far, nothing less than victory in World War II (at least, victory at lower cost than would otherwise have been possible) and machines like the one on which I type this.

    I just previewed this post and read it, and I realized I've used words like "vainglorious" and "intellection". I've clearly been watching too much Dennis Miller.

    sev
    --
    but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
  40. It shouldn't be necessary by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Research as fundamental as this should be funded, with no regard to practical applications. These scientists shoudn't be forced to think about practical applications, that is the job of other scientists, later in the process.

  41. this is really cool by __aahlyu4518 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    from the article:
    "They cooled potassium gas to a billionth of a degree C above absolute zero or minus 459 degrees F -- which is the point at which matter stops moving. "

    So you have something that could bring a superconductor closer, which would save HUUUGGGEEE amount of energy. Only 1 thing... you need to cool it down to minus 459 degrees F. And that would cost exactly how much energy???

  42. Re:When can I buy a coil of it? by Catbeller · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Hmmmmm; how are they going to come to a process that can produce an extruded filament that can be bought in Radio Shack, if cooling to such a low temperature is needed in the process?"

    Well, the point is the process, or some future decendant of it, will produce materials that will superconduct AFTER it is warmed up to room temperature. That this is only the first step to creating new, heretofore unknown superconductors that will perform to different specs.

    As for how it would be economical, which I think your point is: how economical is the process that builds silicon processors? How incredibly, ridiculously persnickity and expensive. But economies of scale and massive investment by both government and private concerns made factories theat could turn out enough chips to change the world.

    Superconducting materials at room temperature will change so many things. Motors. Power transmission. Industrial manufacturing. Transportation. No matter how hard it is to make the room temperature superconductors, it would be more expensive NOT to make them. It'll be done.

  43. Re:Privatize Education by TGK · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are you out of your mind? The only one of those that has the slightest prayer of working is private school.... and even that will only provide an education to those who can afford it.

    Argue all you like, there is a fundamental truism in Education. Those who can do, those who can't teach. The reason is simple, teaching doesn't pay shit. The related catch 22, which is that if you pay teachers more you'll attract some decent teachers but a lot of people who are just looking for job security and a nice salary, is also pretty much inescapable. Again, argue all you want, at this stage it's about what you believe about human nature.

    So moving on, if the basic problem is that teachers (as a whole, there are of course individual exceptions) are some of the least qualified people in their fields. We are confronted with the problem of how to get good teachers into the classroom while introducing a minimum number of disinterested individuals. Let's examine how the three methods you advocate do that.

    Private Schools -- Have the option of paying more, but frequently don't. They do have the advantage of being more or less immune to the completely insane federal regulations (such as No Child Left Behind) and therefore able to operate within the bounds of reality, but will ultimately fail the American People because we need to educate more than just the children of the wealthy. Higher scores? Of course, most standardized test scores can be expressed as a function of socio-economic status

    Home schools -- Again, a problem of who can get into it. Most American families require two incomes to survive, and that's not addressing those with only one parent. How can you home school these kids?

    Community Schools -- Here you encounter many of the same problems as public schools (in terms of teacher pay and regulations). This isn't solving the problem, it's shifting it off onto a community with fewer resources less able to deal with the it.

    So what can we do? Well a big part of the problem is funding. Michigan has boosted test scores through the roof by socializing their education across the state. No longer is the funding of a school tied to the taxes generated locally, rather all those taxes are thrown together and applied to all schools across the state. The result is the application of funds where they are needed the most.

    Another part remains the ability to attract good teachers to bad areas. Wealthy school districts with well behaved kids and lots of resources will never have problems attracting teachers. Ask at your local college's education school... most of the applications go to the ritzy 'burbs. So how do you get teachers into the inner city? The rural backwoods areas? You pay them for it of course, and you pay them in the best way possible.... student loans. Granting temporary licensure to BA and BS holders to teach for three years is fairly easy to do in most states (No Child Left Behind will make it all but impossible). Let these young graduates teach the next generation, let them emerge from those disadvantaged schools debt free and able to enter the professional world with solid experiance and confidance. The forgiveness of tens of thousands in debt will draw graduates to these jobs like nothing else and will allow these underfunded schools some of the nations brightest minds, if only for a few years.

