[–] seeprime 1 points 19 points (+20|-1) ago 

The lowest temperature known is zero Kelvin. These guys got to 360 microKelvin, still above absolute zero. Headlines like this make me cringe as it's exaggeration that should not exist in science.

[–] jerrykantrell 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I came in here to see exactly how these guys had managed to circumvent a universal law.

[–] adfasdf 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

They had to transfer it into a universe with vastly different laws which they have not been able to do yet.

[–] OnlyMyLifeMatters 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

The point of the article is that the particular object in question was under current understanding of physics predicted to be coolable to a certain degree under certain conditions, but in the actual experiment scientists observed that it was cooler than they expected. That's a pretty big deal.

[–] BoraxTheFungarian 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Thanks! Perfect TLDR

[–] leweb 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Not to mention the assertion that absolute zero is the temperature at which matter is "nearly devoid of energy" :/

[–] SrBearLordofOldCastl 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Yeah so they were able to freeze it to absolute zero, they didn't break that barrier. However is this the first time we are able to freeze something to that point?

[–] watitdew 7 points 16 points (+23|-7) ago 

cool story

[–] jaceame 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

They should bring it to the white house.

[–] knightwarrior41 6 points 1 points (+7|-6) ago 

i see what you did there

[–] fcsuper [S] 1 points 8 points (+9|-1) ago 

You couldn't just upvoat and let this one go? :)

[–] geosprintforever 2 points 7 points (+9|-2) ago 

"were able to take it to less than one-fifth of a single 'quantum' lower than the laws of physics predict that temperatures can get." Then it is not a "law" is it?

[–] fcsuper [S] 0 points 15 points (+15|-0) ago 

First, it wasn't a law to begin with. Second, that's not what a scientific law even is. There is a common misunderstanding perpetuated by grade school lessons that there is some sort of hierarchy between laws, theories, hypotheses and principles. There isn't. None of these things are taken as absolute knowledge either. Data and facts are king, and everything else follows that, with different functions to utilized the facts.

[–] Morbo 5 points 5 points (+10|-5) ago 

Unless the subject is Climate change. The science is settled and unchanging so it's not just law but dogma as well.

[–] Norm85 1 points 9 points (+10|-1) ago 

That word "quantum" they keep using. I don't think it means what I think it means in this situation.

[–] FPSFairy 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

I'm going to give someone the benefit of the doubt and assume that somewhere along the line, "quantum" was substituted for the word "quanta," which would make sense. As far as my pitiful understanding of advanced physics goes, anyway.

[–] newoldwave 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Laws of physics stand until broken. Then we have to refigure.

[–] frenemy 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

more of a readjustment. one quanta off isn't bad.

[–] MrPim 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

It's more of a guide book really.

[–] theburntsausage 1 points 6 points (+7|-1) ago 

Usually when researchers cool down objects, they use lasers to slow down the motion of atoms, which dampens the thermal vibrations occurring in a material.

laser guns will freeze you.

[–] Link1299 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 


[–] fcsuper [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 


[–] Il0O-O0lI 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

ELI5 how light can cool something down....

[–] Tancred 1 points 19 points (+20|-1) ago 

A bowling ball travels towards you. You throw tennis balls at it to slow it down.

[–] GetWithThePogrom 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Probably the best ELI5 I've ever read.

[–] lord_nougat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Or a steady stream of ping pong balls.

[–] Il0O-O0lI 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 


[–] 9-11 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

even better, a continuous stream of these tennis balls.

[–] fcsuper [S] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The light is focused in a way that organizes the atoms so that they move less. I'm not sure if the light actually carries away energy as it passes, but that might be part of the process.

[–] Dougal_McHaggis 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

From what i understand it adds energy which is then immediately released again, but the release randomly changes the momemtum of the atom. So net energy is not added or removed just constantly redirected by the photons. It's basically wack-a-mole and the squeezed light can wack them faster.

[–] Il0O-O0lI 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Thanks. That makes a kind of sense.

[–] jerrykantrell 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Do photons have mass? If not, how will they affect the vibration of the atoms?

[–] 9-11 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

[–] Tancred 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Alternative title:

Previously assumed limits seem to be wrong

[–] fcsuper [S] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I already fixed the title from the original which made it seem like the test violated the laws of physics.

[–] newoldwave 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 


[–] Browngaijin 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

What's cooler than cool?


load more comments ▼ (8 remaining)