So... 30 years down the line when I'm playing Crysis 20 on my 25th generation intel nano-carbon quantum transistor processor, I'll know who to thank. :)
How can you compare Signals or Power Windows to Moving Pictures? Just.... how?! I kid. One of the great things about Rush is that they've done so many different things over their career, there's a little bit of something for everyone. Me? I love it all.
Amazing work, done and described with an enthusiasm that is infectious. And how very clever to make it all the way though both videos--right through to the point here, at 1:20, where speaks of the end of the road for silicon--without once mentioning the properties graphene. I love these videos.
I have a question : the water molecule, trapped inside the C60, isn't affected by much in vacuum. Would it still be the case at atmospheric pressure? Would it change something?
Nothing should be able to get inside of the cage, but that doesn't mean that pressure wouldn't morph the cage enough to prevent the shielding effect you see. I'm not saying it definitely would, but it seems plausible to me.
Does the water molecule isolation makes it significantly protected from decoherence? If it is the case could this technique could be useful for making a quantum computer?
If this can be used to store qubits then I wonder how hard will it be to interact and read/write information since the trapped molecule is so isolated? Obviously if you need something as complicated as a particle accelerator it would defeat the purpose... but at a glance this does seem really promising for dealing with decoherence.
The question for me would be whether the buckyballs are perfectly sp2 carbon all around or whether there are some defects like alcohol groups etc. If we're talking about 'perfect' fullerens, the water molecule should be repelled uniformly from all sides by the hydrophobic carbon walls to sit in the middle though it will have some wiggle-room But I do not know just how hydrophobic buckyballs are...
So could this have an effect on say quantum computing? If you could get the water molecule to predictably move within the Fullerene, would you be able to store binary information within these encased molecules?
That's outstanding science, the idea of the wave of the Bucky ball as a cage and an interactive antenna has to become useful.(?) I don't yet see the significance of the water molecules except maybe as a standardization benchmark that could lead into studing single large atoms in the cage(?). For example, how is the Pentaquark detectable, if there's nothing to tune to the decay state somewhere near the resonance state of the particle? (bit of a stab in the dark type question) 4yrs later on it's a stab at the probable correspondence of hyper-hypo Superspin-spiral hypersymmetric Singularity Apature, that might be related to Lagrange Point coordination objectives of orbital-orbits in positioning integration. (?) Same old Wave Mechanism..
Question: has and how has temperature an effect on the trapped water molecule? And now you used silver (because of it's conductivity?), but does the material of the ground plate make any difference? Or is that for another time?
I've seen Moriarty's colleagues refer to him as a "him" quite a number of times. So, between that and his male-gendered clothes, I think I can safely say that he identifies as male. :P
Is it at all possible to solve the wave function for the electrons in the cage and/or the oxygen molecule? How does the cage influence the molecule due to Heisenberg?
Is the gravitational force so small on the water molecule due to its small size, and if that is the case, is the gravitational force smaller on an ant than it is on a human?
No, the molecule is sooooo much smaller than the ant, remember Force = Mass x Acceleration and if the mass is really tiny the accel. won't be much and so the effect goes to zero the smaller you go. An ant is wayyyyy bigger than this zero order. Ants were once the size of cars... loong ago, which means they are subject to the same strength of gravity we experience.
So, is this a verra complex way of beating the uncertainly principle because you end up knowing precisely wherr the watar molecule is, and since it's stuck inside the fullerine, the photongs can pinpoint its movement too? Or does not the uncertainty principle work on whole molecules.
The uncertainty principle is the exact reason why the water molecule will always wiggle around in the cage and never sit perfectly still in the middle. It simply cannot.
How many water molecules can you fit inside a C60? This experiment was focused on how a single H2O reacted inside the cage, but it would be interesting to see what sort of configurations different sized, small groups of H2O molecules might take on when isolated.
They wouldn't be isolated then. The point of the experiment was to examine the single isolated individual water molecule inside a carbon nano cage. Adding more molecules would be the antithesis of this experiment.
If you watched the original video the purpose of their experiment was to see if a single molecule was influenced inside a C60 cage...they can't be collectively isolated. That would be like grouping individually = oxymoron.
The experiment was to see if stuff inside the cage was isolated from the outside yes, which is what the results show. But from those results, new questions can be asked, and if you had actually read my comment, you would realize that is the kind of questions I am asking. And, yes, in fact, groups can be collectively isolated from outside actions, while still freely interacting with each other. There is no contradiction there.
Brilliant videos, both of them. Professor Moriarty, you mentioned the water molecule jiggles inside carbon cage due to quantum effects. Would it be possible for the molecule to escape the cage by quantum tunnelling? I guess it is possible, but is it a "reasonable" probability? Could you observe this effect in your sample set?
