Page 2,653«..1020..2,6522,6532,6542,655..2,6602,670..»

New IOTech partnership to deliver artificial intelligence and visual inference at the Internet of Things edge – IT Brief New Zealand

Edge software company IOTech has announced it has entered into a partnership with machine learning company Lotus Labs.

The partnership is set to deliver artificial intelligence and visual inference solutions at the IoT edge. The partnership enables IOTech to integrate Lotus Labs' computer vision technology into its edge software solutions.

According to IIOTech, this combination provides a functionality that is especially useful for companies building intelligent solutions across vertical use cases. These include loss prevention in retail, crowd management in entertainment venues, manufacturing component fault detection, COVID safe-distancing management, and smart safety systems within industrial plants.

The integrated solution will enable the data from conventional sensors and OT endpoints to be combined with the results from the latest AI and video inference technologies to provide a much more accurate real-time operational picture and make smarter decisions from the fusion of data.

"An IoT edge system's ability to obtain immediate local insights from vision-based analytics will revolutionise how businesses create new value through their operations," says Keith Steele, chief executive IOTech.

"Our partnership with Lotus Labs creates new opportunities to provide our customers with advanced AI and visual inference solutions," he says.

IOTech has pilot programs underway at major sporting venues and anticipates soon deploying AI and visual inference solutions for a number of these.

Lotus Labs, based in Arizona, provides visual inference through Padm, its AI platform. Padm will be integrated with IOTechs Edge Xpert to offer a comprehensive solution for computer vision at the edge. The solution will support a range of use cases, including people counting, predictive maintenance, product quality checking and theft detection. All of these increase in accuracy through AI and video inference..

"Growth and advancements in AI, machine learning, computer vision and edge computing are coalescing to disrupt traditional business models," says Anjali Nennelli, founder and CEO, Lotus Labs.

"Our partnership with IOTech is another step forward in this journey to combine advanced technologies at the IoT edge to deliver new value for the enterprise," he says.

The global video analytics market size was valued at $4,102.0 million in 2019, and is projected to reach $21,778.0 million by 2027, registering a CAGR of 22.7% from 2020 to 2027 (source Allied Market Research, April 2021). This growth represents a massive opportunity for vendors such as IOTech and Louts Labs who supply the software technologies that will help drive this adoption.

IOTech's Edge Xpert edge computing platform is supported by a pluggable open architecture for computer vision that allows users to run their AI algorithms and vision models at the edge. Edge Xpert allows users to easily control camera devices, collect video streams and automatically apply AI and vision inference right at the edge. The platform supports deploying models that can include object detection, classification and recognition; it passes the inference results to other services for real-time decision making.

Here is the original post:
New IOTech partnership to deliver artificial intelligence and visual inference at the Internet of Things edge - IT Brief New Zealand

Read More..

Quantum of solace: even physicists are still scratching their heads – The Guardian

Your editorial on quantum physics (30 August) starts with a quote from Richard Feynman nobody understands quantum mechanics and then says that is no longer true. One of us (Norman Dombey) was taught quantum theory by Feynman at Caltech; the other (John Charap) was taught by Paul Dirac at Cambridge. Quantum theory was devised by several physicists including Dirac, Erwin Schrdinger and Werner Heisenberg in the 1920s and 1930s, and Dirac made their work relativistic.

It is absurd to say that quantum mechanics is now understood whereas it was not 50 years ago. There have of course been advances in our understanding of quantum phenomena, but the conceptual framework of quantum physics remains as it was. The examples you give of nuclear plants, medical scans and lasers involve straightforward applications of quantum mechanics that were understood 50 years ago.

The major advance in the understanding of quantum physics in this period is a theorem of John Bell from Cern, which states that quantum physics cannot be local that is to say that it permits phenomena to be correlated at arbitrarily large distances from each other. This has now been demonstrated experimentally and leads to what is known as quantum entanglement, which is important in the development of quantum computers. But even these ideas were discussed by Albert Einstein and coworkers in 1935.

The editorial goes on to say that subatomic particles do not travel a path that can be plotted. If that were so, how can protons travel at the Large Hadron Collider at Cern and hit their target so that experiments can be performed?

