The best time to be alive, eternity, the fall of Babylon, freedom, love in a world with living, mother's being mother's, and father's being able to protect their loved ones with knowledge and their heart
It is remarkable how Matt is capable of simplifying all these difficult concepts. This should be usual for the whole academia, where instead bad writing is the common practice. Well done, Space Time!
Don't make the mistake of misunderstanding the target audience for scientific papers and literature. Academic papers are usually aimed at an audience that has a deep understanding of the subject matter. It's quite unlikely that a layman would understand all the technical data presented in such a paper. So while I agree that this channel is an absolute GEM, but maybe you've been reading the wrong "Physics for the Masses" books? I've read ALL of Brian Greene's books, as well as books by Lisa Randall, Leonard Suskind, Stephen Hawking, John Gribbin, and many more physics authors - and I find them to be, as a rule, understandable by a non-mathematically-inclined layman such as myself. It certainly takes some effort - the topics under discussion are extremely counterintuitive, highly technical in nature, and based on very complex math, but as Einstein said: "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." NO ONE finds this stuff easy to understand. Even the scientists at the cutting edge of physics research struggle to understand the results and implications of their experiments and theories. You can look at your difficulty as either a deficiency in the delivery of the data, or a challenge to your ability to understand radically different concepts and phenomena.
I see your point, but what I meant is somewhat different. I do maths, and most papers I read use an overcomplicated prose. So, my comment was more about the ability of Matt to recollect the ideas of those papers and write a coherent essay about it. As far as I'm concerned, when I watch a Space Time video I do it from an insider perspective. It's more or less like a review. And I am fascinated on how much simpler some concepts may be expressed, instead of the obscure and unpleasant academicese I usually find in scientific papers.
Evi1M4chine Exactly! Feynman's spirit is strong with him. In the description it's written "Written and Hosted by Matt O’Dowd", so I suppose he is the only one who feynman the subject, isn't he? Btw, I appreciate the work of the whole team as well.
A colleague and friend of mine is now working on her master's thesis on time crystals! They are a niche topic, I'm very happy that you guys covered it. Great job!
The thing I love about these videos is that you just don't simply watch it but have to put in hard work by researching on the topic to fully grasp the concept and then watch it again a couple times.A great way to brush up your knowledge.
Beautifully done, the concept of this series to break down new papers, analyze and simplify them, and then discuss the results here is one the best methods to popularize science! Everyone can do it and everyone can become knowledgeable!
How I understand it is like this. You put a chain of spinning and floating sponges on water. Then you add waves to the water. The spinning directions of these sponges oscillate will follow the direction of the wave. Then you stop the waves. If the spinning sponges are still oscillating as if the waves were still there, then you have formed a time crystal!
This was _immensely_ better coverage of time crystals than DNews. (I won't say infinitely because singularities give quantum physicists nightmares.) They couldn't even get a Newtonian explanation of potential energy right, so I had no idea what to make of the rest of their video. Thank you for all of the hard work you guys put into your science videos. You've done more to make theoretical physics accessible than the entire rest of the Internet!
Heard about this result today so looked up Time Crystals on Wikipedia and had no idea what it was saying. Can always rely on PBS Space Time to post a video right when I need it :) Thanks
Commie Commieston - Not quite. I'd consider that an ideal, but I don't think we can have a functioning society on a large scale without some system of government. I'd call myself a democratic socialist or a left-libertarian.
Thank you for this video. When the Internet first reacted to the paper, I tried to research Time Crystals but understood very little. This video did a very good job at breaking down the complicated science into something easily understandable.... or at least for some definitions of "easily".
Atoms that periodically change over time in stead of in space. Normal crystals have plains of atoms that repeat themselves in certain directions. That's the only reason why they speak about Time "Crystals".
All the crystals we have on earth are a representation of the time density zone at which we live. By compress the shape of a crystal lattice, energy is released. If we could get a crystal from another time density zone it would warp the time density zone into a positive or negative state. If these crystal are arranged into a complete encompassing structure a positive or negative time void would be created. Time within this void would move forward or backward.
i'm fairly well educated, fairly well informed about a variety of sciences and i can barely wrap my head around this. now imagine trying to explain this to someone from a century ago. we are now basically wizards... xD
StickyTank Yeah. People from a hundred years ago would never understand. People like a 38 year old Einstein were such idiots. Hopefully that had enough sarcasm dripping from it to show my point.
Why would it be difficult? They might not know what atomic spin or lasers are, but matt explains that in terms they would understand in the video. They'd still know what a magnetic domain is, they'd get the concept of coherent light, and they'd have just heard of a new paper by a chap called Einstein about stimulated emission, even if the "laser" acronym didn't exist yet. And of course they'd know stuff like thermodynamics/statistical mechanics pretty well.
It's not you. This guy has to be the worst teacher I have ever seen. Instead of starting with a simple analogy and then expanding upon it, he explains things in a way that you will only understand if you already have a fairly good understanding of the subject. Couple that with his tone and volume of his voice not changing, and the use of overly technical terms and he starts to sound like the adults in Charlie Brown. Wha wha wha.
I'm glad i subscribed to this channel because even though there are many terms and ideas i don't understand,the videos produced are in such high quality.
Please make a video on 'Spin'. What is spin on a quantum scale, are the particles actually moving. And what happens to matter when it is spinning at a high rate, such as in a Neutron star/quasar. How can a Black Hole spin if it is a singularity? Also how does matter 'know' it is spinning relative to other objects? I.e. why does Sandra Bullock feel force spinning above the Earth. Are centripetal forces analogous to inertia?
1.) Black holes are regions of space bounded by an event horizon, the singularity, (which is a hypothesis, not a proven fact) is only a feature of this. As with charge and mass the event horizon is responsible for spinning. 2.) Matter knows it is spinning because spinning involves acceleration, parts of a lump of matter will be constantly changing direction to avoid flying off in a straight line.
If you place a heavy cylinder of mass or spherical shell of mass around Sandra and spin it fast, it'll warp space time around Sandra in A similar way that a spinning black hole warps space time. Sandra will experience forces on her limbs similar to centrifugal and coriolis forces! To put it another way: You could consider, in Sandra's frame of reference, that the stars and universe are spinning around her, warping space time and causing those forces. I've been thinking about this problem for years and only recently found a reference to papers describing this cylinder/empty shell thought experiment... the maths was beyond me but the results made me extremely happy: It confirmed for me that the only possible explanation for centrifugal force, in a Universe that doesn't have a preferred frame of reference, is that that force is the result of the entire rest of the Universe revolving around YOU at its centre!
