A new quantum uncertainty was recently published in a paper published in the journal Nature Communications. from the University of Exeter in the UK. This ratio adds to the well-known uncertainty principle that links the temperature to the measured energy and the noise resulting from coupling to the environment.
If you measure the temperature of your cup of coffee with a mechanical thermometer you will find that it is around 90 degrees to an accuracy of 0.5 degrees Celsius. The uncertainty in the temperature actually comes from fluctuations (frenzied) of the mercury atoms that are in your thermometer.
The matter becomes more interesting if you try to measure the temperature of tiny objects like nanometer machines or individual cells. To measure the degree of a nanometer cell or machine researchers need to use a thermometer on the same scale and even smaller, the size of a few individual atoms.
The team from the University of Exeter have developed a theoretical method that will allow you to measure the temperature of tiny objects with high enough accuracy. It turns out that in such systems, fluctuations resulting from quantum effects also appear. If we go deeper we can say that thanks to quantum mechanics, a system can be in a superposition (or in other words in several states) of different temperatures at the same time, both 90 degrees and 89.5 for example. A bit similar to the idea of our cup of coffee, but this time the uncertainty does not come from the measuring device, but from a principle deep in nature. The famous analogy of Schrödinger's cat demonstrates this nicely - it is a thought experiment that Schrödinger proposed to illustrate the principle of superposition. Suppose a cat is put in a box with radioactive material. As soon as the radioactive substance radiates, its radiation will hit the detector which will release poison and kill the cat. If we close the box with the cat, we will not be able to know when or if at all the radioactive material broke down and released the poison, therefore we can claim that until we open the box the cat is alive and dead at the same time. Another principle in this system, but very important, is the coupling, or in other words, the contact of the system with its environment. Once the system is in contact with the environment it is forced to be in a fluctuating state (in this case meaning unstable) in its energy.
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is a fundamental principle in quantum theory. The principle links two measurable quantities in nature and claims that they cannot be measured with maximum precision at the same time, such as position and momentum. This principle has nothing to do with the measuring device we have and how sensitive it is, it is a deep principle in nature and quantum theory.
Harry Miller, the first author of the article explains: "Apart from the thermal noise that exists thanks to our measuring device, the fact that the system is in superposition means that quantum phenomena can affect it." In each measurement, the fluctuations can tip the scale towards one temperature or another and we will not be able to know what the temperature will be until we measure it. In the future, the uncertainty will allow researchers to more accurately calculate temperatures of nanoscale systems that will take into account the quantum phenomenon.
Dr. Janet Anders, one of the authors of the article adds: "This discovery is important for understanding the basic principles of the thermodynamic theory on the nanometer scale, where macroscopic assumptions (belonging to the world on a scale much larger than the atomic scale) are broken.
More of the topic in Hayadan:
- Take a picture of Schrödinger's cat
- Erwin Schrödinger. A fierce opponent of the Nazi regime and the proud owner of a quantum cat
- Quantum Philosophy IV: Schrödinger's Cat on a Journey to a De-Coherent World and Parallel Worlds
- Schrödinger's cat resurrected as particles in the laboratories of the 2012 Nobel Prize winners in physics
14 תגובות
Schrödinger's cat is a metaphorical example intended to mock the Copenhagen interpretation of (modern) quantum theory, not to illustrate the principle of superposition.
The professor's quantum information theory is also used in quantum computing. Eric Verlind makes use of it in the derivation of gravity from entropy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25IyrYltPPI
He shuffled his feet between universities, with a positive attitude that a change of opinion regarding dark matter or its absence requires persuasion.
The subject of quantum thermodynamics presented here is also applicable to the subject of fused gravity with general relativity.
The father of the gravitational entropy theory, Professor Eric Verlind, who was an honored guest at the Technion last year,
Uses the same phrases that the distinguished professor Anders and her doctoral student Harry Miller use.
He deduces the force of gravity from entropy - a measure of the degree of order in space.
Hoff's theory because it rules out the multitude of dark matter predictions, he himself admits that it is in the making.
The beauty is to see two different fields in physics meet in one theoretical basis.
I downloaded 3 of their articles - they remind me of oblivion, and new research possibilities for myself as well.
The doctorate is also very young. Not yet a professor but a senior lecturer.
Such articles in Nature are promoted.
http://emps.exeter.ac.uk/physics-astronomy/staff/ja343
The guy Harry JD Miller is our "look". Sorry for the racism, and he may not even be a PhD student.