We agree with Phillip Ball, who wrote in Physics World that quantum mechanics is still, a century after it was conceived, making us scratch our heads. There are many speculative proposals in contention but none have consensus support. John Charap Emeritus professor of theoretical physics, Queen Mary University of London; Norman Dombey Emeritus professor of theoretical physics, University of Sussex

Whoever wrote this editorial does not understand what Richard Feynman meant when he said that nobody really understands quantum mechanics. Being able to make a smartphone, a nuclear weapon or an MRI machine does not require understanding quantum mechanics in the sense he meant it requires the physical chops to set up the equations and the mathematical chops to find or approximate solutions to them. Any competent physicist has been able to do those calculations for at least 50 years. What Feynman meant was that, for quantum mechanics, nobody has the kind of intuitive understanding of what is actually happening in the world that physicists seek to gain. All we can do is shut up and calculate, or get lost in a never-never land of competing but empirically equivalent interpretations.

Perhaps Carlo Rovellis relational interpretation of quantum mechanics provides the intuitive understanding wed like to have, although I rather doubt it, and I dont believe Rovelli claims it does. Perhaps it even makes testable predictions that could distinguish it from other interpretations and thus is science rather than philosophy (I have no objection to philosophy).

It is just as true today as it was when Feynman said it in 1964 that nobody (or almost nobody) really understands quantum mechanics. And now, as then, a competent physicist does not need the kind of understanding Feynman meant to use the theory. Indeed, theres no strong reason to believe that the human mind should be equipped to understand it at all. To quote another famous physicist: this editorial is not even wrong.Tim BradshawNorth Tawton, Devon

While its highly probable that the position of my copy of Helgoland is where I shelved it, I wont know whether its pages are printed or blank until I get round to reading it. However, from Prof Rovellis previous work, I agree the fundamental truth is that its impossible to know everything about the world, including whether this letter will be published and in what world.Harold MozleyYork

Given your editorial on quantum physics, is the strapline now facts are relatively sacred or facts are sacred but relative?Simon TaylorWarwick, Warwickshire

Have an opinion on anything youve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication.

See the original post here:

Quantum of solace: even physicists are still scratching their heads - The Guardian

Read More..

Would Doctor Strange think of using a quantum crystal to reveal the secrets of dark matter? – SYFY WIRE

Doctor Strange already has the Time Stone, but if he lived in our universe, he would probably be after a quantum crystal. So maybe it cant transport you through space and time or be worn in a necklace that looks like mesmerizing cosmic eye.

What would make quantum crystal desirable even in the Marvel universe is its hypersensitivity, since it can pick up on such faint electromagnetic signals that it might detect dark matter particles, or axions, in the future. That means it could prove the existence of (still hypothetical) dark matter. Magic? More like quantum mechanics.

There was just one issue with transforming an ordinary beryllium crystal into something borderline paranormal. Quantum noise was in the way. Researcher Diego Barbarena and his colleagues, led by atomic physicist Ana Maria Rey of JILA, realized that quantum entanglement was the only way out.

Creation of quantum entanglement between our system and our probe allowed us to avoid the effects of the noise on our readout and hence we end up with just the signal, he told SYFY WIRE. Entanglement allows us to avoid some of the sources of noise present on our system.

Quantum entanglement of two particles means that they will do the same thing simultaneously no matter how far away they are from each other. This is the same idea behind Hawking radiation, in which one entangled particle escapes a black hole while the other falls in. It is thought that the escaped particle may be able to tell us what actually happens inside a black hole. Entanglement gets around of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, which claims that the more precision you observe a particle with, the less you will find out less about its properties.

Creating a quantum crystal involved using a system of electrodes and magnetic fields to trap beryllium ions and prevent their usual tendency to try to repel each other. Without that repulsion, the atoms arranged themselves into a thin, flat crystal. The motions of the beryllium ions were entangled with their spins. Because the beryllium atoms were now able to move as a whole when they felt a signal, the entire crystal would vibrate.

So what makes this crystal so hypersensitive, which would be highly desirable for a superhero who is constantly breaking the laws of physics?

The crystal consists of many ions, which like to move in an oscillatory fashion with a certain natural frequency, Barbarena said. If you hit it with something that oscillates at that same frequency the effect on the motion is going to be greater than if you hit it with something oscillating at a lower or higher frequency.

Another reason this quantum crystal can pick up on such low frequencies is the amount of ions it has. The crystals 150 ions to make it seem as if its responses are being measured as many times. Because the thing being measured is the motion of the crystal in response to an electromagnetic signal, and a signal affects the ion spin entangled with it, the researchers were looking for signals that oscillated at the same frequency as the ions. This is the resonance conditionwhen a signal and a detector are moving at the same frequency.

By turning on that magnetic field, and assuming axions are present, an electric field signal would be automatically generated, said Barbarena.

