Efimov 3-body theory experimentally proven

  • Thread starter Thread starter turbo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theory
turbo
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
3,157
Reaction score
57
Efimov theorized an analog to the rings using particles: Three particles (such as atoms or protons or even quarks) could be bound together in a stable state, even though any two of them could not bind without the third. The physicist first proposed the idea, based on a mathematical proof, in 1970. Since then, no one has been able to demonstrate the phenomenon in the lab - until now.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20091216/sc_livescience/strangephysicaltheoryprovedafternearly40years;_ylt=AkqB2UImPjRiYu5ibWcOgQys0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTRxaGZvMDN0BGFzc2V0A2xpdmVzY2llbmNlLzIwMDkxMjE2L3N0cmFuZ2VwaHlzaWNhbHRoZW9yeXByb3ZlZGFmdGVybmVhcmx5NDB5ZWFycwRjY29kZQNtb3N0cG9wdWxhcgRjcG9zAzgEcG9zAzUEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHNlYwN5bl9oZWFkbGluZV9saXN0BHNsawNzdHJhbmdlcGh5c2k-
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
turbo-1 said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20091216/sc_livescience/strangephysicaltheoryprovedafternearly40years;_ylt=AkqB2UImPjRiYu5ibWcOgQys0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTRxaGZvMDN0BGFzc2V0A2xpdmVzY2llbmNlLzIwMDkxMjE2L3N0cmFuZ2VwaHlzaWNhbHRoZW9yeXByb3ZlZGFmdGVybmVhcmx5NDB5ZWFycwRjY29kZQNtb3N0cG9wdWxhcgRjcG9zAzgEcG9zAzUEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHNlYwN5bl9oZWFkbGluZV9saXN0BHNsawNzdHJhbmdlcGh5c2k-

That's pretty cool. "Experimental proof" is still one of my favorite fallacies, but it's cool nonetheless :wink:. Go science?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
kote said:
That's pretty cool. "Experimental proof" is still one of my favorite fallacies, but it's cool nonetheless :wink:. Go science?
Maybe "proof" is a strong word, but in this case, it may be justified because of another critical verification.

Efimov had calculated that the triplet of bound particles was possible, and that it was repeating: New bound states could be achieved at higher and higher energy levels in an infinite progression. All of the bound states would occur at energy levels that were multiples of 515.
To prove that they had really created the trios, called Efimov trimers, the researchers produced one set of three lithium atoms bound together, and then reproduced it with a binding energy 515 times the first one. (Essentially, binding energy indicates how tightly the particles hold onto one another and how much energy it would take to pull them apart.)
The researchers used a setup called a Feshbach resonance that allowed them to tweak the energy levels of their atoms. They found that when they hit multiples of 515, the particles would bind, but at other energies they wouldn't, proving that the trios really were Efimov trimers.

It's one thing to have general experimental verification of an idea, and another level entirely (IMO) to have quantified the concept, and have the quantification verified by experiment. That's pretty impressive.
 
turbo-1 said:
Maybe "proof" is a strong word, but in this case, it may be justified because of another critical verification.

It's one thing to have general experimental verification of an idea, and another level entirely (IMO) to have quantified the concept, and have the quantification verified by experiment. That's pretty impressive.

I am impressed. I do think it's pretty cool and is definitely good science. The experimental proof comment had nothing to do with the topic mentioned. I was just commenting on the wording (you weren't the only one to use it). It's that formal logic sequence they made me take in school. Sorry!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
12K
Replies
39
Views
8K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
7K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Back
Top