home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!gumby!destroyer!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!csa2.lbl.gov!sichase
- From: sichase@csa2.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE)
- Newsgroups: sci.physics
- Subject: Re: Defining Photons
- Date: 28 Jul 92 20:05:10 GMT
- Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
- Lines: 23
- Distribution: na
- Message-ID: <24990@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
- References: <3942@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us> <24910@dog.ee.lbl.gov> <mcirvin.712335342@husc10>
- Reply-To: sichase@csa2.lbl.gov
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.197
- Keywords: Relating photons E=MC^2 criticism
- News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4
-
- In article <mcirvin.712335342@husc10>, mcirvin@husc10.harvard.edu (Mcirvin) writes...
- >
- >Or hydrogen, for that matter. A professor in my department
- >has discussed the possibility of doing "optics" with atoms. I
- >don't know how close it is to being feasible.
-
- If I understand correctly, then the recent discussion of atomic "optics"
- does not have anything to do with the statistical properties of atoms, but
- rather that the technology of diffraction gratings has advanced to the
- point of allowing people to construct atomic interferometers - which among
- other things would provide incredibly sensitive position and motion
- sensors since the de Broglie wavelength of an atom is orders of magnitude
- shorter than that of visible light.
-
- This would work for atoms of all spins.
-
- -Scott
- --------------------
- Scott I. Chase "The question seems to be of such a character
- SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV that if I should come to life after my death
- and some mathematician were to tell me that it
- had been definitely settled, I think I would
- immediately drop dead again." - Vandiver
-