That's interesting stuff Jorrie, thanks for passing it along.

Roger

Detection of gravity waves!, On a desk top! Why isn't this stuff on the front page of every newspaper in the world?

Oh I forgot, Britney's back in town.

Haven't recent measurements shown that our entire (observable) universe is all 'flowing' and 'heading' in one general direction as if it is either being 'pushed' or 'pulled' in that direction?

Anyone have any thoughts, Ideas or insight into this and the cause of it?

No matter how far, how big, or how far 'back in time' we go, ultimately we come to a Time &/or Space/Place where there was/is literally 'No 'thing''. Thus somehow everything IS a manifestation of 'nothing'.

There were significant reasons why numerous Gods and Goddesses conspired to destroy Chronos. Failing to do so, they did manage to banish Him to the 'Edge of 'Existence'' for all Eternity.

It has only been very recently that 'material science' has totally and completely replaced Spirituality as our 'religion' Up until such very recent times, (material) scientists for the most part did not perceive the 'UnSeen' 'Occult'' Sciences/Spirituality and material Science as being mutually exclusive. This is rather ironic considering most of our current science IS 'occult' science in that for the most part it is no longer dealing with observation only obtained DIRECTLY exclusively by our human senses. Thus both what is considered to be 'Occult' science in the traditional sense is no different than our modern material science: They both utilize the ability to understand and discern what forces are behind what is observable through (now indirect) observations and the capacity of 'right thinking' utilizing thought experiments as most scientists do when positing theories based on observations, thoughts and ideas. Albert Einstein being a very notable modern example of this.

We can even go to the opposite extreme of the ever decreasing scales of physical existence and matter and find the same dilemma. Here we find that literally every 'physical' thing is not really physical at all but is only made up entirely of energy and is not really 'physical matter' at all. What then is this 'energy'? It would seem to be nothing more than vibrations. So what then is this? What is IT that IS 'vibrating'? Ultimately we come again to a point of everything is a manifestation of nothing. Quite literally: ''EVERYTHING' = 'NoThing' (physical)''

In spite of the fact that we study, utilize and harness it all of the time, no one REALLY even knows what 'electricity' truly is and magnetism even less so.

As has been said many times in many contexts over significant periods of human existence, our entire realms of what we usually consider to be our 'solid, physical existence, universe and cosmos is very much just an 'illusion' Though a VERY good one to be sure! Whomever or Whatever is behind the creation, maintenance and sustenance of our realms of existence certainly have a substantially greater imagination by many, many orders of magnitudes than I do. Though at this plain of existence it is doubtful that the words 'whomever' or 'whatever' are applicable.

For anyone interested in knowledge of this type, I suggest the works of Rudolph Steiner who refuted Kant's assertions that we 'can't know' (pun intended). Indeed our current levels of Science and knowledge are very clear examples of that fact that we CAN know more than just what is immediately apparent in and around us.

Though it does not directly fall into the topic of this realm, by the nature of this question, this is a good place to inquire into it:

The magnetic fields of our home planet reverses periodically. Measurements of manifestations of current 'anomalies' in what is usually considered as being ''regular' and 'homogeneous'' are evidence that we are approaching an occurrence of this.

What will be the effects of this on our modern technological society that utilizes innumerable electronic and likely more pertinently electrical technology? What if anything will happen to machines that utilize power from the grid that will have its polarities reversed? Though for the most part our power grid and motors etc that utilize (significant amounts of) power are run on Alternating Current and hence are generally considered to be un-polarized which of course is not really the case, though it is a distinction and differentiates it from Direct Current. It nevertheless literally utilizes our Earth itself as the 'negative' pole and for the transmission of this power and in this sense IS 'polarized'.

What will be the effects of this, if any? Will everything just 'run backwards' or ?????

(8 >) Happy Spelunking (< 8)

Hi Doug, you asked: "Haven't recent measurements shown that our entire (observable) universe is all 'flowing' and 'heading' in one general direction as if it is either being 'pushed' or 'pulled' in that direction?"

Check out my latest Blog entry on 'dark flow'.

-J

Just great!

Thanks.

"the University of California (and team), used quantum mechanics to test general relativity to this unprecedented accuracy" hahaha, Einstein is turning over in his grave!

Einstein was used to this (well, almost). In his great debate with Niels Bohr, General Relativity was used by Bohr to refute an Einstein thought experiments that tried to poke a hole in quantum mechanics!

AFAIK, Einstein eventually accepted the predictions of QM, without ever fully embracing the theory.

