Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Chill Mirror to Near Absolute Zero

An anonymous reader writes "Physicists have managed to cool a dime-sized mirror to within one degree of absolute zero. This is the lowest laser-induced freeze yet achieved with a visible object. Laser cooling involves firing pulses of light at a specific frequency that exactly matches an atom's motions."

202 comments

  1. Thought of that once.... by hcmtnbiker · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I actually thought of making a instant refrigerator like that once, like a microwave speed but a freezer. My goals where of course shot down when I did research into how the limitations(thing to work really have to me microscopic), as well as the Microsoft had already patented it. Go figure.

    --
    If i had one dollar for every brain you dont have, i would have $1.
    1. Re:Thought of that once.... by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 1, Funny

      My goals where of course shot down when I did research into how the limitations(thing to work really have to me microscopic) Clearly not anymore. Your dreams can become reality! People do eat mirrors right?
      --
      Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    2. Re:Thought of that once.... by SnowZero · · Score: 4, Funny

      I've heard that eating a mirror was bad luck.

      Nothing came up on Snopes.com, so it must be true...

    3. Re:Thought of that once.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard that eating a mirror was bad luck.

      Nothing came up on Snopes.com, so it must be true...
      It's true, I saw it on MythBusters.
    4. Re:Thought of that once.... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      It's surprising how well that actually works.

      --
      It's been a long time.
  2. Other uses... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Could they make a cheaper version of this system to build more efficient air-conditioners?

    1. Re:Other uses... by Boogaroo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Only if they can get lasers to stop burning 10x the amount of energy that you put in to get it to fire.
      (I know that some are more efficient than others, but you all know there's no free lunch)

      I'd be willing to bet that the massive amount of power required to cool all the air in your house would make you bankrupt in less than a year(and really piss off your power company).

    2. Re:Other uses... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Funny

      but you all know there's no free lunch

      Tell that to my cousin Tommy, the mooch.
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Other uses... by somersault · · Score: 1

      I'd be willing to bet that the massive amount of power required to cool all the air in your house would make you bankrupt in less than a year(and really piss off your power company). Not to mention the cost of all those extra layers of clothing and cups of hot cocoa you need while walking around near absolute zero
      --
      which is totally what she said
  3. Cue by phalse+phace · · Score: 0

    "sharks with frickin' laser" posts...

    1. Re:Cue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't it just scream FREEZE RAY!

    2. Re:Cue by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      Cool!

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    3. Re:Cue by doi · · Score: 1

      nah, that's old. Now it's "sharks with frickin' absolute zero mirrors".

      --
      A man's reach must exceed his grasp, or what's an erection for?
    4. Re:Cue by orclevegam · · Score: 0, Redundant

      No, no, no, it's "Sharks with frrickin' freeze lasers!"

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
  4. One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cool....

  5. a mirror for The Fonze by Blue+Shifted · · Score: 1

    Happy Days!

    i'm still waiting for someone to chill something to absolute zero, and it disapears....

    1. Re:a mirror for The Fonze by gardyloo · · Score: 1

      You're saying that Henry Winkler is SOOO cool that his career has disappeared?

    2. Re:a mirror for The Fonze by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And as long as it still has an energy diffusion velocity after that, you get antimatter!

  6. As for me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was nearly first post!

  7. But... by jcr · · Score: 0

    A mirror that cold would totally fog up, eh? So you couldn't use it for shaving.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  8. See, kids? by FlyByPC · · Score: 2, Funny

    Science *is* cool. Sometimes literally!

    --
    Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
    1. Re:See, kids? by packeteer · · Score: 1

      Puns like that are why kids dont like us scientists...

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  9. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by Merc248 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Overclocking!

    --
    "Hegelians, who love a synthesis, will probably conclude that he wears a wig." - Bertrand Russell
  10. Mirror by biocute · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What's the significance of chilling a dime-sized mirror, vs chilling a dime?

    1. Re:Mirror by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      You get 13 years if you crack a dime-sized mirror or a criminal offense if you crack a dime. Since most research these days are funded by the government, cracking a mirror is the safest course of action even though you're at risk of skewing the research data for years on end.

    2. Re:Mirror by glwtta · · Score: 5, Funny

      Makes you look cool?

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    3. Re:Mirror by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

      Probably about $99,999.90. Im guessing that the mirror had to be specifically designed!

    4. Re:Mirror by nanamin · · Score: 0

      When the atoms in the mirror are slowed down enough, interesting effects such as quantum entanglement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Entanglement between the light and the mirror can be observed. Using an object which is highly reflective allows them to study phenomenon which would otherwise be unobservable.

    5. Re:Mirror by ZombieRoboNinja · · Score: 1

      Well, when they get the mirror close enough to absolute zero, apparently it will "show its quantum behavior for the first time," which I assume means it will reflect THE FUTURE.

    6. Re:Mirror by MoralHazard · · Score: 1

      What's the significance of chilling a dime-sized mirror, vs chilling a dime?

      No idea, but the significance of chilling WITH a dime is that I'm high as hell on some stinky, stinky weed.

      JK, Mom.

    7. Re:Mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the significance of chilling a dime-sized mirror, vs chilling a dime?

      Cold, hard cash

    8. Re:Mirror by dmsuperman · · Score: 1

      "-sized mirror"

      --
      :(){ :|:& };: Go!
    9. Re:Mirror by rohan972 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, then they'd be making some cold, hard cash.

  11. The Real Question is... by Lifyre · · Score: 1

    Does it make good ice cream?

    --
    I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
  12. Bad luck by brer_rabbit · · Score: 1

    This should answer the age old question, if a mirror at absolute zero breaks, do you have bad luck?

    1. Re:Bad luck by Overkill+Nbuta · · Score: 1

      No because Absolute Zero * 7 Years bad luck = 0. Anything multiplied by 0 is 0!

    2. Re:Bad luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't 0! equal to 1?

    3. Re:Bad luck by pyite · · Score: 1

      Anything multiplied by 0 is 0!

      So n * 0 = 1?

      Just kidding, playing on the fact that 0! = 1.

      --

      "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

    4. Re:Bad luck by robgig1088 · · Score: 1

      o_____o I totally did not know that.... How does 0! = 1....

