The creation of an acoustic black hole leaves the way open for the discovery of Hawking radiation.
One of the many curious properties of Bose-Einstein Condensates (BECs) is that the flow of sound through them is governed by the same equations that describe how light is bent by a gravitational field. That sets up the possibility of all kinds of fun and games: in theory, physicists can reproduce with sound and BECs whatever wicked way gravity has with light.
Today, Oren Lahav and his mates at the Israel Institute of Technology, in Haifa, say that they've created the sonic equivalent of a black hole in a BEC. That's some achievement, given that physicists have wondered about this possibility for some 30 years, and various groups with the ability to create BECs have been racing to create acoustic black holes.
The general idea is to set up a supersonic flow of atoms within the BEC. Sound waves moving against this flow can never make any ground. So the region where the flow changes from subsonic to supersonic is an event horizon. Any sound waves (or phonons) created inside the event horizon can never escape because the flow there is supersonic. That's the black hole.
Lahav and co set up a supersonic flow by creating a deep potential well in the middle of a BEC that attracts atoms. The atoms stream into it but cannot give up their energy when they arrive (they're already in their lowest energy state), and so they stream across the well at supersonic speed.
The result is a region within the BEC in which the atoms move at supersonic speed. This is the black hole: any phonon unlucky enough to stray into this region cannot escape.
One reason why sonic black holes are so highly prized is that they ought to produce Hawking radiation. Quantum mechanics predicts that pairs of "virtual" phonons with equal and opposite momentum ought to be constantly springing in and out of existence in BECs.
If one of this pair were to cross the event horizon, it would be sucked into the black hole, never to escape. The other, however, would be free to go on its way. This stream of escapees would be the famous, but as yet unobserved, Hawking radiation.
Lahav and his buddies haven't gotten this far yet, but they've made an important step toward observing Hawking radiation and clearly have their eyes on this goal.
There's no shortage of competition here, and the creation of the first sonic black hole will be sure to spur the competition. Expect to see somebody claim the first observation of Hawking radiation soon.
Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0906.1337: A Sonic Black Hole in a Density-Inverted Bose-Einstein Condensate
Comments
ImaginaryUni...
06/10/2009
Posts:1
wierderandwi...
06/19/2009
Posts:1
yanniru
08/07/2009
Posts:1
ZephirAWT
08/15/2009
Posts:158
www.noblackholes.com/hawking_radiation.html
bhskeptic
08/03/2009
Posts:3
Elroch
08/12/2009
Posts:36
bhskeptic
09/18/2009
Posts:3
When a star collapses, space-time is stressed to the point that it rebounds forcing the mass outward resulting in a nova. If there is enough matter, space-time pressure (gravity) will balance the outward pressure of collapsed space-time resulting in a black hole.
Extrapolating backward in time, the beginning of our observable universe can be attributed to the intrusion of matter/energy into this space-time continuum. The reaction of space-time on this intrusion dispersed most the intrusion driving it violently apart. The remainder became a bubble of space-time with a two-dimensional surface; the first black hole.
Incidentally, gravity is not a force. Gravity is the consequence of the mutual antagonism of matter and space-time. This antagonism results in spherical planets, the limit of the speed of light, and the accelerating expansion of the universe.
As a consequence, gravity does not precisely follow the Newtonian Inverse Square Law. Observations of trajectories of spacecraft slingshoting around planets show a clear, consistent discrepancy between the mathematical predictions and actual results. These are just some observations that are not adequately accounted for by conventional theories of gravity:
• Extra fast stars: Stars in galaxies follow a distribution of velocities where stars on the outskirts are moving faster than they should according to the observed distributions of normal matter. Galaxies within galaxy clusters show a similar pattern. Dark matter, which would interact gravitationally but not electromagnetically, would account for the discrepancy. Various modifications to Newtonian dynamics have also been proposed.
• Pioneer anomaly: The two Pioneer spacecraft seem to be slowing down in a way which has yet to be explained.[1]
• Flyby anomaly: Various spacecraft have experienced greater accelerations during slingshot maneuvers than expected.
• Accelerating expansion: The metric expansion of space seems to be speeding up. Dark energy has been proposed to explain this.
• Anomalous increase of the AU: Recent measurements indicate that planetary orbits are expanding faster than if this was solely through the sun losing mass by radiating energy.
• Extra energetic photons: Photons travelling through galaxy clusters should gain energy and then lose it again on the way out. The accelerating expansion of the universe should stop the photons returning all the energy, but even taking this into account photons from the cosmic microwave background radiation gain twice as much energy as expected. This may indicate that gravity falls off faster than inverse-squared at certain distance scales[4].
• Dark flow: Surveys of galaxy motions have detected a mystery dark flow towards an unseen mass. Such a large mass is too large to have accumulated since the Big Bang using current models and may indicate that gravity falls off slower than inverse-squared at certain distance scales[4].
• Extra massive hydrogen clouds: The spectral lines of the Lyman-alpha forest suggest that hydrogen clouds are more clumped together at certain scales than expected and, like dark flow, may indicate that gravity falls off slower than inverse-squared at certain distance scales[4].
These and other observations suggest a revision of classical gravitational theory is necessary.
If, as I suggest, gravitation is a consequence of space-time pressure on matter due to mutual antagonism, then gravitational phenomena are not linear but volume dependent, then, instead of an inverse square law, gravitation requires an inverse cube law; Gravity at A = gravity at B × (distance B / distance A)3 .
Interestingly, this suggests that what is called the Strong Nuclear Force that serves to hold atomic nuclei together is not a separate force at all, but the very same space-time pressure that results in what we perceive as gravity. This theory also accounts for the galactic rotational anomalies “explained” by the fallacy of dark matter and the accelerating expansion of the universe attributed to “dark energy.”
Using simple, undergraduate level equations, the mass pressure of space-time can easily be calculated as 5.757 X 10-17 gs. Using this, the observable limit of the speed of light in a vacuum becomes a consequence of space-time pressure. This is the calculation: Space-time mass pressure @ C = 1.727 X 10-26 m/gs2. Incidentally, this means that photons have mass, despite what you read in high school physics textbooks.
Further research to refine mathematical rigor and make the observational measurements necessary is indicated.
1. ^ Wanted: Einstein Jr, The Economist, 6th March 2008.
2. ^ Dark energy may just be a cosmic illusion, New Scientist, issue 2646, 7th March 2008.
3. ^ Swiss-cheese model of the cosmos is full of holes, New Scientist, issue 2678, 18th October 2008.
4. ^ a b c "Where Matter Fears to Tread", New Scientist issue 2669, 14 March 2009
jameylynne
10/29/2009
Posts:1