-J

Hi Jorrie,

Interesting stuff. I hope they prove or disprove the gravity waves soon - the suspense is slowly killing me. I haven't heard the term "matter waves" before. Do we get to make up terms to validate out own theories? Yes, I know matter and energy are equivalent, but still. The whole thing seems too hypothetical with the two "quantum states" and all. How does one wave have a higher potential energy than the other? Relative to what? Interesting nevertheless, Thanks for sharing it.

-S

Hi S, yes, quantum mechanics do sound somewhat hypothetical, especially in the "how does it work" stakes. Its observable effects are however beyond any doubt.

Your questions: "matter waves" are standard old De Broglie waves (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie_Wave), with a wavelength inversely proportional to the momentum of the particle (λ = h/p). As you know, the interference patterns formed by shooting particles through a double slit proved that particles do have this particle/wave duality ('split personality' :).

One can view a single quantum particle to follow multiple (possibly infinitely many) paths between two points. In this experiment, it happens that there are only two very probable paths, depending on the characteristics of the laser pulse that hits the particles (I do not understand that detail). The one path is arranged to be slightly higher than the other and hence they have different gravitational potentials relative to Earth. It is not really the potential energy that counts, but the difference in gravitational potentials (GM/r₂-GM/r₁), also representing a difference in gravitational redshift. This means a wavelength difference, hence the interferometer result.

Be that as it may, it is apparently the most accurate test of gravity by far and I expect to eventually see the principle in all sorts of gravity-measurement devices, e.g. mapping the varying gravity around Earth more accurately. Apart from more accurate GPS, there are possibly a multitude of other advantages, e.g., prospecting for oil, gas, minerals...

-J

PS: also see my Cosmology post on Particle Momentum Decay. I have later learned that this is a well-known cosmological principle, not mere speculation.:)

Oh yes, I have heard of De Broglie waves. I guess I forget things that are not in my everyday experience.

"As I understand it, a laser pulse puts the matter wave into two quantum states, the one at slightly higher potential energy than the other. The two waves then travel for a short distance, before meeting again. The higher one suffered a little less gravitational time dilation^[1] than the lower one, which shows up as a difference frequency in an interferometer."

But since the higher potential energy changes the frequency: , how do we know that wasn't the change that was measured by the interferometer? What am I missing?

Hi S, I suspect what you are missing (and I didn't say) is that h and p are Planck's constant and momentum.

Gravitational potential does change a particle's frequency, but according to a different formula, √[1-2GM/(rc²)], the gravitational redshift factor. As I understand it, this is what they have measured. I also suspect that they have carefully compensated for the difference in path lengths of the 'upper' and 'lower' waves, which is easy to calculate.

-J

Hi Jorrie,

"I suspect what you are missing (and I didn't say) is that h and p are Planck's constant and momentum"

No, I knew that. The article says that they are unable to measure the frequency so they use interference. One can only assume (and hope) that they accounted for the change of frequency from the laser, and that there was an additional change that was measured.

Today the NIST-F1 cesium fountain clock is over 3,000 times more accurate than the standard used 30 years ago which is shown here. A new clock which is 37 times more accurate that the NIST clock is described here. The experiment of 30 years ago could be repeated today with colossal accuracy, but I doubt if any scientist would think it was necessary.

-S

Hi S.

But the laser frequency should play no role other than to create the superposition of states of the atoms. The two states should start off at exactly the same De Broglie frequency - after all, it's the same atom going into two quantum states, if I understand correctly. The difference in height then creates the small differential redshift of the two states, hence the interference fringes.

AFAIK, the accuracy that they talk about cannot be achieved by atomic clocks.

-J

Louis de Broglie ...rearranged Compton's equation λ = h/p but p = momentum = mass x velocity = mv now a quest λ = h/mv.my point is for an electron it will interfere constructively and also destructively wich will give place to interference pattern...is prediction matter assosiate with wave caracteristic.basacly we can easy find the loss of potential energy of the proton...gain in kinetic energy equals the loss in potential energy according to de Broglie.me philippe a beleive the wave particul are all over the place at the same time but let dont talk about speed of light.

Does it also explain why time flies when you're having fun, but slows down to a halt when you're listening to a boring idiot talk?

'They used cesium atom matter waves at the bizarre frequency of 3x10²⁵ Hz - that's 30 Tera-Tera Hz. Impossible to measure directly, but then, there is the principle of interference...'