His articles are cited the most within a year or two, so it is a temporary situation that he is not yet a professor.
It's very nice that such an interesting theory comes from a student combined with the professor though.
https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=LE4Qsw0AAAAJ&hl=en
Review article by Dr. Anders
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1508.06099.pdf
Interesting article. Exposes us to quantum thermodynamics and many body quantum thermodynamics
And the resulting relationship shows that more surprises can be found in the research.
Adi - Thank you for your comment.
It is important for me to note that the term fluctuation in physical contexts is not translated by "random vibrations".
The correct translation is "movement" and so was determined by the Language Academy back in the nineties, I can direct you to search on the academy's official glossary website. It was not for nothing that the word migration was chosen to translate the scientific term lectuaation. The word vibration has several hidden assumptions, mainly movement around some reference point. When fluctuation *does* not occur, in physics fluctuation can describe the movement of a system from one state to another state without continuing to move or vibrate afterwards. Fluctuation hides another idea behind it - the process takes place at a random time or the system randomly chooses which state to move to. Therefore, even the word "movement", which is better than vibration, or oscillation, does not fully indicate the phenomenon.
The choice to use foreign words for scientific terms is my personal choice out of my personal desire for the public to recognize professional terms. If he comes across them later, he will know what it is about. Of course, every foreign word should come with a context or a reasonable translation that sometimes I can miss along the way, and that's why readers' comments are important.
Regarding Mercury, I'm more than ready and it's even important to add the word "mercury" next to it.
As Mercury is mercury (and please Noam correct the article) the word "fluctuations" also has a simple term in Hebrew. ->
It's called vibrations (by the way, not fluctuations that are cyclic, but vibrations that are random)
I expect the author of a scientific article, even if it is intended for the general public, to be edited, both linguistically and syntactically. This article is an example of bad linguistic writing. The most prominent of them - what about 'Mercury'? What happened to the mercury? I assume the writer is an Israeli student who also attended an Israeli high school. I have no doubt that he did not hear 'Mercury' there. So why spoil it?!!
to the doubter -
I probably wasn't precise in my words, it was just an example.
There are hundreds of measuring devices that measure temperature, from mechanical devices to complex digital devices.
The idea here is that in the classical world there will always be an error resulting from the accuracy of the measuring instrument/its sensitivity. 0.5 This is an example of an imaginary device that can measure temperature. Who also said that the coffee is at 90 degrees? I can of course make coffee at 80 degrees, and when is the temperature like that? Once the coffee is made? Maybe after it cooled down?
In any case, this is an illustration and nothing more.
Regarding quantum measurement - this is an even more complex issue. The debate about what measurement is continues even today, every scientist has a personal interpretation, although there are several interpretations that are more accepted. Measurement is a mechanism that we integrate into quantum mechanics. In fact, the quantum theory can exist even without it, but we live in a world where measurements exist, so it is important that physical theory takes this principle into account. Measurement requires a long article in itself, and maybe in the future you will write one.
Mai - Thank you for your comment, indeed mercury is the Hebrew translation for the element Mercury. There are of course thousands more foreign words that are common in the scientific language and it is important to give them a Hebrew emphasis (it is important to say that not every word has a Hebrew translation). I would be happy if in the future you would also ask a question or comment about the content of the article, I am here to clarify if something is not clear.
Mercury in Hebrew is mercury...and I'm afraid someone used Google Translate to translate something they didn't really understand.
Inaccuracy due to quantum effects of 0.5 degrees Celsius in mercury?
The whole issue of measuring and calibrating the devices is extremely complex, from what I know in process control devices, inaccuracy is in most cases related to many environmental parameters, the form of calibration, the location of the device and a long list of other issues,
There is also the subject of exact temperature (calibration) and the ability to detect a temperature change in the device's tested media,
On the Internet it is a bit difficult to find accurate information when most search results send you to medical websites but
From one place I read, the accuracy value of mercury meters is about 0.05 degrees Celsius, while laboratories also have meters that are more accurate, until today I knew that this 0.5 degree inaccuracy is usually associated with digital meters (this is also a financial matter)
When there are also environmental effects unrelated to quantum effects,
The same article in English as the article from above in the following link:
https://phys.org/news/2018-08-hot-schrodinger-coffee.html
and taken from the scientific research (complex) in the following link:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04536-7
So if anyone knows anything accurate about the subject I would love to know more especially what is the quantum effect on accuracy
of mercury temperature gauges, is the value the same as in the article or different?