http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/bose-einstein-condensate-created-at-room-temperature/
*Bose-Einstein condensate created at room temperature* the electronic properties of the material itself replaced the need for cooling, allowing the quasiparticles to gather and condense into a BEC. The experimenters confirmed this effect by detecting the telltale light emission. This experiment marked the first room-temperature BEC ever observed in the laboratory. While the authors didn't suggest any practical application, the potential for studying BECs directly is obvious. Without the need for cryogenic temperatures or the sorts of optical and magnetic traps that accompany atomic BECs, many aspects of Bose-Einstein condensation can potentially be probed far less expensively than before. On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > Axil, > > LOL - once again - you have perfectly illustrated the fact that you do not > understand how to read scientific papers, since what you posted actually > contradicts the point you want to make. You have done this over and over > again. A superfluid, even if it had been seen at room-temperature - is not > a > BJJ which still only occurs at ultracold. > > Apparently you want us to conflate two quantum phenomena in hopes of > proving > an unrelated capability. But sorry, these two are not the same. > > From: Axil Axil > > Seeing macroscopic quantum states directly remains an > elusive > goal. Particles with boson symmetry can condense into > quantum > fluids, producing rich physical phenomena as well as > proven potential for interferometric devices1-10. However, > direct imaging of such quantum states is only fleetingly > possible > in high-vacuum ultracold atomic condensates, and not > in superconductors. Recent condensation of solid-state > polariton > quasiparticles, built from mixing semiconductor excitons > with microcavity photons, offers monolithic devices capable > of supporting room-temperature quantum states that exhibit > superfluid behavior. > > But you failed to read the important fact: this is > superfluidity - and speculative, and these are still condensates and so > they > have gone from ultracold gases to condensates, which are very cold but not > absolute zero ! Amazing that you cite this when it illustrates another > point > than the one you want to make. A superfluid is not a BJJ and a superfluid > cannot thermalize gammas in any event. > > And you do the very same thing with PH > > "Anyway, that's sort of the essence of the model that we've > been studying. It's been a tough physics problem for a lot of reasons, > recently we've had some luck in obtaining analytical and numerical results > on these models, so that we can quantify them. We're actually able, these > days now, suppose you want to start out with a 23 MeV quantum, and chop it > up into 50 meV quanta, how long does it take to do that? How many nuclei do > you need to do it? How much excitation do you need to do it? We can ask > these questions of these models, and the models can give us quantative > answers. As a result, within the framework of these models we can begin to > develop answers to some of these questions. > > For example, it's pretty sure from these models that you > don't go directly from a 24 MeV quantum down to the optical phonons. What > you'd prefer to do is to downshift from 24 MeV to some sort of intermediary > stopping point, maybe 2.25 MeV or so, and then try to downshift to the > optical phonon loads. The models say that that works vastly better than > starting with a larger energy quantum. Anyway, those are the kinds of > things > that the basic model does." > But sorry Axil, P.H. NEVER says that there is a gamma emission, which is > what you have been implying. > Do you really not understand the difference between gamma radiation and 50 > meV quanta? > Jones Beene wrote: > Axil, > Analog or not - the BJJ only occurs in ultracold gases - > even colder than the JJ. > Do you never read the papers you cite? Where is your > reference to any BJJ at the operating temperature of LENR? > And PLEASE do not misquote Hagelstein again. He is not > claiming gammas are captured by phonons, which would support your lame > theory, but instead that gammas are NOT emitted and the energy coupling is > direct to phonons. This is completely contrary to a theory where gammas are > emitted and then captured. > Anyone else you would like to misquote today? > From: Axil > Remember: > 1) A Josephson junction (JJ) is an > effect > of superconductor and of nano-layering to form the junction > 2) The highest temperature > superconductor > operates at minus ~150 C. > 3) A Josephson junction requires lower > temperature than the superconductor > From the reference: > "A bosonic analog is the so called Bosonic > Josephson junction (BJJ) where two macroscopic populations of bosons are > trapped in a double well geometry." > Note the word "analog". This word means > that > the BJJ is not a Josephson junction as found in a cold superconductor, it > is > an ANALOG that just behaves like a Josephson junction. > > >