    What we're doing now doesn't work. You're right, we need real change, but not the kind of change that only benefits the few. Public education must benefit all. Should we fail even a few, we have failed the community as a whole. Education is the silver bullet. Crime? Hunger? Even longevity is beneficially affected by education. We don't need "No Child Left Behind" or school vouchers, we need to actually leave no children behind, and we need to do it be strengthening the public schools.

    --
    Killfile(TGK)
    No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
  44. Important Point by Maxdan · · Score: 2, Informative

    A lot of people seem to be saying this has nothing to do with superconductivity and the scientists are deliberately misleading the press. The success of the group was the formation of this condonsate at such a high temperature. I know it doesn't sound high, but it is orders of magnitude above when such a condensate should theoretically form. They acheived this by manipulating other factors in the materials local environment (a particular magnetic field). Superconductors form a similar condensate and if the condonsate could be formed at higher temperature by changing some environmental factor other than temperature, it may be possible to create a room temperature superconductor. I think thats the point that was been made and would have been one of the motivating factors for the research.

  45. the Pauli Exclusion Principle... by karlandtanya · · Score: 3, Informative
    Says that


    "Only one fermion of a given type is allowed to be in a specific quantum state. A quantum state is a discrete level that can be labeled. The labeling gives information about the spatial characteristics (e.g. the orbit) and the spin of the particle. Two electrons can exist in the same quantum orbital, but only if they have different spin states. No two electrons of the same spin can occupy the same orbital state. "


    That's why this is interesting.


    yeah, I've got a degree in it. But engineering pays better.


    Just google for "Pauli Exclusion Principle" and Fermion.

    --
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
    1. Re:the Pauli Exclusion Principle... by geekoid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "yeah, I've got a degree in it. But engineering pays better."

      unless you invent a room temp. super conductor...

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  46. Name Change! by tarsi210 · · Score: 4, Funny

    This will not do! I demand that the scientists come up with a name for this stuff that is more fun. You just can't use this properly in sci-fi films. Observe:

    Captain Shamerica: Cease and desist, foul scum!
    Grokthor: Never! *rowr*
    Captain Shamerica: Then I shall blast you with my fermionic condensate ray!

    See? Poor Captain Shamerica now looks like a pussy because he's using some weirdo-thingy to whack the bad guys.

    New name! New name! *forms picket line*

  47. A Physicist's Answer by jpflip · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's not really that simple. The hydrogen atom (taken as a whole) is ALWAYS a boson, there's no doubt about that - the spins add up right. What you are asking about, however, is whether you can see any interesting condensation effects because of it. That turns out to be very difficult to arrange. You need to get a whole bunch of hydrogen atoms together in exactly the same state (no excited states, and they all must be moving with the same velocity). More importantly, quantum effects (like condensation) only become important when the (excuse the jargon) wavefunctions of the particles begin to substantially overlap. Basically, the "particles" are a little smeared out by quantum mechanics, and you only get quantum weirdness when these smears overlap. The size of the smear is inversely proportional to the mass of the object. Hydrogen atoms are 2000 times heavier than electrons, and so they have to be brought to very high densities before they can behave this way. The upshot is that the only way we know to do this is to bring the atoms to a nearly dead stop (hence EXTREME cold) in a small region and watch the magic happen. So the atoms are always boson, but only under extreme conditions do we care.

  48. how is this related to this year's nobel prize? by sluke · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This year one of the nobel prizes in physics went to Tony Legget who explained experiments over twenty years ago in which Helium 3, when cooled low enough exhibited superfluidity. In this scenario the Helium 3 which is a fermion pairs up much like low Tc cooper pairing (except in a p-wave state). This allows it to flow without resistance in addition to giving it interesting magnetic properties. What I would like to know is how this experiment is different from the experimental work on Helium 3. It seems that both involve pairing of fermion atoms to form bosons, except that somehow in this example there are charge carriers... Does someone have a reference to the article at the preprint archive (or in a journal)?