    5. Re:Bad luck by lavid · · Score: 1

      it's part of the definition of factorial.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factorial

      --
      If Bush wants to kill the terrorists, he should jump off a cliff.
    6. Re:Bad luck by Deltaspectre · · Score: 1

      Well, you see... (0 != 1) == 1

      And with a very lax compiler (0! = 1) == 1

      --
      My UID is prime... is yours?
    7. Re:Bad luck by demeteloaf · · Score: 1

      For non-positive integer inputs, the factorial function generalizes to the Gamma function. That's how you get stuff like 0! = 1 and (.5)! = sqrt(pi)/2

      --
      If there's anything more important than my ego around, i want it caught and shot now.
    8. Re:Bad luck by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      This should answer the age old question, if a mirror at absolute zero breaks, do you have bad luck? Absolutely not positively nor negatively absolute bad luck.
  13. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by camperdave · · Score: 4, Funny

    could someone explain what the significance of this is?

    Perhaps we could reflect on it.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  14. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by sholden · · Score: 3, Informative

    You could try reading the first sentence of the article.

  15. I imagine that by pavon · · Score: 5, Informative

    the surface has to be highly reflective for this to work. If it absorbed the photons, then it's temperature would increase, and if it was transparent the photons wouldn't interact with the material very much, and thus would not be able to cool it.

    1. Re:I imagine that by weighn · · Score: 1

      IANAP, but I'd guess that a super-flat surface is needed so they can have a precise measurement of the distance between the laser and the object being zapped. That way they can time the laser freq with the atomic vibrations. There's just too many mountainous bumps on a dime.

      --
      Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
    2. Re:I imagine that by gardyloo · · Score: 1

      The beauty of laser-cooling is that surface roughness (on a moderate scale; the face of a dime is pretty rough, but a "smooth" piece of metal probably wouldn't affect things too much) isn't a problem. Nor are small motions in the direction of the laser axis. In fact, it's the doppler effect of the motions to and fro in the laser beam axis that *helps* laser cooling work. It's nice to have atomic transitions near the laser's frequency, but it's not especially necessary. And I kind of doubt that phonons present in the mirror at any kind of low temperature are at frequencies anything close to a typical laser frequency. This is all speculation on my part, of course.

    3. Re:I imagine that by shaitand · · Score: 0

      Then why use a mirror? Mirrors absorb light, there are much better materials if you are hoping to reflect electrons.

    4. Re:I imagine that by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      I think you're confusing "mirror" with "heat sink".

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    5. Re:I imagine that by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      Mirrors absorb light?

      Wow.

      And they are hoping to reflect photons (which are light) not electrons.

      I think you need to go retake some science classes. Seriously.

    6. Re:I imagine that by shaitand · · Score: 1

      'Mirrors absorb light?

      Wow.'

      Yes. Everything absorbs light but your typical glass mirror absorbs quite a bit more than say mylar.

      'And they are hoping to reflect photons (which are light) not electrons.'

      Yup, I thought one word and my fingers typed another. It happens to me quite a bit, especially at 4am.

      'I think you need to go retake some science classes. Seriously.'

      I would always love to take more science classes. That doesn't change the fact that there are much more reflective surfaces than mirrors. Drywall coated with flat white paint will bounce more photons back at you than a silvered glass mirror. Any school kid can tell you that.

    7. Re:I imagine that by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Silvered glass mirrors absorb more light than freshly painted drywall and substantially more light than a reflective substance like mylar. Feel free to ask any high school science student. Actually a high school stoner might be a better choice, they discover this when they need to save every possible photon because the under-powered light they use to grow their pot in the closet.

    8. Re:I imagine that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That's an interesting point, but there's no doubt that mirrors are superior to drywall for this application. Why?
      1. A mirror's surface is highly polished to reflect specularly; the reflection from a chunk of drywall diffuses light all over the place.
      2. It's common for mirrors used in optics research to be coated not with silver, but with thin layers of dielectric that achieve >99% reflection at the wavelength of interest. (Silvered mirrors, on the other hand, reflect a broad swath of the electromagnetic spectrum, but commonly with 80-90% efficiency.)
    9. Re:I imagine that by shaitand · · Score: 1

      'It's common for mirrors used in optics research to be coated not with silver, but with thin layers of dielectric that achieve >99% reflection at the wavelength of interest. (Silvered mirrors, on the other hand, reflect a broad swath of the electromagnetic spectrum, but commonly with 80-90% efficiency.)'

      I didn't know this but it would certainly explain this puzzle. Thanks for the information. :)

  16. Confirms quantum theory by quokkapox · · Score: 4, Informative

    It confirms our understanding of light and matter and how they interact. You would think that shining light (energy) on something would warm it up. If it cools it down, something strange is going on.

    In a broader sense, it means that we can manipulate matter and energy in ways nobody imagined 100 years ago (well, except for Einstein).

    --
    it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
    1. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      cause Einstein was such a quantum theorist.

    2. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed he was. Consider his work on the photoelectric effect, for example.

    3. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It confirms our understanding of light and matter and how they interact. You would think that shining light (energy) on something would warm it up. If it cools it down, something strange is going on. You must not be familiar with how waves interact. The light waves and the material's "atom waves" are interacting so that maximum destructive interference is achieved; same frequency but half a wavelength out of phase of each other. The resulting wave of the atoms in the material should then have close to zero energy because other waves in the system may add constructively interfere with the atom waves.

      In my opinion, scientists may be able to approach absolute zero but they will never effectively reach it. They may hit a point at which it can be proclaimed as "good enough", but since the entire system must contain no energy and energy will always leak into the system from the universe, absolute zero will not be reached in actuality.

      The benefits of moving closer to absolute zero are that we can better understand exactly what atoms do when macro-forces are canceled out and only micro-forces apply, how the building blocks relate to each other in an energy-less environment, and if any other "laws" apply to our universe that we just weren't able to witness otherwise.
    4. Re:Confirms quantum theory by NightHwk1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It seems like it's the same effect as noise cancellation... firing pulses at the exact opposite frequency of the atom.

      And about the mirror versus using an actual dime or something else--a perfectly smooth, very thin object probably makes atomic-level laser targeting much easier than a relatively rough object such as a coin.

    5. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Firrenzi · · Score: 1

      If one can slow an object to near zero at the quantum and physical, how is it possible to then measure this state if we slow the rate below that of 1 quanta. In reference to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, how are we able to view the state of the molecules (velocity and position) if the minimum energy source we can fire at them is at one quanta and they are below that? Wouldn't that suggest that there is a limit to the level that we observe these subatomic particles at (ie the speed excited by one quanta of energy)?

      Any thoughts on this?

      --
      The Tao that can be named is not the Tao
    6. Re:Confirms quantum theory by tomatensaft · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is no such thing as opposite frequency. There is a thing like counterphase, though. So, noise cancellation works by emitting noise of the same frequency, but in a counterphase.

    7. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Anpheus · · Score: 1

      Two reasons: One, the greater the mass, the more certain we can be of its velocity and position. Two, we're nowhere near that low of an energy.

