Best yet test of Lorentz invariance
The more crucial a physical law is, the more important it is to keep testing it. One of the most important laws formulated in the last century or so is Albert Einsteinэs principle of invariance, which says that there is no preferred reference system or orientation in the universe.
A hypothetical violation of this principle might come about through the intervention of some not-yet-known force field.
The field would manifest itself by the simultaneous violation of three basic symmetries in nature, called CPT: charge conjugation (a symmetry which says that nature treats matter and antimatter alike), parity inversion (which says that nature cant differentiate between left and right), and time inversion (a symmetry which holds that movies of microscopic interactions should look alike even if you reverse the order running from front to back).
In other words, looking for violation of Lorentz invariance is equivalent to looking for violations of CPT invariance.
Michael Romalis and his colleagues at Princeton look for the faint magnetic influence the hypothetical field would have on matter by watching two species of atoms potassium and helium-3 which are contained in a rotating vessel.
The whole lab is of course attached to the Earth, which itself rotates daily and orbits the Sun. All of these motions, carefully accounted for, should leave behind a trace of a difference for the two atomic species if an extra field exists.
The result of the latest round of observations improves by a factor of 30 the constraint on the existence of the hypothetical Lorentz-violating field.
"This is a rather dramatic improvement in CPT and Lorentz tests," says Romalis. "Our new technique also has the potential for much larger improvements in the future, so there are more limits to come."
Michael Romalis will present the findings at Frontiers in Optics (FiO) 2010/Laser Science XXVI -- the 94th annual meeting of the Optical Society (OSA). The presentation, "New Limit on Lorentz and CPT Violation for Neutrons," will take place on Thursday, Oct. 28.
Provided by
Optical Society of America
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
28 comments
-
Every black hole contains a new universe: A physicist presents a solution to present-day cosmic mysteries,
214 comments
-
New silicon memory chip developed,
16 comments
-
Computing experts unveil superefficient 'inexact' chip,
45 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
41 comments
Physicists to discuss largest parity violation, other adventures in table-top physics
-
Paradox of motion implies discrete space?
1 hour ago
-
acceleration decceleration
3 hours ago
-
Spiral motion and the centripetal force
3 hours ago
-
Uniform Circular Motion
4 hours ago
-
freely accesible translations
5 hours ago
-
Potential difference and terminal potential difference
6 hours ago
- More from Physics Forums - General Physics
More news stories
Is a classical electrodynamics law incompatible with special relativity?
(Phys.org) -- The laws of classical electromagnetism that were developed in the 19th century are the same laws that scientists use today. They include Maxwell’s four equations along with the Lorentz la ...
Thousands of invisibility cloaks trap a rainbow
Many people anticipating the creation of an invisibility cloak might be surprised to learn that a group of American researchers has created 25 000 individual cloaks.
2 hours ago |
5 / 5 (2) |
0
|
Slip-and-slide power generators
Researchers from Vestfold University College in Norway have created a simple, efficient energy harvesting device that uses the motion of a single droplet to generate electrical power.
3 hours ago |
not rated yet |
0
Excitons: Exotic particles, chilled and trapped, form giant matter wave
Physicists have trapped and cooled exotic particles called excitons so effectively that they condensed and cohered to form a giant matter wave.
9 hours ago |
5 / 5 (1) |
1
|
Sound increases the efficiency of boiling
Scientists at the Georgia Institute of Technology achieved a 17-percent increase in boiling efficiency by using an acoustic field to enhance heat transfer. The acoustic field does this by efficiently removing vapor bubbles ...
3 hours ago |
not rated yet |
0
HyperSolar shows dirty water no barrier to power world
(Phys.org) -- The Santa Barbara, California, company, HyperSolar, is set to transparently share the ups and downs of its research experiences toward the companys ultimate vision, successfully producing ...
Asteroid nudged by sunlight: Most precise measurement of Yarkovsky effect
Scientists on NASA's asteroid sample return mission, Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security, Regolith Explorer (OSIRIS-REx), have measured the orbit of their destination asteroid, ...
New mapping of Mars shows western Medusae Fossae formation older than once thought
(Phys.org) -- Recent geologic mapping of the Medusae Fossae Formation on Marsan intensely eroded deposit near the northern edge of the cratered highlandshas revealed a wider distribution of its ...
Organic carbon from Mars, but not biological
Molecules containing large chains of carbon and hydrogen--the building blocks of all life on Earth--have been the targets of missions to Mars from Viking to the present day. While these molecules have previously ...
In nanorod crystal growth, nanoparticles seen as artificial atoms
In the growth of crystals, do nanoparticles act as "artificial atoms" forming molecular-type building blocks that can assemble into complex structures? This is the contention of a major but controversial theory ...
First direct observation of oriented attachment in nanocrystal growth
Berkeley Lab researchers have reported the first direct observation of nanoparticles undergoing oriented attachment, the critical step in biomineralization and the growth of nanocrystals. A better understanding ...
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
indicate a preferred frame of reference? We also launch satellites using the using the earth's rotation around the sun to our advantage. Certainly we would use the rotation of our galaxy to our advantage if we sent a spaceship to other stars in our galaxy or to other galaxies. Is there any place in our universe where we couldn't use our proper motion to our advantage?
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: 4.7 / 5 (3)
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
well you fill a glass with water then you turn it upside down. it will certainly tell you which way is up and which is down. water does not flow "up". No?
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
Perhaps he should have made a better choice of words.
Which direction is the "top" of the galaxy?
Which direction is the "top" of the universe?
However, "up" is also relative, because the direction that is "up" on one side of the earth is actually "down" on the opposite side of the earth. It is only if you define "up" with respect to a polar coordinate centered on the earth's CoG that you obtain consistency, in which case, "up" is simply any vector pointing away from the center of the earth.
Oh yeah, to my knowledge, no version of relativity correctly describes an observer on the surface of a planet or other object, because no version of relativity even considers the problem of the spinning observer. They deal only with uniform linear motion or linear acceleration.
Oct 26, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
I presume you meant Cosmic radiation :-)
But no, that only means that we move in relation to that radiation. It still doesn't make that reference frame somehow better than others. In particular, all physical phenomena should have the same outcome regardless in which system you look at them.
Consider the example in another question - about the water pouring out of a glass. The end result (glass is empty) remains the same even if you stand on your head (so that subjectively it flows towards your head so would appear to go "up" in your coordinate system).
Oct 26, 2010
Rank: 1.1 / 5 (11)
Oct 26, 2010
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
Oct 26, 2010
Rank: 3.4 / 5 (5)
What would they call them, surely "skeptics" or "deniers" would be too kind, maybe "heretics" or even "lunatics"? :-))
Oct 26, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
Which is why, IIRC, the initial solutions found when applying Relativity to Mercury's precession were incorrect. The math failed to account for both Earth's rotation, and its movement through space.
Oct 26, 2010
Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
Oct 27, 2010
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
But if i were a guessing id say you could determine top and bottom if the space into which the universe is expanding into was not expanding equally. You could probably discern this easily over time by seeing from which directions the "oldest" light comes from and form a 3d "distorted" shape from that.
Youd probably have some weird shape for the universe which would change shape as more data was added over time. But eventually you have a rough shape of the universe.
Once youve smoothed a few edges, and lobbed in a general definition of top being the furthest away youd end up with a nice map and the absolute geometry system of the universe youre after.
Oct 30, 2010
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
They call them scientists, just like every other person who uses logic, reason, and scientific method to determine how and why things work.
Nov 01, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
Nov 03, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
Is this essentially what they are looking for?
Nov 04, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
The Michaelson-Morley experiments have been repeated ad-nauseum with accuracies reaching 2 X 10^-13 with no effect detected. The aether-dragging solution proposed by Stokes was proven to be contradictory. To date, all experiments that attempt to detect our speed through the "aether" have failed. Special Relativity explains that all distances, speeds, and time references are relative and that the universe has no "preferred" frame of reference.
Nov 04, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
The fastest running clock is always your local, stationary clock (ignoring gravity, for the moment). If you and I are passing each other, rapidly, in space, your clock is slower than mine (from my point of view) and my clock is slower than yours (from your point of view). We're both right because time is relative. Faster clocks tick slower... or stated more accurately, things that move, relative to an observer, appear to be aging slower than the observer. This is true for all observers, including those that appear to be moving from your point of view (because, from THEIR point of view, THEY'RE stationary and YOU'RE moving).
So, to answer your question, "Yes" and "No". If there's no center of the universe, then all points are the center, in a way. But no.