Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Create New Form of Matter (phys.org)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Phys.Org: MIT physicists have created a new form of matter, a supersolid, which combines the properties of solids with those of superfluids. By using lasers to manipulate a superfluid gas known as a Bose-Einstein condensate, the team was able to coax the condensate into a quantum phase of matter that has a rigid structure -- like a solid -- and can flow without viscosity -- a key characteristic of a superfluid. Studies into this apparently contradictory phase of matter could yield deeper insights into superfluids and superconductors, which are important for improvements in technologies such as superconducting magnets and sensors, as well as efficient energy transport. The researchers report their results this week in the journal Nature. The team used a combination of laser cooling and evaporative cooling methods, originally co-developed by Ketterle, to cool atoms of sodium to nanokelvin temperatures. Atoms of sodium are known as bosons, for their even number of nucleons and electrons. When cooled to near absolute zero, bosons form a superfluid state of dilute gas, called a Bose-Einstein condensate, or BEC. To create the supersolid state, the team manipulated the motion of the atoms of the BEC using laser beams, introducing "spin-orbit coupling." In their ultrahigh-vacuum chamber, the team used an initial set of lasers to convert half of the condensate's atoms to a different quantum state, or spin, essentially creating a mixture of two Bose-Einstein condensates. Additional laser beams then transferred atoms between the two condensates, called a "spin flip."

57 comments

  1. Playing with fire by lucm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bose-Einstein condensates

    Just remember that if ghost-like warriors are created with this technology, they can be beat with iron.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
    1. Re: Playing with fire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awful movie.

  2. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Does this mean they made a frictionless solid? Or a solid that can change shape?

    1. Re:What? by hey! · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, as near as I can make out, they are describing a phenomenon that is analogous to a standing wave in a river.

      Watch water in a swift river cascade over a ledge. It will form a standing wave behind the ledge which does not move, even though all the matter in it is moving downstream. This is the opposite of a traveling wave in the ocean where the mater doesn't move but the structure does.

      Now so much for analogies. Again as far as I can make out, they coaxed super-cooled sodium atoms into a crystal-like structure which is stable, but allows the constituent atoms move freely within the structure. Again, I suspect this is an analogy too, but I'm at the limit of my understanding of modern physics.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:What? by tom17 · · Score: 4, Informative
    3. Re:What? by hey! · · Score: 1

      Yep. Where I live we have reversing falls -- rapids that run in opposite directions on the outgoing and incoming tide. They look very much like that.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:What? by psmoot · · Score: 1

      Well, as near as I can make out, they are describing a phenomenon that is analogous to a standing wave in a river.

      That's about the best I got too. I'm sure any real physicists would wince and say "yeah, close enough."

      ("Well, think of computer memory as kinda like a big Excel spreadsheet...")

    5. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you're analogy is getting at sounds more like plasma crystals in dusty plasma, e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8WQuz5EO5c

    6. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, concentrating too much on making sure the link formatting came out okay from a phone keyboard to notice the autocorrect picked the wrong version of "your."

    7. Re:What? by jimbob6 · · Score: 2

      This is a similar technique to the one that was used last year to create metallic hydrogen.

    8. Re:What? by doccus · · Score: 1

      One step closer to "terminator style" liquid metal soldiers!

  3. Haven't we already seen this form of matter? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 0

    I never played with it because it was unknown where I grew up, but my child has played with silly putty.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  4. Yes, Sodium is a "boson" by ClickOnThis · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those who facepalmed when they saw that Sodium is a boson in TFS ... technically, its most common isotope (Na23) is in fact a composite boson, because the total number of fermion particles is even: 11 protons + 12 neutrons + 11 electrons = 34 fermions, each with spin 1/2. So, the composite Na23 atom is net integer spin, and thus a boson.

    http://theworldofsmall.blogspo...

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  5. Re:Anonymous Coward by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2, Funny

    Surfers disagree.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  6. Re:Trump funds this crap? by ClickOnThis · · Score: 2

    Here's an example of Trump spending money on a couple of elitist eggheads' meaningless mind masturbation. At the same time he's going to take the Obamaphones away from the brothas! This is one nigga that damn sure wants his Obamaphone. I don't give a damn fuck what some lily white MIT cracker wants. The white boys be taking my Obamaphone.

    If people in authority (cough, cough) listened to the likes of you, humanity would never have invented the wheel, the lever, the steam engine, the electric motor, the vacuum tube, the transistor, the laser, the internet ...

    Next time, post with both hands. That is all.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  7. Does Bose-Einstein feature.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bad haircut cancellation?

    OK, I'm leaving.

  8. Hell yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the kinda news I come to slashdot for :)

  9. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is bullshit. Discuss.