As you say, the problems of measuring something like this with enough certainty to make it credible. Though I'm not sure that the exact frequency would make much difference to the outcome. This likely more to do with the (resonant) frequencies etc of the cesium itself in order to get the separation.

A question here on this matter: this difference in states due to the energy injected by the laser. These states are of a 'fixed quanta' aren't they? Like electrons, they have specific defined orbits that are related to the energy levels and can't just be ANY 'analog' state or 'height' can they? I appreciate the 'Heisenberg uncertainty principle' here and recognize that at this scale we are not talking about something being located as definite and defined as say the moons orbit around our planet.

- "This difference is tiny - the height difference between the two quantum paths is only 4/1000 of an inch. During the approximately 0.3 seconds of freefall of the matter waves, the time difference due to gravity is only ~10^-20 sec, but Müller's test produced a claimed accuracy of ~10^-28 sec. Astonishing!"

Couple of thought on measurements again here. The 0.004" is most definitely not on a 'quantum' scale. This is more on a 'macro scale' of matter really. As someone that worked as a machinist for over a decade, this is a fairly wide tolerance for finish machining on a 'macro matter' scale of matter that we routinely are directly aware of in our everyday lives. How many cesium atoms would their be in a sphere or 0.004" diameter? I don't know and didn't work it out but I'm fairly certain that the size of the exponent is going to be significant.

I worked to tolerances of 10,000 of an inch at times and +/- 1/1,000" regularly as do most machinists and I'm not referring to micro machining like MEMS. These are measurements readily made by hand held, operated and directly read physical instruments. I could run my finger over a 'step' on a round work piece that were only 1/1,000" different in diameter and tell you which one was larger. This most definitely is not on a 'quantum scale' So if they really got a difference of 0.004" on such a small scale experiment that is HUGE compared to the scale of the atoms, electrons, neutrons involved and much more so on a true quantum scale. Personally I would of thought that to get this much difference, that the 'hang time' of 1/3 second before they reunited would of had to have been orders of magnitudes larger than this. Considering the structures and particles we are talking about, again here I would of thought that the 1/3 second of 'separated freefall' would of been many orders of magnitudes smaller. More along on the time scales of the differences due to gravity of ~10^-20 sec and the ' claimed accuracy of ~10^-28 sec'

Going back over this before posting it, why would the more energized particle have to always literally 'be higher' than the other ones? Why would this separation and temporary energy make it 'higher' relative to the center of gravity of the Earth than the other similar particles unaffected by the laser? Couldn't it just as readily make the energized particle go 'sideways' perpendicular to the pull of gravity? Or even drive it down closer to the center of gravity of the Earth? I'm thinking that the energized particle would have a trajectory. This is not unrealistic. These trajectories are routinely created, measured and studied in particle accelerators: the so called 'Atom smashers'. Given the orientation of the laser light in the diagram 'pointing down', wouldn't it be more likely that the energized particle would be driven down towards the force vector of gravity? This leads me to question the validity of the premise of this entire experiment and that if this is really a true test of what it is supposed to be?

Is it consistently repeatable and reproducible? Does the temporarily energized particle consistently 'remain higher' than the other non energized particles or do they scatter in all different directions every different time? To me the latter seems more likely. If this is so, and they are 'cherry picking' the small portion of energized particles that 'go up', then what does this experiment REALLY prove? What would the energized particles that are driven down towards the center of the Earth 'prove'? Is this the force of gravity that they are really measuring or is it strictly along the lines of quantum particle physics?

(8 >) It just keeps getting 'curiouser and curiouser' (< 8)

Hi Doug, you wrote: "A question here on this matter: this difference in states due to the energy injected by the laser. These states are of a 'fixed quanta' aren't they? Like electrons, they have specific defined orbits that are related to the energy levels and can't just be ANY 'analog' state or 'height' can they? "

As I understand the experiment, the 50% atoms that were deviated received 3 laser pulses, one to deflect upwards, one to deflect downwards and one to put them on the same trajectory as the other 50% again. Hence all atoms had the same energy again, but the deflected (higher) ones went through less spacetime curvature, so they arrived slightly earlier at the detector (the undeflected atoms suffered Shapiro time delay), hence the interference pattern shift.

I understand the general relativity part of the experiment, but the quantum physics part is a bit above my head - e.g. I do not quite understand how the laser pulses affect 50% of the atoms...

Nevertheless, I have not seen any refutation of the experiment. Maybe it is because it produced exactly the predicted result?

-J