SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
There's a mysterious threshold that's predicted to exist beyond the limits of what we can see. It's called the quantum-classical transition.
If scientists were to find it, they'd be able to solve one of the most baffling questions in physics: why is it that a soccer ball or a ballet dancer both obey the Newtonian laws while the subatomic particles they're made of behave according to quantum rules? Finding the bridge between the two could usher in a new era in physics.
We don't yet know how the transition from the quantum world to the classical one occurs, but a new experiment, detailed in Physical Review Letters , might give us the opportunity to learn more.
The experiment involves cooling a cloud of rubidium atoms to the point that they become virtually motionless. Theoretically, if a cloud of atoms becomes cold enough, the wave-like (quantum) nature of the individual atoms will start to expand and overlap with one another. It's sort of like circular ripples in a pond that, as they get bigger, merge to form one large ring. This phenomenon is more commonly known as a Bose-Einstein condensate, a state of matter in which subatomic particles are chilled to near absolute zero (0 Kelvin or −273.15° C) and coalesce into a single quantum object. That quantum object is so big (compared to the individual atoms) that it's almost macroscopic—in other words, it's encroaching on the classical world.
[Also Covered By]: http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/05/atomic-telescope-brings-atoms-to-standstill/
Original Submission
(Score: 5, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Sunday May 31 2015, @05:55AM
Yes, that is what most people believe, and it is consistent with what we know. However there's a big difference between "we assume it because we don't have a reason to think otherwise" and "we have made an experiment to test it".
Before quantum mechanics, it seemed obvious that electrons have definite paths. Before relativity, it seemed obvious that space is Euclidean and independent of time.
Just because our current theory doesn't tell you there's a limit to its applicability doesn't mean there is no limit to its applicability. It just means we don't know if there is a limit for applicability, and therefore it is rational to assume there is no limit, but yet do experiments to check for such limits.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by hendrikboom on Sunday May 31 2015, @03:15PM
Yes, certainly there's a strong case for testing theory by experiment. But calling it physics' biggest contradiction is wrong. Physics does have a real contradiction -- the conflict between general relativity and quantum mechanics. But I don't see this experiment as having any relevance to this.