At least hypothetically, detecting dark matter would mean that axions would have to morph into photons when they ran into a magnetic field. Axions are believed to create an invisible mass rather than just float around as individual particles. This is why scientists think that entire globs of dark matter exist, but dark matter is supposedly extremely light, so it helps having something that can pick up the faintest signals. This crystal is already ten times more sensitive than anything else, and if axions did turn into photons, it would probably find them.

You can probably imagine how useful this would be for Doctor Strange trying to sense enemies on the prowl, so long as they gave off some sort of electromagnetic signal.

More here:

Would Doctor Strange think of using a quantum crystal to reveal the secrets of dark matter? - SYFY WIRE

Read More..

Physics – 3D Collimation of Matter Waves – Physics

August 30, 2021• Physics 14, 119

An innovative matter-wave lens exploiting atomic interactions is able to slow the expansion of a Bose-Einstein condensate in three dimensions, thus reaching unprecedented ultralow temperatures.

At ultralow temperatures, dilute atomic gases manifest their full quantum nature as matter waves in the form of Bose-Einstein condensates (BECs). Through the interference of matter waves in an interferometer, researchers can probe gravitational effects at microscopic scales and thereby test gravity at the quantum level. But improving the precision of these tests requires lowering the temperature of the BECs even further. Ernst Rasel from Leibniz University Hannover in Germany and colleagues have realized BECs at the lowest temperature so far (38 pK) by collimating the atoms in 3D with a new time-domain lens system based on atomic interactions [1].

The team prepared BEC matter waves with over one hundred thousand atoms and recorded their time evolution via absorption imaging during 2 s of free fall in a 110-m-high tower. Without any lensing applied, the BEC expanded through random thermal motion and became too dilute to be detected after 160 ms. In contrast, when the team collimated the atoms with their lens, the expansion slowed, and the BEC was visible throughout its fall. Moreover, the authors extrapolated their results and found that their innovative collimation technique can generate slowly expanding BECs that should remain detectable even after 17 s, which could be useful in future tests of gravity in space-based experiments.

BEC matter waves are a magnificent tool with which to explore the interface between quantum theory and general relativitythe underlying theories of the microcosmos and the macrocosmos, respectively. When a BEC is placed in an interferometer, its interference pattern will partly depend on gravitational effects due to the mass of the atoms. Detecting these effects could allow for fundamental tests, such as the verification of the Einstein equivalence principle with quantum objects. These tests require letting the BEC freely evolve for long times, which poses a problem, as the atoms tend to fly apart because of the internal kinetic energy (or temperature) of the system. Reducing this energy would extend the expansion time before the BEC becomes too dilute and improve the precision of matter-wave interferometry.

A powerful way to reduce a BECs internal kinetic energy is to exploit a matter-wave lens to focus the BEC atoms at infinity. Standard matter-wave lenses that are based on magnetic, optical, or electrostatic forces have indeed been used to reduce the BEC internal kinetic energy. Those tools can reach effective temperatures of about 50 pK but, unfortunately, only in two dimensions [2]. A magnetic lens, for example, has a cylindrical geometry that can bend the trajectory of atoms inward along the two radial directions, but it lacks this refractive power along the axial direction.

In their experiments, Rasel and colleagues achieve an unprecedently low temperature of 38 pK by exploiting an innovative matter-wave lens system in the time domain. Such a system can focus the BEC wave at infinity in all three spatial dimensions by cleverly combining both a magnetic lens and a collective-mode excitation (or shape vibration) in the BEC [3].

The team first generated a BEC of approximately one hundred thousand rubidium atoms within a cylindrically shaped magnetic trap produced on a microchip [4]. To excite the collective-mode oscillation, the researchers quickly reduced the trap magnetic bias field along one direction, while increasing the trapping strength in the other two directions. Because of the atomic interactions, the BEC responded by lengthening along its axis and slimming around the waist (Fig. 1). If allowed to continue this oscillation, the BEC would return to its original shape, but the researchers instead released the BEC at the time of maximum slimming. This was the key step for achieving 3D collimation, as it minimized the expansion along the axial direction. To slow the expansion around the BECs waist, the team applied a magnetic lens that collimated the atomic motion in the other two dimensions.

The experiments were performed at the Bremen drop tower in Germany, which provides an exceptional microgravity environment with residual accelerations of the order of 106g [5]. The researchers released the BEC at the top of the tower and measured its size via absorption imaging at different points during the free fall. From the data, they surmised that the expansion velocities were of the order of 60ms. In simulations, the team extended the free-fall time and showed that the BEC should remain detectable for up to 17 s.

By tuning both the oscillation time at the condensates release and the strength of the magnetic lenss potential, this new lensing method offers the possibility to engineer and control BEC shape and expansion for fundamental physics tests as well as for quantum sensing technologies. Indeed, the ability to generate slowly expanding BECs for tens of seconds can enable high-precision gravitational-wave detection [6], measurements of the gravitational constant [7] and the tidal force of gravity [8], as well as the search for ultralight dark matter [9] and a stringent quantum verification of Einsteins equivalence principle, both in drop towers and in space [10].

Furthermore, the 3D matter-wave lens system introduced by Rasel and co-workers provides a new and exciting perspective on the quantum advantage hidden behind the presence of interatomic interactions, often viewed as a drawback in matter-wave optics with long expansion times. Indeed, such interactions can be exploited as a powerful metrological tool in the development of matter-wave quantum sensors, enabling not only high-coherence properties but also highly nonclassical correlations.

Vincenzo Tamma is currently the Founding Director of the Quantum Science and Technology Hub and a reader in physics at the University of Portsmouth, UK, after being a group leader at the Institute of Quantum Physics at Ulm University, Germany. His Ph.D. research at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County and at the University of Bari Aldo Moro, Italy, was recognized with the Giampietro Puppi Award for the best Italian Ph.D. thesis in physics and astrophysics in 20072009. His research aims for a deeper understanding of the fundamental physics at the interface of quantum mechanics, quantum information, complexity theory, atomic physics, and general relativity, as well as at boosting the real-world implementation of quantum-enhanced technologies for computing and sensing applications.

Christian Deppner, Waldemar Herr, Merle Cornelius, Peter Stromberger, Tammo Sternke, Christoph Grzeschik, Alexander Grote, Jan Rudolph, Sven Herrmann, Markus Krutzik, Andr Wenzlawski, Robin Corgier, Eric Charron, David Gury-Odelin, Naceur Gaaloul, Claus Lmmerzahl, Achim Peters, Patrick Windpassinger, and Ernst M. Rasel

Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 100401 (2021)

Published August 30, 2021

Researchers demonstrate lighter, smaller optics and vacuum components for cold-atom experiments that they hope could enable the development of portable quantum technologies. Read More

Continue reading here:

Physics - 3D Collimation of Matter Waves - Physics

Read More..

Making OLED Displays In The Home Lab – Hackaday

Just a general observation: when your projects BOM includes ytterbium metal, chances are pretty good that its something interesting. Wed say that making your own OLED displays at home definitely falls into that category.

Of course, the making of organic light-emitting diodes requires more than just a rare-earth metal, not least of which is the experience in the field that [Jeroen Vleggaar] brings to this project. Having worked on OLEDs at Philips for years, [Jeroen] is well-positioned to tackle the complex process, involving things like physical vapor deposition and the organic chemistry of coordinated quinolones. And thats not to mention the quantum physics of it all, which is nicely summarized in the first ten minutes or so of the video below. From there its all about making a couple of OLED displays using photolithography and the aforementioned PVD to build up a sandwich of Alq3, an electroluminescent organic compound, on a substrate of ITO (indium tin oxide) glass. We especially appreciate the use of a resin 3D printer to create the photoresist masks, as well as the details on the PVD process.

The displays themselves look fantastic at least for a while. The organic segments begin to oxidize rapidly from pinholes in the material; a cleanroom would fix that, but this was just a demonstration, after all. And as a bonus, the blue-green glow of [Jeroen]s displays reminds us strongly of the replica Apollo DSKY display that [Ben Krasnow] built a while back.

Excerpt from:

Making OLED Displays In The Home Lab - Hackaday

Read More..

Ask Ethan: What Impact Could Magnetic Monopoles Have On The Universe? – Forbes

Electromagnetic fields as they would be generated by positive and negative electric charges, both at ... [+] rest and in motion (top), as well as those that would theoretically be created by magnetic monopoles (bottom), were they to exist.

Out of all of the known particles both fundamental and composite there are a whole slew of properties that emerge. Each individual quantum in the Universe can have a mass, or they can be massless. They can have a color charge, meaning they couple to the strong force, or they can be chargeless. They can have a weak hypercharge and/or weak isospin, or they can be completely decoupled from the weak interactions. They can have an electric charge, or they can be electrically neutral. They can have a spin, or an intrinsic angular momentum, or they can be spinless. And if you have both an electric charge and some form of angular momentum, youll also have a magnetic moment: a magnetic property that behaves as a dipole, with a north end and a south end.