  49. Re:This is news?! :-) - Looooose translation by ZackStone · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I finally get to use my croatian knowledge for something ....

    Here we go:

    Huge Discovery

    Danijel Djurek manufactured a techologically revolutionary material that helps conserve energy.

    Croatian physycist discovered a conductor of electicity without resistance. Even though results are verified additional investigation is still needed according to Mladen Prester from the Physics Institute

    Conduction of electiricity without loss and vehicles which with their small electrical motors travel thousands of kilometars [without recharching i guess] will soon be an everyday occurance. This revlutionary discovery, a material composed of led, silver, oxygen and water [maybee hydrogen], surounded by [i think] copper, performs as a superconductor, insists the croatian physisist Dr. Danijel Djurek. The global independant labaratory already verified this croatian scientists discovery and have announced a new technological revolution.

    Some are skeptical

    The quest for superconductivity, transfer of electricity without loss resulting from resistance, lasted 15 years. Massive production of wires and the installation of new materials in various compontens, ie. speakers and electrical motors, should begin in the upcoming months in Croatia and should expand throughout the world afterwards. If it suceeds, a new industrial branch should make a contribution to croatian economy.

    The world acknowledges

    In order for a scientific discovery to be acknowledged and subsequently published in various journals it has to be verified by independent labaratories whose members are secretely selected by teams of particular journals. Dr. Danijel Djurek's discovery has been given the green light by the independant labaratory. As a result of which an article in The Economist, Scientific American, New Scientist and a scientifict brach of New York Times, about the new superconductive material has been published. This is a landmark discovery for technology and [maybee economy, not sure]. With current techniques, transmition over high power electrical lines, results in a loss of 30% of the manufactured power. An additional 20% is lost at the consumer level. The new material is not only ecologically acceptable and will save electrical energy, time and money - said Dr. D. Djurek. Despite the support of coleagues and scientists from other parts of the word and a despite a worldwide [maybee global] ackowledgment many remain skeptical becuase Djurek's material does not emit a magnetic field. More correcty, Meissner's [something maybee work] which was though to be required in order for a material to be superconductive.

    I will continue in next post as it is not relevant to discussion any more but will be there in case you want to read.

  50. should called it "nobelium" by peter303 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When you see hype like this, they are gunning for the Nobel prize. I doubt they'll grant one for fermiotic matter, since it is an extension of the efforts that creatic Einstein-Bose matter and won the nobel in the late 1990s.

  51. Re:I might also point out... by symbolic · · Score: 2, Insightful


    That even with the so-called "pros," much of the ideas associated with quantum dynamics is theory. While some is based on real physical phenomenon (the particle/wave duality of light for example), other ideas, like the notion that there exist quantum entities that float around in spacetime (moving backward and forward in time - we notice their presence only when they happen to share the same point in spacetime that we occupy), qualify as nothing more than "the best way we can think of at the moment to explain what we see." Fortunately, a good imagination doesn't require a PhD in quantum physics.

  52. Re:Sixth form of matter? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 4, Funny

    Okay, what was the fifth?

    Mila Jovovich. Duh.

    --
    "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  53. hyper-cold and hyper-hot new states of matter by peter303 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Note these new states of matter occur at super-cold or super-hot conditions. At super-cold the atoms stop motion and engage in bizaire quantum mingled quantum states. You needed a micro-degree about absolute zero for Bose matter and a nano-degee for fermatic matter.
    There was a physics conference earlier in january debating whether gluon plasmas have been seen or not. When you heat and collide protons to billions of degrees, almost the speed of light, they may just merge into one big quark soup, not seen since the Big Bang.

