Can Freezing Light Overcome Limitations in Solid Surfaces?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of "freezing" light and its implications for solid surfaces, exploring experimental methods, definitions of temperature in a vacuum, and the behavior of light under certain conditions. The scope includes theoretical considerations, experimental observations, and conceptual clarifications related to light and quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants describe an experiment involving an atmospheric vacuum of approximately 10-14 atmospheres and temperatures near 10-3 Kelvin, suggesting it was one of the coldest places known.
  • There is a discussion on how temperature is defined in a vacuum, with one participant suggesting it relates to the kinetic energy of particles and the challenges of achieving absolute zero.
  • Some participants question how light behaves when "frozen," specifically whether it adheres to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and how its state can be detected.
  • One participant clarifies that while light pulses were described as frozen, they were actually slowed and reflected within a small zone, indicating that photons were not completely stopped but rather trapped and re-emitted.
  • References to external research papers are provided, discussing the slowing of light to speeds on the order of 102 m/sec.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying interpretations of the experiment and the terminology used, particularly regarding the freezing of light and its implications. There is no clear consensus on the definitions and implications of the findings discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of defining temperature in a vacuum and the nuances of light behavior under experimental conditions, indicating that assumptions and definitions may vary among contributors.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying quantum mechanics, experimental physics, and the properties of light in various states, as well as individuals curious about the intersection of light and matter in extreme conditions.

Science news on Phys.org
ok, so that's odd.. any suggestions on how they did it?
 
All of this data is off the top of my head, I claim no precision in any way. The experiment created atmospheric vacuum on the order of [tex]10^{-14} atmospheres[/tex] with temp on the order of [tex]10^{-3}[/tex]degrees Kelvin. In other words at the time of the experiment the area created was the coldest and most vacuous place in the known universe. Again if memory serves me correctly - the paper came across my desk at my office, I am away for the holidays - a laser source(possibly sodium?) injected the light, and which became trapped in the area emitting a reddish-orange colour appearing wafer-like. If enough interest is expressed I would ring up back to my office and provide more specifics.








bluehadron_colour

Edited the LaTex to correct exponents.
Integral [/color]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How does one DEFINE "temperature" in a vacuum?
 
[thanks for latex editing, infra]

Temperature ( perhaps we might need to just stick to numbers here, not "word definitions" as such since they cause this sort of confusion) is a function of the (integral) sum of kinetic energy; and since there is no absolute zero nor total vacuum, merely the ability to remove increasingly smaller volumes totals of the energy of a closed system/carnot which requires increasingly larger portions of energy. Classical mechanics can describe this well.

Expression in terms of percentage of Kelvin etc is appropriate much the same as velocity is expressible in terms of c, e.g., 0.89 c [tex]= {[ 0.89]} {[2.997 x 10^8 m /sec]}[/tex].
 
Last edited:
OK, so they injected light into a vacuum and it was frozen for a split second. Does light follow Heisenbergs uncertainty principle? i know it would be easy to detect cos you can see it, but how would they know it had stopped?
 
ultra slow light

http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/cond-mat/pdf/0307/0307402.pdf

http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/9904/9904031.pdf


I just created the second pdf there, it should be ready for reading now. The mentioned group's research results are on that web site. The light is reported on the order of [tex]10^2m/sec[/tex], with other reports of slowing given in terms of c (as I indicated in this thread above)in recent experiments. This should answer the questions.

Heisenberg <=> quantum is concerned with one "end" if you will of the "universe"(<=>multiverse) and relativity with the "other end" although of course there is no rigour in this shorthand. Our goal as mankind has been said to understand how those ends meet.

As we progress technically (and Ed Teller [if not Michio Kaku q.v.] might have objected to the use of the word progress in this context)we see more new forms of matter arising (second article q.v.); similarly we see matter existing as "clumps" of nuclear particles, not matter existing as "atoms" (much less molecules) with other (atomic) particles stripped away as we are able to alter the conditions of matter in the laboratory for example approaching fusion temps (as at the centre of the sun) or in a neutron star.


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally posted by jimmy p
OK, so they injected light into a vacuum and it was frozen for a split second. Does light follow Heisenbergs uncertainty principle? i know it would be easy to detect cos you can see it, but how would they know it had stopped?

The title of the article was slightly misleading. While the pulses were considered frozen, the photons were not. They were trapped, slowed and reflecting back and forth, within a small zone. They have slowed light, but not stopped it (including the photons) w/o the loss of photons (as in their energy was absorbed by the sodium or rubidium atoms, then reemitted later).
 
Originally posted by radagast
The title of the article was slightly misleading. While the pulses were considered frozen, the photons were not. They were trapped, slowed and reflecting back and forth, within a small zone. They have slowed light, but not stopped it (including the photons) w/o the loss of photons (as in their energy was absorbed by the sodium or rubidium atoms, then reemitted later).


OHHHH I see now! That makes a little more sense and stops my brain hurting!
 
  • #10
solid surface T

The T is right in some solid surface.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
10K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K