Can Graphene/Nanotubes Change Mass?

sanman
Messages
737
Reaction score
24
A new conjecture postulates that it may be possible to "create" mass through relativistic effects on leptons inside of graphene, when it is rolled up into a nanotube:

http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25914/?p1=A4

Gee, does that imply that it could be possible to manipulate or modulate the mass of a system comprising graphene/nanotubes?
Can anyone think of a suitable mechanism to accomplish this?

Leaving aside the details of how to accomplish this for a moment, what are the further implications and applications of a system whose mass could be modulated through internal relativistic effects?
Could it be possible to achieve propellantless propulsion? Perhaps even artificial gravity?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is a mathematical analog of relativity, not an actual relativistic effect. Solid state physics has lots of phenomena that are mathematically analogous to interesting things in other fields of physics (e.g., black holes).
 
It's not the true mass of the electrons or any other particles that is being altered.

What's modified is the effective mass of the quasiparticles of the system. Quasiparticles are reflections of the low-lying degrees of freedom of the system. As the name suggests, these low-lying degrees of freedom can be modeled using a particle picture. These quasiparticles can behave like ordinary non-relativistic electrons (same charge, same spin, different mass) which is what happens in a Fermi liquid. In graphene the quasiparticles behave as massless, relativistic Dirac fermions -- which is one of the reasons what makes this material so interesting. However, these Dirac fermions are not the original electrons.

So the article is simply wrong in saying that it's the electrons which have no mass, and that the compactification of one spatial direction generates a mass term for the electrons. This is not true. It applies to the low-lying degrees of freedom of the system -- the quasiparticles.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top