this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2025
63 points (98.5% liked)

Science

5037 readers
407 users here now

General discussions about "science" itself

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

https://lemmy.ml/c/science

https://beehaw.org/c/science

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (10 children)

Needless to say, at 19,000 Kelvin, the solid gold sample blew past that boundary, heating up to more than 14 times its melting point, which is about 1,300 Kelvin. The team suggests the speed of the heating likely kept the gold from expanding. They blasted the gold to its record-setting temperature in just 45 femtoseconds, or 45 millionths of a billionth of a second.

“The thing that’s intriguing here is to ask the question of whether or not it’s possible to beat virtually all of thermodynamics, just by being quick enough so that thermodynamics doesn’t really apply in the sense that you might think about it

The team notes that the second law of thermodynamics, which states that disorder increases with time, still stands—their work did not disprove it. That’s because the gold atoms reached their extreme temperature before they had time to become disordered, White tells Nature’s Dan Garisto.

Even still, researchers are now faced with a question they had considered all but completely solved nearly four decades ago, per New Scientist: How hot can something really get before it melts? If a material is heated quickly enough, there might be no limit, per the SLAC statement.

Sort of reminds me of the energy-time version uncertainty principle: if an interval is short enough, energy fluctuations can be extremely high.

What I'd like to know here is what the duration threshold to would allow fusion to start is.

[–] Wigners_friend@piefed.social -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (9 children)

Energy-time relations have no link to the uncertainty principle. They apply to classical cameras for instance. There are no "energy fluctuations", you cannot magically get energy from nothing as long as you give it back quickly, like some kind of loan.

This is because the energy-time relation works for particular kinds of time, like lifetime of excitations or shutter times on cameras. Not just any time coordinate value.

Edit: down votes from the scientifically illiterate are fun. Let's not listen to a domain expert, let's quote wiki and wallow in collective ignorance.

[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Fine, I can say this in a way that does not violate energy conservation but still uses the energy-time uncertainty principle:

Say you have a system with two levels, hot and cold like the gold sheet in this experiment. Then I can take a linear combination of these two (stationary) states, between which which the period of oscillation would be deltat=h/deltaE, which would be the time for the system to "heat" and "cool" within 45 femtoseconds. (lifted from Griffiths, page 143)

That would give a deltaE>1.5E-20J compared with kT (T=19000K) = 27E-20J 🤔 (T=1300K) = 1.8E-20J so the fusion T is close to the oscillation limit, the extra energy for 19000K is not going to do anything unless the cooling slows down.

Soo...I don't understand the point of the experiment. It just looks like they're exciting ~~atoms~~ metal and then letting them quickly deexcite radiatively...and then wonder why they won't absorb huge amounts of energy and melt (if the energy remained within the system, it would). I probably would have to get the actual paper, but I don't wanna 😛

[–] zabadoh@ani.social 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

They didn't say anything about cooling the gold film.

They measured it lasted as solid at a certain temperature for a certain length of time after it had reached that temperature.

I'm sure it eventually melted, but the question was how long it stayed solid after being superheated past previously theoretical limits.

[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

it lasted as solid at a certain temperature for a certain length of time after it had reached that temperature.

That's the problem, reading the quotes from my top reply even they seem to admit that what they are calling temperature is not what is usually called temperature in thermal equilibrium.

[–] zabadoh@ani.social 2 points 20 hours ago

It's a subtle distinction.

High temperature/energy leads to entropy/liquification, but I think what this experiment demonstrated is there's a short delay or "entropy build up curve" between high amounts of energy and the "transmission" of entropy through the solid molecular structure to a liquid state.

I'm not sure if I'm wording all this correctly.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)