“Breaking the vacuum” with petawatt laser

[OldBiologist]

Perhaps this is old news for some but this was the first I heard about it, ripping particles from empty space.

“...most alluring, Li says, would be showing that light could tear electrons and their antimatter counterparts, positrons, from empty space—a phenomenon known as "breaking the vacuum." It would be a striking illustration that matter and energy are interchangeable...”

Physicists are planning to build lasers so powerful they could rip apart empty space | Science | AAAS

 

[toobfreak]

Perhaps this is old news for some but this was the first I heard about it, ripping particles from empty space.

“...most alluring, Li says, would be showing that light could tear electrons and their antimatter counterparts, positrons, from empty space—a phenomenon known as "breaking the vacuum." It would be a striking illustration that matter and energy are interchangeable...”

Physicists are planning to build lasers so powerful they could rip apart empty space | Science | AAAS

"That would be very exciting," he says. "It would mean you could generate something from nothing." I kinda had to laugh at that statement. If I'm right, their petawatt laser would be using 5.3 X 10^15th watts in order to produce a few electrons and positrons. Meantime I can get trillions of electrons from a simple AAA battery! And I can get scads of positrons from the simple interaction of the w and z gauge bosons (radioactive decay)! Perhaps my old tritium backlit wristwatch produces them? But I know, it is more exciting to pull them out of empty space (convert energy to matter). Science marches on.

 

[Frannie]

Perhaps this is old news for some but this was the first I heard about it, ripping particles from empty space.

“...most alluring, Li says, would be showing that light could tear electrons and their antimatter counterparts, positrons, from empty space—a phenomenon known as "breaking the vacuum." It would be a striking illustration that matter and energy are interchangeable...”

Physicists are planning to build lasers so powerful they could rip apart empty space | Science | AAAS

There is nothing in empty space to tear apart, though this may prove false, nor does matter if there have a present antimatter counterpart to rip away as matter and antimatter can not cohabitate the same space without neutralizing each other

Nice story though, popping in einstein makes it seem logical, at least to an illogical processor, which I lack

 

[cnm]

Meantime I can get trillions of electrons from a simple AAA battery!

How to miss the point.

 

[OldBiologist]

Actually, current theory on quantum fluctuations says particles are popping in and out of existence in vacuum constantly. Here’s a wiki link.

“A quantum fluctuation is the temporary appearance of energetic particles out of empty space, as allowed by the uncertainty principle.”

Quantum fluctuation - Wikipedia

However, even better, with less math and more humor, is this talk by Lawrence Krause. I’ve listened to this through several times and always enjoyed it. I hope you find it equally interesting.

Perhaps this is old news for some but this was the first I heard about it, ripping particles from empty space.

“...most alluring, Li says, would be showing that light could tear electrons and their antimatter counterparts, positrons, from empty space—a phenomenon known as "breaking the vacuum." It would be a striking illustration that matter and energy are interchangeable...”

Physicists are planning to build lasers so powerful they could rip apart empty space | Science | AAAS

There is nothing in empty space to tear apart, though this may prove false, nor does matter if there have a present antimatter counterpart to rip away as matter and antimatter can not cohabitate the same space without neutralizing each other

Nice story though, popping in einstein makes it seem logical, at least to an illogical processor, which I lack

 

[Innocynioc]

Splendid video, OldBiologist. Than you for posting it.
I know I am just picking nits, but it really bothers me when the lecturer says that all the atoms in our body were created in super novae explosions without considering all the hydrogen, helium and a smattering of lithium atoms which were created by the big bang. Once I hear one falsehood I wonder how many other misstatements the lecturer makes that I am just too uninformed to catch.

 

[Frannie]

Actually, current theory on quantum fluctuations says particles are popping in and out of existence in vacuum constantly. Here’s a wiki link.

“A quantum fluctuation is the temporary appearance of energetic particles out of empty space, as allowed by the uncertainty principle.”