Actually spin would most likely be the direction of travel of the transverse waves that make up the standing waves we interpret as particles. Look up Energy Wave Theory
so if I understand correctly, one could make optical (due to the laser) components that in electrical engineering that resist changes in frequency, just as inductors resists changes in current and capacitors resists changes in voltage? right?
@@thersten No time for that. Call it a memory chip. Nothing new about it, apart from the liquid Helium cooling you need, and the size. But hey, it is a start to somwhere expensive. and expensive stuff grants subsidies for R&D.
I would like to thank this dude right here man I'm learned so much about physics, about math, and about space... it's just unbelievable the kind of knowledge that he's able to give you in a 15-minute video
I _think_ I understood the basic gist of this research, and it sounds awesome :D I'm really loving this Journal Club. Wish there were something like this for all other kinds of research papers out there.
String theory being 'wrong' as a model for the physical universe has no bearing on its usefulness as a tool for understanding real physical systems, getting insight in many unprobed areas and even for giving new perspectives and methods in pure mathematics. It's a gorgeous and useful framework and it deserved to be exposed, with a correct, modern and unhyped perspective of course.
String theory isn't 'wrong', it's just not proven yet. And the only evidence against SUSY is that it also hasn't been proven yet. It's true that the LHC has not provided expected results at this time that would demonstrate SUSY, and it's also true that that means that SUSY as currently formulated is less likely to be an accurate description, but that DOESN'T mean that SUSY CAN'T be true.
Search Brian Greene on String Theory. Though I appreciate your curiosity, I also appreciate Matt exploring areas that are current and less-well covered - breaking new ground. And be careful what you ask for - a detailed explanation of string theory would get into some REALLY gnarly math pretty quickly!
Quantum processing, quantum memory....sounds like the kind of stuff that might power a ship in EVE Online, or Elite Dangerous. Maybe one day, in real life. :)
Thanks for talking about it. I heard it for the first time on Dnews, but their explanation was terrible. They oversimplified it I guess, so I had no clue what it was about. At least here, you guys give more information, while still explaining it well enough that I can understand it. Have they any idea what is keeping these Time Crystals to hold on to their periodicity? "Resisting changes" implies that there must be a force, right? Or is it because for the atom to change it spin, it needs to get a certain amount of energy? That still doesn't explain how it can maintain it's previous periodicity?
Good questions. I don't understand it; I expect I would need to learn a lot more about quantum stuff before I had a chance. But I think you're right, it sounds like these systems have some form of inertia.
What's keeping it periodicity is the laser, or more specifically the alternating electromagnetic field. Think of the time crystal as a swing, the laser is giving it a push every 2 (or 3) swings keeping the cycle going. Like such a swing if you stop the laser it will keep moving for a while before it runs out of energy. Also like the swing if you try to push it at a different rate (Change the frequency) the swing will resist, the pushes will 'miss' it or a push will occur while the swing is moving back, hitting the pusher in the face. Because the 'swing frequency' is different from the 'push frequency' we can say that the swing isn't just being blindly moved about by the laser all the time, but is moving by itself, relying on the laser only for periodic energy boosts.
But how long is "for a while longer" (that the oscillations continue)? And why don't phonons destroy any oscillations almost instantly? I need to read these, I guess.
Every action has an equal reaction. A smaller black hole means that the event horizon is closer to its singularity than a big one. That means that an object that is closer to a small black hole will be closer to the singularity too! That means that it feels a gravitational field stronger and faster , than beeing close to a big balck hole. The stronger the gravitational field (action ) , the stronger its hawking radiation ( reaction ) The Hawking radiation is the reaction part if you didnt get it !
In small black holes the rate in which the gravity grows near the event horizon is greater. Which creats a bigger zone where the tidal forces can seperate the two virtual praticles.
It basically boils down to how much tidal force there is (How fast the gravity changes over distance) PLUS how easy it is to randomly 'miss' the hole. To produce a particle of a given energy the hole must be able to 'disrupt' a virtual particle pair (Well not exactly a pair, but let's be simple.) For light (and massless) particles this is simple since said particle pair can exist for some time and cover some distance, but heavier particles require more energy and for that energy to be added quickly. Once the particle pair forms the two particles will be heading off in random directions. To drain the hole one particle must 'hit' the hole and the other miss. Large holes will basically take up most of the 'sky' of a particle, only a massless particle moving straight away from it will avoid having its path bend and fall into the hole. Smaller holes on the other hand are hard to hit, a particle must be moving right towards it in order to be absorbed. So for large holes most of the low energy particles that form will have both absorbed by the hole to no effect while small holes will see a far greater number of higher energy aprticles escape.
Because radiation carries energy away from the black hole, and mass is energy (divided by c²). Energy is conserved, so if energy is coming out of the black hole, it must come from somewhere, and the only available source of energy is the black hole itself. Gareth's explanation is incorrect (sorry Gareth!) because Hawking radiation is not made up of point particles but rather waves with wavelength of the size of the black hole itself, so the notion of a "sky" for the particles isn't meaningful.
In Hawking Radiation, why do only positive-mass/energy virtual particles escape and evaporate, and not the negative-mass/energy ones? Or am I not understanding correctly?
that's because there are is no such thing as negative mass/energy. They are conceptually different from properties like position or charge. positions in space, time and charge can be thought of as positions within multidimensional property space. Physical laws then describe the restrictions on how the particles can move in this space. Mass and energy are conceptually more similar to distances instead of positions - they have no direction - only size.
The way you've been told about Hawking Radiation, with a pair of positive and negative mass spontaneously emerging in space and then that the negative mass falls by chance in the Black Hole, is not accurate for exactly the reason you were asking about. I have no idea what the real mechanism is, but I know that the mechanism spread in the general public is not correct :)
I think they exist in some sort of quantum uncertainty. Each particle exists as both the negative, and positive particle. When one falls into the black hole, the other becomes positive since this is the only way for it to exist.
elios311 your analogy is better than the negative mass one, that's sure. However, I don't get why suddenly by attracting things, a black hole does work, and thus losing energy. That's frowning my eyebrows a bit, but nevertheless you explained it in a good way. Thank you!
Only real particles have mass or energy. The virtual pairs should annihilate and go back into the vacuum (the vacuum particles have a sum of zero energy; the virtual pairs 'borrow' energy from the vacuum and give that energy back almost instantly). If virtual pairs are at the event horizon of a black hole they might not annihilate: if one falls into the black hole, and the other leaves the black hole then this must become a real particle. Since a real particle is emitted from near the event horizon of the black hole, then it must come from an energy source. This energy cannot come from the vacuum outside of the black hole, so it comes from inside the black hole, therefore the black hole loses mass when it emits Hawking radiation. You can imagine the Hawking radiation 'tunnels' through the event horizon.
Do the time crystals have preferred resonances or is the frequency of the spin flips purely dependent on (some integer multiple of) the laser's em field oscillation frequency? If they don't have a preferred frequency then it seems like a bit of stretch to call them 'time crystals', since 'space crystals' clearly have a preferred spatial frequency depending on the material.
Their preferred frequency depends on the material (the strength of interaction between atoms.) and the magnetic field forcing the spin alignments. This is equivalent to regular crystals vs pressure. (Increase the field strength, increase the preferred flip rate, just as increasing pressure decreases atomic spacings.)
But if you mess with the oscillation frequency, the time crystals may get very hot or even shatter? Everything has a frequency oscillation, I am sure that the military have weponised patical beam weapons from this theory.
hey :) once again, great job! I really love your channel and am so thankful for all the stuff I've learned so far from your videos. Could you also make a video about the whole holographic properties of black holes, or actually what does this mean and what are the implications in understanding our universe? Greetz from Austria :)
Actually yes, and this has been a thing for some time now. Search up optical clocks, the most recent record on time accuracy is greater than the age of the universe set by a strontium clock. The clock loses 1 second every 15 billion years or so.
My thoughts precisely. And it is indeed, for example the case in Kaon / anti-Kaon (a.k.a K-Kbar) oscillation which is predicted and observed to break CP and therefore T as well. So I'm not sure how this fits in with the paper mentioned in this video that states that no quantum system can break T at equilibrium.
The video briefly covers this; firstly the oscillation cannot be macroscopic, a planet orbiting a star is no more a time crystal than a stack of bricks is a regular crystal. Limited like that things become more difficult since most of what we consider oscillations on atomic scales are a single quantum state.
Because the oscillation keeps happening in a closed system. In other places, either the oscillations are too "noisy" or they require energy. So, basically kinda like a perpetual motion machine, that doesn't gain or lose energy, while it's moving.
It is the quantum state of the particles that is repeating in time yes, not position or some other observable. This was a driven system and the time symmetry is only broken "locally" in the sense that if you consider all the energy in the chain you end up with more than you started with because as mentioned energy is constantly being pumped in from the laser.
All of science is a combination data and theory. Quantum physics happens to be theory with a colossal amount data backing it up, giving it a level of veracity that other fields of science can only dream about.
I rather put my beliefs in hard tangible evidence, not math constructs built upon even more math constructs... take string theory for example, might as well believe quantum strings are made of fairy dust and unicorn DNA from other dimensions... if u cannot measure it, then it is just theories... doesn't matter the ammount of data they have if its build uppon erroneous or inacurate fundamental concepts, but thats just me.. I'm no physcicist, I make software so my mantra is plain discrete logic thats why I find hard to believe in most of these quantum concepts.
String theory is not quantum theory. Quantum theory explains the nature of matter and energy on the atomic and subatomic level. String theory tries to go deeper but as yet has provided no testable hypothesizes. There is an enormous amount of hard evidence for quantum theory. From the double slit experiment to Large Hadron Collider, all the data gathered from experimentation in this field has given us incredible insights into the nature of matter and energy, giving us the most successful theory in all of science. Not a single one of the untold thousands of experiments done to test it has ever found the basic principles to be in error. Our understanding has allowed us to harness the power of the atom and construct incredible machines such as the computer. Your lack of "belief" on the matter reeks of ignorance, and there is no shame in that. The only shame is in choosing to remain ignorant.
A system in which energy transfer cannot take place is called an isolated system. A closed system, on the other hand, only prevents the transfer of matter but allows transfer of energy.
They say once you observe something it will never be the same once you observe it again, your observation changed it. You observed the change in his voice and so as you observed it, it changed. It's your fault.
So just an update on this video...not only has the time crystals now been verified as a real thing...but they’ve taken a video showing the time crystal formations with a 40 Billion frame per second X-Ray camera...and our dear friend Anton Petrov made a video about it a few months ago that’s gives you a more layman’s explanation of what time crystals are...check it out yo! 😁 th-cam.com/video/nDXU9hshlr8/w-d-xo.html
Discovering the world by shadows... shadows of the parable of the cave. Amazing how we find ways to work around our chains... until we learn to break them.
First, first time I've caught one of these vids in time to comment! (just found you a couple months ago) Anyway, two questions: 1. Does this phenomenon have anything in common with piazoelectricity? 2. Could they, in addition to quantum computing, be used in timekeeping, and would they offer any benefit if used so? Great to see the educational PBS spirit I remember from my childhood is alive and well on TH-cam!
1.) No really. These crystals work because an electromagnetic field, light, can move atoms. Pizoelectricity works because squashing certain atomic arrangements separates opposite charges causing an electric potential. 2.) Yes, but their accuracy is far below that of our best clocks and they are quite susceptible to disruption. Their exact period is also a bit variable, depending on a number of factors.
Dankulous Memelord III ......I, but interesting (weirdly enough) anyway. I usually get the feeling, though, that the forest is forgotten for the trees.
I usually understand at least a part of a Space Time episode but this time he lost me at "time crystal". Still I do not feel like I lost my time, sometime I do not understand something right away but later do because of other stuff I learn or just because my brain had time to do some processing.
I think they should have explicitly brought up that time is the fourth dimension when describing why the word "crystal" makes sense. A crystalline structure is a repeating molecular structure in three dimensions, and a "time crystal" is a repeating state in the fourth dimension, time. Also the idea that an oscillating state (repeating, going from one value to another then back to the first) is not an obvious stable state (one that will exist forever unless you put in enough energy in to change it) is not just going to make sense to somebody who doesn't have some working knowledge of the states particles can be in. There's a lot of scaffolding here and I think they just decided to spend a small amount of time on it hoping people will come back once they understand more. There are lots of lectures out there on youtube to move yourself forward with!
You can think about the arrows like little magnets with a nord and south pole. Align a few small megnets next to each other like perls on a string. If a big magnet effects the first magnet on the string the effect will move along the chain forward and backward one little magnet flipping the next one. If the small megnats are very weak they don't effect the other small magnets next to them but they get effected by a big magnet comming along. That's how I think about it. The time in time crystal means that the movement is repeating itself and you could measure the time when the constelation returns to it's initial state and startes all over again. Not sure if that is helpfull or even correct just how I think about it.
