Can someone explain why Graphene does not qualify for Quantum Physics Forum?

[DevilsAvocado]

Could someone please explain why the thread https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=435072"?

Not that I have anything against General Physics, but it seems like maybe topics like "Cleaning your PC with a vacuum cleaner", "Rock On Rod Stewart", "My Air Mattress as a Pressure Vessel", "Kevlar and knives", "Throwing a ball in my office", etc, is predominant.

If Graphene were only about "Scotch tape & Pencils", I would have understood the "movement". But that’s not right, is it?

As far as I understand, Graphene has already, and will in the future be very important for the progress of quantum physics.

http://static.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2010/info_publ_phy_10_en.pdf"[/URL]
...
[B]Graphene also allows scientists to test for some of the more ghost-like quantum effects that so far only have been discussed theoretically[/B]. One such phenomenon is a variant of Klein tunelling, which was formulated by the Swedish physicist Oskar Klein in 1929. The tunnel effect in quantum physics describes how particles can sometimes pass through a barrier that would normally block them. The larger the barrier the smaller the chance of quantum particles passing through. However, this does not apply to electrons traveling in graphene – in some circumstances they move ahead as if the barrier did not even exist.
...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][PLAIN]http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2010/press.html"[/URL]
...
However, with graphene, physicists can now study a new class of two-dimensional materials with unique properties. [B]Graphene makes experiments possible that give new twists to the phenomena in quantum physics[/B]. Also a vast variety of practical applications now appear possible including the creation of new materials and the manufacture of innovative electronics. Graphene transistors are predicted to be substantially faster than today’s silicon transistors and result in more efficient computers.
...[/QUOTE]


Talking about quantum physics and computers: What could possibly be more interesting than [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_qubit"[/URL]?
[QUOTE][SIZE="1"][B][url]http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v3/n3/abs/nphys544.html[/url][/B][/SIZE]

[SIZE="3"][B]Spin qubits in graphene quantum dots[/B][/SIZE]

Björn Trauzettel, Denis V. Bulaev, Daniel Loss and Guido Burkard
Nature Physics 3, 192 - 196 (2007)
doi:10.1038/nphys544

Abstract: The main characteristics of good qubits are long coherence times in combination with fast operating times. It is well known that carbon-based materials could increase the coherence times of spin qubits, which are among the most developed solid-state qubits. Here, we propose how to form spin qubits in graphene quantum dots. A crucial requirement to achieve this goal is to find quantum-dot states where the usual valley degeneracy in bulk graphene is lifted. [B]We show that this problem can be avoided in quantum dots based on ribbons of graphene with armchair boundaries. The most remarkable new feature of the proposed spin qubits is that, in an array of many qubits, it is possible to couple any two of them via Heisenberg exchange with the others being decoupled by detuning. This unique feature is a direct consequence of the quasi-relativistic spectrum of graphene.[/B]

[SIZE="1"](Also at [url]http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0611252[/url])[/SIZE][/QUOTE]


A search on arXiv.org for [I]Graphene[/I] under [I]quant-ph[/I] gives [URL]http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/abs:+Graphene/0/1/0/all/0/1?per_page=100"[/URL]...

[B]So could someone please explain what’s going on?[/B]

It’s quite useless to spend a lot of your private time in finding information about new physics, if the information without any reasonable explanation is dumped in the "Rod Stewart" section...?:confused:?

 

[alxm]

I suppose because Nobel prize announcements, as interesting as they are, aren't really related to quantum mechanics in-themselves.

 

[G037H3]

what alxm said

Nobel Prize material is just likely to be moved to General Physics

I haven't seen the post, but if it was just focusing on graphene itself then I agree with you, it shouldn't have been moved

also: umad

 

[ViewsofMars]

The topic of discussion can be found here: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2919916#post2919916

I just now posted to the topic. "The Nobel Committee said that the physicists, based at the University of Manchester, have shown that an extremely thin form of carbon just one atom thick had exceptional properties originating in the world of quantum physics."

You can review that quote by following the link (url) I just provided. Thanks and have a great day.