| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Tales from the quantum frontier | Main | bad news from the Oracles of Astrampsychus »

March 18, 2010

Scientists supersize quantum mechanics

From Nature:

News.2010.130 A team of scientists has succeeded in putting an object large enough to be visible to the naked eye into a mixed quantum state of moving and not moving. Andrew Cleland at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and his team cooled a tiny metal paddle until it reached its quantum mechanical 'ground state' — the lowest-energy state permitted by quantum mechanics. They then used the weird rules of quantum mechanics to simultaneously set the paddle moving while leaving it standing still. The experiment shows that the principles of quantum mechanics can apply to everyday objects as well as as atomic-scale particles. The work is simultaneously being published online today in Nature and presented today at the American Physical Society's meeting in Portland, Oregon.

According to quantum theory, particles act as waves rather than point masses on very small scales. This has dozens of bizarre consequences: it is impossible to know a particle's exact position and velocity through space, yet it is possible for the same particle to be doing two contradictory things simultaneously. Through a phenomenon known as 'superposition' a particle can be moving and stationary at the same time — at least until an outside force acts on it. Then it instantly chooses one of the two contradictory positions.

More here.

Posted by Azra Raza at 06:07 AM | Permalink

Comments


Abbas,

Thanks for the post.

I am always amazed at the ingenuity of scientists who develop the technologies and apparatuses to demonstrate such fundamental principles in science. In this case, it is quantum mechanics. As I understand this, it is the first time ever that quantum mechanics is demonstrated at the superatomic level.

I guess Schroedinger was right. That means you can never be wrong because every possible state, at the quantum level, is right. Every state is right at some time and in some place within a multiplicity of universes. I know what the words are and what they intend to communicate. Wrapping my head around it is a far different thing.

Posted by: Norman Costa | Mar 19, 2010 12:26:28 AM

So is there a universe in which Schroedinger is wrong? Sorry Norman but you got me to thinking about this and that's what popped out...in this local universe of course. So if they can get something this large to display quantum effects, could they do it to a cat?

Posted by: Pete Chapman | Mar 19, 2010 7:02:01 PM


Pete Chapman,

Yes, they could do it to a cat. However the cat would have to cooled to near absolute zero. But I could be wrong and right.

Posted by: Norman Costa | Mar 20, 2010 4:20:47 AM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

3QD ADVERTISING

Find the best prices on Las Vegas Show Tickets at Best of Vegas and Orlando Theme Parks at Best of Orlando!

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

Al on Franzen, Wallace and the Question of Realism

aguy109 on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

aguy109 on The Pathology of Stabilisation in Complex Adaptive Systems

Ken Pidcock on How to win a fight against twenty children

Erich on How to win a fight against twenty children

reader on How to win a fight against twenty children

Carlos on Franzen, Wallace and the Question of Realism

Janet Kerr on Olivia Chaney -Aupres de ma Blonde

omar on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

j_93 on Sanctions Don’t Promote Democratic Change

droog on How to win a fight against twenty children

Mike Cope on Sanctions Don’t Promote Democratic Change

Dredd on Sanctions Don’t Promote Democratic Change

Louise Gordon on How to win a fight against twenty children

Seyma on Snowboarding at Night

aguy109 on Whitney Houston: Didn't we almost have it all

aguy109 on Matzo ball memories

j_93 on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

Mike H. on Whitney Houston: Didn't we almost have it all

Jim on the tyrant's wife

Evert Cilliers on Why Is the Amazing Movie Directed by Angelina Jolie not on the Oscar List?

modernguy(NeanderthalGuy) on Why Is the Amazing Movie Directed by Angelina Jolie not on the Oscar List?

aguy109 on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

Orla Schantz on Bubbles: Spheres, Volume I: Microspherology

Kabir on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed