Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Submission + - First Nuclear Clocks Start Ticking in Vienna and Beijing (phys.org)

necro81 writes: Two groups, one in Vienna and one in Beijing, have successfully demonstrated the world's first nuclear clocks. Standard atomic clocks, like the caesium clocks that define the second, operate by observing the transition of electrons between different orbits about the nucleus. The resulting radiation is usually in the microwave range, and can produce clocks accurate to one second in 100 billion years.

Nuclear clocks go a step further, and probe energy transitions within the nucleus itself. Nuclei can arrange their protons and neutrons into different configurations, called isomers. The isomer with the lowest energy is the one usually found; higher-energy ones are only metastable and decay quickly. Usually it takes serious energy — x-rays and gamma rays — to excite a nucleus into a higher-energy arrangement. It so happens that thorium-229 can be excited using UV light with a wavelength of 148 nm — just within the capabilities of some exotic lasers.

It's still been quite a challenge. For one thing, Th-229 is not found in nature; it must be extracted from the decay chain of uranium-235. The Beijing team used just a microgram mixed in a crystal of calcium fluoride.

Although these prototype nuclear clocks are not yet more accurate than existing atomic clocks (one second in millions, rather than billions, of years), they show the way towards what may be possible. Because the energy transition is in the nucleus, rather than the electron cloud, it is less susceptible to outside disturbances like magnetic fields. And the fundamental frequency is much higher (five orders of magnitude), which should yield more precise timing. This development could lead to smaller and more reliable time standards across the world (and solar system).

Comment Re:4C (Score 3, Interesting) 100

Just... absolutely staggering energy numbers.!

If you are interested in staggering some more: go check out how much power is channeled via the Gulf Stream, both in terms of heat transport and in shear kinetic energy. It's tens-to-hundreds of terawatts.

(It's tough to tease the Gulf Stream on its own from the larger AMOC, which is on the order of one petawatt.)

Comment Re:Once again, for the clueless (Score 1) 92

There are only two choices, strong security or weak security. It's impossible to have security that's strong against the bad guys and weak against the good guys. It's impossible to precisely define who the good guys are and to guarantee that they will always be good. It's impossible to stop the bad guys from corrupting or threatening the good guys.

CGPGrey summed it up nicely:

"The nature of a keyhole is to be cracked, and the nature of the Internet is to bring demons to the door. No matter how much we might wish it, there is no way to build a digital lock that only angels can open and demons cannot. Anyone saying otherwise is either ignorant of the mathematics, or less of an angel than they appear."

Comment Re:Unpossible!11! (Score 1) 132

There is investment in green energy but the reality on the ground as a result of current economic conditions is that both manufacturing is down, and emissions are up. How so? Well turns out when the economy is upended countries take emergency measures, and one of the fastest ways of addressing this is starting up mothballed coal station.

Well, the climate-denying mouthbreathers in power wasted a few decades claiming that it didn't exist. Now they're claiming that 1) it's too expensive to do anything about it (as though not doing anything is costless), or 2) anything we do now won't matter because Look Over There!

So, yeah, it could have been an easy, orderly, and gradual transition, stretching over generations. We could have avoiding both the drastic economic upheavals and the worst effects on the climate. But we wasted 30-40 years with our collective head in the sand, and now shit's gettin' real, so both drastic measures and effects are piling up. Is it any wonder? It's like bitching about having to pull an all-nighter for a college essay, even though it was assigned weeks ago.

Comment Re:ecurity by obscurity (Score 1) 34

And lastly, what's to stop me from generating some slop and throwing it up on a nice monitor and taking a picture of it? Jackalopes are real, I can prove it, here's a certified picture I took of one!

Really tough to get pictures of a monitor without Moire effects making it obvious what you've done.

Comment what are the odds (Score 2) 97

What are the odds of this loan actually being paid back? NextEra (and Google) are certainly large enough to have the means to repay, but will they actually, and will the Administration force them to? What is the penalty if, after burning through all this money, no electrical power is actually produced?

This, in my opinion, is more like a grant - a giveaway. What is the public benefit for the risk being assumed by the taxpayer? Given the current government's love of ownership stakes (despite decrying "socialism" with a pearl-clutching gasp), why not provide the money in return for stock? Or make it a corporate bond such that, if NextEra defaults on the terms, the rest of the corporate bond market can extract their own form of punishment?

And furthermore, if this turns out to be a flop, will the politicians in favor of it get raked over the coals the way Obama was over Solyndra? Heck, that was only $500 million of lost taxpayer money!

Comment Who owns it? (Score 1) 64

The press release says Blue Origin "will design, develop, integrate, launch, and operate the network". Who actually owns it, though? For $700 million, I certainly hope it is the U.S. taxpayer. I'd contrast it to NASA's Deep Space Network, which is infrastructure with unique capabilities that is owned by NASA and operated by JPL. (JPL is, in turn, operated by CalTech, but is so enmeshed with NASA it's hard to see as a separate entity.)

Comment Re:Oh give it a fucking rest (Score 4, Insightful) 153

Oh right, so if you'd been alive in the 70s you'd have eschewed a car and heating and/or air con and gone to live in a yurt with a donkey as transport? You moron, you have no clue. You're just another stupid kid blowing raspberries at easy targets. Why are you even using a computer? Switch it off and save the energy.

I wouldn't look to the 1970s as the time when the boomers were most responsible for this mess - they were just coming into adulthood, and the problem was not widely understood. I'd be looking to the 1990s and early 2000s, when it was 1) well established that this is a problem, and 2) was far enough out that modest and gradual changes could have limited the future effects at relatively low cost. And, yeah, boomers were mostly in charge during that time, and continue to have an outsized influence even today. The current occupant of the White House, age 80, is actively dismantling all U.S. policy to acknowledge or act on the problem.

Slashdot Top Deals

A CONS is an object which cares. -- Bernie Greenberg.

Working...