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

      I agree. Something has to be done. All matter should be banned immediately because of potential terrorist and environmental implications. Not only that, but matter is known to cause cancer, albeit only in the state of California. Think of the fucking children, people.

  10. Re:Trump funds this crap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You might sound more intelligent if you tried posting with your penis.

  11. Matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Matter doesnt matter

  12. Bohr Model by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A note to researchers: You know why the Bohr Model of the atom persists in education even though it's wrong? Because it provides a simple starting point that anyone can immediately grasp and then build upon.

    If we (the scientific community) want laypeople to stop rolling their eyes whenever quantum mechanics is mentioned we need to start communicating better. You spent tons of money and years of research to create a supersolid, but you can't make a simple gif animation conveying what it is?

    This is why we have to fight tooth and nail for every cent that goes to NASA while the military can waste hundreds of billions on planes that don't work.

    --
    Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    1. Re:Bohr Model by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Managed to find this from 2008. Definitely helps, but also raises questions:

      What conditions make it so a given atom in the lattice will be affected by the motion or not?
      Do the atoms retain their "bonds" (if that even applies), or are they reformed when the motion stops?
      Do the atoms "remember" their original place in the lattice, or do they simply re-establish the "bonds" with those nearest them?
      What would happen, theoretically, if linear motion is applied, or if there was a gap in the disc (like a slice out of a pie)? Would the atoms hit the "wall" or would they pass through it? Would the effect not work under those conditions? If not, why?

      See, now I want you to do more research to answer these questions, if you can't already.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    2. Re:Bohr Model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You spent tons of money and years of research to create a supersolid, but you can't make a simple gif animation conveying what it is?

      Which is why I get plenty of spam from small companies and independent consultants willing to make snazzy graphics for my research after every paper I've published. Of course they want $10k or more per nonanimated graphic... but will offer a steep discount if your grant won't pay for that (most smaller ones don't have an outreach component) and need to pay out of your own pocket. Even when I've spent a lot of free time making animations related to research, the PR department says it is not what people want to see (i.e. isn't click bait), so they just languish on my personal webpage.

    3. Re:Bohr Model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A note to researchers: You know why the Bohr Model of the atom persists in education even though it's wrong? Because it provides a simple starting point that anyone can immediately grasp and then build upon.

      If we (the scientific community) want laypeople to stop rolling their eyes whenever quantum mechanics is mentioned we need to start communicating better. You spent tons of money and years of research to create a supersolid, but you can't make a simple gif animation conveying what it is?

      This is why we have to fight tooth and nail for every cent that goes to NASA while the military can waste hundreds of billions on planes that don't work.

      You can explain it to some people and they will be like:

      "Yo! Yo! Yo! I just created a new form of matter.. in the bathroom! Don't go in there!"

    4. Re:Bohr Model by physicsphairy · · Score: 1

      The Bohr model does have its usefulness, and I am certainly with you that those of us in the sciences need a lot more humility in how we approach the general public with what we think they should know and care about.

      But it is also overextended and the cause of a great deal of frustration for people who want to genuinely understand the bizarre quantum phenomenally we nerds keep excitedly touting, but instead find out that they have hinged their understanding on a lie that is nearly useless outside the narrow scope of things like spectroscopy.

      IMHO if we want to invite the layfolk in to the quantum domain we really need to emphasize teaching people about waves more. QM is much more intuitive as a topic of wave phenomena. (Plus, the wave picture will serve to understand classical optics, E&M, acoustics, etc.)

      Teaching people QM without the wave part is like trying to each people economics without the calculus part. In theory it is "simpler" but ask just about any student who has learned about integration and they will say that they find the explanations invoking calculus much more comprehensible.

  13. It's called superglue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It flows with zero viscosity onto every nearby surface while at the same time phase-shifting to a solid form that takes 3 days to wear off of your fingers.

    And about the time some scientist figures out how to combine it with glitter and those little prickly-pear thorns, we'll need to re-write the standard model to allow for what may turn out to be the most annoying substance known to man.

    1. Re:It's called superglue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's see what the good people at BadDragon make of this.

    2. Re:It's called superglue by kencurry · · Score: 1

      It flows with zero viscosity onto every nearby surface while at the same time phase-shifting to a solid form that takes 3 days to wear off of your fingers.

      And about the time some scientist figures out how to combine it with glitter and those little prickly-pear thorns, we'll need to re-write the standard model to allow for what may turn out to be the most annoying substance known to man.

      this could be the "grey goo" everyone used to worry about. Would be great sic-fi it the goo teaches the matter around it to also become goo.

      --
      sigs are for losers (except to point out that sigs are for losers)
  14. Bose-Einstein condensates by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    The next generation of premium Apple headphones, for which we'll need another dongle.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  15. Physicists are Researchers, Doctors are Scientists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The media has no idea what is science and what is not. Whenever psychologists or doctors perform a purely statistical study, it gets called "science", whenever physicists perform actual experiments it is called "research". See how that works?

