Posted on 02/07/2013 12:43:29 PM PST by Kevmo
RE: [Vo]:Bose-Einstein condensate created at room temperature
Jones Beene Thu, 07 Feb 2013 11:13:22 -0800
Yes they can. In fact this could be important for LENR, should it be broad enough to include other boson quasiparticles, such as the magnon.
The definitions are similar: polaritons are quasiparticles resulting from strong coupling of electromagnetic waves with an electric or magnetic dipole-carrying excitation. The magnon could be imagined to be the subset of that - where the coupling is only magnetic. However, it may be only a partial subset with other features included.
Polaritons describe the dispersion of light (photons) with an interacting phonon resonance; while the magnon would describe the dispersion of spin current with an interacting resonance.
Using the same general terms, superconductivity where the Cooper pair is the boson, would describe the dispersion of charge within an interacting phonon resonance. (the last is my interpretation, which may not be correct).
Thus we have a linking of three BEC phenomena which may happen either at room temperature or close- in the case of the RTSC. From: Axil Axil
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/bose-einstein-condensate-created-at-room-temperature/
Bose-Einstein condensate created at room temperature
-----------------------------------------
Can those interested in LENR draw any lessons from this formulation?
Cheers: Axil
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpt of Arstechnica article
Bose-Einstein condensate created at room temperature
Instead of atoms, condensation was achieved using quasiparticles.
by Matthew Francis- Feb 6 2013, 9:15am PST
Physical Sciences 27
Aluminum-Nitrogen nanowires, relatives of the ones used in these experiments.
NIH
Bose-Einstein condensation is a dramatic phenomenon in which many particles act as though they were a single entity. The first Bose-Einstein condensate produced in the laboratory used rubidium atoms at very cold temperatures—work that was awarded the 2001 Nobel Prize in physics. Other materials, like superconductors, exhibit similar behavior through particle interactions.
These systems typically require temperatures near absolute zero. But Ayan Das and colleagues have now used a nanoscale wire to produce an excitation known as a polariton. These polaritons formed a Bose-Einstein condensate at room temperature, potentially opening up a new avenue for studying systems that otherwise require expensive cooling and trapping.
Bosons are part of a large class of particles that can have the same quantum configuration or state. This is in contrast to the fermions, the category including electrons, protons, and neutrons, which resist having the same state. (This resistance, known as the Pauli exclusion principle, leads to the presence of different energy states, or orbitals, occupied by the electrons of atoms.) At extremely low temperatures, bosons can coalesce into a single quantum system known as a Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC), named for Satyendra Nath Bose and Albert Einstein.
Many atoms are bosons, though this characteristic doesn't generally make any difference except at high density or very low temperatures. However, thanks to the wonders of quantum physics, interactions within materials can produce quasiparticles. These are excitations that act like particles, but don't exist independent of the medium in which they occur.
As with normal particles, quasiparticles are either fermions or bosons, obeying the same general rules as their free cousins. For example, one widely accepted model for superconductivity describes the phenomenon as a Bose-Einstein condensation of quasiparticles formed by pairs of electrons. As with atomic BECs, quasiparticle BECs tend to form under very cold temperatures.
Another quasiparticle can be formed by the interactions between photons and excitations in a material. The resulting polaritons are low-mass bosons that should be able to condense at higher temperatures—possibly including room temperature. One signature of a polariton BEC is the production of coherent light—effectively, the quasiparticles act like a laser. Several experiments have created polariton BECs, though still at relatively cold temperatures.
The current study embedded a very thin wire—a nanowire—in a cavity designed to produce standing waves of microwave photons. The nanowire was an alloy of aluminum, gallium, and nitrogen, but with varying amounts of aluminum. The irregular composition created a de facto "trap" for the polaritons. A wire of uniform composition couldn't form a BEC—fluctuations within the material would destroy the condensation, even at low temperatures.