    8. Re:Confirms quantum theory by asninn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In my opinion, scientists may be able to approach absolute zero but they will never effectively reach it. They may hit a point at which it can be proclaimed as "good enough", but since the entire system must contain no energy and energy will always leak into the system from the universe, absolute zero will not be reached in actuality.

      IANAP, but doesn't it immediately follow from Heisenberg's uncertainty principle that absolute zero is not reachable, as well?

      --
      butter the donkey
    9. Re:Confirms quantum theory by growse · · Score: 3, Informative

      You are correct, and I believe GP is wrong to assume that matter at absolute zero has no energy. It actually has whatever the zero-point energy is (for it's particles), which all quantum physics and wikipedia-browsers will know is the expectation value of the Hamiltonian :)

      --
      There is nothing interesting going on at my blog
    10. Re:Confirms quantum theory by hotdiggity · · Score: 1
      You must not be familiar with how waves interact. The light waves and the material's "atom waves" are interacting so that maximum destructive interference is achieved; same frequency but half a wavelength out of phase of each other. The resulting wave of the atoms in the material should then have close to zero energy because other waves in the system may add constructively interfere with the atom waves.

      In the context of the parent's post, I believe this description qualifies as "something strange going on".

    11. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nah, you can cool it to absolute zero, you'd just never be able to find it ;)

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    12. Re:Confirms quantum theory by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Correct.
      It's also one of the ideas of "quantum" physics. You either have a quantum of energy or you don't, so you can't say there's an "inbetween" for zero and the first level of excitation.

    13. Re:Confirms quantum theory by aeonturnip · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've had optical damping explained to me in a classical sense - rather than wave interactions causing maximum destruction, think of an excited atom being like a child on a swing, and rather than pushing them every time they start to move away from your to get their swing higher and higher, to push them every time they approach you to get them to swing lower and lower.

      As you say, though, whichever analogy you use, it's not possible to remove all the energy in the system due to Heisenbergs Uncertainty principle and the effect of zero-point energy: absolute zero is a theoretical minimum temperature, not one that can be practically achieved for any length of time or for any object with mass.

    14. Re:Confirms quantum theory by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      It would also violate the 3nd law of thermodynamics.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    15. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my opinion, scientists may be able to approach absolute zero but they will never effectively reach it.

      You don't have to rely on your opinion - it's a consequence of the laws of thermodynamics. Like accelerating a particle towards the speed of light, bringing a system towards absolute zero (by pumping heat out of the system) requires an amount of energy that asymptotes towards infinity.

    16. Re:Confirms quantum theory by encoderer · · Score: 1

      But he was a constant (and vocal) skeptic of quantum theory. I mean, not only did he devote the last 1/4 of his life on unified field theory, he publicly criticized quantum theory many times.

    17. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Adam+Hazzlebank · · Score: 1

      In my opinion, scientists may be able to approach absolute zero but they will never effectively reach it. They may hit a point at which it can be proclaimed as "good enough", but since the entire system must contain no energy and energy will always leak into the system from the universe, absolute zero will not be reached in actuality.
      Isn't the problem with reaching absolute zero that you violate Heisenberg's uncertainty principle? (IANAP)
    18. Re:Confirms quantum theory by kmac06 · · Score: 1

      What? That's nonsense. The light waves and atom waves cannot interfere since they are describing distinct particles. The process is much more like another poster described it, pushing on the atom completely out-of-phase with it. And scientists have already gotten pretty much as close as possible to absolute zero with a Bose-Einstein condensate. In a BEC, a significant portion of the particles are in their ground state, i.e. lowest energy possible.

    19. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Fission86 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually no, what they do is, and I had Nobel Laureate Eric Cornell explain this to me himself, use a very specific laser tuned to one of the main absorbsion energies of that atom. The atom absorbs the light, and then emits more energy than it takes in, as it is absorbing photons and then emitting them, during the emittion process the atom gives off the original momentum of the photon plus a recoil momentum equal to the original absorbed photon. This effect, being done by several beams around your object, reduces temperature.

      as a side note: If I remember correctly this process only cools to about 4.5K, so Eric Cornell used a process called magnetic evaporation to reduce the temperature further, I remember not understanding it on a quantum level but he made an analogy to a hot cup of coffee, you lose 1/4 of your sample but 1/2 of your total temperature)

      --
      Coming to you live from another dimension.
    20. Re:Confirms quantum theory by mstahl · · Score: 1

      It actually follows from the third law of thermodynamics.

    21. Re:Confirms quantum theory by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      He was not only skeptic and critic of the quantum theory, he was also one of its more successful practitioners: like the Einstein-Rosen-Podolski paradox.

    22. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      You may be right, but you shouldn't have +5 for it. You're just being a smug ass assuming that because the person doesn't say what "something strange going on" is, he doesn't know.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    23. Re:Confirms quantum theory by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      You must not be familiar with how waves interact. The light waves and the material's "atom waves" are interacting so that maximum destructive interference is achieved; same frequency but half a wavelength out of phase of each other. The resulting wave of the atoms in the material should then have close to zero energy because other waves in the system may add constructively interfere with the atom waves.

      The thing about wave interactions is that neither wave is altered by the interaction.

      Therefore, if you are considering the system to be composed of waves representing the atoms and waves representing the laser, neither can affect the other. In other words, your explanation is wrong - the fact that the "atomic waves" and "laser waves" interfere cannot affect the energy of the "atomic waves". That cannot be why the material is cooled.

  17. So.... by Karsaroth · · Score: 1

    What do they expect that the mirror will do once it is only subject to quantum effects? Will it explode? That would be cool.

    1. Re:So.... by zazelite · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, it does say in the article that a major goal is the detection of so-called gravity waves. As far as I know, there's no irrefutable evidence that gravity doesn't propagate faster than lightspeed - that, in fact, it's speed might very well be unbounded. I can bet you that once we have a gravity wave emitter that the next step will be a coherent gravity wave emitter i.e. a gravitational laser.

  18. Hmm, the "laser-induced" part must be significant by PaulBu · · Score: 1

    ... otherwise I can go to the lab tomorrow and drop a whopping *palm-sized* mirrow in a dewar of liquid He to get within a factor of 4 to their achievement! And then. if keep being nice to other guys around, I can sneak a dime-sized object to cool to, like, some mK... :)

    Paul B.

  19. So you've met my ex, then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > "Physicists have managed to cool a dime-sized mirror to within one degree of absolute zero. This is the lowest laser-induced freeze yet achieved with a visible object. Laser cooling involves firing pulses of light at a specific frequency that exactly matches an atom's motions."

    So you've met my ex, then?

  20. I thought this was a breakthrough by Barkmullz · · Score: 5, Informative

    IANAP, so I figured this was some sort of breakthrough. As it turns out:

    1. Others have gotten much, much closer to 0 K using atoms and laser cooling.
    2. Others have gotten much, much closer to 0 K using solid objects and different cooling methods.
    3. Their method has the potential of getting closer to 0 K.

    So, even if it is not a breakthrough it is still impressive.

    --
    Ronald said nothing. He flung himself from the room, flung himself upon his horse, and rode madly off in all directions.
    1. Re:I thought this was a breakthrough by btgreat · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, this really is a breakthrough. According to the article, laser supercooling has been used in the past by researchers, but never on anything more than a few atoms. These researchers successfully lasercooled a mirror the size of a dime (which would probably be about .01 to .1 moles, on the order of 10^21 or 10^22 atoms, more than just "a few" (probably meaning on the order of 10^6 or so, but IANAP, so don't quote me there)).

    2. Re:I thought this was a breakthrough by imsabbel · · Score: 2, Informative

      What _you_ seem to know as laser cooling is esentially using a modified penning trap with 6 circular polarized lasers. There is no way to use such an assembly on any _visible object_ (thats why that sentence was used in the blurb). It needs the volume of entrapment to be translucent.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    3. Re:I thought this was a breakthrough by Engine · · Score: 1

      For neutral atoms you don't use a Penning trap. A penning trap is for charged particles. For neutral atoms, two coils in anti-helmholtz configuration and six laser beams is what you need. Don't understand what you mean by "any visible object". It certainly is possible to view the cloud of atoms trapped and cold in such a trap, called a MOT (Magneto Optical Trap). The atoms scatters a lot of light.

    4. Re:I thought this was a breakthrough by Bozdune · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is, it doesn't make a dime's worth of difference, right?

  21. Here's the sginificance. by deft · · Score: 5, Funny

    The real world application of this will be truly shown when they find the exact frequency on beer.

    Then, gaze upon its brilliance.

    --

    There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
    1. Re:Here's the sginificance. by Phleg · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but what person that actually likes beer wants to drink it at a temperature where your taste buds are virtually incapable of processing taste. Crappy American macrobrews? I wouldn't drink them frozen.

      --
      No comment.
    2. Re:Here's the sginificance. by bob.appleyard · · Score: 1

      Cooling beer makes it taste of nothing. Of course, if you hate the taste of beer, that's a good thing.

      --
      How dare you be so modest!! You conceited bastard!!
  22. but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is that one degree fahrenheit or one degree celsius?

    1. Re:but by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Celsius.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    2. Re:but by Beefslaya · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, I thought it was measured in Kelvin?

    3. Re:but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the baseline changes, the interval doesn't. a degree of kelvin is a degree of celsius.

    4. Re:but by Darth · · Score: 1

      absolute zero is zero degrees kelvin. the article notes that that is -273 degrees celcius.
      (which i guess is why the gp assumed celcius)

      i expect the scientists are measuring it in kelvin

      --
      Darth --
      Nil Mortifi, Sine Lucre
    5. Re:but by Phil246 · · Score: 1

      iirc, the kelvin scale is identical in steps to that of celcius, the only difference is the starting zero point.
      With kelvin it is at absolute zero, the point where atoms stop vibrating. With celcius it is at the freezing point of water

    6. Re:but by fabs64 · · Score: 1

      The unit size for Kelvin and Celsius is the same, it's only the zero-point that moves.

    7. Re:but by Darth · · Score: 1

      true

      i meant that the scientists are probably using the kelvin scale for notation. i didn't intend to imply the units were different sizes.
      i'm posting from the web browser in a ps3. typing with a controller is very distracting.
      i'll go upstairs and use a keyboard from now on.

      --
      Darth --
      Nil Mortifi, Sine Lucre
    8. Re:but by shaitand · · Score: 1

      'the baseline changes, the interval doesn't. a degree of kelvin is a degree of celsius'

      Yes but he didn't ask if it was one degree away from absolute zero in Celsius or Fahrenheit he asked if it was one degree Celsius or Fahrenheit and the answer is that it is one degree Kelvin. One degree Celsius would be above the freezing point and wouldn't even begin to approach absolute zero.

    9. Re:but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, its not one degree Kelvin, it's just plain ol' one Kelvin.

  23. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by norton_I · · Score: 1, Informative

    Thermal motion of mirrors are a limiting factor in high precision experiments. This allows those fluctuations to be reduced, allowing cool physics.

  24. Re:Hillery Clinton by DittoBox · · Score: 1

    Who TF is "Hillery?"

    --
    Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick Two.
  25. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by sarge+apone · · Score: 5, Funny

    could someone explain what the significance of this is?

    Perhaps we could reflect on it.

    Absolutely... to a degree.

  26. Actually... by ABasketOfPups · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's already pretty cool. HAHAHAHA I slay me.

  27. That's nothing by edwardpickman · · Score: 5, Funny

    My exwife could do that with just a glance. It may not have been one degree over Absolute Zero but it sure felt that way.

    1. Re:That's nothing by AmigaHeretic · · Score: 1

      >>My exwife could do that with just a glance.

      Funny that you bring up exwives...
      I was just wondering what kind of thermometer they use to tell that the temperature is at -273 degrees celcius. Oral or Rectal? My ex is fairly frigid so if it's the later maybe she could help make it reach zero.

      Which begs the the next question, would it have a zero on it? Because really, if it reached zero it would just dissapear and you wouldn't see it really ever reach zero. Hmm...

    2. Re:That's nothing by Air-conditioned+cowh · · Score: 1

      Hey!

      The Fonze could do this every time he combed his hair.

  28. Re:Hillery Clinton by Frogbert · · Score: 1, Funny

    You know, that chick with the snuke up her sniz.

  29. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by lessthanjakejohn · · Score: 0

    Well, an experiment was performed near absolutely zero that stopped light...

  30. Obligatory Star Trek Refference by wolf369T · · Score: 0, Redundant

    "In a Mirror, Darkly..."

    Now give some "+5 Funny" or "+5 Informal", 'cause my karma is bad.

    1. Re:Obligatory Star Trek Refference by tickbox · · Score: 1

      I modded you funny for calling STFU the s-word. err wait...

    2. Re:Obligatory Star Trek Refference by Mifflesticks · · Score: 3, Informative

      You realize that star trek reference (the star trek enterprise episode title) is itself a reference to Corinthians in the new testament, right? And that it's not the only time star trek has referenced it... another translation comes out not as "in a mirror darkly" but "through a glass, darkly", for the same passage, which Picard says in Star Trek Nemesis.

