Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

UC Riverside Researchers' Discovery Of Electrostatic Spin Topples Century-old Theory
University Of California - Riverside / ScienceDaily.com ^ | April 2, 2003 | Anders Wistrom and Armik Khachatourian

Posted on 04/03/2003 7:28:43 AM PST by forsnax5

RIVERSIDE, Calif. -- April 2, 2003 -- In a discovery that is likely to impact fields as diverse as atomic physics, chemistry and nanotechnology, researchers have identified a new physical phenomenon, electrostatic rotation, that, in the absence of friction, leads to spin. Because the electric force is one of the fundamental forces of nature, this leap forward in understanding may help reveal how the smallest building blocks in nature react to form solids, liquids and gases that constitute the material world around us.

Scientists Anders Wistrom and Armik Khachatourian of University of California, Riverside first observed the electrostatic rotation in static experiments that consisted of three metal spheres suspended by thin metal wires, and published their observations in Applied Physics Letters. When a DC voltage was applied to the spheres they began to rotate until the stiffness of the suspending wires prevented further rotation. The observed electrostatic rotation was not expected and could not be explained by available theory.

Wistrom and Khachatourian designed the study with concepts they had developed earlier. "Experimental and theoretical work from our laboratory suggested that the cumulative effect of electric charges would be an asymmetric force if the charges sitting on the surface of spheres were asymmetrically distributed," said Wistrom. "In the experiments, we could control the charge distribution by controlling the relative position of the three spheres."

Yet, for more than 200 years, researchers have known only about the push and pull of electric forces between objects with like or unlike charges. Since as early as 1854, when Thomson, later to become Lord Kelvin, theorized about an electric potential surrounding charged objects, scientists have concentrated on understanding how electric and magnetic phenomena are related.

"While Thomson's hypothesis of electric potential has brought enormous benefits when it comes to modern electromagnetic technologies, we now realize that his definition of electric potential was not exact," said Wistrom. "The effects are particularly noticeable when the spheres are very close to one another." (Electric potential is the ratio of the work done by an external force in moving a charge from one point to another divided by the magnitude of the charge.)

Indeed, the general applicability of Thomson's theory has not been tested experimentally or theoretically until now. In the Journal of Mathematical Physics, Wistrom and Khachatourian recently published the breakthrough that provides the theoretical underpinnings for electrostatic rotation. "It is very satisfying to learn that electrostatic rotation can be predicted by the simple laws of voltage and force that date back at least 200 years," Wistrom said.

He added, "This is curiosity driven research that starts with a simple question and ultimately leads to findings that will likely have impacts across many fields of science and engineering. Because electrostatic rotation without friction leads to spin, we can only speculate how this discovery will provide new approaches to aid the investigation of fundamental properties of matter."

Spin is used in quantum mechanics to explain phenomena at the nuclear, atomic, and molecular domains for which there is no concrete physical picture. "So the discovery of electrostatic rotation and the identification of electrostatic spin as a natural phenomenon opens up an entirely new field of inquiry with the potential for significant advances," Wistrom said.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: crevolist; physics; realscience; science
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last
For you bleeding-edge science fans...
1 posted on 04/03/2003 7:28:43 AM PST by forsnax5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: forsnax5
Thanks, been a while since I had a good bleeding.
2 posted on 04/03/2003 7:32:15 AM PST by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forsnax5
I'm confused. The "spin" variable used in quantum mechanics has nothing to do with our notion of physical spinning like a tennis ball, etc. The author implies that subatomic particles actually spin. Just as a "top", "bottom", or "strange" quark has nothing to do with the physical definitions of those words. They are just quantum variables.
3 posted on 04/03/2003 7:37:24 AM PST by Flightdeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
- ping -

I know you like this stuff. Potential truth, or a story a day late for April Fool's?

4 posted on 04/03/2003 7:38:06 AM PST by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *RealScience
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list
5 posted on 04/03/2003 7:39:47 AM PST by Free the USA (Stooge for the Rich)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: forsnax5
bump
6 posted on 04/03/2003 7:51:53 AM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; jennyp; Junior; longshadow; *crevo_list; RadioAstronomer; Scully; Piltdown_Woman; ...
Could be big, could be bogus.