To bypass this, the researchers gradually decreased the amount of aluminum in the alloy to zero in the center of the nanowire, then bookended the aluminum-free segment with a region containing a relatively high amount of aluminum. The microwaves from the cavity interacted with the material, generating polaritons. These drifted preferentially along the wire toward the aluminum-free zone, where they collected and condensed.
In other words, the electronic properties of the material itself replaced the need for cooling, allowing the quasiparticles to gather and condense into a BEC. The experimenters confirmed this effect by detecting the telltale light emission.
This experiment marked the first room-temperature BEC ever observed in the laboratory. While the authors didn't suggest any practical application, the potential for studying BECs directly is obvious. Without the need for cryogenic temperatures or the sorts of optical and magnetic traps that accompany atomic BECs, many aspects of Bose-Einstein condensation can potentially be probed far less expensively than before.
First, you claim that Bose-Enstein condensate can be manufactured in ordinary environmental room temperatures.
But what is described in the article is not "ordinary environmental room temperature." Room temperature, yes, but hardly ordinary environment.
Second, so what? No statistical physicist that I know would claim that creating boson condensates is theoretically impossible at any temperature, and I know a lot of them, including the former condensed matter theorist I see when I shave every morning. The question is whether the conditions under which LENR has been said to occur (in one theory) would in fact be an example of a single energy eigenstate under which BEC could form. This experiment does not by any means suggest that it does. It simply says that a thing that most condensed matter theorists already accept as possible in principle can indeed be done in a lab.
Does that have any applicability to the theory that LENR is made possible via a BEC mechanism? No, because nobody claims that under the circumstances of that theory this experiment has any applicability, EXCEPT for the fact that they both happen at more or less ordinary temperature.
That's not really a big deal.
That’s so evasive.
Does that have any applicability to the theory that LENR is made possible via a BEC mechanism? No, because nobody claims that under the circumstances of that theory this experiment has any applicability,
***Um, you’re the one who’s wrong this time. Y.E. Kim generated his BEC LENR theory and Sinha generated his experimental results (and theory) which show the applicability at room temperatures. So take it up with Y.E. Kim and KP Sinha, since you’re such a great physics guru. I know that guys like you try to tussle with pedestrians like me, but that’s just for show, because you’re intimidated by real physicists like KP Sinha and prefer to bully pedestrians rather than motorists. So... go ahead. Let us know how it goes.
Since you’ve put yourself into the rarefied atmosphere of people like Stephen Chu, Energy Director for the Obama administration (blech), who got his Nobel prize for removing energy from systems to create BEC’s with Lasers, take this issue up with him as well. I have no doubt that you’ll report your positive results back to us promptly. /s
You’ve got nothing, so you call Fred a bully. And congratulations on getting your thread demoted to the Smoky Backroom.
Oh, you again.
Never once has any lurker followed up your ridiculous anti-science Luddite objections and said they were worth pursuing.
Thanks for bumping the thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19
Let's demolish your stupid post one "point" at a time.
Y.E. Kim generated his BEC LENR theory and Sinha generated his experimental results (and theory) which show the applicability at room temperatures.
So what? People watch television in their living rooms at room temperature. Babies are born in hospitals at room temperature. So clearly watching television is where babies come from. See? Because they both occur at room temperature.
who got his Nobel prize for removing energy from systems to create BEC’s with Lasers, take this issue up with him as well.
Translation: "Oh, and I post on FRee Republic at room temperature! So, that proves there's something going on there, as well."
John F. Kennedy was murdered in Dallas on a November day that for physical purposes was at "room temperature."
What does that prove? Something to you apparently, but nothing to anyone who knows any physics.
But wait, Steven Chu used LASERS! So that must mean something, too. Because his LASERS created Bose condensates. So there has to be a connection. There does. Because Lasers are cool, and BEC is cool, and LENR is cool, so .. they're like ... related.
You're in way over your head here buddy. I've forgotten more physics in a day than you've learned in your life. This experiment proves that by using some very clever confinement techniques, Bose condensates can be created at room temperature. That has nothing more to do with LENR than anything else that happens at "room temperature."