But there are no fundamental entities that have a unique magnetic charge, like a north pole or south pole by itself. This idea, of a magnetic monopole, has been around for a long time as a purely theoretical construct, but there are reasons to take it seriously as a physical presence in our Universe. Patreon supporter Jim Nance writes in because he wants to know why:

You've talked in the past about how we know the universe didn't get arbitrarily hot because we don't see relics like magnetic monopoles.You say that with a lot of confidence which makes me wonder, given that no one has ever seen a magnetic monopole or any of the other relics, why are we confident that they exist?

Its a deep question that demands an in-depth answer. Lets start at the beginning: going all the way back to the 19th century.

When you move a magnet into (or out of) a loop or coil of wire, it causes the field to change around ... [+] the conductor, which causes a force on charged particles and induces their motion, creating a current. The phenomena are very different if the magnet is stationary and the coil is moved, but the currents generated are the same. This was the jumping-off point for the principle of relativity.

A little bit was known about electricity and magnetism at the start of the 1800s. It was generally recognized that there was such a thing as electric charge, that it came in two types, where like charges repelled and opposite charges attracted, and that electric charges in motion created currents: what we know as electricity today. We also knew about permanent magnets, where one side acted like a north pole and the other side like a south pole. However, if you broke a permanent magnet in two, no matter how small you chopped it up, youd never wind up with a north pole or a south pole by itself; magnetic charges only came paired up in a dipole configuration.

Throughout the 1800s, a number of discoveries took place that helped us make sense of the electromagnetic Universe. We learned about induction: how moving electric charges actually generate magnetic fields, and how changing magnetic fields, in turn, induce electric currents. We learned about electromagnetic radiation, and how accelerating electric charges can emit light of various wavelengths. And when we put all of our knowledge together, we learned that the Universe wasnt symmetric between electric and magnetic fields and charges: Maxwells equations only possess electric charges and currents. There are no fundamental magnetic charges or currents, and the only magnetic properties we observe come about as being induced by electric charges and currents.

It's possible to write down a variety of equations, like Maxwell's equations, that describe the ... [+] Universe. We can write them down in a variety of ways, but only by comparing their predictions with physical observations can we draw any conclusion about their validity. It's why the version of Maxwell's equations with magnetic monopoles (right) don't correspond to reality, while the ones without (left) do.

Mathematically or if you prefer, from a theoretical physics perspective its very easy to modify Maxwells equations to include magnetic charges and currents: where you simply add in the ability for objects to also possess a fundamental magnetic charge: an individual north or south pole inherent to an object itself. When you introduce those extra terms, Maxwells equations get a modification, and become completely symmetric. All of a sudden, induction now works the other way as well: moving magnetic charges would generate electric fields, and a changing electric field can induce a magnetic current, causing magnetic charges to move and accelerate within a material that can carry a magnetic current.

All of this was simply fanciful consideration for a long time, until we started to recognize the roles that symmetries play in physics, and the quantum nature of the Universe. Its eminently possible that electromagnetism, at some higher energy state, was symmetric between electric and magnetic components, and that we live in a low-energy, broken symmetry version of that world. Although Pierre Curie, in 1894, was one of the first to point out that magnetic charges could exist, it was Paul Dirac, in 1931, who showed something remarkable: that if you had even one magnetic charge, anywhere in the Universe, then it quantum mechanically implied that electric charges should be quantized everywhere.

The difference between a Lie algebra based on the E(8) group (left) and the Standard Model (right). ... [+] The Lie algebra that defines the Standard Model is mathematically a 12-dimensional entity; the E(8) group is fundamentally a 248-dimensional entity. There is a lot that has to go away to get back the Standard Model from String Theories as we know them.

This is fascinating, because not only are electric charges observed to be quantized, but theyre quantized in fractional amounts when it comes to quarks. In physics, one of the most powerful hints we have that new discoveries might be around the corner are by discovering a mechanism that could explain why the Universe has the properties we observe it to have.

However, none of that provides any evidence that magnetic monopoles actually do exist, it simply suggests that they might. On the theoretical side, quantum mechanics was soon superseded by quantum field theory, where the fields are also quantized. To describe electromagnetism, a gauge group known as U(1) was introduced, and this is still used at the present. In gauge theory, the fundamental charges associated with electromagnetism will be quantized only if the gauge group, U(1), is compact; if the U(1) gauge group is compact, however, we get magnetic monopoles anyway.

Again, there might turn out to be a different reason why electric charges have to be quantized, but it seemed at least with Diracs reasoning and what we know about the Standard Model that theres no reason why magnetic monopoles shouldnt exist.

This diagram displays the structure of the standard model (in a way that displays the key ... [+] relationships and patterns more completely, and less misleadingly, than in the more familiar image based on a 4x4 square of particles). In particular, this diagram depicts all of the particles in the Standard Model (including their letter names, masses, spins, handedness, charges, and interactions with the gauge bosons: i.e., with the strong and electroweak forces). It also depicts the role of the Higgs boson, and the structure of electroweak symmetry breaking, indicating how the Higgs vacuum expectation value breaks electroweak symmetry, and how the properties of the remaining particles change as a consequence.

For many decades, even after numerous mathematical advances, the idea of magnetic monopoles remained only a curiosity that hung around in the back of theorists minds, without any substantial progress being made. But in 1974, a few years after we recognized the full structure of the Standard Model which in group theory, is described by SU(3) SU(2) U(1) physicists started to entertain the idea of unification. While, at low energies, SU(2) describes the weak interaction and U(1) describes the electromagnetic interaction, they actually unify at energies of around ~100 GeV: the electroweak scale. At those energies, the combined group SU(2) U(1) describes the electroweak interactions, and those two forces unify.

Is it possible, then, that all of the fundamental forces unify into some larger structure at high energies? They might, and thus the idea of Grand Unified Theories began to come about. Larger gauge groups, like SU(5), SO(10), SU(6), and even exceptional groups began to be considered. Almost immediately, however, a number of unsettling but exciting consequences began to emerge. These Grand Unified Theories all predicted that the proton would be fundamentally stable and would decay; that new, super-heavy particles would exist; and that, as shown in 1974 by both Gerard tHooft and Alexander Polyakov, they would lead to the existence of magnetic monopoles.

The concept of a magnetic monopole, emitting magnetic field lines the same way an isolated electric ... [+] charge would emit electric field lines. Unlike magnetic dipoles, there's only a single, isolated source, and it would be an isolated north or south pole with no counterpart to balance it out.

Now, we have no proof that the ideas of grand unification are relevant for our Universe, but again, its possible that they do. Whenever we consider a theoretical idea, one of the things we look for are pathologies: reasons that whatever scenario were interested in would break the Universe in some way or another. Originally, when tHooft-Polyakov monopoles were proposed, one such pathology was discovered: the fact that magnetic monopoles would do something called overclose the Universe.

In the early Universe, things are hot and energetic enough that any particle-antiparticle pair you can create with enough energy via Einsteins E = mc2 will get created. When you have a broken symmetry, you can either give a non-zero rest mass to a previously massless particle, or you can spontaneously rip copious numbers of particles (or particle-antiparticle pairs) out of the vacuum when the symmetry breaks. An example of the first case is what happens when the Higgs symmetry breaks; the second case could occur, for example, when the Peccei-Quinn symmetry breaks, pulling axions out of the quantum vacuum.

In either case, this could lead to something devastating.

If the Universe had just a slightly higher matter density (red), it would be closed and have ... [+] recollapsed already; if it had just a slightly lower density (and negative curvature), it would have expanded much faster and become much larger. The Big Bang, on its own, offers no explanation as to why the initial expansion rate at the moment of the Universe's birth balances the total energy density so perfectly, leaving no room for spatial curvature at all and a perfectly flat Universe. Our Universe appears perfectly spatially flat, with the initial total energy density and the initial expansion rate balancing one another to at least some 20+ significant digits. We can be certain that the energy density didn't spontaneously increase by large amounts in the early Universe by the fact that it hasn't recollapsed.

Normally, the Universe expands and cools, with the overall energy density being closely related to the rate of expansion at any point in time. If you either take a large number of previously massless particles and give them a non-zero mass, or you suddenly and spontaneously add a large number of massive particles to the Universe, you rapidly increase the energy density. With more energy present, suddenly the expansion rate and the energy density are no longer in balance; theres too much stuff in the Universe.

This causes the expansion rate to not only drop, but in the case of monopole production, to plummet all the way to zero, and then to begin contracting. In short order, this leads to a recollapse of the Universe, ending in a Big Crunch. This is called overclosing the Universe, and cannot be an accurate description of our reality; were still here and things havent recollapsed. This puzzle was known as the monopole problem, and was one of the three main motivations for cosmic inflation.

Just as inflation stretches the Universe, whatever its geometry was previously, to a state indistinguishable from flat (solving the flatness problem), and imparts the same properties everywhere to all locations within our observable Universe (solving the horizon problem), so long as the Universe never heats back up to above the grand unification scale after inflation ends, it can solve the monopole problem, too.

If the Universe inflated, then what we perceive as our visible Universe today arose from a past ... [+] state that was all causally connected to the same small initial region. Inflation stretched that region to give our Universe the same properties everywhere (top), made its geometry appear indistinguishable from flat (middle), and removed any pre-existing relics by inflating them away (bottom). So long as the Universe never heats back up to high enough temperatures to produce magnetic monopoles anew, we will be safe from overclosure.

This was understood way back in 1980, and the combined interest in tHooft-Polyakov monopoles, grand unified theories, and the earliest models of cosmic inflation led some people to embark on a remarkable undertaking: to try and experimentally detect magnetic monopoles. In 1981, experimental physicist Blas Cabrera built a cryogenic experiment involving a coil of wire, explicitly designed to search for magnetic monopoles.

By building a coil with eight loops in it, he reasoned that if a magnetic monopole ever passed through the coil, hed see a specific signal due to the electric induction that would occur. Just like passing one end of a permanent magnet into (or out of) a coil of wire will induce a current, passing a magnetic monopole through that coil of wire should induce not only an electric current, but an electric current that corresponds to exactly 8 times the theoretical value of the magnetic monopoles charge, owing to the 8 loops in his experimental setup. (If a dipole were to pass through, instead, there would be a signal of +8 followed shortly after by a signal of -8, allowing the two scenarios to be differentiated.)

On February 14, 1982, no one was in the office monitoring the experiment. The next day, Cabrera came back, and was shocked at what he observed. The experiment had recorded a single signal: one corresponding almost exactly to the signal a magnetic monopole ought to produce.

In 1982, an experiment running under the leadership of Blas Cabrera, one with eight turns of wire, ... [+] detected a flux change of eight magnetons: indications of a magnetic monopole. Unfortunately, no one was present at the time of detection, and no one has ever reproduced this result or found a second monopole. Still, if string theory and this new result are correct, magnetic monopoles, being not forbidden by any law, must exist at some level.

This set off a tremendous interest in the endeavor. Did it mean inflation was wrong, and we really did have a Universe with magnetic monopoles? Did it mean that inflation was correct, and the one (at most) monopole that should remain in our Universe happened to pass through Cabreras detector? Or did it means that this was the ultimate in experimental errors: a glitch, a prank, or something else that we couldnt explain, but was spurious?

A number of copycat experiments ensued, many of which were larger, ran for longer times, and had greater numbers of loops in their coils, but no one else ever saw anything that resembled a magnetic monopole. On February 14, 1983, Stephen Weinberg wrote a Valentines Day poem to Cabrera, which read:

Roses are red,

Violets are blue,

Its time for monopole

Number TWO!

But despite all the experiments weve ever run, including some that have continued to the present day, there have been no other signs of magnetic monopoles ever seen. Cabrera himself went on to lead numerous other experiments, but we may never know what truly happened on that day in 1982. All we know is that, without the ability to confirm and reproduce that result, we cannot claim that we have direct evidence for the existence of magnetic monopoles.

These are the modern constraints available, from a variety of experiments largely driven from ... [+] neutrino astrophysics, that place the tightest bounds on the existence and abundance of magnetic monopoles in the Universe. The current bound is many orders of magnitude below the expected abundance if Cabrera's 1982 detection was normal, rather than an outlier.

Theres so much that we dont know about the Universe, including what happens at energies far in excess of what we can observe in the collisions that take place at the Large Hadron Collider. We dont know whether, at some high energy scale, the Universe can actually produce magnetic monopoles; we simply know that at the energies we can probe, we havent seen them. We dont know whether grand unification is a property of our Universe in the earliest stages, but we do know this much: whatever occurred early on, it didnt overclose the Universe, and it didnt fill our Universe with these leftover, high-energy relics from a hot, dense state.

Does our Universe, at some level, admit the existence of magnetic monopoles? Thats not a question we can presently answer. What we can state with confidence, however is the following:

Its nearly 40 years since the one experimental clue hinting at the possible existence of magnetic monopoles simply dropped into our lap. Until a second clue comes along, however, all well be able to do is tighten our constraints on where these hypothetical monopoles arent allowed to be hiding.

Send in your Ask Ethan questions to startswithabang at gmail dot com!

View post:

Ask Ethan: What Impact Could Magnetic Monopoles Have On The Universe? - Forbes

Read More..

Altcoin Evolution – Part V: The Closing Recap – NewsBTC

Throughout the Altcoin Evolution series, we have taken a closer look at the potential gains and pitfalls that will define the path forward for cryptocurrencies not named Bitcoin (BTC) or Ethereum (ETH).