Quantum fluctuation - Wikipedia

However, even better, with less math and more humor, is this talk by Lawrence Krause. I’ve listened to this through several times and always enjoyed it. I hope you find it equally interesting.

Perhaps this is old news for some but this was the first I heard about it, ripping particles from empty space.

“...most alluring, Li says, would be showing that light could tear electrons and their antimatter counterparts, positrons, from empty space—a phenomenon known as "breaking the vacuum." It would be a striking illustration that matter and energy are interchangeable...”

Physicists are planning to build lasers so powerful they could rip apart empty space | Science | AAAS

There is nothing in empty space to tear apart, though this may prove false, nor does matter if there have a present antimatter counterpart to rip away as matter and antimatter can not cohabitate the same space without neutralizing each other

Nice story though, popping in einstein makes it seem logical, at least to an illogical processor, which I lack

To pop in and out of existence is a theory that requires totally new physics. Furthermore antimatter can not be separated from matter because they can not exist together.

It's all gibberish

My theory is that fools are pushing pseudoscience in an attempt to dethrone the current title holder

 

[Frannie]

Splendid video, OldBiolohist. Than you for posting it.

Lol, so there was nothing and nothing created the universe just because nothing had nothing to do and nothing decided to create everything.

I find this valuable because it makes the people saying that God raised his hands and said let there be a universe look bright.

 

[Frannie]

Actually, current theory on quantum fluctuations says particles are popping in and out of existence in vacuum constantly. Here’s a wiki link.

“A quantum fluctuation is the temporary appearance of energetic particles out of empty space, as allowed by the uncertainty principle.”

Quantum fluctuation - Wikipedia

However, even better, with less math and more humor, is this talk by Lawrence Krause. I’ve listened to this through several times and always enjoyed it. I hope you find it equally interesting.

Perhaps this is old news for some but this was the first I heard about it, ripping particles from empty space.

“...most alluring, Li says, would be showing that light could tear electrons and their antimatter counterparts, positrons, from empty space—a phenomenon known as "breaking the vacuum." It would be a striking illustration that matter and energy are interchangeable...”

Physicists are planning to build lasers so powerful they could rip apart empty space | Science | AAAS

There is nothing in empty space to tear apart, though this may prove false, nor does matter if there have a present antimatter counterpart to rip away as matter and antimatter can not cohabitate the same space without neutralizing each other

Nice story though, popping in einstein makes it seem logical, at least to an illogical processor, which I lack

To pop in and out of existence is a theory that requires totally new physics. Furthermore antimatter can not be separated from matter because they can not exist together.

It's all gibberish

My theory is that fools are pushing pseudoscience in an attempt to dethrone the current title holder

If you really take in what he is saying one conclusion is that a person with downs syndrome could make and defend all the same claims

 

[OldBiologist]

Lawrence Krause is anything but a fool. He is one of the leading particle physicists and cosmologists of the day and, as demonstrated by the Wiki article, this is current thinking in theoretical physics, a Nobel prize having been awarded on this exact topic. I’m not sure you read the article, or if you did that you understood it. It is completely in keeping with current theory that, if you dump enough energy into a finite space, you might get matter. That is exactly one of the keen points of interest in doing the experiment. Energy to matter conversion.

 

[OldBiologist]

Splendid video, OldBiolohist. Than you for posting it.
I know I am just picking nits, but it really bothers me when the lecturer says that all the atoms in our body were created in super novae explosions without considering all the hydrogen, helium and a smattering of lithium atoms which were created by the big bang. Once I hear one falsehood I wonder how many other misstatements the lecturer makes that I am just too uninformed to catch.

I think, I didn’t go back to listen, that he specifies that it is the heavier elements, carbon, iron, etc., necessary for life as we know it, that were created by stars. Obviously the hydrogen and helium had to exist early on or stars could not have formed in the first place. Regardless, glad you enjoyed it. As I said, I’ve listened to it all the way through many times and, despite being a biologist as he jokes several times, I have been able to understand the great majority of it. The only part that I get bogged down on is the 1 degree size constraint of the clumps of matter at the last scattering surface as seen in the CMB. Fascinating stuff though.