  54. Re:show me by jafuser · · Score: 2, Funny

    the economics will never see a real useful maglev

    "never" is a very long time. =)

    --
    Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
  55. More Information by InfoSec · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's a VERY detailed article about the whole thing over at Physics Web.

    --

    Wherever you go, there I am...
  56. Re:Sixth form of matter? by squaretorus · · Score: 2, Informative

    stupidly I was refering to the previous name without being explicit about this - now roughly 300 people have told me that Mr Adams is dead, a fact I know and feel bad about every time I think 'i didnt finish that dirk gently book' - i didnt finish it because neither did he!

    Pratchett is funny - but with no disrespect to the man, Adams pisses all over his big funny hat!

  57. Re:Too many references to superconductors by Transcendent · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These guys keep talking about superconductors but the fact remains that this is fundamental research with no real applications now or even in the near future.

    Wanna talk about pointless research, I heard about these zany scientists that were looking into interactions between electicity and magnetism (like anything good could come of that). I think they were trying to make something called a "Cathode Ray". I mean, what good would that do the general public? Are we going to zap things with this mysterious "Cathode Ray" or something? It sounds like something from a bad sci-fi movie.

    These people should be cut from funding... they're just waisting tax payers money. Who ever heard of a Cathode Ray anyway?

    ...oh wait...

  58. Re:Logic? by wurp · · Score: 2, Informative

    Aha! Now I can actually see where you're coming from, and refute it, I think... can you name a 'quantummy effect' that happens at liquid nitrogen temps (other than superconductivity ;), and not at room temp? I can't either, and that's what I base my conviction that we don't know when we'll see room temp superconductivity, but it may as likely be soon as late.

    I think we're arguing based on the same "feel" for what enables superconductivity, I just have different beliefs about where those things happen than you do. To me, the big barrier was making it 30 kelvins away from absolute zero, which is the zone of weirdness. Once it's out of that weirdness zone, it seems like "merely" a technical problem. That said, if you had said we probably won't see it in 20 years, I would have been right there with you. 50, and I would have been suspicious. However, for 100 years out, I think we are talking out of our hat to project anything other than that things will be very different.

    It's nice to know that our feelings for each other are mutual. ;-)

  59. The US power distribution infrastructure... by pr0ntab · · Score: 2, Insightful

    consumes 30% of generated power in transit.

    Superconductor research (especially that which works at "room temperature") could be immediately applied to this problem once refined, drastically reducing energy costs and our largest source of pollution.

    The sooner, the better, I say.

    --
    Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
  60. Plus... by DarkMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "sixth form of matter"

    So, let's count, shall we - we have:

    1. Solid.
    2. Liquid
    3. Gas
    4. Plasma
    5. Bose-einstein condensate
    7. Nemetic liquid crystals
    8. Smetic liquid crystals
    9. The other type of liquid crystals whoes name escapes me
    10. Glass (Arguable)
    11. That funky stuff that neurtron stars are made of
    12-15 truely wierd QM stuff, like charmonium

    And now, the newest member: 6

    Maybe, just maybe, that's an over hyped term. There are lot's of states of matter. I've probably missed some.

    Can we please kill the meme that there are only a very small number.

    Yours, a miffed quantum materials physicist

  61. Re:Sixth form of matter? by kevininspace · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How about the condensed matter that white dwarf stars are made of? Nuclei bouncing about in an electron soup. Heat it and it shrinks! This stuff is held up by the Pauli exclusion principle for crying out loud, it has to be another form of matter

    How about neutronium? this stuff is weird, governed by the strong force.

  62. Re:Sixth form of matter? by ryanjensen · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I would imagine you could expect a patent soon ... though not for what you'd like to complain about. Rather than being able to patent the "form" of matter, the scientists will be able to apply for a patent (if they haven't already) on the *specific process* they used to create material in that form.

    Now, if the patented process turns out to be the only way to physically create the new form of matter, then yes, your fears will be realized. Darn, after all that research, the scientists are the only ones allowed to profit from their discovery!