Not for the molecule, it's too large for it to be at all likely; quantum tunnelling is per particle not per assemblage--so you might get one of the hydrogens tunnel out. But that's as likely as water is to disassociate because one of the hydrogens has tunneled away and left a hydroxide ion--not very.
Please! If there is any chance for me to get hands on these articles it would be amazing! They've already been published? If yes, were? I'm currently working with carbon allotropes and its integration to biological systems when added to polymeric matrices and these experiments really turned up my curiosity!
you mean single super-heavy elements? I don't think so, the force that makes those atoms unstable comes from the atom itself. This just contains molecules from interacting with other molecules.
Are there some issues with quantum physics relating to this experiment? You try to observ a single water molecule caged in a tiny carbon molecule so there has to be some "real" quantum physics problems like water molecules just wiggling about and not being inside their cage.
Can you make it bigger?! I've heard of a c720 buckeyball so... Molecule encapsulation? Super safe transport of not so safe molecules? 4K you say? What do you think would be the case of radiation from the inside molecule? Half-life preservation?! So many questions!!!!!!!!
I think when fullerens where first discovered molecule encapsulation more or less what people envisioned, hence the nobel prize. Turns out that so far they have been utterly useless. It's pretty complicated to put in and also not trivial to get it back out again and I don't really see the use of it. I can't see how encapsulating a radioactive element would stop it from decaying.
Perhaps but if the radiation does not react on the "cage" nor will leave it I think there may be uses and if nothing else is an exciting prospect. I think it was said that the process essentially isolates the quantum mechanical features of the H2.O inside... Perhaps it is in this process that lies answers or more questions to Zero-Point Energy or Cavity QED. Perhaps you are right and are utterly useless. I like to think nothing is quite useless, it's just the right questions haven't been asked. 42 orders of magnitude eh? =P
I see where you're coming from but I'm almost certain that there is no way this kind of packaging would stop radioactive decay from occurring. Radioactive decay is one of those pretty fundamental physical phenomena and damn reliable, that's why we can use it to date geological samples, it is subject to relativistic time dilation and so on. The cage also won't block radiation from escaping. We already know that beta and gamma radiation can pass through the cage - otherwise the experimental setup wouldn't be possible. I'm not sure if alpha particles would be able to escape the cage but even if they don't, shielding radiation doesn't prevent radioactive decay from happening. Shielding alpha particles is not really exciting either - a simple sheet of paper will do that for you. Fullerens aren't certainly entirely useless as was demonstrated in this video :P They can apparently be a canvas for some interesting fundamental research in physics and there are also a handful of other fringe applications like anti-oxidant properties according to google. But when I think of encapsulating molecules I think of stuff like drug transport and such and it seems that so far fullerens haven't really been able to accomplish all those things people originally envisioned - similar to other hyped up materials like MOFs or graphene.
I must have misinterpreted the results when he said that the water particles were relatively unchanged by the beam. I'll watch it all again at my leisure.
For some reason, imagining the researchers studying these interactions, made me wonder did the sun or the stars have to LEARN how to create fusion? And if we are made from exploded stars, why do WE have to LEARN anything rather than just have the innate knowledge? (Although I am thankful that my body does have innate knowledge that I am unaware of.)
This stuff is so fascinating!
42 orders of magnitude. Nice.
It's only 42 orders of magnitude in base 10 :(
TheLongDark but of course, what did you expect? 42 is the answer xD
Or 10 orders of magnitude in base 42 ;)
Gantic unfortunately 10^42 is not equal to 42^10
*cough cough* er hem... yes yes I knew that..Just testing you
you forgot to include the link to the original video in the description, it just says "... our filming of this experiment: LINK"
I'm sure he reads our comments. I'm sure he will fix this mistake any week now.
hold it...
Well, here it is: ruclips.net/video/tWWyAklkYqM/видео.html
I hope it helps someone
@@danthemango 1 1/2 years later: still not fixed. Bahaha. He read the comments, alright
Nice work! Great videos! Dr. M., Your enthusiasm is contagious.
So... 30 years down the line when I'm playing Crysis 20 on my 25th generation intel nano-carbon quantum transistor processor, I'll know who to thank. :)
Sick shirt man!
A "Signals" or "Power Windows" shirt would've been better! ;)
You mean a farewell to kings or permanent waves shirt would have been better :P
How can you compare Signals or Power Windows to Moving Pictures? Just.... how?!
I kid. One of the great things about Rush is that they've done so many different things over their career, there's a little bit of something for everyone. Me? I love it all.
Tour 2018 shirt would have been better! I may have created a tour next year by quantum. Album to be called Schrodinger's Place
I asked for the results and you delivered! thank you very much
Amazing work, done and described with an enthusiasm that is infectious. And how very clever to make it all the way though both videos--right through to the point here, at 1:20, where speaks of the end of the road for silicon--without once mentioning the properties graphene.
I love these videos.
The "Royal" 'we' actually means "I", so he meant NOT the "Royal we".
I have a question : the water molecule, trapped inside the C60, isn't affected by much in vacuum. Would it still be the case at atmospheric pressure? Would it change something?
Nothing should be able to get inside of the cage, but that doesn't mean that pressure wouldn't morph the cage enough to prevent the shielding effect you see. I'm not saying it definitely would, but it seems plausible to me.
Would that morphing be uniform?
Does the water molecule isolation makes it significantly protected from decoherence?
If it is the case could this technique could be useful for making a quantum computer?
If this can be used to store qubits then I wonder how hard will it be to interact and read/write information since the trapped molecule is so isolated?
Obviously if you need something as complicated as a particle accelerator it would defeat the purpose... but at a glance this does seem really promising for dealing with decoherence.
No. They are talking about isolation from other molecules. The type of isolation needed for quantum particles is fundamentally different.
Is there a force on the water molecule that pushes it towards the center? Or is it moving freely inside the buckyball?
Mr. Spock the water molecule is surrounded by a sphere of carbon atoms, so it's being pushed uniformly from all sides.
The question for me would be whether the buckyballs are perfectly sp2 carbon all around or whether there are some defects like alcohol groups etc.
If we're talking about 'perfect' fullerens, the water molecule should be repelled uniformly from all sides by the hydrophobic carbon walls to sit in the middle though it will have some wiggle-room
But I do not know just how hydrophobic buckyballs are...
So could this have an effect on say quantum computing? If you could get the water molecule to predictably move within the Fullerene, would you be able to store binary information within these encased molecules?
He's a RUSH fan _and_ a physicist! In other words, his scientific instincts are beyond question. 👌
Awesome!!
When was this recorded? He says the paper will be ready in June but June is almost over.
I like these carbon cages. Would it be possible to build some sort of battery cell like that?
That's outstanding science, the idea of the wave of the Bucky ball as a cage and an interactive antenna has to become useful.(?) I don't yet see the significance of the water molecules except maybe as a standardization benchmark that could lead into studing single large atoms in the cage(?).
For example, how is the Pentaquark detectable, if there's nothing to tune to the decay state somewhere near the resonance state of the particle? (bit of a stab in the dark type question)
4yrs later on it's a stab at the probable correspondence of hyper-hypo Superspin-spiral hypersymmetric Singularity Apature, that might be related to Lagrange Point coordination objectives of orbital-orbits in positioning integration. (?)
Same old Wave Mechanism..
Question: has and how has temperature an effect on the trapped water molecule? And now you used silver (because of it's conductivity?), but does the material of the ground plate make any difference? Or is that for another time?
Prof. Moriarty is definitely rocking that beard. Looks good on him.
Did you just assume the gender of the beard wearer?
I've seen Moriarty's colleagues refer to him as a "him" quite a number of times. So, between that and his male-gendered clothes, I think I can safely say that he identifies as male. :P
Does the particle-in-a-box quantummechanical model apply to this water particle? The particle confined in an energy well with infinite walls?
RUSH! Ask phil what his fav rush album is. Mine is probably a farewell to kings or permanent wave.
That molecule is dope(d)!
Good to see that Prof. Moriarty is _russhing_ electrons to get _moving pictures_ of the behavior of a caged molecule. ;)
Is it at all possible to solve the wave function for the electrons in the cage and/or the oxygen molecule? How does the cage influence the molecule due to Heisenberg?
"Quantum mechanics tells us it will always jiggle."
Is the gravitational force so small on the water molecule due to its small size, and if that is the case, is the gravitational force smaller on an ant than it is on a human?
No, the molecule is sooooo much smaller than the ant, remember Force = Mass x Acceleration and if the mass is really tiny the accel. won't be much and so the effect goes to zero the smaller you go. An ant is wayyyyy bigger than this zero order. Ants were once the size of cars... loong ago, which means they are subject to the same strength of gravity we experience.
So, is this a verra complex way of beating the uncertainly principle because you end up knowing precisely wherr the watar molecule is, and since it's stuck inside the fullerine, the photongs can pinpoint its movement too? Or does not the uncertainty principle work on whole molecules.
The uncertainty principle is the exact reason why the water molecule will always wiggle around in the cage and never sit perfectly still in the middle. It simply cannot.
How many water molecules can you fit inside a C60? This experiment was focused on how a single H2O reacted inside the cage, but it would be interesting to see what sort of configurations different sized, small groups of H2O molecules might take on when isolated.
They wouldn't be isolated then. The point of the experiment was to examine the single isolated individual water molecule inside a carbon nano cage. Adding more molecules would be the antithesis of this experiment.