    Gee, I wonder why anyone would want to confuse the public about what is science and what is not? What could the motivations possibly be? Hmmm...

  16. one group of scientsts by siamesevodka · · Score: 1

    The article said one group of scientist was using mirrors. Now all they have to introduce smoke to the equation Then it will prove my theorem that it is all done with smoke and mirrors. Somewhere down the road I'm sure there is a practical application for all this. I just hope it is not a fluid metal terminator..

    1. Re:one group of scientsts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ho ho ho, it is for a Silver Surfer in a shortcut. Na Body, you get it?

  17. Claimed before but disproved by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    No we have not yet seen this form of matter. It was claimed to have been observed a while ago but this was disproved. Let's hope the same thing does not happen again.

    1. Re:Claimed before but disproved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow the joke went right over your head dude. Or did you only read the title?

  18. Re: Trump funds this crap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, that's basically why we stopped going to the moon. People started asking why millions were spent on rocket science but not a penny for feeding the poor.

  19. Re: Physicists are Researchers, Doctors are Scient by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    Selling newspapers mainly

  20. Ahhh by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    But does it really count if it only existed for a femtosecond and no one manages to reproduce it?

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:Ahhh by ShoulderOfOrion · · Score: 1

      Or worse yet, manage to 'lose it' like the team that made that carbon thing recently.

  21. Bose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    People who made Bose-Einstein condensates and other derivatives thereof have Nobel prizes, heck half of the Higgs "Boson" is even named after him. But they didn't give Nobel prize to Satyendar Nath Bose himself who laid the mathematical and theoretical foundation for all of this.

  22. MIT Professors and their Service Desk Support L2 by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

    been there, done that, MIT in general rocks. keep up the good work.

  23. Re: Trump funds this crap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny how all the money saved didn't go to feeding the poor, though.

  24. Re: Trump funds this crap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny how all the money saved didn't go to feeding the poor, though.

    It is funny though that there always are more idiots saying this "Whyyy oh why can't we feed the poor before going to space???? WHAAAAAYYYYYYY!?!?!?!"

    And we notice that nature keeps printing up more and more poor people and more and more stupid idiots to say why aren't we feeding the poor people first?

    Fuck the poor and fuck these stupid people, if they matter they should be able to feed themselves, Survival of the fittest being the rule.

  25. More vaporware by RghtHndSd · · Score: 1

    Very few details provided, probably no where close to production. Tell me about it when I can buy the damn thing.

  26. MIT quit wasting your time on this crap by Osgeld · · Score: 1, Funny

    and get back to work on the important stuff like Rovables, Scratch, and duoskin

  27. Re: Trump funds this crap? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    "And we notice that nature keeps printing up more and more poor people and more and more stupid idiots to say why aren't we feeding the poor people first?"

    THIS factor, not economic theoretics, is the primary reason we need private space programs.

  28. Re: Physicists are Researchers, Doctors are Scient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a physicist, I've always preferred the term "boffin".

  29. Re: Physicists are Researchers, Doctors are Scient by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    And it's important to call it, oddly, a boson because that sounds like Bose in Bose-Einstein condensate.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  30. Re: Trump funds this crap? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

    Actually, increased standard of living is strongly associated with lower birth rates, so your analogy falls flat. It has nothing to do with helping the poor, and everything to do with things such as the military industrial complex.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  31. Crap, just another piece of the technology needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for Skynet to be able to build the T1000.

  32. Just wondering thx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the matter?

  33. Re: Trump funds this crap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well the military-industrial complex has provided the funding that has moved theoretical science from the white board to reality. The US is not possess the only military-industrial complex. China and Russia have their own complex and their complex has one thing the US doesn't, freedom to do anything they want without putting up with their citizens constantly complaining in that area. And as long as Russia and China have their own MIC I think the US should make theirs better.

  34. Re:Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It does collapse.

  35. Re: Physicists are Researchers, Doctors are Scient by michael_wojcik · · Score: 1

    And it's important to call it, oddly, a boson because that sounds like Bose in Bose-Einstein condensate.

    Why "oddly"? It "sounds like Bose" because bosons are named for Bose. Or was that your point, and it was just too oblique (or I'm too dense today) for me to get it?

    AIUI, not all composite bosons can form Bose-Einstein condensates. More generally, while an atom (an electrically-neutral one, not an ion) containing an even number of fermions (electrons and neucleons in this case) is a composite boson, they don't always follow exactly the Bose statistics of an elementary boson. When the wave functions of two composite bosons interact strongly, for example, other factors become significant.

    But for many purposes, composite bosons behave like elementary bosons, and if you want to whip up a Bose-Einstein condensate, you'll want to start with bosons.