 

[Frannie]

Lawrence Krause is anything but a fool. He is one of the leading particle physicists and cosmologists of the day and, as demonstrated by the Wiki article, this is current thinking in theoretical physics, a Nobel prize having been awarded on this exact topic. I’m not sure you read the article, or if you did that you understood it. It is completely in keeping with current theory that, if you dump enough energy into a finite space, you might get matter. That is exactly one of the keen points of interest in doing the experiment. Energy to matter conversion.

So you believe that the universe and all the matter in it just popped into existence from nothing and that a degree is needed to claim this

Lol

 

[Crepitus]

Perhaps this is old news for some but this was the first I heard about it, ripping particles from empty space.

“...most alluring, Li says, would be showing that light could tear electrons and their antimatter counterparts, positrons, from empty space—a phenomenon known as "breaking the vacuum." It would be a striking illustration that matter and energy are interchangeable...”

Physicists are planning to build lasers so powerful they could rip apart empty space | Science | AAAS

That's a long ways off.

IIRC a petawatt is something like 10 to the 15th power watts, and right now I'm not ever sure we could power Doc Brown's delorian and all it needs is 1.5 gigawatts. Again, IIRC (college was a long time ago) a gigawatt is about 1 millionth of a petawatt. Or maybe 1 billionth?

Edit, now that I finally made the article load I see that they have actually done it, even if only for a trillionth of a second.

Neat.

 

[Frannie]

Perhaps this is old news for some but this was the first I heard about it, ripping particles from empty space.

“...most alluring, Li says, would be showing that light could tear electrons and their antimatter counterparts, positrons, from empty space—a phenomenon known as "breaking the vacuum." It would be a striking illustration that matter and energy are interchangeable...”

Physicists are planning to build lasers so powerful they could rip apart empty space | Science | AAAS

That's a long ways off.

IIRC a petawatt is something like 10 to the 15th power watts, and right now I'm not ever sure we could power Doc Brown's delorian and all it needs is 1.5 gigawatts. Again, IIRC (college was a long time ago) a gigawatt is about 1 millionth of a petawatt. Or maybe 1 billionth?

But if that laser were here now could it separate antimatter from matter in a vacuum

Lol

 

[Frannie]

Perhaps this is old news for some but this was the first I heard about it, ripping particles from empty space.

“...most alluring, Li says, would be showing that light could tear electrons and their antimatter counterparts, positrons, from empty space—a phenomenon known as "breaking the vacuum." It would be a striking illustration that matter and energy are interchangeable...”

Physicists are planning to build lasers so powerful they could rip apart empty space | Science | AAAS

That's a long ways off.

IIRC a petawatt is something like 10 to the 15th power watts, and right now I'm not ever sure we could power Doc Brown's delorian and all it needs is 1.5 gigawatts. Again, IIRC (college was a long time ago) a gigawatt is about 1 millionth of a petawatt. Or maybe 1 billionth?

Edit, now that I finally made the article load I see that they have actually done it, even if only for a trillionth of a second.

Neat.

They did not find antimatter

 

[OldBiologist]

What I believe is that it’s an interesting and testable, verifiable and falsifiable hypothesis. An experiment to test it all has been designed and it is just a matter of developing the technology a bit more to catch up to the experimental design, I look forward to seeing the results. It’s exciting stuff, to me, getting to know the universe we inhabit.

Science is always restless if it’s good science. In my field, Abbe’s Law of Diffraction was the 800 lb gorilla in the room when it came to determining ultimate resolution of optical systems in microscopy. That held for over a century until Stefan Hell smashed the optical resolution barrier, rewrote Abbe’s equations and won a noble prize doing it. The truths science uncovers often depend on certain technology or tools to reveal them. So things change as we grow our smarts and technology.