[This ping list is for the evolution -- not creationism -- side of evolution threads, and sometimes for other science topics. To be added (or dropped), let me know via freepmail.]

7 posted on 04/03/2003 7:52:58 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forsnax5
Maybe James Blish's "Spindizzy" will come out of this...
8 posted on 04/03/2003 7:53:20 AM PST by boris (Education is always painful; pain is always educational)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forsnax5
Electro-static spin?

Our clothes dryer does that....it's caused by the machine ingesting one sock out of each pair.

9 posted on 04/03/2003 7:55:52 AM PST by N. Theknow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flightdeck
The "spin" variable used in quantum mechanics has nothing to do with our notion of physical spinning like a tennis ball, etc. The author implies that subatomic particles actually spin.

This was appended to the article at the UC site, and probably explains the confusion:

"Produced by the Office of Marketing & Media Relations."

10 posted on 04/03/2003 7:57:17 AM PST by forsnax5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Flightdeck
Keep in mind that whoever wrote this article probably has made a high school level science background, and maybe not even that level in physics.

To describe quantum mechanics in terms that are readily understandable to the general public is next to impossible, since you can't use analogies, since, as you said, quantum mechanics simply don't work in the same way we view reality.

Trying to describe it even stumped Richard Feynman, so I'm willing to cut the author a little slack.
11 posted on 04/03/2003 7:57:19 AM PST by Viva Le Dissention
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: N. Theknow
That's a special application of quantum physics. The existence of the other sock depends on whether you observe the first sock.
12 posted on 04/03/2003 7:58:58 AM PST by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: forsnax5
Tommy Roe figured this out and explained it as: "I'm so dizzy, my head it spins..."
13 posted on 04/03/2003 8:00:17 AM PST by trebb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: N. Theknow
Our clothes dryer does that....it's caused by the machine ingesting one sock out of each pair.

Conservation of matter and energy, you know. That sock is converted into pure electrostatic spin. Not to mention lint.

14 posted on 04/03/2003 8:02:43 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; Physicist; RadioAstronomer; ThinkPlease; Gordian Blade
Not clear what the deal is here; if they are saying that rotation occurs because of asymmetric charge distribution, I don't see how that violates any standing theories, but then I'm not an expert.
15 posted on 04/03/2003 8:03:15 AM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: js1138
That sock is converted into pure electrostatic spin. Not to mention lint.

That harkens back to a discussion a few years back in which I hypothesized the existence of a gyro-rotational Black Hole inside of clothes dryers, that swallowed stray socks, and led via a worm-hole to the Planet of Lint...... I'm still waiting to hear from the Nobel Committee on when I can expect my nomination to come thru....

16 posted on 04/03/2003 8:06:33 AM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
I just printed the article and it looks like they have three spheres in an asymetrical configuration. They put a potential on one sphere and the others move. The asymetrical arrangement causes the torque.

There isn't anything about QM spin; it's all electrostatic.
17 posted on 04/03/2003 8:21:29 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Not clear what the deal is here ...

This could be the long-sought answer to one of the great naggning questions in my life -- why does my secretary's telephone cord get so darn twisted up every day that I'm forever having to let the thing swing free for a couple of minutes to untangle itself?

18 posted on 04/03/2003 8:30:48 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: forsnax5
This article made essentially no sense to me. Furthermore, while the title says:

UC Riverside Researchers' Discovery Of Electrostatic Spin Topples Century-old Theory

the article says:

"It is very satisfying to learn that electrostatic rotation can be predicted by the simple laws of voltage and force that date back at least 200 years," Wistrom said.

19 posted on 04/03/2003 8:56:04 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flightdeck
I'm confused. The "spin" variable used in quantum mechanics has nothing to do with our notion of physical spinning like a tennis ball, etc. The author implies that subatomic particles actually spin. Just as a "top", "bottom", or "strange" quark has nothing to do with the physical definitions of those words. They are just quantum variables.

While the spin of an electron, etc. cannot be envisioned as the rotation of a rigid body, it is not true that this spin "has nothing to do with" the spinning of a tennis ball. They represent the same conserved quantity, angular momentum.

If you align the spins of photons, for example (i.e. circularly polarized light), and shine the beam at an opaque object, you will impart a measurable torque to it.

20 posted on 04/03/2003 9:00:31 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson