If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Phys Org2)   Cool tag: Physicists have created a synthetic magnetic monopole. Spiffy: this particle's existence was predicted 85 years ago   (phys.org) divider line 55
    More: Cool, magnetic monopoles, particles, Paul Dirac, physicists, Amherst College, billionths, Physical Society, moon rocks  
•       •       •

2641 clicks; posted to Geek » on 29 Jan 2014 at 9:58 PM (29 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



55 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-29 07:31:01 PM
So someone looks at magnets and asks, "Why can't it just be north or south?" and now, though they haven't found one in nature, they've managed to make one.

So... what can it do?

I mean, I would assume that there is somewhere in nature that mimics the conditions this was created in.  If we can make it happen in a lab it's likely that it's also made somewhere else "naturally". But is this pure science with the idea that any practical use is nice but unnecessary, or does it have some theoretical application?

/giving you Farkers a chance to get smart'd
 
2014-01-29 08:13:26 PM

timujin: So... what can it do?


Remember Game Genie for the NES?

Kind of like that, only for the universe.
 
2014-01-29 08:47:28 PM
There aren't enough tags for this.  Spiffy, Cool, awesome, HOLY shiat; hell, you could even throw in Florida for Dirac.

This is really a really big deal.
 
2014-01-29 08:54:48 PM
imgs.xkcd.com

/Seriously, this is farking amazing
 
2014-01-29 09:07:11 PM
It's weird to think that something could attract one pole of another object without repelling its opposite.  Anyway, this stuff is beyond me.

Regardless, any word that begins with 'Mono' makes me whisper, do jazz hands, and think of this:
img.fark.net
 
2014-01-29 09:37:43 PM

Riche: timujin: So... what can it do?

Remember Game Genie for the NES?

Kind of like that, only for the universe.


It can not work?
 
2014-01-29 09:59:57 PM
The ring came off my pudding can
 
2014-01-29 10:05:16 PM
i1.ytimg.com
 
2014-01-29 10:05:49 PM
http://io9.com/5620547/ask-a-physicist-what-ever-happened-to-magnetic - monopoles

d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net

"Nick Sohl was coming home.

...He had gone mining in Saturn's rings, with a singleship around him and a shovel in his hand (for the magnets used to pull monopoles from asteroidal iron did look remarkably like shovels)...
A century ago monopoles had been mere theory and conflicting theory at that. Magnetic theory said that a north magnetic pole could not exist apart from a south magnetic pole, and vice-versa. Quantum theory implied that they might exist independently.

The first permanent settlements had been blooming among the biggest Belt asteroids when an exploring team found monopoles scattered through the nickel-iron core of an asteroid. Today they were not theory, but a thriving Belt industry. A magnetic field generated by monopoles acts in an inverse linear relationship rather than an inverse-square. In practical terms, a monopole-based motor or instrument will reach much further. Monopoles were valuable where weight was a factor, and in the Belt weight was always a factor. But monopole mining was still a one man operation.

Nick's luck had been poor. Saturn's rings were not a good region for monopoles anyway; too much ice, too little metal. The electromagnetic field around his cargo box probably held no more than two full shovelfuls of north magnetic pole. Not much of a catch for a couple weeks backbreaking labor... but still worth good money at Ceres."
 
2014-01-29 10:06:14 PM
There is exactly one magnetic monopole in the universe. It passed through a detector once in 1982 and has not been seen since.
 
2014-01-29 10:17:04 PM

Parthenogenetic: http://io9.com/5620547/ask-a-physicist-what-ever-happened-to-magnetic - monopoles

[d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net image 286x475]

"Nick Sohl was coming home.

...He had gone mining in Saturn's rings, with a singleship around him and a shovel in his hand (for the magnets used to pull monopoles from asteroidal iron did look remarkably like shovels)...
A century ago monopoles had been mere theory and conflicting theory at that. Magnetic theory said that a north magnetic pole could not exist apart from a south magnetic pole, and vice-versa. Quantum theory implied that they might exist independently.

The first permanent settlements had been blooming among the biggest Belt asteroids when an exploring team found monopoles scattered through the nickel-iron core of an asteroid. Today they were not theory, but a thriving Belt industry. A magnetic field generated by monopoles acts in an inverse linear relationship rather than an inverse-square. In practical terms, a monopole-based motor or instrument will reach much further. Monopoles were valuable where weight was a factor, and in the Belt weight was always a factor. But monopole mining was still a one man operation.

Nick's luck had been poor. Saturn's rings were not a good region for monopoles anyway; too much ice, too little metal. The electromagnetic field around his cargo box probably held no more than two full shovelfuls of north magnetic pole. Not much of a catch for a couple weeks backbreaking labor... but still worth good money at Ceres."



Off to get Lucas Garner's travel chair serviced.  BRB.
 
2014-01-29 10:20:42 PM
So does being able to manufacture one provide the same evidence of string theory as finding one in the wild?  (IIRC...)
 
2014-01-29 10:21:52 PM

JasonOfOrillia: It's weird to think that something could attract one pole of another object without repelling its opposite.  Anyway, this stuff is beyond me.

Regardless, any word that begins with 'Mono' makes me whisper, do jazz hands, and think of this:
[img.fark.net image 460x345]


Came here to reply to Timujin thusly:

Well, sir, there's nothing on earth 
Like a genuine, 
Bona fide, 
Magnetized, 
No bar 
Monopole!
 
2014-01-29 10:24:53 PM

LockeOak: [i1.ytimg.com image 850x637]


I should know this, but what game is that?
 
2014-01-29 10:27:38 PM
Now that we have Monopoles, I can get on with building my Cyclotron.  First Byzantium Secundus, then the Known Worlds!

/how obscure are those references around here?
 
2014-01-29 10:30:38 PM

doglover: Riche: timujin: So... what can it do?

Remember Game Genie for the NES?

Kind of like that, only for the universe.

It can not work?


Farking monopoles, how do they work?
 
2014-01-29 10:45:09 PM

FrancoFile: LockeOak: [i1.ytimg.com image 850x637]

I should know this, but what game is that?


Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, and now everyone reading this has to play it again. (Not that this is a bad thing.)
 
2014-01-29 10:45:46 PM
img.fark.net
Could use one when grappler ships are made.
 
2014-01-29 10:47:28 PM
Yeah, well, when the Earth's magnetic field flips, what good will your bag of N monopoles be then, eh?
 
2014-01-29 11:05:43 PM

Sliding Carp: There aren't enough tags for this.  Spiffy, Cool, awesome, HOLY shiat; hell, you could even throw in Florida for Dirac.

This is really a really big deal.


What he said.
This really is a big farkin' deal, even if nothing immediately practical shakes out. This is Lewis Carol, through the looking glass shiat.
 
2014-01-29 11:07:23 PM

kyleaugustus: Now that we have Monopoles, I can get on with building my Cyclotron.  First Byzantium Secundus, then the Known Worlds!

/how obscure are those references around here?


This is Fark.com, haven for nerds commenting on stories sarcastically.

How obscure do you think the reference is to a crowd like that?
 
2014-01-29 11:07:54 PM

BafflerMeal: So does being able to manufacture one provide the same evidence of string theory as finding one in the wild?  (IIRC...)


Don't know; how long is a piece of string?
 
2014-01-29 11:10:39 PM

kyleaugustus: Now that we have Monopoles, I can get on with building my Cyclotron.  First Byzantium Secundus, then the Known Worlds!

/how obscure are those references around here?


Build your own cyclotron:

http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/august-2010/the-do-it-yoursel f -cyclotron
 
2014-01-29 11:21:56 PM

BafflerMeal: So does being able to manufacture one provide the same evidence of string theory as finding one in the wild?  (IIRC...)


No, not really.  In fact, finding one in the wild wouldn't provide much evidence for string theory either.  Pretty much all, if not all, of the major unified theories predict monopoles, because they're all based in part on Pauli.  It's more in studying their precise properties that will give credence to one over another.
 
2014-01-29 11:25:58 PM
I'm thinking that I read a story very like this several years ago. That time, and perhaps this time as well, it was more of a pretend monopole -- or, to be a bit more flattering to the researchers, a "model". Like putting a hole in the middle of a lump of lead and saying you've "created a negative mass".

But I'm in no position to read and understand the actual paper, so maybe I'm just yelling at clouds.
 
2014-01-29 11:31:13 PM

Twilight Farkle: FrancoFile: LockeOak: [i1.ytimg.com image 850x637]

I should know this, but what game is that?

Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, and now everyone reading this has to play it again. (Not that this is a bad thing.)


It is if you had any plans for the next six months.

Anyway, even if we never find any natural monopoles, I have to think that these artificial doodads will lead to some nifty innovations down the road.  So congrats to all involved.  You've done science proud.
 
2014-01-29 11:42:32 PM
Came for Larry Niven, leaving satisfied.
 
2014-01-29 11:49:03 PM

jfarkinB: I'm thinking that I read a story very like this several years ago. That time, and perhaps this time as well, it was more of a pretend monopole -- or, to be a bit more flattering to the researchers, a "model". Like putting a hole in the middle of a lump of lead and saying you've "created a negative mass".

But I'm in no position to read and understand the actual paper, so maybe I'm just yelling at clouds.


No, you're not alone, I remember that too. I think this is actually differnet, though.
 
2014-01-29 11:49:20 PM

jfarkinB: I'm thinking that I read a story very like this several years ago.


There was one in 2013, and one in 2010.
 
2014-01-30 12:19:24 AM
Oh please... my pole's had mono for years now.  I didn't go to the press about it.
 
2014-01-30 12:19:59 AM

Ivo Shandor: jfarkinB: I'm thinking that I read a story very like this several years ago.

There was one in 2013, and one in 2010.


the condensed matter people manage to get a monopole looking effect every now and then by smashing together some swirling bits and pieces. It's kinda sorta like a tiny spinning halbach array....well not really
 
2014-01-30 12:21:04 AM

LrdPhoenix: BafflerMeal: So does being able to manufacture one provide the same evidence of string theory as finding one in the wild?  (IIRC...)

No, not really.  In fact, finding one in the wild wouldn't provide much evidence for string theory either.  Pretty much all, if not all, of the major unified theories predict monopoles, because they're all based in part on Pauli.  It's more in studying their precise properties that will give credence to one over another.


Thanks for the clarification.
 
2014-01-30 12:23:33 AM

Deadite: [img.fark.net image 640x480]
Could use one when grappler ships are made.


Dang, I was going to ask, but can it help me escape the prison on Hecatoncheires, but you beat me to it.  Well played!
 
2014-01-30 12:54:53 AM
Mind = blown.  Ask me a day ago if we'd ever see a magnetic monopole, and I'd say that you'd have the same chance of seeing a unicorn in person.

Which tells me yet again that I don't know shiat.
 
2014-01-30 01:03:18 AM

LrdPhoenix: BafflerMeal: So does being able to manufacture one provide the same evidence of string theory as finding one in the wild?  (IIRC...)

No, not really.  In fact, finding one in the wild wouldn't provide much evidence for string theory either.  Pretty much all, if not all, of the major unified theories predict monopoles, because they're all based in part on Pauli.  It's more in studying their precise properties that will give credence to one over another.



Also, as I recall, Dirac's theory pretty much said, "If there's even one magnetic monopole in the whole universe, then electric charge must be quantized."

And, as far as we can tell, electric charge is quantized, which has made the lack of observed magnetic monopoles even more interesting to physicists.

This finding, if substantiated (i.e., reproduced by other labs), is super cool and Nobel Prize worthy, in my opinion.

/drtfa
 
2014-01-30 01:04:46 AM

BafflerMeal: So does being able to manufacture one provide the same evidence of string theory as finding one in the wild?  (IIRC...)


String theory isn't science; it's bullshiat.
 
2014-01-30 01:35:57 AM

FizixJunkee: BafflerMeal: So does being able to manufacture one provide the same evidence of string theory as finding one in the wild?  (IIRC...)

String theory isn't science; it's bullshiat.


Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not bullshiat, it's a hypothesis.  It is science, in that it makes falsifiable predictions.

Now, numerology?  That's bullshiat.
 
2014-01-30 01:40:01 AM

jfarkinB: That time, and perhaps this time as well, it was more of a pretend monopole


What they have here is a real monopole just not a natural one. Basically at the temperatures they're working at, just a teeny tiny amount above absolute zero, if you mess with magnetic fields you can get a monopole to emerge. A real genuine monopole. Of course once you stop the magnetic field fun it goes away, but as long as the conditions are right you have a genuine monopole.
 
2014-01-30 02:17:44 AM
Real magnetic monopoles are instant Nobel prize shiat.  If these are for real I'm completely astounded.

It's like finding a something with a front but no back.
 
2014-01-30 02:24:06 AM

jfarkinB: I'm thinking that I read a story very like this several years ago. That time, and perhaps this time as well, it was more of a pretend monopole -- or, to be a bit more flattering to the researchers, a "model". Like putting a hole in the middle of a lump of lead and saying you've "created a negative mass".

But I'm in no position to read and understand the actual paper, so maybe I'm just yelling at clouds.


No, you're right on.  It's a monopole in a field that affects neutral particles in Bose-Einstein condensates the same way that a magnetic field affects charged particles, and therefore shares a lot of mathematical structure with actual magnetic fields, but is not the field that shows up in Maxwell's equations.  Everywhere you see the adjective "synthetic" in the article, it's talking about something pertaining to the not-actually-magnetic field.  Actual, real, div B magnetic monopoles continue to not exist in this reality.
 
2014-01-30 02:53:53 AM

Cpl.D: FizixJunkee: BafflerMeal: So does being able to manufacture one provide the same evidence of string theory as finding one in the wild?  (IIRC...)

String theory isn't science; it's bullshiat.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not bullshiat, it's a hypothesis.  It is science, in that it makes falsifiable predictions.

Now, numerology?  That's bullshiat.


Actually, I don't think that anyone has managed to come up with a falsifiable prediction for any of string theory yet, which is its main criticism as far as I know.

To see anything on the scale of strings, you need orders and orders of magnitude more powerful colliders, which we'll probably never reach.

Also, it's more a family of theories with widely different properties based on which parameters you tweak.  In essence, it's a theory that predicts that the universe behaves in any of a billion billion different ways, which is basically indistinguishable from predicting nothing at all as far as I can tell.
 
2014-01-30 03:16:26 AM
I need to hang out more places with an "atomic refrigerator...  in the basement laboratory."

/also, mumble mumble Phssthpok
 
2014-01-30 05:05:51 AM
FTFA:"Hall's team adopted an innovative approach to investigating Dirac's theory, creating and identifying synthetic magnetic monopoles in an artificial magnetic field generated by a Bose-Einstein condensate, an extremely cold atomic gas tens of billionths of a degree warmer than absolute zero."

Heck, i didn't even know you could go below 1 degree above zero. This is seriously cool stuff.
 
2014-01-30 05:14:51 AM

timujin: So someone looks at magnets and asks, "Why can't it just be north or south?" and now, though they haven't found one in nature, they've managed to make one.

So... what can it do?

I mean, I would assume that there is somewhere in nature that mimics the conditions this was created in.  If we can make it happen in a lab it's likely that it's also made somewhere else "naturally". But is this pure science with the idea that any practical use is nice but unnecessary, or does it have some theoretical application?

/giving you Farkers a chance to get smart'd


Now, see, that's entirely the wrong attitude to have when doing research like this. Most of the physics knowledge we have today which provides for all the neat technology we have came from scientists who wondered "what happens when i do THIS?".
 
2014-01-30 05:39:57 AM

Smoking GNU: Now, see, that's entirely the wrong attitude to have when doing research like this. Most of the physics knowledge we have today which provides for all the neat technology we have came from scientists who wondered "what happens when i do THIS?"


Don't forget all the other important parts of science.

"Whoops"
"Oh shiat"
"damn who spilled this beaker?!"
"uh...wtf just happened?"
"Is it supposed to look like that?"
"HEY! NO EATING IN THE LAB!...hey that's a neat reaction do it again"

There's some science that wouldn't have happened without someone being clumsy/messy/accident prone.
 
2014-01-30 05:43:01 AM

Deadite: Smoking GNU: Now, see, that's entirely the wrong attitude to have when doing research like this. Most of the physics knowledge we have today which provides for all the neat technology we have came from scientists who wondered "what happens when i do THIS?"

Don't forget all the other important parts of science.

"Whoops"
"Oh shiat"
"damn who spilled this beaker?!"
"uh...wtf just happened?"
"Is it supposed to look like that?"
"HEY! NO EATING IN THE LAB!...hey that's a neat reaction do it again"

There's some science that wouldn't have happened without someone being clumsy/messy/accident prone.


Yup, those too, definitely.
 
2014-01-30 06:09:23 AM

Ivo Shandor: There is exactly one magnetic monopole in the universe. It passed through a detector once in 1982 and has not been seen since.


So happy to see the SLAC incident. Truly nothing is obscure on Fark!
 
2014-01-30 06:48:22 AM

FizixJunkee: LrdPhoenix: BafflerMeal: So does being able to manufacture one provide the same evidence of string theory as finding one in the wild?  (IIRC...)

No, not really.  In fact, finding one in the wild wouldn't provide much evidence for string theory either.  Pretty much all, if not all, of the major unified theories predict monopoles, because they're all based in part on Pauli.  It's more in studying their precise properties that will give credence to one over another.


Also, as I recall, Dirac's theory pretty much said, "If there's even one magnetic monopole in the whole universe, then electric charge must be quantized."

And, as far as we can tell, electric charge is quantized, which has made the lack of observed magnetic monopoles even more interesting to physicists.

This finding, if substantiated (i.e., reproduced by other labs), is super cool and Nobel Prize worthy, in my opinion.

/drtfa


Ah crap, I meant Paul Dirac, not Wolfgang Pauli.  Eh, close enough.
 
2014-01-30 06:51:18 AM
BLAST IT. I was afraid of this.

My Q-mech teacher from a previous grad institution basically just said "stringy dipole in a solid. has a N and a S".

So yeah, it's "We've gotten something that LOOKS LIKE a monopole in a weird substance". Again. It's not ACTUALLY a pure monopole.

God damnit Phys.org.

(Still gonna read the paper and try to make sense of it to double check.)


Deadite: Don't forget all the other important parts of science.

"Whoops"
"Oh shiat"
"damn who spilled this beaker?!"
"uh...wtf just happened?"
"Is it supposed to look like that?"
"HEY! NO EATING IN THE LAB!...hey that's a neat reaction do it again"

There's some science that wouldn't have happened without someone being clumsy/messy/accident prone.


I actually feel like a REAL scientist now because I have done exactly this. Screwed up ("This filter is in a box labeled UV filter! This means this is the UV filter,and I do not need to check." *Does experiment.* ".. WAit this is all green light. Why is this making the chemical react? That shouldn't be happening." Advisor: "KEEP DOING THAT." ))


Cpl.D: Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not bullshiat, it's a hypothesis. It is science, in that it makes falsifiable predictions.

Now, numerology? That's bullshiat.


No, it's not even a hypothesis, because for the most part, it DOESN'T make falsifiable predictions. (IT is, I think, *finally* starting to come up with some "well maybe" experiments?). It is String Conjecture.
 
2014-01-30 07:20:41 AM

Professor Science: jfarkinB: I'm thinking that I read a story very like this several years ago. That time, and perhaps this time as well, it was more of a pretend monopole -- or, to be a bit more flattering to the researchers, a "model". Like putting a hole in the middle of a lump of lead and saying you've "created a negative mass".

But I'm in no position to read and understand the actual paper, so maybe I'm just yelling at clouds.

No, you're right on.  It's a monopole in a field that affects neutral particles in Bose-Einstein condensates the same way that a magnetic field affects charged particles, and therefore shares a lot of mathematical structure with actual magnetic fields, but is not the field that shows up in Maxwell's equations.  Everywhere you see the adjective "synthetic" in the article, it's talking about something pertaining to the not-actually-magnetic field.  Actual, real, div B magnetic monopoles continue to not exist in this reality.


It's a quasiparticle, like an electron hole or a polaron.
 
Displayed 50 of 55 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report