      Plus many books have used the same reference too.... but now I'm rambling.

    3. Re:Obligatory Star Trek Refference by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Corinthians: Sounds Latin. Did Virgil write this? An early novel? Never heard of it.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    4. Re:Obligatory Star Trek Refference by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      This is Slashdot. We don't quote original sources, just the last famous person to utter them.

    5. Re:Obligatory Star Trek Refference by somersault · · Score: 1

      Like A Scanner Darkly, right? *puts on Captain Obvious hat*

      --
      which is totally what she said
    6. Re:Obligatory Star Trek Refference by treeves · · Score: 1

      You seem to be trying to make a joke. Can I help?

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  31. Re:Hillery Clinton by Mike89 · · Score: 1

    Oh, you mean Hilldog.

  32. I said before and I'll say again... by The+Great+Pretender · · Score: 2, Funny

    You want to get to absolute zero, go see my first wife

    --
    A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
  33. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by priestx · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Hopefully we can all see the light.

    --
    "To be is to do." -Socrates
    "To do is to be." -Jean-Paul Sartre
    "Do-be-do-be-do." -Frank Sinatra
  34. Within a degree? by The+Orange+Mage · · Score: 1

    So for visible objects, there are non more cold? And it's not going to absolute zero. It's going to absolute one. It's one higher.

  35. Well? by fredrated · · Score: 1

    What did they see in the mirror?

    1. Re:Well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the nature of reality

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

      What did they see in the mirror?

      Nothing, it was all frosted up...

    3. Re:Well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The researcher looked and saw a laser beam and decided not to look again with his remaining eye.

  36. When you get a mirror cool enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...everyone looks like The Fonz.

    Aaaaay.

  37. Re:Hillery Clinton by Mountaineer1024 · · Score: 1

    Someone snuck a snuke up her snizz?

  38. Beer Cooler by truckaxle · · Score: 1

    Now we would all be a lot more impressed if they cooled a glass of Guinness down to the requisite 5 degrees Celsius.

    A functional laser operated beer cooler... now that would be a patent i wouldn't complain about.

    1. Re:Beer Cooler by weighn · · Score: 1
      ...requisite 5 degrees Celsius...

      although the "serve at room temperature" thing is a bit of a myth for Irish/British beers, the best temp for pouring a Guinness is around 7-8 degrees. Sounds like I'm nit-picking, but there is a difference for us piss-heads^H^H^H connoisseurs.

      --
      Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
  39. Website on laser cooling and trapping by XchristX · · Score: 2, Informative

    The JILA group at UC Boulder does lots of work on laser cooling and trapping (the Weimann/Ketterle/Cornell group got the 2001 Nobel Prize for generating BEC by laser cooling). They have a neat java applet demonstrating the effect

    http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/bec/lascool1. html

    --
    l'Homme n'est Rien l'Oeuvre Tout: Gustave Flaubert to George Sand
  40. Conservation of Energy... by btgreat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A couple of people made posts that got my brain ticking.. Someone mentioned that this confirms quantum theory in that adding light energy reduces the temperature, thereby reducing the energy of the system. In response, someone mentioned it was like noise cancellation. The problem I see with this analogy, and the idea of the experiment in general is that while I can see similarities, when we talk about noise cancellation, no energy is lost. It is still there, even though destructive interference cancels the noise where the waves overlap. The sound waves will continue to travel, and if they leave the area where they are destructively influenced, the noise will start back up. With the photons reducing temperature situation, where is the energy going? We start with high speed atoms and light, and end with low speed atoms and no light; isn't the energy being destroyed? I am not very up on my quantum mechanics, but can see two possibilities: either energy isn't really conserved under quantum mechanics, or the atom is rereleasing a photon after the initial photon hits it and slows it down. Perhaps neither is right, but could someone please explain the apparent lack of conservation of energy here?

    1. Re:Conservation of Energy... by smaddox · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We start with high speed atoms and light, and end with low speed atoms and no light; isn't the energy being destroyed? You actually DO end up with light. More energetic light, to be more specific.

      It can almost be simplified to classical collision physics. The photon hits the atom and bounces off, slowing down the atom and in turn, the photon "speeds up" (gets red shifted).
    2. Re:Conservation of Energy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      How does getting redshifted speed it up? Isn't the red end of the spectrum the lower energy, lower frequency, longer wavelength one?

    3. Re:Conservation of Energy... by Engine · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You are correct. The scattered light is blue shifted due to the energy it takes away.

  41. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by staeiou · · Score: 1
    ...but could someone explain what the significance of this is?

    I know I'm new here because I'm reading the articles, but the opening and closing paragraphs of the article directly answers your question:

    If you want to really see quantum mechanics in action, you've got to turn the temperature down so low that even atoms stop moving. Physicists have come close to achieving this "absolute zero" state by using precision-tuned lasers, but the technique has only allowed researchers to freeze small groups of atoms at a time. Now members of an international team say they have managed to cool a dime-sized mirror to within one degree of absolute zero, the lowest laser-induced freeze yet achieved with a visible object. [...] If the effort is successful, Mavalvala says, it will also lead to much more sensitive instruments for LIGO, which is attempting to detect elusive phenomena called gravity waves. Predicted by Einstein but not yet observed, the waves are thought to be emitted by the most violent events in the universe, such as black hole collisions.
  42. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by YGingras · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It has many applications in astronomy. During the winter, the only expedition to climb to the top of the Mauna Kea are to fill the liquid nitrogen and liquid helium tanks of those huge telescopes. We don't realize it but getting pretty picture in IR requires that you more of less shut down the black body radiation of your optics. With liquid helium they cool the CCDs to 4.5 Kelvin. They use so much of the stuff that they need to fill the tanks every other week. I admit that I have no idea how big is the said tank but laser cooling would open the way to mostly unattended (think orbital) telescopes for a much broader part of the spectrum. At the moment we send IR orbital scopes with big tanks of liquid helium which is dead lift weight that could be used for larger optics and we drop the scopes in the ocean when they run out of the stuff. Spitzer, unlike Hubble, will be useless soon and will not be able to perform observations even if all the mechanical and electronics are still in top condition. If you ever visit the Mauna Kea, notice the frost patches inside the observatory. It's kind of cold up there but the best experience is inside the observatory: it's freezing, everyone is dizzy after climbing the stair (the air is really thin) and you see all those big pipes with cryo-steam. It feels like the visit to the cryo chamber in Akira.

  43. Absolut Zero by weighn · · Score: 1

    ... is that what they serve at AA meetings?

    --
    Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
  44. Freeze-Ray!?! by ziekrage · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Laser cooling involves firing pulses of light..." I believe Victor Fries would be proud.

  45. Blessed are the Buckyballs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The problem here is that an incoherent mass has been
    convinced that it is not only coherent energy, but 180deg out of phase
    with a coherent light source (almost). Seems to me that QM
    might even have a problem or two with this.

  46. Ah, a balmy 0.8K by xPsi · · Score: 1

    Using LASER cooling to bring a macroscopic object o 0.8K is pretty darn neat. But cooling big things in general to sub-Kelvin temperatures is not that unusual (the article only gives a nod to this idea). For example, in our bolometry experiment, we cool 40 kg of TeO2 crystals down to just 10 milliKelvin using an ancient Oxford (brand) dilution refrigerator.

    --
    i\hbar\dot{\psi}=\hat{H}\psi
  47. Can I overclock with this technique? by Derling+Whirvish · · Score: 2, Funny

    When will we see this technique used to cool the CPUs in gaming machines?

    1. Re:Can I overclock with this technique? by slart42 · · Score: 1

      When will we see this technique used to cool the CPUs in gaming machines?

      More importantly, when will see this technique to get hand fired freezer guns, so we can play Duke Nukem in real life?

  48. What quantum effects expected by mattr · · Score: 1

    If the mirror was cooled lower still it supposedly would exhibit quantum effects, TFA says. Would this mean the mirror could interfere with itself, like in the single photon double slit experiment? How could this create more sensitive mirrors for the LIGO?

  49. I call un-PC by drfuchs · · Score: 1

    Nice, but why is the Scientist character a white male, and the interviewer a dark-skinned female? For that matter, why is the scientist blond? A little snooping around the web shows that Weimann and Cornell have dark hair, and Ketterle HAD dark hair (now it's gray).

    1. Re:I call un-PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the photons are getting stuck in your head.

    2. Re:I call un-PC by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      Nice, but why is the Scientist character a white male, and the interviewer a dark-skinned female? I suppose that is a combination of sexual and racial stereotyping.
  50. Oblig. by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, who's the coolest one o-- AAAAAAAH! MY EYES!

  51. Yes, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does it freeze kernels too?

  52. cooling 1g under 1K trivial. TFA has typos/errors? by viking80 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There must be some error in TFA. Looks like it was written by someone with little understanding. To cool a 1g item under 1K is trivial. You can buy coolers that can keep large volumes way down in the mK range. Commercial literature give numbers like 1mW cooling at 35mK.

    TFA says that the purpose of cooling was to "...cancel the natural forces entirely, so quantum forces apply exclusively."

    That is of course incorrect. Quantum mechanics *are* the natural forces(,excluding gravity?), and cooling is often used to bring matter to the ground state or similar, so quantum effects take on macroscopic and often more observable (and intriguing) properties.

    If there is a real breakthrough here, does anyone have the original scientific reference?

    --
    don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
  53. Laser Cooling by FreemanPatrickHenry · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Laser cooling involves firing pulses of light at a specific frequency that exactly matches an atom's motions."

    I may be wrong on this, as I'm just an undergrad physics major, but in my experience laser cooling involves detuning a laser slightly below some atomic transition frequency, and counterpropagating the same beam back. What happens is as a laser moves quickly in the direction of the beam, it observes the laser's frequency to be higher due to the Doppler shift, and suddenly this laser that was not resonating with the atoms comes into resonance, and the atom starts absorbing photons, which have momentum. This knocks the atom back such that it can't move quickly in the direction of the laser. Often this is done with six beams along three orthogonal axes so that you cool the atoms in all directions.

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous .sig which, unfortunately, this space is too small to contain.
  54. pffft.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. thats nothing, I knew a girl that was colder that that

  55. Re:cooling 1g under 1K trivial. TFA has typos/erro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You missed the point. The rest of the world might be doing this regularly, but this is HAPPENING IN AMERICA. And some of the scientists on the team are AMERICAN.

    This means it's really happening, and that this is the breakthrough everyone has been looking for. It proves the the US still ROCKS, and that foreigners can't compete with our slick science - so we're still a GREAT POWER.

    Things that happen in Europe or Asia just don't count. Or if they do, it's because an AMERICAN (probably living in a log cabin in 1910) had the idea first.

    If you don't believe me, I have many quotes from Hollywood films to PROVE that AMERICA is best, cleverest, and has invented everything in the world!

  56. Why the low tempurature matters in a telescope by afarhan · · Score: 1

    'temperature' denotes how agitated the molecules are in the matter. the hotter they get the more they knock around with each other. this in turn leads to them dislodging electrons from each other and these electrons float around until they find a slot (of another atom that had an electron knocked off) and fall back into the atom. hence, these floating electrons setup random electric currents.

    any electric conductor that is not at absolute zero will introduce these random variations in a flowing signal. this is simply what we call as noise. hence, the higher the temperature, the noisier it gets inside an electronic component.

    if you have a very weak signal (like a distant star's light), having a sensor operating at a low tempurature can mean the difference between seeing it and not seeing it at all.

    remember, the noise will go down proportionate to the absolute tempurature. so moving from my city (hyderabad, 40 centigrade in the shade today) to stockholm will not make much of a difference. but moving down to single digit kelvin will be a huge force multiplier.

    --
    The purpose of all philosophers was to impress women
  57. If ... by can56 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Scientists can use lasers to cool atoms/crystals/mirrors to near absolute zero, does that mean: a) really god-damn-cold-fusion is possible, or b) by increasing the power of the lasers, hot-fusion may occur?. Sorry, but I'm waiting for someone (less drunk and more eloquent than I) to comment on the definition of temperature, the scales (K/F/C), and what this experiment could lead to.

  58. Predictable one-word comment. by Sippan · · Score: 0, Troll

    Cool.

    --
    Frog blast the vent core.
  59. Nice by mashall-law · · Score: 1

    Thank you so much for providing this. Flv to avi

  60. but the question is... by ady1 · · Score: 1

    did the reflection froze or not?

  61. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by tbo · · Score: 1

    I'm a physicist. I even have a very small bit of experience with low-temperature work (as an undergrad, I once used a dilution refrigerator to get a macroscopic object down to about 0.5 K, or half a degree above absolute zero). I'm now a theorist, working (in theory) with laser-cooled cold atoms, among other things. Despite all this, I have no clue what the significance is.

    Lower temperatures are reachable with conventional techniques (such as dilution refrigerators). TFA suggests that the technique can eventually be used to achieve even lower temperatures, which they can use this to probe how quantum mechanics works with macroscopic objects. A good friend of mine is working on developing measures for characterizing macroscopic superpositions (so-called "cat states"), and I've never heard him mention ultra-cold mirrors as a candidate system; they usually think about things like Josephson junctions, BECs in double-well potentials, or the like.

