Slashdot Mirror


High Temperature Bose-Einstein Condensation Observed

ultracool writes "Two separate research groups claim to have observed Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) in quasiparticles at much higher temperatures than atomic BEC — one at 19 Kelvin and the other at room temperature. The 19 K BEC was composed of half-matter, half-light quasi-particles called polaritons, and the room temperature condensate was composed of 'magnons' (packets of magnetic energy). There is some skepticism among physicists as to whether these really are BECs. If they are true BECs, these experiments are the first evidence of them in the solid state." Just in case you need a brush up on BEC, like I did, check out the Wikipedia article on Bose-Einstein condensation.

9 of 106 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The Wiki article by Zugok · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You could have tried the external links at the end of the page.

    --
    "I just can't sit while people are saying nonsense in a meeting without saying it's nonsense" J Watson, Sci Am 288:(4)51
  2. Solid State? by FlavorText · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I thought Bose-Einstein condensate was a completely different state of matter. How then, could it appear in a "solid state"?

    --
    "Yes, I do have something to hide - my shame."
    1. Re:Solid State? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No offense, but that explanation is almost entirely incomprehensible. It introduces unfamiliar terms ("crystal," "effective spring constants," "effective phase transition," etc.) with no context from which to infer their meaning, and uses words in ambiguous ways (for example, it took me a while to understand that a "mode" describes not a single back-and-forth motion, but rather a specific frequency of motion). Additionally, it provides no assistance in making significant conceptual leaps, such as the one from "modes" to this new and apparently redundant concept called "quanta."

      I was lost long before you ever mentioned the Bose-Einstein Condensate. It's possible you were cursed with a particularly slow pupil, I'll admit. But even so, your lesson plan was no help either.

      I understand you're trying to help, at least, and I'm sure everyone appreciates the effort. But God, man, please try to work on your teaching skills before you're asked to actually start teaching.

    2. Re:Solid State? by Engine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Being in a BEC does not halt radioactive decay. I don't see why it should.

      Radioactive decay does affect a BEC. Firstly, it frees energy that will heat the BEC. A BEC of atoms is so cold that even recoils from (ordinary light) photons destroys it, then imaging what the recoils from the decay would do. Secondly, a BEC can only consist of identical particles. Emitting a alpha or beta particle leaves you with an other species and this can no longer be part of the BEC.

      I am a Ph.D. student actually working with BECs so I should know what I am talking about. I am not as confident expressing my thoughts in english, so sorry for any confusion I might cause.

  3. A *live* Wikipedia page? Thanks guys. Nice work. by NereusRen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh, for the love of...

    Editors, if you link a Wikipedia page from the summary, PLEASE link a historical revision. That way, whatever vandalism happens won't affect the link, and thus fewer people will be tempted to even vandalize at all.

    Seriously, do the editors have any sense at all? It's not like this is a new problem.

  4. Re:A *live* Wikipedia page? Thanks guys. Nice work by Pink+Tinkletini · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And whatever corrections are made won't be updated in the link, either. With many eyes, after all, all errors are shallow--isn't that the founding principle of Wikipedia? A crush of visitors should improve the article beyond anything seen in Britannica or the New York Post.

    Wait, what?

  5. Re:huh by raka · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You intuation is right.

    They cool thing about BEC is that it violates that intuition. Until B&E published, everyone thought that "much higher than zero kelvin" meant when that (in the appropriate units) the temperature (i.e. roughly the average energy per particle) had to be (much) less than the difference in energy between lowest state and any of the the others. If you think about this assumption, you will see that it nearly comes from
    Bolzman's law (and if you don't know what Boltzman's law is, and are not a science or engineering student, you probably don't care).

    Satyendranath (sp?) Bose came up with the bombshell that although Bolztman's law is right Bolztman's law operates differently for quantum particles. Some quantum particles (nowadays called Bosons) are more likely than expected to get into the same quantum state. They will do this wheneve the temperature is low enough
    that their momentum uncertainty forces their position uncertainty to be at least as large as the typical distance between partciles (i.e their wavefunctions must "overlap" coherently, and again if you don't understand, you don't care).

    So even ordinary BECs happen at relatively high temeratures. Unfortunately these temperatures are still in the nanokelvin range, at least for atoms under experimental conditions.

  6. Please translate. by posterlogo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have a Ph.D. in biology, and I am interested in current research in many other fields as well. That said, I have no idea WTF the *significance* of the current breakthrough is. What does it mean? Why isn't there even a one sentence half-assed attempt in the summary? Thanks for the wiki-link. If I wanted to seriously brush up while trying to navigate the ridiculous wiki, I'd go there. Seriously, most people might just want to know why they should give a shit that BE condensation has been observed at solid-state. Don't get me wrong, I think there is something fascinating in all this, just wish the summary would have pointed to that aspect instead of regurgitating the so-called claimes of a breakthrough.

  7. Slashdot used to be more technical like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously, I had no idea Slashdot articles could be this far above my head.

    Slashdot started off as a strongly science/tech-oriented discussion site, and articles that required detailed knowledge of the subject matter were common in those early days (I have a 4-digit Slashdot ID so this is first-hand).

    But popularity brought in a broader cross-section of the population, and deep science and engineering knowledge is rare in the population at large. The fact that nowadays the majority of Slashdot articles are merely rehashes of some non-technical person's blog is just the editors keeping in tune with their majority audience. It's sad, but inevitable.