Lawrence Krause is anything but a fool. He is one of the leading particle physicists and cosmologists of the day and, as demonstrated by the Wiki article, this is current thinking in theoretical physics, a Nobel prize having been awarded on this exact topic. I’m not sure you read the article, or if you did that you understood it. It is completely in keeping with current theory that, if you dump enough energy into a finite space, you might get matter. That is exactly one of the keen points of interest in doing the experiment. Energy to matter conversion.

So you believe that the universe and all the matter in it just popped into existence from nothing and that a degree is needed to claim this

Lol

 

[Frannie]

What I believe is that it’s an interesting and testable, verifiable and falsifiable hypothesis. An experiment to test it all has been designed and it is just a matter of developing the technology a bit more to catch up to the experimental design, I look forward to seeing the results. It’s exciting stuff, to me, getting to know the universe we inhabit.

Science is always restless if it’s good science. In my field, Abbe’s Law of Diffraction was the 800 lb gorilla in the room when it came to determining ultimate resolution of optical systems in microscopy. That held for over a century until Stefan Hell smashed the optical resolution barrier, rewrote Abbe’s equations and won a noble prize doing it. The truths science uncovers often depend on certain technology or tools to reveal them. So things change as we grow our smarts and technology.

Lawrence Krause is anything but a fool. He is one of the leading particle physicists and cosmologists of the day and, as demonstrated by the Wiki article, this is current thinking in theoretical physics, a Nobel prize having been awarded on this exact topic. I’m not sure you read the article, or if you did that you understood it. It is completely in keeping with current theory that, if you dump enough energy into a finite space, you might get matter. That is exactly one of the keen points of interest in doing the experiment. Energy to matter conversion.

So you believe that the universe and all the matter in it just popped into existence from nothing and that a degree is needed to claim this

Lol

The only reason that a law can be smashed is because it never existed

 

[OldBiologist]

Obviously the law existed. It had to exist to be smashed. I think your confusion is a result of a misunderstanding of what science actually is. It is not a rigid body of knowledge cast in stone. It is an ongoing revelation fueled by expertise and technology subject to constant challenge and revision, hence my qualification of testable, verifiable (repeatable) and falsifiable. If if it cannot be subject to that kind of scrutiny, it is not science, it is hypothesis at best or idol dreaming at worst.

What I believe is that it’s an interesting and testable, verifiable and falsifiable hypothesis. An experiment to test it all has been designed and it is just a matter of developing the technology a bit more to catch up to the experimental design, I look forward to seeing the results. It’s exciting stuff, to me, getting to know the universe we inhabit.

Science is always restless if it’s good science. In my field, Abbe’s Law of Diffraction was the 800 lb gorilla in the room when it came to determining ultimate resolution of optical systems in microscopy. That held for over a century until Stefan Hell smashed the optical resolution barrier, rewrote Abbe’s equations and won a noble prize doing it. The truths science uncovers often depend on certain technology or tools to reveal them. So things change as we grow our smarts and technology.

Lawrence Krause is anything but a fool. He is one of the leading particle physicists and cosmologists of the day and, as demonstrated by the Wiki article, this is current thinking in theoretical physics, a Nobel prize having been awarded on this exact topic. I’m not sure you read the article, or if you did that you understood it. It is completely in keeping with current theory that, if you dump enough energy into a finite space, you might get matter. That is exactly one of the keen points of interest in doing the experiment. Energy to matter conversion.

So you believe that the universe and all the matter in it just popped into existence from nothing and that a degree is needed to claim this

Lol

The only reason that a law can be smashed is because it never existed

What I believe is that it’s an interesting and testable, verifiable and falsifiable hypothesis. An experiment to test it all has been designed and it is just a matter of developing the technology a bit more to catch up to the experimental design, I look forward to seeing the results. It’s exciting stuff, to me, getting to know the universe we inhabit.

Science is always restless if it’s good science. In my field, Abbe’s Law of Diffraction was the 800 lb gorilla in the room when it came to determining ultimate resolution of optical systems in microscopy. That held for over a century until Stefan Hell smashed the optical resolution barrier, rewrote Abbe’s equations and won a noble prize doing it. The truths science uncovers often depend on certain technology or tools to reveal them. So things change as we grow our smarts and technology.

Lawrence Krause is anything but a fool. He is one of the leading particle physicists and cosmologists of the day and, as demonstrated by the Wiki article, this is current thinking in theoretical physics, a Nobel prize having been awarded on this exact topic. I’m not sure you read the article, or if you did that you understood it. It is completely in keeping with current theory that, if you dump enough energy into a finite space, you might get matter. That is exactly one of the keen points of interest in doing the experiment. Energy to matter conversion.

So you believe that the universe and all the matter in it just popped into existence from nothing and that a degree is needed to claim this

Lol

The only reason that a law can be smashed is because it never existed

 

[Frannie]

Obviously the law existed. It had to exist to be smashed. I think your confusion is a result of a misunderstanding of what science actually is. It is not a rigid body of knowledge cast in stone. It is an ongoing revelation fueled by expertise and technology subject to constant challenge and revision, hence my qualification of testable, verifiable (repeatable) and falsifiable. If if it cannot be subject to that kind of scrutiny, it is not science, it is hypothesis at best or idol dreaming at worst.

What I believe is that it’s an interesting and testable, verifiable and falsifiable hypothesis. An experiment to test it all has been designed and it is just a matter of developing the technology a bit more to catch up to the experimental design, I look forward to seeing the results. It’s exciting stuff, to me, getting to know the universe we inhabit.

Science is always restless if it’s good science. In my field, Abbe’s Law of Diffraction was the 800 lb gorilla in the room when it came to determining ultimate resolution of optical systems in microscopy. That held for over a century until Stefan Hell smashed the optical resolution barrier, rewrote Abbe’s equations and won a noble prize doing it. The truths science uncovers often depend on certain technology or tools to reveal them. So things change as we grow our smarts and technology.

Lawrence Krause is anything but a fool. He is one of the leading particle physicists and cosmologists of the day and, as demonstrated by the Wiki article, this is current thinking in theoretical physics, a Nobel prize having been awarded on this exact topic. I’m not sure you read the article, or if you did that you understood it. It is completely in keeping with current theory that, if you dump enough energy into a finite space, you might get matter. That is exactly one of the keen points of interest in doing the experiment. Energy to matter conversion.

So you believe that the universe and all the matter in it just popped into existence from nothing and that a degree is needed to claim this

Lol

The only reason that a law can be smashed is because it never existed

What I believe is that it’s an interesting and testable, verifiable and falsifiable hypothesis. An experiment to test it all has been designed and it is just a matter of developing the technology a bit more to catch up to the experimental design, I look forward to seeing the results. It’s exciting stuff, to me, getting to know the universe we inhabit.

Science is always restless if it’s good science. In my field, Abbe’s Law of Diffraction was the 800 lb gorilla in the room when it came to determining ultimate resolution of optical systems in microscopy. That held for over a century until Stefan Hell smashed the optical resolution barrier, rewrote Abbe’s equations and won a noble prize doing it. The truths science uncovers often depend on certain technology or tools to reveal them. So things change as we grow our smarts and technology.

Lawrence Krause is anything but a fool. He is one of the leading particle physicists and cosmologists of the day and, as demonstrated by the Wiki article, this is current thinking in theoretical physics, a Nobel prize having been awarded on this exact topic. I’m not sure you read the article, or if you did that you understood it. It is completely in keeping with current theory that, if you dump enough energy into a finite space, you might get matter. That is exactly one of the keen points of interest in doing the experiment. Energy to matter conversion.

So you believe that the universe and all the matter in it just popped into existence from nothing and that a degree is needed to claim this

Lol

The only reason that a law can be smashed is because it never existed

If the law was smashed it never existed.

Physical laws do not change, only human understanding changes

 

[OldBiologist]

Wow, nice display of ignorance. Try looking up the definition of Laws, theories and hypothesis as used in science. It is science we’re discussing here so those definitions apply.

Here, let me help. Live and learn.

“In general, a scientific law is the description of an observed phenomenon. It doesn't explain why the phenomenon exists or what causes it. The explanation of a phenomenon is called a scientific theory. It is a misconception that theories turn into laws with enough research.

"In science, laws are a starting place," said Peter Coppinger, an associate professor of biology and biomedical engineering at the Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. "From there, scientists can then ask the questions, 'Why and how?'"”

What Is a Law in Science?

Obviously the law existed. It had to exist to be smashed. I think your confusion is a result of a misunderstanding of what science actually is. It is not a rigid body of knowledge cast in stone. It is an ongoing revelation fueled by expertise and technology subject to constant challenge and revision, hence my qualification of testable, verifiable (repeatable) and falsifiable. If if it cannot be subject to that kind of scrutiny, it is not science, it is hypothesis at best or idol dreaming at worst.

What I believe is that it’s an interesting and testable, verifiable and falsifiable hypothesis. An experiment to test it all has been designed and it is just a matter of developing the technology a bit more to catch up to the experimental design, I look forward to seeing the results. It’s exciting stuff, to me, getting to know the universe we inhabit.

Science is always restless if it’s good science. In my field, Abbe’s Law of Diffraction was the 800 lb gorilla in the room when it came to determining ultimate resolution of optical systems in microscopy. That held for over a century until Stefan Hell smashed the optical resolution barrier, rewrote Abbe’s equations and won a noble prize doing it. The truths science uncovers often depend on certain technology or tools to reveal them. So things change as we grow our smarts and technology.

Lawrence Krause is anything but a fool. He is one of the leading particle physicists and cosmologists of the day and, as demonstrated by the Wiki article, this is current thinking in theoretical physics, a Nobel prize having been awarded on this exact topic. I’m not sure you read the article, or if you did that you understood it. It is completely in keeping with current theory that, if you dump enough energy into a finite space, you might get matter. That is exactly one of the keen points of interest in doing the experiment. Energy to matter conversion.

So you believe that the universe and all the matter in it just popped into existence from nothing and that a degree is needed to claim this

Lol

The only reason that a law can be smashed is because it never existed

What I believe is that it’s an interesting and testable, verifiable and falsifiable hypothesis. An experiment to test it all has been designed and it is just a matter of developing the technology a bit more to catch up to the experimental design, I look forward to seeing the results. It’s exciting stuff, to me, getting to know the universe we inhabit.

Science is always restless if it’s good science. In my field, Abbe’s Law of Diffraction was the 800 lb gorilla in the room when it came to determining ultimate resolution of optical systems in microscopy. That held for over a century until Stefan Hell smashed the optical resolution barrier, rewrote Abbe’s equations and won a noble prize doing it. The truths science uncovers often depend on certain technology or tools to reveal them. So things change as we grow our smarts and technology.

Lawrence Krause is anything but a fool. He is one of the leading particle physicists and cosmologists of the day and, as demonstrated by the Wiki article, this is current thinking in theoretical physics, a Nobel prize having been awarded on this exact topic. I’m not sure you read the article, or if you did that you understood it. It is completely in keeping with current theory that, if you dump enough energy into a finite space, you might get matter. That is exactly one of the keen points of interest in doing the experiment. Energy to matter conversion.

So you believe that the universe and all the matter in it just popped into existence from nothing and that a degree is needed to claim this

Lol

The only reason that a law can be smashed is because it never existed

If the law was smashed it never existed.

Physical laws do not change, only human understanding changes