    If you'll forgive the pun, this is a very cool experiment, but it seems like a technique looking for an application. That doesn't mean it's a bad idea--the same was true of the laser once upon a time, but fortunately Charlie Townes et al didn't give up on it.

  62. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by Elkboy · · Score: 1

    Looking at yourself in a cold mirror would logically make you look cooler.

  63. My Fridge.... by YourMoneyOrYourDuck · · Score: 1

    .. goes up to eleven

  64. In later experiments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...scientists plan to breathe on the mirror, and write their name in the condensation.

  65. Re:cooling 1g under 1K trivial. TFA has typos/erro by osu-neko · · Score: 1

    There must be some error in TFA. Looks like it was written by someone with little understanding. To cool a 1g item under 1K is trivial. You can buy coolers that can keep large volumes way down in the mK range. Commercial literature give numbers like 1mW cooling at 35mK.

    It looks like you read a little too quickly. They didn't use a cooler, they used lasers. This is the first time laser cooling has ever been successfully used to bring a macroscopic object under 1K.

    --
    "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  66. Re:I know what you're thinking by SunTzuWarmaster · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you knew that supercooled matter has a tendency to form one giant particle (Bosones and Fermions). What do we know about these fused matter states? Actually very little, because supercooling things is hard.

  67. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by grimwell · · Score: 1

    Let's see... a mirror is used in optics, something chilled to near-zero isn't moving(atoms are near motion-less), putting those two together means my pr0n is going to be that much crisper.

    Or maybe someone would like to use the demonstrated cooling effect to chill some hardware? Maybe superconductors without having to use liquid nitrogen?

    Sometimes just seeing what you can do is enough of a reason. "Because it is there"

    --
    If the govt becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law, it invites man to become his own law, it invites anarchy
  68. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by arminphys · · Score: 1

    Despite all this, I have no clue what the significance is. AFAIK, one of the limitations in graviation wave search by laser interferometry is the noise created by the temperature of the mirrors that are used to create the interferometer. Cooler mirrors give less noise. There it is important that you cool the stuff without mechanical interaction, therefore liquid Helium cooling cannot be applied there, AFAIK. Armin
  69. should have used spinal tap's laser by speculatrix · · Score: 1

    their laser goes up to 11, which might have allowed them to get below 1 degree!

  70. Cooling one dimension only by GayBliss · · Score: 1

    The article fails to mention that the cooling was in one dimension only, in the direction of the laser, so the mirror would not even feel cryogenically cold if you touched it. The atoms are frozen in one dimension but are free to move in the other dimensions.
    I don't have a reference at the moment nor the time to dig it up, but I am fairly sure this is the case.

  71. Laser refrigeration technique? by rly2000 · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this method could be potentially useful for refrigeration. Attach a laser and a mirror to anything you want to cool, and it could act like a heat sink.

    Maybe if the heat produced by the laser is less than the amount of cooling that it results in, it would be different than any kind of current refrigeration, where the net effect is always more heat. If this were possible, then refrigeration could happen in an enclosed space. Though somehow I think this proposition violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

  72. .Sig by Morosoph · · Score: 1

    If i had one dollar for every brain you dont have, i would have $1.
    Hang on, I don't have your brain, nor do I have anyone else's bar my own.

    I make it that you'd have more than 6,500,000,000 dollars. Unless you're counting all possible potential brains that I could have, in which case the sum would be astronomical.

  73. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by qazxswedc · · Score: 1

    Dude, it totally validates Duke Nuke 'em's freeze ray.

  74. One step closer to the chill pill! by elrous0 · · Score: 1

    In the 21st century, the evolution of ice beer continued unabated...

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  75. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by camperdave · · Score: 1
    You could try reading the first sentence of the article.

    If you want to really see quantum mechanics in action, you've got to turn the temperature down so low that even atoms stop moving. Hmm... Nope. No explanation as to why they're using a dime sized mirror at all. You could just as easily* chill a cube of carbon, the plastic plug from the end of a ball point pen, or a leftover piece of cheese from last night's pizza. Perhaps the scientists had an old dental mirror lying around. Who knows? Whatever the reason, it certainly isn't explained in the first sentence.

    * I have no idea how easy or hard it would be to chill these items vs chilling a mirror.
    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  76. So this means.. by chord.wav · · Score: 1

    laser air conditioner for my flying car?

    ---
    I just woke up, go easy on me will ya?

  77. A Question for the Scientists Out There by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

    From what I understand about absolute zero, there is no energy in the system, including the energy required to keep electrons in orbit around the nucleus of an atom. Therefore, the atoms would collapse in on themselves, creating an extremely dense substance. Am I right in thinking this would happen? If so, would this doom the earth to become a black hole, or do something similar?

    --
    You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    1. Re:A Question for the Scientists Out There by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.

      There is energy within the system at absolute zero, it's just that you can't go below that energy by removing heat.

    2. Re:A Question for the Scientists Out There by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      From what I understand about absolute zero, there is no energy in the system, including the energy required to keep electrons in orbit around the nucleus of an atom. Absolute Zero means that the temperature of the system is exactly 0 Kelvin. What is temperature, on the other hand, is not so easy to define. For example, it has nothing to do with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which relates energy and time, or position and momentum. Energy is an all together different physical quantity than temperature.

      Therefore, the atoms would collapse in on themselves, creating an extremely dense substance. Am I right in thinking this would happen? Not quite: the laws of quantum mechanics would prevent such collapse: standard quantum-mechanical description of atom already presupposes that the atom is at 0 Kelvin. What happens however is that matter at low temperature can undergo phase transitions, like when water freezes and becomes in many regards quite different a substance, ice.

      Similarly, when many ordinary metals are cooled down they become superconducting (conduct electricity without any resistance), or liquid Helium becomes superfluid (can flow outside the open container in which it was stored at higher temperatures). The latter two phenomena are essentially quantum-mechanical, and they tell us to expect new phenomena/states of matter sitting at low temperatures. That's one of the reasons why low temperatures are interesting.

      If so, would this doom the earth to become a black hole, or do something similar? Many think the main problem with Earth is about its warming up, not cooling down...
  78. Moving heat vs. creating cold. by neo · · Score: 1

    My refrigerator repair man was explaining to me in a very pedantic way that a refrigerator doesn't make cold, but rather it moves heat out of the inside and pushes it to the outside. This is the conservation of energy.

    If a laser can counter the speed of atoms, thus creating an object at near absolute zero, couldn't this create a cold environment without creating equal heat outside the environment? Am I misunderstanding the experiment or are they creating cold without removing heat?