There’s nothing evasive about it. Saying two things both happen at “room temperature” doesn’t prove they’re related, even if they claim to use the same mechanism.
So clearly watching television is where babies come from. See? Because they both occur at room temperature.
***Um, no. Correlation is not causation. But your straw argument is invalid and draws from classic fallacies. Are you a real physicist? Then why do you use straw argumentation, which a first year logician would drop whereas your claim to “real physicist” looking in the mirror implies many more years of educational training. How is that? You swallow the camel but strain at the gnat of straw argumentation? Did you flunk first year critical thinking?
So what? People watch television in their living rooms at room temperature. Babies are born in hospitals at room temperature. So clearly watching television is where babies come from. See? Because they both occur at room temperature.
***Again, straw argumentation. Did you flunk first year logic while moving ahead in super-duper physics logics?
Translation: “Oh, and I post on FRee Republic at room temperature! So, that proves there’s something going on there, as well.”
***Translation: flunking first year critical thinking courses while claiming to be a higher level physicist. How is that? I call bowlsheet. You’re a freeping liar. Note how you try to tussle with me, an admitted pedestrian, while you forego tussling with real physicists like KP Sinha because... yes I’m saying it... you’re a coward on top of being a hypocritical logician.
You’ll need all the bumps you can get now that you’re in the Bermuda Triangle of FR.
John F. Kennedy was murdered in Dallas on a November day that for physical purposes was at “room temperature.”
What does that prove? Something to you apparently, but nothing to anyone who knows any physics.
But wait, Steven Chu used LASERS! So that must mean something, too. Because his LASERS created Bose condensates. So there has to be a connection. There does. Because Lasers are cool, and BEC is cool, and LENR is cool, so .. they’re like ... related.
***And you’re like... not bringing any of this up with real physicists like KP Sinha because you’re like... a coward and a straw argumenter who seems to have flunked first year critical thinking while claiming to have gone onto hard level physics logic courses. Show us.
You’re in way over your head here buddy.
***I know that. That’s why you should be having this conversation with KP Sinha, YE Kim, Peter Hegelstein and others but choose to tussle with me.
I’ve forgotten more physics in a day than you’ve learned in your life.
***Prove it. Contact YE Kim. Contact KP Sinha. Contact Hegelstein. Tells us how that goes. You won’t because you’re an impostor.
This experiment proves that by using some very clever confinement techniques, Bose condensates can be created at room temperature. That has nothing more to do with LENR than anything else that happens at “room temperature.”
***And yet... real physicists who’ve been published in peer reviewed journals... beg to differ with you.... while you beg to differ with pedestrians.
You've still got nothing, therefor another personal attack.
I call bowlsheet.
Still zippo, so now you're swearing.
You’re a freeping liar.
More name calling.
yes I’m saying it... you’re a coward on top of being a hypocritical logician.
Zippo, zilch, nada.
How about pedestrians?
You won’t because you’re an impostor.
How do you come up with such a diversity of names to call people?
Never once has any lurker followed up your ridiculous anti-science Luddite objections and said they were worth pursuing.
Thanks for bumping the thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19
How do you come up with such a diversity of names to call people?
***You’re creative with verbs. I’m only half as creative as you at nouns.
Thanks for bumping the thread. No, you won’t be put on the ping list.
You’ll need all the bumps you can get
***Well, then, thanks for bumping the thread... T4BTT
You’re a bit overwrought. But thanks for bumping the thread, though you contribute nothing else.
So you’re a physicist who doesn’t know freshman year critical thinking and who prefers to tussle with pedestrians rather than other physicists.
Kevmo, the pedestrian. I'm going to remember that. Given your own admitted shortcomings in physics, why should we trust that your judgement of someone else's critical thinking is any better, especially given your documented inclination to do personal attacks and call names?
Many of the things you've posted here are incorrect, including the very broad claim that this experiment has some implications specific to LENR. It doesn't. I'm sorry that you don't understand why it doesn't, but I hope less emotional readers will benefit from my attempts to correct you. It's clear that you're too emotionally involved to benefit yourself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.