|
|
Graphene, a mesh of carbon one atom thick, has been used to finally pin down a mysterious universal constant. Credit: Thomas Szkopek SYDNEY: The world's thinnest material can shed light on the exact measurement of one of the universe's fundamental physical constants, a new study reveals. Researchers led by physicist Andre Geim from the University of Manchester in the U.K., used graphene – a sheet of carbon just one atom thick – to gauge the exact measurement of the fine structure constant, a fundamental physical constant defining the interaction between fast moving electric charges and light. Their results were published online in the current edition of the journal Science Express, ahead of publication in the U.S. journal Science. The fine structure constant was first introduced by physicists in attempts to understand atomic structure and has long mystified scientists because there seemed to be no natural mathematical relationship that described the constant, like a circle's circumference divided by its diameter describes the universal constant pi. Foundations of life In this new study, the U.K. and Portuguese researchers shone light through sheets of graphene and found that it absorbs a surprising amount of light considering its extreme thinness. The material's opacity is due to its molecular structure: a mesh of carbon atoms and bonds that looks something like chicken wire (when rolled up, graphene forms carbon nanotubes and when piled in layers it forms graphite). They found that the exact value of light absorbed by graphene – 2.3 per cent of visible light – divided by pi gives the value of the fine structure constant (approximately 1/137). As the researchers point out, few other universal constants can be described so simply. "We were absolutely flabbergasted when we realised that such a fundamental effect could be measured in such a simple way. One can have a glimpse of the very foundations of our universe just looking through graphene," said Geim, who was part of the team that discovered graphene in 2004. "Change this fine-tuned number by only a few per cent and life would not be here because nuclear reactions in which carbon is generated from lighter elements in burning stars would be forbidden. No carbon means no life," he added. Acting like light Theoretical physicist Ross McKenzie from the School of Physical Sciences and the Centre for Organic Photonics and Electronics (COPE) at the University of Queensland, Australia, describes the research as "very beautiful". "It's rare in condensed matter physics to get something so clean and elegant, particularly in the way the theory agrees with the experiment," he said. Graphene can be used to calculate the fine structure constant because its crystal structure is unique among solids, according to McKenzie. As electron waves travel through the crystal, the symmetry of the carbon atoms forces the relationship between the electron wavelength and energy to be the same as the relationship for photons in light. As a result, the electrons effectively act as photons, but move at a much slower velocity. This property in turn leads to other unique properties that rely on the fine structure constant. Chemical physicist Paul Meredith, also from COPE, said the research represents a "great leap forward" in terms of manipulating graphene. "The first step towards making a device, especially a nanoscopic device, is the ability to manipulate this material and they've cracked it," he said. Graphene has very high conductivity so could be used in a variety of structured electronic materials, Meredith said. Possible uses include flexible transparent electronics or transparent electrodes for solar cells, as well as innovative uses in medicine. Readers' comments |
COSMOS newsletter!Receive regular updates highlighting the latest in science from COSMOS. Latest News |
Goradia S., http://www.arXiv.org/pdf/physics/0210040v3
The finding makes my heart beat faster. It confirms my prediction at the 2007 and 2008 March and April APS meetings, and in the subject preprint that the fine-structure constant goes down with cosmic time. 2.3 percent happens to be the natural logarithm of 10. The natural logarithm of 10 will go down very slightly with cosmic time as the base (e) of natural logarithm goes up with cosmic time slightly by the addition of one term every Planck time in its expansion series. The expansion series of the base of natural logarithm increases every Planck time per my prediction. In my abstract submitted in April for the NW section APS meeting (NSW08-2008-000117)I am pointing out in effect that the fine-structure constant generates mass by an increment of 10E19 Gev (Planck energy)every Planck time to make the baryon number of 10E79 during the age of the universe, 10E60 Planck times. Does this not sound as simple as 4+1=5? For a copy of the APS abstract, email: sg@gravityresearchinstitute.org
Goradia S., http://www.arXiv.org/pdf/physics/0210040v3
The experiment confirms the logic in the my paper on the internet. Instead of using just arbitray number 2.3, if you use the natureal log of 10 ,the exact number comes out to be 2.303. Using this logical number, the reciprocal of the fine-structure constant comes out to be 136, not 137. Therefore, the more correct approach is a correction to Boltzmann equation silently implied as S = ln W/pi, and using 13.7 billion years as the age of the universe gives the reciprocal of the fine structure constant as equal to or greater than the natural logarithm of the age of universe in Planck times/pi. Not only it gives the value closer to the measure value of the fine-structure constant 1/137, but also it explains the difference by "equal to or greater than" sign, an attribute of the uncertainty principle. After the presentation my talk, Mike Turner, the Chairman, asked if there is an experimental verification of my theory. Had I known, I would have said it is coming. Now I can say it has come. If one thinks deeply into the series expansion for the base of the natural logarithm, one can understand that the nature is simple(4+1=5). I am linking e to consciousness in another abstract submitted in April:
NWS08-2008-000065
Submitters Email Address:
sg@gravityresearchinstitute.org
In your article you write >
In your article you write
> I predict that during tornadoes, photons ceate nuclear reactions
> that should explyin the uknown source of energy that fuel destructive
> tornadoes
do you have any numbers justifying your "prediction" ?
And is this article a hoax?