    The applications of this are remarkable. Cooling systems that don't require heat dissipation, air conditioners without access to the outside. Engines can be cooled without radiators.

    So what am I missing here, because this sounds remarkable to me.

    1. Re:Moving heat vs. creating cold. by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      My refrigerator repair man was explaining to me in a very pedantic way that a refrigerator doesn't make cold, but rather it moves heat out of the inside and pushes it to the outside. This is the conservation of energy.[...]So what am I missing here, because this sounds remarkable to me. Well, does that mean that your refrigerator does not make your electricity bill higher? I honestly doubt. In order to move heat out of the inside outside, refrigerator needs energy, electrical energy that is. So, in fact, refrigerator is a heater: it converts electrical energy into heat. Just like an air-conditioner.
    2. Re:Moving heat vs. creating cold. by MarkAyen · · Score: 1

      I'm still confused as to how you can make something colder by adding energy to it (i.e. firing a laser into it). I suspect I'm about one graduate degree away from understanding how this doesn't break thermodynamics.

    3. Re:Moving heat vs. creating cold. by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      From the thermodynamics point of view, there is no problem with cooling some system down by adding some energy to it from the outside of the system. Thermodynamics basically says that in order to take some heat away from the given system, some work has to be done from the outside of the system, and the amount of work done is always greater than the amount of heat taken ("work" and "heat" are just two different kinds of energy). So, if we think in terms of energy and know that the total energy is conserved, it boils down to redistribution of this total energy: We take energy from inside of the refrigerator and put it ouside, heating the room, and in order to do so we need some electrical energy.

      Now, laser cooling is just a very fancy refrigerator, looking from the thermodynamics point of view. But of course the devil is in details, and laser cooling works along the following lines:

      1. To cool atoms/molecules of some solid object means to make them vibrate less.
      2. This vibration of molecules is like swinging of someone on the swing, but with one crucial difference: while person on the swing can pretty much swing as high or low as he/she wants, molecules can swing only in certain discreet amounts of energy: E0, E1, E2,.... because of quantum mechanics.
      3. Now, lets say that molecules are mostly vibrating with energy E1, and we want to make them vibrate mostly with energy E0. By doing so we would cool the system.
      4. For some kinds of molecules this can be made so in the following way: we first add energy to make them swing even higher, with energy E2.
      5. Since molecules do want to lower their energy, they will try to go back to a lower energy state by emitting some radiation ("heat"). But this kind of molecules, instead of going back to E1, will go to E0. This is possible because it might just happen so that it is easier for molecules to get from E2 to E0 than it is to get from E1 to E0.
      6. Most of these molecules began at E1, then we added some energy to get them to E2, and they go after that to E0, emitting some energy out (i.e the heat has been taken out of the system by adding some energy to it).

  79. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by corifornia · · Score: 0

    Eh, its just a cool mirror, no big deal.

    --
    crap.
  80. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by roman_mir · · Score: 1

    could someone explain what the significance of this is?

    Perhaps we could reflect on it.

    Absolutely... to a degree.


    Reflection to that degree requires an unclouded mind, so chill.

  81. Big deal, we go below 50 milikelvin all the time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We use an ADR (Adiabatic Degmagnetization Refrigerator) to cool sensors in one of our labs and regularly go below 50 milikelvin (our sensors can't measure below 50 milikelvin).
    50 milikelvin is 0.050 degrees C above absolute zero.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_refrigeratio n

  82. HMM, would it be possible by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

    I have always wanted the reverse of a Microwave, something that can rapidly cool food/drink, I wonder if it is possible with this technology?

    Seems limited to things that are made up primarily of the same types of atoms?

    I wonder if you could do this with sound waves, (or with this tech) kind of like how noise cancelling tech works, but tuned to the water in food/drink, if you specifically shot the slight or sound waves at the frequency of water (OR H or O atoms instead) molecules to steady them it would theoretically cool any organic substance...right?

  83. CU not UC by Skadet · · Score: 1

    Just a nitpick, but the UCs are in California (University of California) and U of Colorado is called CU. So it's CU-Boulder.

  84. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

    I'm a physicist. I even have a very small bit of experience with low-temperature work (as an undergrad, I once used a dilution refrigerator to get a macroscopic object down to about 0.5 K, or half a degree above absolute zero). I'm now a theorist, working (in theory) with laser-cooled cold atoms, among other things. Despite all this, I have no clue what the significance is. Then how about then getting yourself educated a bit?

    PS: You can look for "Penrose bomb", or, for instance: The Meaning of the Interaction-Free Measurements
  85. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

    Perhaps we could reflect on it. And indeed, the linked article is entitled "Reflections of Absolute Zero"
  86. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by sholden · · Score: 1
    Maybe you could try reading the post I replied to, and then point to me where in:

    This is cool stuff and all... ...but could someone explain what the significance of this is? Does this tell us anything interesting about the universe? Or is this just a "let's see if it can be done" kind of thing?

    is the question about why it's a dime sized mirror?

    "Seeing quantum mechanics in action" seems a reasonable answer to "does this tell us anything interesting about the universe?".

    I'm terribly sorry I didn't ask your completely unrelated question to you satisfaction. My mind reading skills are a bit below par I guess.

  87. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by camperdave · · Score: 1

    point to me where ... is the question about why it's a dime sized mirror?

    In the word "this". Since the original post was a direct child of the story "Researchers Chill Mirror to Near Absolute Zero" (which later describes the mirror as dime sized), I assumed that the "this" in the question "could someone explain what the significance of this is" referred to chilling a mirror. Or to put it another way, I took the first question of the post to mean "could someone explain what the significance of chilling a mirror, as opposed to any of the other things that are routinely chilled to near absolute zero, is?". In other words "Why a mirror?"

    Of course, in a post morning coffee world, I can see that I was projecting my own question into the post, and that you were responding to the second question. I humbly apologize for the confusion, and for any offense I may have caused.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  88. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by sholden · · Score: 1

    Whereas I was replying to what I was replying to, not the entire chain of posts.

    The answer to your question is in the fourth last sentence of the article, far to far down for slashdot.

  89. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by camperdave · · Score: 1
    Ah!

    the team's specialized mirror resembles an atom more than a solid object in some respects because of its precise interaction with light. Thanks! That explains a lot.
    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  90. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

    Pickup trucks!

    --
    It's been a long time.
  91. Re:This is cool stuff and all... by tbo · · Score: 1

    I've heard of interaction-free measurements and the Penrose bomb before (although I think it was given another name), but I'm not immediately seeing how this is relevant. Care to elaborate? Is it necessary to perform the experiment?