How colliders are the best microscopes we can possibly build
A short thread 🧵1/10
The human eye has a severely limited angular resolution. We can't tell apart points that are closer together than 0.02 degrees. This corresponds to a separation of 0.1 mm for points 30cm in front of us -about the thickness of hair. Anything closer together gets smeared out 2/10
We can do better with lenses. The best light microscopes have a resolution of ~200 nm. This is 2x10^-7 m, about 1000 times better than a human eye. Good enough to look into the interior of cells
3/10
But there is a limit. The wavelength of visible light is 700-380 nm. The best possible resolution R is roughly half the wavelength λ (even though there are modern techniques to overcome this limit by about an order of magnitude) 4/10
However, quantum mechanics comes to the rescue. Every particle corresponds to a wave with a wavelength λ set by the de Broglie equation, where h is Plancks constant and p is the momentum of the particle 5/10
If we accelerate for example an electron we will decrease its wavelength and eventually get better resolution than any light miscroscope can achieve.
Indeed, electron microscopes can resolve objects of a size of 10^-10 m: the size of an atom 6/10
Electron microscopes use high voltage to accelerate electrons, achieving short wavelengths in turn. Alternatively one can look at this as electrons scattering off the target.
Shorter wavelength = higher voltage
As a result ultra high voltage electron miscoscopes are huge 7/10
In principle the wavelength can be shortened further.
Achieving the enormous momenta necessary to resolve structures smaller than an atom needs miles of electromagnets: a particle accelerator
Below is an aerial view of the linear accelerator in Stanford (SLAC) 8/10
Particle accelerators can collide a beam of charged particles with a fixed target or with each other.
In that sense colliders are direct generalisations of microscopes with enormously increased resolution. Currently we can probe 7-8 orders of magnitude beyond the best EM 9/10
The debris from the collisions allows for a reconstruction of what the world looks like at these smallest scales in the same way as the reflected light from a macroscopic object is detected by our eyes and allows our brains to reconstruct an image 10/10
Colliders are limited by size and the power of the electromagnets.
We haven't exhausted this technology yet, but there are novel technologies, like plasma wakefield acelerators. If we can master this, the future best microscopes could look even more alien to us 11/10
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
First of all, not all wavefunctions are complex. The Schrödinger equation tells us that time-independent (stationary) solutions can be real. These are energy eigenstates, e.g. a bound state in an hydrogen atom
But even if you start with a real wavefunction, time-evolution introduces an imaginary part
2/15
Time-evolution for a real-valued wavefunction correspond to a global phase. But global phases don't have observable consequences
Renormalisation is a central concept in modern physics. It describes how the dynamics of a system change at different scales. A great way to understand and visualise renormalisation is the Ising model
(some math, but one can follow without it )
1/13
Start with a lattice and assign two possible values to each vertex (+1/-1 here) and an interaction between each point with its next neighbours. Mathematically this interaction can be written as a sum, where the parameter beta decides how strongly the vertices interact (beta=0 is no interaction)
2/13
An example for such a system would be a (2D) magnet, where the vertices label magnetic moments. The probability of finding the whole lattice in a specific combination of +1/-1 distributions is then given by the exponential below. (Z(beta) is just a normalisation constant, we'll ignore it)
The most energetic neutrino ever observed just smashed into the Mediterranean and left a signal that was picked up by the K3Mnet neutrino telescope 2400m under the sea
At the moment we don't really know where this neutrino came from, nor should it really be there.
🧵1/10
Neutrinos that hit water or ice can kick and electron out of its atom with so much momentum that its speed exceeds the speed of light (in the medium). What happens than is the light equivalent of a sonic boom: Cherenkov radiation
The same effect makes nuclear reactors shine blue
2/10
Neutrino telescopes are large arrays of photomultipliers that can detect that light and reconstruct the energy, type of neutrino and direction it came from. They use the sea as a detector. K3Mnet operates 2400m under the sea
Could we tell whether anyone in our galaxy uses a warp drive?
This sounds like a crazy question, but it can be answered using numerical GR
(one of the fun highlights of the annual theory meeting presented by Katy Clough)
🧵1/7
In GR, a 'warp drive' corresponds to a gravitational distortion of spacetime
In 94 it was shown that this is possible in principle by contracting space in front of of a spaceship and expanding space behind it (if you believe the aliens discovered negative mass) by Alcubierre
2/7
If a space-ship used that technique it would be surrounded by a 'warp bubble' moving through the galaxy. And this results in gravitational waves moving away from that path