Scientists Trap a Rainbow 147
An anonymous reader writes to tell us that Physicists from both the University of Surrey and Salford University have devised a method to trap a multi-colored rainbow of light inside a prism. "Previous attempts to slow and capture light have involved extremely low or cryogenic temperatures, have been extremely costly, and have only worked with one specific frequency of light at a time. The technique proposed by Professor Hess and Mr Kosmas Tsakmakidis involves the use of negative refractive index metamaterials along with the exploitation of the Goos Hänchen effect, which shows that when light hits an object or an interface between two media it does not immediately bounce back but seems to travel very slightly along that object, or in the case of metamaterials, travels very slightly backwards along the object."
In Rainbows (Score:4, Funny)
It shouldn't hurt to be a photon.
Re:In Rainbows (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Your linked post added nothing to the debate, it's only intent was to attack the parent poster.
Even if you were right, it's still trolling.
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Did they get the pot of gold as well? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
*bows in shame*
Re:Did they get the pot of gold as well? (Score:5, Funny)
Quite the opposite. The people who make Skittles candy are suing for patent infringement.
Re:Did they get the pot of gold as well? (Score:5, Funny)
But they'll never get my Lucky Charms.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
it's not all fun and games... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Rainbows are people too.
Abu Ghraib for Photons? (Score:2)
Ponies and rainbows! Who will save the ponies and rainbows?
Re: (Score:1)
What if we could find the fabled rainbow collection, predicted as early as 1979?
Well, fine. If the lovers and dreamers won't help, I'll just have to do it all by myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Does this mean (Score:2)
Re:Does this mean (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
...and Delta Goodrem (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
SomeWHeeere... (Score:2)
(Captcha: cadaver)
Scientists Trap a Rainbow (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Scientists Trap a Rainbow (Score:4, Interesting)
The other interesting thing is - if you don't let the light out, how much light can you put in there? Does it "fill up"? And if it does, what happens when it does? Does the universe end or something?
Re:Scientists Trap a Rainbow (Score:5, Interesting)
In any case, I wouldn't worry about the universe ending!
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I thought it would have to be pretty much along those lines - but, but, wouldn't that slow everything down? I mean the whole POINT of using light is that it's faster, etc. But then you need an electronic system to do the switching for you, so it will only be as fast as your electronics and the speed at which you can switch the thing (the material itself).
It would be neat if instead, light and interference patterns or so
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed actually, now that I think of it, this sounds similar *pulsing* to how the brain functions.
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like a bomb to me. A laser bomb...
Re: (Score:2)
It's a common misconception, but capacitors don't store electrons. They store energy. The number of electrons remains constant.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Scientists Trap a Rainbow (Score:5, Informative)
Kosmas L. Tsakmakidis, Allan D. Boardman & Ortwin Hess 'Trapped rainbow' storage of light in metamaterials [nature.com] Nature 450, 397-401 (15 November 2007) | doi: 10.1038/nature06285 [doi.org]. (See also summary comment box [nature.com], doi 10.1038/450330a [doi.org].)
It's also worth noting that metamaterials at various wavelengths (e.g. microwave band and IR) have already been made. We are getting very close to optical metamaterials. For instance, see this review of the field:
Vladimir M. Shalaev Optical negative-index metamaterials [nature.com] Nature Photonics 1, 41 - 48 (2006) doi: 10.1038/nphoton.2006.49 [doi.org].
We already have prototype metamaterials at wavelengths of 780 nm, which is on the edge of the visible spectrum. Significantly, we already have metamaterials that operate in the IR band, which is what is used for modern fiber-optics, telecommunications, etc. The materials to date are not optimized, so it will of course be awhile before all these great applications of metamaterials are implemented in real telecom devices. But, still, we are getting quite close to these applications. In particular, I expect we'll see a commercial 'rainbow trapping' device for communications before we see a commercial 'invisibility cloak'!
Re: (Score:1)
I absolutely _hate_ the term metamaterial. I know about its use and the reasons for its creation, but metamaterial is a stupid word, which does not mean what it says. Structure, for a long long time has been more important than composition. Carbon is a fun example. It is absolutely oxymoronic in my opinion to claim something above a material while using that material as an example...
poor rainbow (Score:2)
!pleh (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
In a related news... (Score:1)
Light Labyrinth? (Score:4, Funny)
Am I making this up myself, or is it serendipity?
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, pass the bong.
Re: (Score:2)
Make a helluva lighter.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Light Labyrinth? (Score:4, Informative)
The main problem with such techniques is losses. Even if your mirror is 99.9% reflective (and mirrors that good are expensive, by the way), you quickly lose all your signal intensity if you are reflecting thousands or millions of times. Your idea of using a photonic crystal is neat, but you would be hard-pressed to make a very long path length without making the crystal large, too. And if you cap the end with a mirror (to trap the light for longer), you run into losses from that.
That's one of the reasons the research mentioned in TFA is significant: in principle it allows a pulse to be trapped for an arbitrary amount of time with no losses (and for a broad range of wavelengths).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Light Labyrinth? (Score:4, Informative)
There are similar problems with refraction: the refractive index contrast is not infinite, so some amount of light is always transmitted. At glancing angles (below the critical angle), you theoretically get perfect 100% internal reflection. This is how fiber-optics work: by having a glancing-angle internal reflection, the losses at the boundary are quite low. However the beam is then propagating inside a material, and there is absorption from the material itself. (Even if the absorption was somehow zero, the refraction at the boundary would never be perfect: imperfections and evanescent waves would cause some amount of light to escape.)
So, while theoretically one could build a light-trap using reflection or refraction, using any known material would involve some imperfections or losses preventing long-term trapping.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It seems to me that the quantum nature of these effects should offer lots of "no strings attached" ways to interact with 100% "elasticity" that human scale matter's statistical average behavior makes impossible.