Sometimes, when i think i'm too stupid to understand this stuff, i like to imagine this guy is just makin' sciency words up because he thinks it's funny. And in fact he's no science nerd at all but rather a catcher for some minor league ball club nobody ever heard of. His teamates like his phony british accent so they talked him in to doing parody TH-cam vids. I hear he batted .167 last year. So that's an improvement!
Thank you so much!!!! (I was reading all these convoluted articles, that seemed like they, didn’t really even know what they were talking about!- and it was really great to find a clear and succinct explanation!) Thank you, for this video! (Looking forward to more info on this topic!) (Though, this video was from four years ago, so they might already be some!)
6:30 where everyone watching this video spat out their popcorns in shock. I hope you know how much sway you have on us, Matt. We'll believe anything you say! 😂
+ـ Excinerus Yep, clocks should be linear but NASA has a round clock conspiracy. For some reason all this text is right-justified on my screen. I apologise if this comment ends up looking a bit messed up, it certainly looks messed up to me.
flat as in non curved time, ya know space time curves... a flat time crystal sounds very dangerous in that context. like it could travel through space moving back and forth in time leaving a trail like a mouse cursor on a glitched Windows 98 desktop.
Shibashish Mahapatra they didn't. The entropy of the system didn't increase, but they were giving energy to it. The second law states that the entropy of an isolated system (no energy input) must always increase.
Shibashish Mahapatra I don't think time crystals are breaking the second law of thermodynamics. This theory is suppose to describe macroscopic systems ( around the avogadro's number of atoms) : it doesn't apply to a 10 ion time crystal.
I think it does apply to the system. At least the one with de diamond and ions. That was macroscopic. But while the crystals resist change, they didn't do it forever. The entropy did increase
It kinda makes intuitive sense that it would work that way. Like, apply a force to a pendulum and it staying in that oscillation until it's exhausted that initial energy source. The particle spin can be manipulated into the same independent oscillation by a force of electromagnetic waves.
It is astonishing, that no matter what bizarre physics question I ask to youtube, Matt is always there to answer.
"A quantum computer with a time crystal drive" Holy Shit. Just the sound of that...
wanna make that sentence more ridiculous ? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip-flop_(electronics)
I'm sure I'll manage to get a 60min per frame render speed with that one. (vfx people will understand)
DrTryloByte But can it run crysis?
Can it run Quake...?
DrTryloByte but can it run minecraft?
"The first practical use of time crystals may be in quantum computing."
What a time to be alive
The best time to be alive, eternity, the fall of Babylon, freedom, love in a world with living, mother's being mother's, and father's being able to protect their loved ones with knowledge and their heart
It is remarkable how Matt is capable of simplifying all these difficult concepts. This should be usual for the whole academia, where instead bad writing is the common practice. Well done, Space Time!
Don't make the mistake of misunderstanding the target audience for scientific papers and literature. Academic papers are usually aimed at an audience that has a deep understanding of the subject matter. It's quite unlikely that a layman would understand all the technical data presented in such a paper.
So while I agree that this channel is an absolute GEM, but maybe you've been reading the wrong "Physics for the Masses" books?
I've read ALL of Brian Greene's books, as well as books by Lisa Randall, Leonard Suskind, Stephen Hawking, John Gribbin, and many more physics authors - and I find them to be, as a rule, understandable by a non-mathematically-inclined layman such as myself. It certainly takes some effort - the topics under discussion are extremely counterintuitive, highly technical in nature, and based on very complex math, but as Einstein said: "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."
NO ONE finds this stuff easy to understand. Even the scientists at the cutting edge of physics research struggle to understand the results and implications of their experiments and theories.
You can look at your difficulty as either a deficiency in the delivery of the data, or a challenge to your ability to understand radically different concepts and phenomena.
I see your point, but what I meant is somewhat different. I do maths, and most papers I read use an overcomplicated prose. So, my comment was more about the ability of Matt to recollect the ideas of those papers and write a coherent essay about it.
As far as I'm concerned, when I watch a Space Time video I do it from an insider perspective. It's more or less like a review. And I am fascinated on how much simpler some concepts may be expressed, instead of the obscure and unpleasant academicese I usually find in scientific papers.
Right ... Know your audience ... You tube followers are on an 8th grade level ..
reference2me Most of them, but some are not, and it is a pleasure to have channels which are more advanced than purely popular ones.
Evi1M4chine Exactly! Feynman's spirit is strong with him.
In the description it's written "Written and Hosted by Matt O’Dowd", so I suppose he is the only one who feynman the subject, isn't he? Btw, I appreciate the work of the whole team as well.
A colleague and friend of mine is now working on her master's thesis on time crystals! They are a niche topic, I'm very happy that you guys covered it. Great job!
was she involved in the recent news?
@@EmpyreanLightASMR I don't think so, she seems to be working on other things at the moment.
The thing I love about these videos is that you just don't simply watch it but have to put in hard work by researching on the topic to fully grasp the concept and then watch it again a couple times.A great way to brush up your knowledge.
one of the few unlazy channels that actually tries to visualize these complex concepts the best way they can y'all deserve an award for that. thank u
I like how he has a layed back look and voice to him.
Beautifully done, the concept of this series to break down new papers, analyze and simplify them, and then discuss the results here is one the best methods to popularize science! Everyone can do it and everyone can become knowledgeable!
This guy has this same T-shirt in every color lol, I would love to see his closet all filled with the exact same shirts
I recently read a short article about this somewhere. Thank you PBS Space Time for being so quick to provide depth of understanding for us!
I watched the entire video. I only have one question.
What?
u arent st0ne cold
I watched the entire video. Now I have a headache.
As someone who watched this video twice back to back, I could answer your question,
yes.
How I understand it is like this. You put a chain of spinning and floating sponges on water. Then you add waves to the water. The spinning directions of these sponges oscillate will follow the direction of the wave. Then you stop the waves. If the spinning sponges are still oscillating as if the waves were still there, then you have formed a time crystal!
This was _immensely_ better coverage of time crystals than DNews. (I won't say infinitely because singularities give quantum physicists nightmares.) They couldn't even get a Newtonian explanation of potential energy right, so I had no idea what to make of the rest of their video. Thank you for all of the hard work you guys put into your science videos. You've done more to make theoretical physics accessible than the entire rest of the Internet!
4:02 I wonder what would happen if someone arrange the ions in this configuration: ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A
Maybe that's how you input cheats into the Universe
it unlocks a secret stage of mario
BMAN488877 Maybe... if you find them I want me some nocliping pls
I want moonjump amd teleport
Pff, there are no moderators boi... only players *laughs in atheist*
Those crystals behave as PLLs at a fundamental level. I can think of a lot of applications. This channel is GREAT as usually.
I may need to rewatch this a couple of times before I can finally say that I understood almost everything. Keep the videos coming Matt :D
Heard about this result today so looked up Time Crystals on Wikipedia and had no idea what it was saying. Can always rely on PBS Space Time to post a video right when I need it :) Thanks
The best thing about Wednesdays. I love Space Time.
It's my favorite TH-cam channel!
Anarcho-syndicalist?
Commie Commieston - Not quite. I'd consider that an ideal, but I don't think we can have a functioning society on a large scale without some system of government. I'd call myself a democratic socialist or a left-libertarian.
EYYY FELLOW LEFT LIBERTARIAN WAZZUP
This show is the best use of electrons that humanity has ever devised!
Incredible, very well done. Not oversimplified yet incredibly coherent. Thanks!
Who else is here in 2021 having Matt explain the news?
*hand up*
Haha
Did ypu say 2022? Im here
I'm still in 2018 family
I did ur mom 2021
Thank you for this video. When the Internet first reacted to the paper, I tried to research Time Crystals but understood very little. This video did a very good job at breaking down the complicated science into something easily understandable.... or at least for some definitions of "easily".
So basically time crystals are like the quartz in a wrist watch but at a quantum scale? Cool. I like the idea of quantum pocket watches!
You know what else grows in quartz formation? Crystal meth
The Faster Than Light music playing in the background, Thumbs Up!
This is probably the first space time episode I have watched where I simply had no fucking idea what he was talking about.
Atoms that periodically change over time in stead of in space.
Normal crystals have plains of atoms that repeat themselves in certain directions. That's the only reason why they speak about Time "Crystals".
alexander reusens nice! that actually makes sense thanks
ZoneNet1 me too.
I was just about to comment this
:|
go to Dr Kenneth R Stauffer "the Theory of Everything" for a classical discussion on "time channels" see which presentations makes sence>
You literally read my mind. I read about this the other day and thought to myself I really hope Matt explains this one soon!!!
All the crystals we have on earth are a representation of the time density zone at which we live. By compress the shape of a crystal lattice, energy is released. If we could get a crystal from another time density zone it would warp the time density zone into a positive or negative state. If these crystal are arranged into a complete encompassing structure a positive or negative time void would be created. Time within this void would move forward or backward.
So glad this video was made. I saw comments about this a few videos ago and decided to look it up.
Thx for explaining it
i'm fairly well educated, fairly well informed about a variety of sciences and i can barely wrap my head around this.
now imagine trying to explain this to someone from a century ago.
we are now basically wizards... xD
StickyTank or crazy XD
Can I be Ron Weasley?
StickyTank Yeah. People from a hundred years ago would never understand. People like a 38 year old Einstein were such idiots.
Hopefully that had enough sarcasm dripping from it to show my point.
Why would it be difficult? They might not know what atomic spin or lasers are, but matt explains that in terms they would understand in the video. They'd still know what a magnetic domain is, they'd get the concept of coherent light, and they'd have just heard of a new paper by a chap called Einstein about stimulated emission, even if the "laser" acronym didn't exist yet. And of course they'd know stuff like thermodynamics/statistical mechanics pretty well.
jezus christ, stop taking this post so literally -.-
I really like the idea of going over popular journal articles. thanks!
I like to watch these videos and nod my head and pretend I'm smart.
HAHAHA ME TOO! :P
It's not you. This guy has to be the worst teacher I have ever seen. Instead of starting with a simple analogy and then expanding upon it, he explains things in a way that you will only understand if you already have a fairly good understanding of the subject.
Couple that with his tone and volume of his voice not changing, and the use of overly technical terms and he starts to sound like the adults in Charlie Brown. Wha wha wha.
Nope. I'm questioning everything.
I'm glad i subscribed to this channel because even though there are many terms and ideas i don't understand,the videos produced are in such high quality.
Please make a video on 'Spin'. What is spin on a quantum scale, are the particles actually moving. And what happens to matter when it is spinning at a high rate, such as in a Neutron star/quasar. How can a Black Hole spin if it is a singularity? Also how does matter 'know' it is spinning relative to other objects? I.e. why does Sandra Bullock feel force spinning above the Earth. Are centripetal forces analogous to inertia?
1.) Black holes are regions of space bounded by an event horizon, the singularity, (which is a hypothesis, not a proven fact) is only a feature of this. As with charge and mass the event horizon is responsible for spinning.
2.) Matter knows it is spinning because spinning involves acceleration, parts of a lump of matter will be constantly changing direction to avoid flying off in a straight line.
If you place a heavy cylinder of mass or spherical shell of mass around Sandra and spin it fast, it'll warp space time around Sandra in A similar way that a spinning black hole warps space time. Sandra will experience forces on her limbs similar to centrifugal and coriolis forces! To put it another way: You could consider, in Sandra's frame of reference, that the stars and universe are spinning around her, warping space time and causing those forces.
I've been thinking about this problem for years and only recently found a reference to papers describing this cylinder/empty shell thought experiment... the maths was beyond me but the results made me extremely happy: It confirmed for me that the only possible explanation for centrifugal force, in a Universe that doesn't have a preferred frame of reference, is that that force is the result of the entire rest of the Universe revolving around YOU at its centre!
Actually spin would most likely be the direction of travel of the transverse waves that make up the standing waves we interpret as particles.
Look up Energy Wave Theory
Centripetal force is just inertia changing directions so on that part you're right
@@tinywillis that's exactly what I thought!
It’s 2024 now my friend. PBS always comes thru with the fire 🔥 🔥
"then we fight about it in the comments" LOL
I heard about these the other day. thanks for breaking it down and making it easier to understand.
so if I understand correctly, one could make optical (due to the laser) components that in electrical engineering that resist changes in frequency, just as inductors resists changes in current and capacitors resists changes in voltage? right?
Interesting. I think you just described regular crystals. Maybe you forgot the time component.
@@thersten No time for that. Call it a memory chip. Nothing new about it, apart from the liquid Helium cooling you need, and the size. But hey, it is a start to somwhere expensive. and expensive stuff grants subsidies for R&D.
I would like to thank this dude right here man I'm learned so much about physics, about math, and about space... it's just unbelievable the kind of knowledge that he's able to give you in a 15-minute video
man.. i can usually follow most of the video. This one.. not a word.
I _think_ I understood the basic gist of this research, and it sounds awesome :D I'm really loving this Journal Club. Wish there were something like this for all other kinds of research papers out there.
can you do an details explanation video on strings theory?
String teory is wrong, calm down, supersymmetry hasn't been proved, instead, there is evidence against that
String theory being 'wrong' as a model for the physical universe has no bearing on its usefulness as a tool for understanding real physical systems, getting insight in many unprobed areas and even for giving new perspectives and methods in pure mathematics. It's a gorgeous and useful framework and it deserved to be exposed, with a correct, modern and unhyped perspective of course.
String theory isn't 'wrong', it's just not proven yet. And the only evidence against SUSY is that it also hasn't been proven yet. It's true that the LHC has not provided expected results at this time that would demonstrate SUSY, and it's also true that that means that SUSY as currently formulated is less likely to be an accurate description, but that DOESN'T mean that SUSY CAN'T be true.
Search Brian Greene on String Theory. Though I appreciate your curiosity, I also appreciate Matt exploring areas that are current and less-well covered - breaking new ground. And be careful what you ask for - a detailed explanation of string theory would get into some REALLY gnarly math pretty quickly!
Relax, guys. I think Sanders was objecting to a previous posters' reference to female mammalian protuberances...
I was wondering if you guys would have an explanation of time crystals.
Glad to see you do.
Quantum processing, quantum memory....sounds like the kind of stuff that might power a ship in EVE Online, or Elite Dangerous. Maybe one day, in real life. :)
i read about this about 2 weeks ago. good to see it made it here. i checked the articles the author posted and it definitely is intriguing.
Can you cover the topic of the Searl Effect Generator?
-How is it suppose to work?
-Would it actually be possible?
-If not, why?
THUMB HIM UP PEOPLE!
th-cam.com/video/Di2eYvCtB5o/w-d-xo.html
man who is the sound architect the sound quality, effect sounds and ambiance is perfect
Hey Matt, how much extra time on average do you spend when trying to end he script with "spacetime?" What's the longest you've spent on it?
The wormhole thing totally got me... I was like, "Oh ma gawd..."
Thanks for talking about it. I heard it for the first time on Dnews, but their explanation was terrible.
They oversimplified it I guess, so I had no clue what it was about. At least here, you guys give more information, while still explaining it well enough that I can understand it.
Have they any idea what is keeping these Time Crystals to hold on to their periodicity?
"Resisting changes" implies that there must be a force, right? Or is it because for the atom to change it spin, it needs to get a certain amount of energy? That still doesn't explain how it can maintain it's previous periodicity?
Or maybe those atoms are just "rolling" their spin, and because they have moment of inertia, they keep their rate of rolling.
I think what's keeping the periodicity it's the electromagnetic beam....but I almost have no idea what he is talking about.
Good questions. I don't understand it; I expect I would need to learn a lot more about quantum stuff before I had a chance. But I think you're right, it sounds like these systems have some form of inertia.
What's keeping it periodicity is the laser, or more specifically the alternating electromagnetic field. Think of the time crystal as a swing, the laser is giving it a push every 2 (or 3) swings keeping the cycle going.
Like such a swing if you stop the laser it will keep moving for a while before it runs out of energy. Also like the swing if you try to push it at a different rate (Change the frequency) the swing will resist, the pushes will 'miss' it or a push will occur while the swing is moving back, hitting the pusher in the face.
Because the 'swing frequency' is different from the 'push frequency' we can say that the swing isn't just being blindly moved about by the laser all the time, but is moving by itself, relying on the laser only for periodic energy boosts.
But how long is "for a while longer" (that the oscillations continue)? And why don't phonons destroy any oscillations almost instantly? I need to read these, I guess.
You heard me, PBS Space Time! Thank you for this episode!
"About science, meth..." I know he meant to say math but I like the idea of a course on meth, taught by Heisenberg.
I absolutely love this channel, thanks for explaining things that seem difficult to understand!!!
Why is more Hawking radiation released the smaller a black hole gets.
Every action has an equal reaction. A smaller black hole means that the event horizon is closer to its singularity than a big one. That means that an object that is closer to a small black hole will be closer to the singularity too! That means that it feels a gravitational field stronger and faster , than beeing close to a big balck hole. The stronger the gravitational field (action ) , the stronger its hawking radiation ( reaction )
The Hawking radiation is the reaction part if you didnt get it !
In small black holes the rate in which the gravity grows near the event horizon is greater. Which creats a bigger zone where the tidal forces can seperate the two virtual praticles.
It basically boils down to how much tidal force there is (How fast the gravity changes over distance) PLUS how easy it is to randomly 'miss' the hole.
To produce a particle of a given energy the hole must be able to 'disrupt' a virtual particle pair (Well not exactly a pair, but let's be simple.) For light (and massless) particles this is simple since said particle pair can exist for some time and cover some distance, but heavier particles require more energy and for that energy to be added quickly.
Once the particle pair forms the two particles will be heading off in random directions. To drain the hole one particle must 'hit' the hole and the other miss. Large holes will basically take up most of the 'sky' of a particle, only a massless particle moving straight away from it will avoid having its path bend and fall into the hole. Smaller holes on the other hand are hard to hit, a particle must be moving right towards it in order to be absorbed. So for large holes most of the low energy particles that form will have both absorbed by the hole to no effect while small holes will see a far greater number of higher energy aprticles escape.
Huh, I didn't think of the 2nd part that way. Good point.
Because radiation carries energy away from the black hole, and mass is energy (divided by c²). Energy is conserved, so if energy is coming out of the black hole, it must come from somewhere, and the only available source of energy is the black hole itself. Gareth's explanation is incorrect (sorry Gareth!) because Hawking radiation is not made up of point particles but rather waves with wavelength of the size of the black hole itself, so the notion of a "sky" for the particles isn't meaningful.
Newest episode reminded me of this and I had to come here, because honestly I forgot what they were.
In Hawking Radiation, why do only positive-mass/energy virtual particles escape and evaporate, and not the negative-mass/energy ones? Or am I not understanding correctly?
that's because there are is no such thing as negative mass/energy. They are conceptually different from properties like position or charge. positions in space, time and charge can be thought of as positions within multidimensional property space. Physical laws then describe the restrictions on how the particles can move in this space.
Mass and energy are conceptually more similar to distances instead of positions - they have no direction - only size.
The way you've been told about Hawking Radiation, with a pair of positive and negative mass spontaneously emerging in space and then that the negative mass falls by chance in the Black Hole, is not accurate for exactly the reason you were asking about. I have no idea what the real mechanism is, but I know that the mechanism spread in the general public is not correct :)
I think they exist in some sort of quantum uncertainty. Each particle exists as both the negative, and positive particle. When one falls into the black hole, the other becomes positive since this is the only way for it to exist.
elios311
your analogy is better than the negative mass one, that's sure.
However, I don't get why suddenly by attracting things, a black hole does work, and thus losing energy.
That's frowning my eyebrows a bit, but nevertheless you explained it in a good way. Thank you!
Only real particles have mass or energy. The virtual pairs should annihilate and go back into the vacuum (the vacuum particles have a sum of zero energy; the virtual pairs 'borrow' energy from the vacuum and give that energy back almost instantly).
If virtual pairs are at the event horizon of a black hole they might not annihilate: if one falls into the black hole, and the other leaves the black hole then this must become a real particle. Since a real particle is emitted from near the event horizon of the black hole, then it must come from an energy source.
This energy cannot come from the vacuum outside of the black hole, so it comes from inside the black hole, therefore the black hole loses mass when it emits Hawking radiation. You can imagine the Hawking radiation 'tunnels' through the event horizon.
Thank you for this. I was having problems comprehending this from all the articles I was reading on it. This helped alot.
Do the time crystals have preferred resonances or is the frequency of the spin flips purely dependent on (some integer multiple of) the laser's em field oscillation frequency?
If they don't have a preferred frequency then it seems like a bit of stretch to call them 'time crystals', since 'space crystals' clearly have a preferred spatial frequency depending on the material.
Their preferred frequency depends on the material (the strength of interaction between atoms.) and the magnetic field forcing the spin alignments. This is equivalent to regular crystals vs pressure. (Increase the field strength, increase the preferred flip rate, just as increasing pressure decreases atomic spacings.)
Ah, that wasn't clear to me from the video, but makes sense. Thanks!
But if you mess with the oscillation frequency, the time crystals may get very hot or even shatter? Everything has a frequency oscillation, I am sure that the military have weponised patical beam weapons from this theory.
man I was waiting for you to make this video, visualizing it make me understand and now I understand.
Ahaha I’m doing my masters project on quantum time crystals 😂
This Journal is a very welcomed idea!
I was worried this video was going to try and sell me on a new-age multi-level marketing scam.
hey :)
once again, great job! I really love your channel and am so thankful for all the stuff I've learned so far from your videos.
Could you also make a video about the whole holographic properties of black holes, or actually what does this mean and what are the implications in understanding our universe?
Greetz from Austria :)
You mean to tell me that I can make a time crystal by sticking an impure diamond in the microwave oven?
yes dr steven strange
When you posed your opening question, "what are time crystals?" I found myself responding aloud with "They're the jumping-beans of the fossil record!"
Does this mean we have a replacement for atomic clocks?
Gabe Tower Atomic clocks are much more precise.
Can you elaborate on why?
Gabe Tower Atomic clocks can keep accurate time for millions of years.
Actually yes, and this has been a thing for some time now. Search up optical clocks, the most recent record on time accuracy is greater than the age of the universe set by a strontium clock. The clock loses 1 second every 15 billion years or so.
Gotcha; thanks!
I couldn't follow you much, but the comment answering section is pretty cool. Keep up the good work.
sorry PBSS ...
i was over 2 months away from this genius channel.
my bad, it wont ever happen again.
inspiring vídeo thanks fpr existing in this space time!
Isn't T-symmetry expected to be broken given the CPT theorem?
My thoughts precisely. And it is indeed, for example the case in Kaon / anti-Kaon (a.k.a K-Kbar) oscillation which is predicted and observed to break CP and therefore T as well. So I'm not sure how this fits in with the paper mentioned in this video that states that no quantum system can break T at equilibrium.
Actually, its expected NOT top be broken... But I don't even know if it's related to this.
Whoa. I have no idea what the hell you just said in those first 9 minutes. This is the first time I've ever had to watch a Space Time video twice.
Aren't all oscillations (like that of a swinging pendulum) identical in time? Why is this idea so groundbreaking?
The video briefly covers this; firstly the oscillation cannot be macroscopic, a planet orbiting a star is no more a time crystal than a stack of bricks is a regular crystal.
Limited like that things become more difficult since most of what we consider oscillations on atomic scales are a single quantum state.
Because the oscillation keeps happening in a closed system. In other places, either the oscillations are too "noisy" or they require energy. So, basically kinda like a perpetual motion machine, that doesn't gain or lose energy, while it's moving.
+Katrina L Oh right. Time crystals can *not* exist in a closed system, if I remember properly.
+Feynstein 100 That's the closest you get to the "idea" of time crystals.
It is the quantum state of the particles that is repeating in time yes, not position or some other observable. This was a driven system and the time symmetry is only broken "locally" in the sense that if you consider all the energy in the chain you end up with more than you started with because as mentioned energy is constantly being pumped in from the laser.
man this is my favorite sci-fi channel... love it! :D
There is no "fi" in this "sci" channel
xD it was a joke; just trolling cuz u know, quantum physics it's mostly just theories...
All of science is a combination data and theory. Quantum physics happens to be theory with a colossal amount data backing it up, giving it a level of veracity that other fields of science can only dream about.
I rather put my beliefs in hard tangible evidence, not math constructs built upon even more math constructs... take string theory for example, might as well believe quantum strings are made of fairy dust and unicorn DNA from other dimensions... if u cannot measure it, then it is just theories... doesn't matter the ammount of data they have if its build uppon erroneous or inacurate fundamental concepts, but thats just me.. I'm no physcicist, I make software so my mantra is plain discrete logic thats why I find hard to believe in most of these quantum concepts.
String theory is not quantum theory. Quantum theory explains the nature of matter and energy on the atomic and subatomic level. String theory tries to go deeper but as yet has provided no testable hypothesizes. There is an enormous amount of hard evidence for quantum theory. From the double slit experiment to Large Hadron Collider, all the data gathered from experimentation in this field has given us incredible insights into the nature of matter and energy, giving us the most successful theory in all of science. Not a single one of the untold thousands of experiments done to test it has ever found the basic principles to be in error. Our understanding has allowed us to harness the power of the atom and construct incredible machines such as the computer.
Your lack of "belief" on the matter reeks of ignorance, and there is no shame in that. The only shame is in choosing to remain ignorant.
Who else has been waiting for this?
A system in which energy transfer cannot take place is called an isolated system. A closed system, on the other hand, only prevents the transfer of matter but allows transfer of energy.
Why does your voice sound different in this video?
ThatBulgarian Differemt mic probably. Maybe different renderer used for the video. Could be anything, really.
I think it's a simple as that he may just have a cold.
They say once you observe something it will never be the same once you observe it again, your observation changed it. You observed the change in his voice and so as you observed it, it changed. It's your fault.