Nexus2Eden they'd collectively be isolated from the rest of the universe still.
If you watched the original video the purpose of their experiment was to see if a single molecule was influenced inside a C60 cage...they can't be collectively isolated. That would be like grouping individually = oxymoron.
The experiment was to see if stuff inside the cage was isolated from the outside yes, which is what the results show. But from those results, new questions can be asked, and if you had actually read my comment, you would realize that is the kind of questions I am asking. And, yes, in fact, groups can be collectively isolated from outside actions, while still freely interacting with each other. There is no contradiction there.
Again, the point of the experiment was to isolate a single water molecule - period. But thanks for playing. 😉
Brilliant videos, both of them. Professor Moriarty, you mentioned the water molecule jiggles inside carbon cage due to quantum effects. Would it be possible for the molecule to escape the cage by quantum tunnelling? I guess it is possible, but is it a "reasonable" probability? Could you observe this effect in your sample set?
Not for the molecule, it's too large for it to be at all likely; quantum tunnelling is per particle not per assemblage--so you might get one of the hydrogens tunnel out. But that's as likely as water is to disassociate because one of the hydrogens has tunneled away and left a hydroxide ion--not very.
Why water?
Please! If there is any chance for me to get hands on these articles it would be amazing! They've already been published? If yes, were? I'm currently working with carbon allotropes and its integration to biological systems when added to polymeric matrices and these experiments really turned up my curiosity!
Can you build really large atoms in a buckyball and keep them stable?
you mean single super-heavy elements? I don't think so, the force that makes those atoms unstable comes from the atom itself. This just contains molecules from interacting with other molecules.
Can the water quantum tunnel out of the c60 molecule?
Are there some issues with quantum physics relating to this experiment? You try to observ a single water molecule caged in a tiny carbon molecule so there has to be some "real" quantum physics problems like water molecules just wiggling about and not being inside their cage.
Can you make it bigger?!
I've heard of a c720 buckeyball so... Molecule encapsulation?
Super safe transport of not so safe molecules?
4K you say? What do you think would be the case of radiation from the inside molecule?
Half-life preservation?!
So many questions!!!!!!!!
I think when fullerens where first discovered molecule encapsulation more or less what people envisioned, hence the nobel prize.
Turns out that so far they have been utterly useless.
It's pretty complicated to put in and also not trivial to get it back out again and I don't really see the use of it. I can't see how encapsulating a radioactive element would stop it from decaying.
Perhaps but if the radiation does not react on the "cage" nor will leave it I think there may be uses and if nothing else is an exciting prospect.
I think it was said that the process essentially isolates the quantum mechanical features of the H2.O inside... Perhaps it is in this process that lies answers or more questions to Zero-Point Energy or Cavity QED.
Perhaps you are right and are utterly useless. I like to think nothing is quite useless, it's just the right questions haven't been asked.
42 orders of magnitude eh? =P
I see where you're coming from but I'm almost certain that there is no way this kind of packaging would stop radioactive decay from occurring. Radioactive decay is one of those pretty fundamental physical phenomena and damn reliable, that's why we can use it to date geological samples, it is subject to relativistic time dilation and so on.
The cage also won't block radiation from escaping.
We already know that beta and gamma radiation can pass through the cage - otherwise the experimental setup wouldn't be possible.
I'm not sure if alpha particles would be able to escape the cage but even if they don't, shielding radiation doesn't prevent radioactive decay from happening.
Shielding alpha particles is not really exciting either - a simple sheet of paper will do that for you.
Fullerens aren't certainly entirely useless as was demonstrated in this video :P
They can apparently be a canvas for some interesting fundamental research in physics and there are also a handful of other fringe applications like anti-oxidant properties according to google.
But when I think of encapsulating molecules I think of stuff like drug transport and such and it seems that so far fullerens haven't really been able to accomplish all those things people originally envisioned - similar to other hyped up materials like MOFs or graphene.
I must have misinterpreted the results when he said that the water particles were relatively unchanged by the beam. I'll watch it all again at my leisure.
cool
I'd be more interested to see what happens if you put a magnetite molecule in the cage.
For some reason, imagining the researchers studying these interactions, made me wonder did the sun or the stars have to LEARN how to create fusion? And if we are made from exploded stars, why do WE have to LEARN anything rather than just have the innate knowledge? (Although I am thankful that my body does have innate knowledge that I am unaware of.)
asking good questions
keep it up chaps..
Could a cage like this possibly keep a radioactive atom from decaying?
Kiwipai no
A physicist, at work, wearing a rush t-shirt. What a G.
Synchrotron!
QBIT!
careful careful 42 - 10 = 32 . 32 x 60 x 60 =
Looks like he was drunk when he trimmed his neck beard. I don't judge, I've done the same.
The question is: Will it gender?
pain in behind :)