Actually it seems more like the opposite (unfortunately): quantum effects tend to ruin any hopes of a 100% anything. In a classical system, you can construct something that is trapped within a "potential energy well", but in quantum mechanics, tunneling [wikipedia.org] means that there will always be a non-zero probability of the "thing" escaping from the trap by tunneling through the barrier (this is, for example, how radioactivity works: by nucleons tunneling out of the strong binding in the nucleus). You can make a tra
Re: (Score:2)
And if so, is there a way to make nanoscopic light frequency shifters by moving masses closer/farther near light's path, perhaps shining in a vacuum channel? What if the li
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
explain whether light moving through the curved space past a mass doesn't just "pull" the mass and light closer, but does it also change the energy in the light, which I would expect to be measurable as a lowered frequency?
Light is affected by gravitational fields (as explained by Einstein/relativity), so a beam of light is deflected by the presence of a massive object. Note, however, that light (photons really) have no mass hence they do not attract (or "pull") the mass in any way. A beam of light is deflected by a star or planet because spacetime itself is "curved", as you say. The photons don't really lose/gain any energy in the process, but their wavelength/frequency is indeed shifted by the gravitational field (energy i
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it seems more like the opposite (unfortunately): quantum effects tend to ruin any hopes of a 100% anything. In a classical system, you can construct something that is trapped within a "potential energy well", but in quantum mechanics, tunneling means that there will always be a non-zero probability of the "thing" escaping from the trap by tunneling through the barrier (this is, for example, how radioactivity works: by nucleons tunneling out of the strong binding in the nucleus). You can make a trap good (low probability of escape) but never perfect (zero probability of escape).
I don't really agree with this, or rather I don't agree with what you seem to be implying. While the performance of everything is going to be limited by quantum uncertainties, in many real world applications (including high precision optics and nanotechnology), the effect can be several orders of magnitude less than we would ever notice. I see no reason why storing light with 99.999999% transmission for several years would be impossible due to quantum uncertainties.
But it's not that there is a quantum level that matches the wavelength of the light, but rather the Heisenberg indeterminacy principle basically allows for "blurring" of everything (the wavelength, the energy gap, etc.). So there is always a non-zero probability of interaction/absorption. Of course, the probability can be made very small. Impurities, as you note, tend to provide a wider range of possible absorption bands, so that the probability of one being close enough to the wavelength of the light is higher. (It's also worth remembering that absorption doesn't only occur because of energy levels associated with electrons bound to atoms: the degrees of freedom for molecular translation, rotation, and vibration also have quantum levels that can absorb light.)
I'm pretty sure this is not the dominant
Re: (Score:2)
Which could then provide the necessary 1.21 jigawatts to the flux capacitor AND power the time circuits to boot...yeah it just might work.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for demonstrating that Slashdot is News for Nerds, not necessarily geeks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
these guys are in for a world of trouble (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Hänchen? (Score:2)
The Source (Score:3, Informative)
Optical Transistor (Score:2)
opposite already exists (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
There may be a prism on the dark side of the moon that produces rainbows... or so an ungodly amount of acid apparently led Pink Floyd to believe.
No, if you turn the album cover over, you'll see where the rainbow is mixed down to a coherent white ray, which travels to the front cover, where it diverges into a rainbow that travels to the back cover, where the rainbow is mixed down to a coherent white ray, which travels to the front cover, where it diverges into a rainbow that travels to the back cover, where the rainbow is mixed down to a coherent white ray, which travels to the front cover, where it diverges into a rainbow that travels to the back
Was over heard in the lab... (Score:4, Funny)
Good! (Score:2)
Though in hindsight that might of made more sense to the UK readers.....
Michael Jackson (Score:1)
A rainbow? (Score:2, Funny)
Peer Review? (Score:1)
Kermit will be happy. (Score:2)
Like Hobbes said... (Score:3, Funny)
- Hobbes, Calvin and Hobbes
Re: (Score:2)
I tried to capture a rainbow once (Score:2)
Great soon we will be able to catch (Score:3, Funny)
Lucky is in Boston. (Score:2)
Tagging (Score:1)
Pshaw, trapping rainbows is easy (Score:2)
Now if you could catch the leprechaun [kuro5hin.org] that would be a different story!
-mcgrew
Metamaterials? (Score:2)
Next Project (Score:1)
Finally:SlowLight from T-Zero game is a reality (Score:2)
Apart from being extremely literary (puzzle references to Prufrock's love song among other things), this game was incredibly complex in it's movement across past, future and present. And the slow light flashlight was the icing on the cake - it illuminated an object with light from the objects past, enabling the player to view what the object WAS - it would be scary and exciting if this was a ste
Did they manage (Score:1)
Douglas Adams (Score:2)
But they didn't actually do it!!! (Score:2)
Experimental physics is littered with beautiful theories that never worked in practice.
Show us the trapped rainbow, please.
Re: (Score:2)
World flooded because Scientists capture Rainbow (Score:2)
"We didn't think we were doing anything wrong; I mean, the rainbow looked neat. It's not like we had any arrows big enough to shoot from it."
"How were we to know we'd be the ones to make 'Waterworld' a reality?"
Thankfully, God quickly scolded the Angels in question and reset His bow in the heavens. The scientists were s
Nice! (Score:1)
Like an episode of Brass Eye. (Score:1)
Peter, you've lost the news! [google.com]
And with that, I've lost our American audience...
Wish they would include a picture (Score:2)
Slow light (Score:1)
And for their next project (Score:3, Funny)
poor Kyle (Score:2)
TRAP? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
If you want virgins, go to Iraq, strap a bomb to yourself and walk towards the nearest US patrol. You'll get 72, apparently.