Nah, you can clearly hear a difference between this video and the The Race to a Habitable Exoplanet video(and all the others before that)
Body Snatched for sure.
The first man to turn science into clickbait
Last time I was this early the Universe was orange...
I like the idea of reviewing papers. Keep up the great work
the hippies were right all along
HAHAHAHA
I love how you so accurately read from the teleprompter. 😮
Who came here after google's time crystal white paper?
I like that you review some of the best comments in your videos! Science is scary awesome!
So just an update on this video...not only has the time crystals now been verified as a real thing...but they’ve taken a video showing the time crystal formations with a 40 Billion frame per second X-Ray camera...and our dear friend Anton Petrov made a video about it a few months ago that’s gives you a more layman’s explanation of what time crystals are...check it out yo! 😁
th-cam.com/video/nDXU9hshlr8/w-d-xo.html
Discovering the world by shadows... shadows of the parable of the cave. Amazing how we find ways to work around our chains... until we learn to break them.
I'm not intelligent enough for this one, wish I were though.
First, first time I've caught one of these vids in time to comment! (just found you a couple months ago)
Anyway, two questions:
1. Does this phenomenon have anything in common with piazoelectricity?
2. Could they, in addition to quantum computing, be used in timekeeping, and would they offer any benefit if used so?
Great to see the educational PBS spirit I remember from my childhood is alive and well on TH-cam!
1.) No really. These crystals work because an electromagnetic field, light, can move atoms. Pizoelectricity works because squashing certain atomic arrangements separates opposite charges causing an electric potential.
2.) Yes, but their accuracy is far below that of our best clocks and they are quite susceptible to disruption. Their exact period is also a bit variable, depending on a number of factors.
Physics gives me a large hadron.
I hope you don't get lepton for this comment.
We'll get fermion that problem right away.
man I love this show
Who else had no clue what the fuck he was talking about?
Dankulous Memelord III ......I, but interesting (weirdly enough) anyway. I usually get the feeling, though, that the forest is forgotten for the trees.
I usually understand at least a part of a Space Time episode but this time he lost me at "time crystal". Still I do not feel like I lost my time, sometime I do not understand something right away but later do because of other stuff I learn or just because my brain had time to do some processing.
I think they should have explicitly brought up that time is the fourth dimension when describing why the word "crystal" makes sense. A crystalline structure is a repeating molecular structure in three dimensions, and a "time crystal" is a repeating state in the fourth dimension, time. Also the idea that an oscillating state (repeating, going from one value to another then back to the first) is not an obvious stable state (one that will exist forever unless you put in enough energy in to change it) is not just going to make sense to somebody who doesn't have some working knowledge of the states particles can be in.
There's a lot of scaffolding here and I think they just decided to spend a small amount of time on it hoping people will come back once they understand more. There are lots of lectures out there on youtube to move yourself forward with!
You can think about the arrows like little magnets with a nord and south pole. Align a few small megnets next to each other like perls on a string. If a big magnet effects the first magnet on the string the effect will move along the chain forward and backward one little magnet flipping the next one. If the small megnats are very weak they don't effect the other small magnets next to them but they get effected by a big magnet comming along. That's how I think about it. The time in time crystal means that the movement is repeating itself and you could measure the time when the constelation returns to it's initial state and startes all over again.
Not sure if that is helpfull or even correct just how I think about it.
I had no idea what the fuck the video was about.
I love this channel even if I can't keep up.
Sometimes, when i think i'm too stupid to understand this stuff, i like to imagine this guy is just makin' sciency words up because he thinks it's funny. And in fact he's no science nerd at all but rather a catcher for some minor league ball club nobody ever heard of. His teamates like his phony british accent so they talked him in to doing parody TH-cam vids. I hear he batted .167 last year. So that's an improvement!
See now that sort f transverse oscillation is the kind of metadynamic that will cause people to consider linear flux.
We need an updated video of this topic.
let your hair grow, pretty please, it would be awesome
Jorge Cardoso .......too long already. Actually not my business, though.
Then he'd look even MORE like Dave Grohl. Ha ha
Thank you so much!!!!
(I was reading all these convoluted articles, that seemed like they, didn’t really even know what they were talking about!- and it was really great to find a clear and succinct explanation!)
Thank you, for this video!
(Looking forward to more info on this topic!)
(Though, this video was from four years ago, so they might already be some!)
(Correction: “There might already be-“)
When you're first and you spend nearly five minutes trying to come up with something clever to say...
The Strange Quark And then you're no longer first );
I would have something clever. If I told you, you'd find a strange quark.
And this is what you came up with?
"first" is perfectly fine and clever.
yeah ...you just did ....*VERY* clever !
Thanks for this video. Just beautiful.
Notification squad!
Assemble!
6:30 where everyone watching this video spat out their popcorns in shock. I hope you know how much sway you have on us, Matt. We'll believe anything you say! 😂
Pff all lies; time crystals are flat.
that's an even scarier arrangement of words. flat time ?
+ـ Excinerus Yep, clocks should be linear but NASA has a round clock conspiracy. For some reason all this text is right-justified on my screen. I apologise if this comment ends up looking a bit messed up, it certainly looks messed up to me.
***** you did something! My chat box only gets messed up when I type your name!
flat as in non curved time, ya know space time curves... a flat time crystal sounds very dangerous in that context. like it could travel through space moving back and forth in time leaving a trail like a mouse cursor on a glitched Windows 98 desktop.
Exactly! Oh they show us those round clock faces all over the place, nothing but lies! TRUE time is linear and flat, as God intended it.
I FREAKING LOVE PBS Space Time
There you go Einstein, and you thought we could not disprove the second law of thermodynamics.
Shibashish Mahapatra they didn't. The entropy of the system didn't increase, but they were giving energy to it. The second law states that the entropy of an isolated system (no energy input) must always increase.
Shibashish Mahapatra
I don't think time crystals are breaking the second law of thermodynamics. This theory is suppose to describe macroscopic systems ( around the avogadro's number of atoms) : it doesn't apply to a 10 ion time crystal.
But oscillations take place even when the laser is stopped, and the crystal does not fall into disorder.
Johan F No the theory is applicable for any isolated system.
I think it does apply to the system. At least the one with de diamond and ions. That was macroscopic. But while the crystals resist change, they didn't do it forever. The entropy did increase
It kinda makes intuitive sense that it would work that way. Like, apply a force to a pendulum and it staying in that oscillation until it's exhausted that initial energy source. The particle spin can be manipulated into the same independent oscillation by a force of electromagnetic waves.