Scientists discover how to turn light into matter after 80-year quest - Polidicks

[url]http://phys.org/news/2014-05-scientists-year-quest.html[/url] [t]http://cdn.phys.org/newman/gfx/news/2014/imagephoton-photoncollider.jpg[/t] [quote]Imperial College London physicists have discovered how to create matter from light - a feat thought impossible when the idea was first theorised 80 years ago. In just one day over several cups of coffee in a tiny office in Imperial's Blackett Physics Laboratory, three physicists worked out a relatively simple way to physically prove a theory first devised by scientists Breit and Wheeler in 1934. Breit and Wheeler suggested that it should be possible to turn light into matter by smashing together only two particles of light (photons), to create an electron and a positron – the simplest method of turning light into matter ever predicted. The calculation was found to be theoretically sound but Breit and Wheeler said that they never expected anybody to physically demonstrate their prediction. It has never been observed in the laboratory and past experiments to test it have required the addition of massive high-energy particles. The new research, published in Nature Photonics, shows for the first time how Breit and Wheeler's theory could be proven in practice. This 'photon-photon collider', which would convert light directly into matter using technology that is already available, would be a new type of high-energy physics experiment. This experiment would recreate a process that was important in the first 100 seconds of the universe and that is also seen in gamma ray bursts, which are the biggest explosions in the universe and one of physics' greatest unsolved mysteries.[/quote] Much more to read in the source, very interesting stuff! Imagine, one day in the distant future they could implant a device directly into the center of a star, and beam in matter of any kind when you need it! Protoss, here we come!

This opens the doors to new ideas! One day they'll be able to convert us into light travel via fiber to a remote location and convert it back into matter

[QUOTE=frozensoda;44842687]Much more to read in the source, very interesting stuff! Imagine, one day in the distant future they could implant a device directly into the center of a star, and beam in matter of any kind when you need it! Protoss, here we come![/QUOTE] I don't know how you gathered that from the article. [QUOTE=stuky4ever;44842706]So we will finally be able to teleport from point a to point b?![/QUOTE] Not as far as I can tell.

I was wondering about this the other day. What sort of applications could such a thing have?

Does this technically disprove the Conservation of Mass if proven true? Is turning a photon into matter "creating" matter?

Would this be like solid light from Portal 2 and Halo?

I was thinking Hard Light bridge type stuff, although not as Portal-y as won't set your hair on fire.

m = E/(c^2)

At first I thought it was something to do with that "solid light" process that some chaps did a year or two ago, forcing light to form in a lattice configuration, but this definitely seems like it could have applications in the fields of generating antimatter. That said it'd need a proper siphon and "trap" for the positrons, and I think a physicist called Hui Chen led a similar experiment in California about 6 years ago involving a laser and a super-tiny gold disc.

Lightsabres perhaps?

[QUOTE=code_gs;44842786]Does this technically disprove the Conservation of Mass if proven true? Is turning a photon into matter "creating" matter?[/QUOTE] mass isn't a conserved quantity, momentum and energy are. Which this doesn't disprove

First thing I thought was lightsabres [quote]Blackett Physics Laboratory[/quote] The place looks pretty fun [t]http://jigglingatoms.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Blackett-1.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=code_gs;44842786]Does this technically disprove the Conservation of Mass if proven true? Is turning a photon into matter "creating" matter?[/QUOTE] Nope, because the matter can be turned back into energy. If you had a set amount of energy and converted it into mass, and then that mass back into energy, you would be left with the same amount of energy as that you started with.

That is just neat as fuck

[QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;44842803]Light-made Dildos coming soon[/QUOTE] I wonder how bright a dildo would have to be for a woman's torso to start shining like this [img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9524LDvDayo/T8ZFHTi0NXI/AAAAAAAAAmo/3_sBRHlUni4/s1600/tut28_fig01.jpg[/img] truly asking the hard-hitting questions over here

[QUOTE=code_gs;44842786]Does this technically disprove the Conservation of Mass if proven true? Is turning a photon into matter "creating" matter?[/QUOTE] No, because of mass-energy equivalence.

I think it's a way to possibly beam electricity through light and shit like that...I dunno.

[QUOTE=code_gs;44842786]Does this technically disprove the Conservation of Mass if proven true? Is turning a photon into matter "creating" matter?[/QUOTE] I was just trying to reply to this by saying that matter is just condensed energy and would have the same mass as the energy it came from, but then I remembered that photons can only travel at c because they are weightless. So, can any physicist maybe explain which part of my understanding of physics is wrong? Do photons not have zero mass or does energy not weight anything?

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44842771]I was wondering about this the other day. What sort of applications could such a thing have?[/QUOTE] Well... Omni Blades? [img]http://imgur.com/lY2M0QM.png[/img]

[QUOTE=Robber;44842868]I was just trying to reply to this by saying that matter is just condensed energy and would have the same mass as the energy it came from, but then I remembered that photons can only travel at c because they are weightless. So, can any physicist maybe explain which part of my understanding of physics is wrong? Do photons not have zero mass or does energy not weight anything?[/QUOTE] Photons have no rest mass or some some shit, it's like they have virtual mass/momentum when they are moving so they can interact with stuff.

[QUOTE=Robber;44842868]So, can any physicist maybe explain which part of my understanding of physics is wrong? Do photons not have zero mass or does energy not weight anything?[/QUOTE] I mightn't have a super-scientist degree or even a science-based apprenticeship, but here's what might be the case (not guaranteed to be the case, but it's still a possibility). Perhaps photons DO have mass, but it's so minor and weak that the effects are on a far tinier scale that we haven't been able to properly probe yet, so to our current sensor technologies it doesn't register on the scale.

[QUOTE=Robber;44842868]I was just trying to reply to this by saying that matter is just condensed energy and would have the same mass as the energy it came from, but then I remembered that photons can only travel at c because they are weightless. So, can any physicist maybe explain which part of my understanding of physics is wrong? Do photons not have zero mass or does energy not weight anything?[/QUOTE] Photons have zero mass, but they have energy and momentum.

[QUOTE=bravehat;44842886]Photons have no rest mass or some some shit, it's like they have virtual mass/momentum when they are moving so they can interact with stuff.[/QUOTE] Photons always move, and always at the speed of light. That's pretty much the key characteristic for any particle that has no mass.

[QUOTE=Falubii;44842745]I don't know how you gathered that from the article. [/QUOTE] I didn't really get it from the article it was just a thought I had when I read the story. I'm not a physicist, I don't have to make sense :v:

"Throw me that light ball, Tommy!" [IMG]http://beyondthemarquee.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Raiders-of-the-lost-ark-melting-face.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=code_gs;44842786]Does this technically disprove the Conservation of Mass if proven true? Is turning a photon into matter "creating" matter?[/QUOTE] Conservation of mass is more generally used in chemistry, because these sorts of reactions don't happen in a chem lab. The equivalent for physics (pretty much the same idea but not limited to mass) is the E=mc^2 law.

[QUOTE=ironman17;44842940]I mightn't have a super-scientist degree or even a science-based apprenticeship, but here's what might be the case (not guaranteed to be the case, but it's still a possibility). Perhaps photons DO have mass, but it's so minor and weak that the effects are on a far tinier scale that we haven't been able to properly probe yet, so to our current sensor technologies it doesn't register on the scale.[/QUOTE] There are some pretty strict upper bounds on photon mass. A photon can at most be something like 26 orders of magnitude lighter than the sum of the neutrino masses (which are pretty damn small).

Sooo I guess I was more or less on the mark with my observation? Or is it that they normally don't have mass and gain it under certain circumstances?

So let me get this straight because All I know about atoms is derived from University Chemistry lectures: Basically they are saying that light photons are essentially the same as all other charged base particles like electrons, neutrons and protons? So if they could build a rudimentary atom out of 2 photons making them act as electron and proton, couldn't you eventually split an entire atom into pure light alone?

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;44843137]There are some pretty strict upper bounds on photon mass. A photon can at most be something like 26 orders of magnitude lighter than the sum of the neutrino masses (which are pretty damn small).[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;44843036]Photons have zero mass, but they have energy and momentum.[/QUOTE] wait, what? do they have mass or do they don't?