The behemoths of the crypto market have clearly set themselves apart from the rest of the pack, and while they may be subject to these potential outcomes, its fair to say at least today that these cryptos have a completely different perspective than virtually any other crypto or blockchain project.

That being said, what can altcoins do to gain traction and become more competitive on a larger scale? Lets recap what weve covered throughout this series.

We highlighted a few projects, particularly around the booming NFT space, that have done this quite well. Sign contracts. Find partners. Make connections. As the broader crypto industry continues to assess what altcoins can provide to daily operations, there are sure to be consistent opportunities. Having a foot in the door when these situations arise is almost certainly beneficial.

Arguably the most compelling argument for the evolution of altcoins is to specialize one particular aspect (low gas fees for transactions, speed, etc.), but be capable in a variety of areas. Of course, projects are going to want to maximize value by having technical capabilities across the board that are ahead of the curve.

However, taking the technical and foundation aspects aside, what we honed in on most was the extras for altcoins the selling points that arent inherent to the blockchain technology being used on certain projects. This is why NFTs made for great examples. A majority of NFTs work off of Ethereum, which is known for having higher transaction costs. So how can projects find other selling points to grab ahold of? Thats what weve looked to address in the duration of Altcoin Evolution.

Related Reading | Crypto Has Arrived In Hollywood, And The Stars Are Loving It!

In Part I, we laid out the groundwork for the inherent challenges that crypto projects often face in the market. We went on to discuss those with more depth in the following three pieces in the series.

We started off with accessibility. With emerging exchanges and platforms, accessibility becomes an increased focal point for rising altcoins. Platforms like UniSwap and SushiSwap have increased accessibility for intermediate consumers. All the while, more widely-used platforms such as Coinbase have placed an emphasis on supporting more tokens. Of course, it takes technological fundamentals, a strong whitepaper, and great marketing even just to be considered for some of the more well-known exchanges and platforms.

By Part III of the series, we began to start scratching the surface of nailing down the importance of a digestible use case. This can often come as shifts in global activity come over time. For example, the economic impacts of COVID-19 are often cited as a growth driver for projects like Axie Infinity, which has taken a prominent position in the NFT marketplace. Axies have essentially formed internet economies that individuals in developing countries can utilize.

In our final discussion around challenges for emerging projects, we highlighted a number of different buckets that we often see some of the best altcoin sales pitches utilize. Some projects lean into more than one of these buckets: Partnerships & IP, Aggressive Interest Rates / Rewards, Decentralization, Versatility, and Low Cost.

Before we close the books on Altcoin Evolution, lets take a closer look at prime examples of each of these buckets that are executing today. Earlier in the series, we highlighted the OMI token and the associated ECOMI project, who have sealed NFT partnerships with companies like Marvel on their VeVe marketplace.

DeFi and CeFi companies like BlockFi, Nexo, and Celsius have been offering aggressive interest rates for storing tokens on their respective platforms; these firms have built massive enterprises simply off of loaning crypto and incentivizing crypto consumers to hold their tokens with these platforms, providing interest rates substantially more aggressive than what weve seen in traditional banking.

Decentralization is a core component of almost any crypto project although many projects can be significantly more centralized than others. However, the crypto community has long recognized the importance of decentralization. One example of this recognition is NFT marketplace Raribles recent move to a more decentralized format, implementing $RARE tokens and giving platform users a greater voice in the future of Rarible.

Versatility can often be seen in projects like Cardano or Polygon. Both respective projects flex the versatility muscle, working across a variety of spaces. Both projects have been building ecosystems around DeFi, smart contracts, NFTs, and a whole lot more.

Finally, the attribute of low cost can often draw in mass consumers. Dogecoin has often had major appeal from its cheap price relative to other tokens, and many mainstream Bitcoin critics have said that the high price of one BTC would dissuade new potential crypto consumers from buying in. While this can be positioned as a mental battle, it is still one that is present in todays crypto discussions, and there is an appeal to having a cheaper token for many emerging projects.

That closes the books on Altcoin Evolution. We appreciate you stopping by each week and look forward to our next altcoin-focused series.

Our team at NewsBTC provides a special thank you to Jerry Sena for his insight, feedback and contributions to this series.

Related Reading | Bittrex Global CEO Declares Dubai Will Gain Benefit From Cryptocurrency Market Expansion

More here:
Altcoin Evolution - Part V: The Closing Recap - NewsBTC

Read More..

Trader Who Called Bitcoin Bottom Predicts This Blazing Altcoin Will Overtake Binance Coin – The Daily Hodl

Pseudonymous cryptocurrency trader Smart Contracter says one red-hot altcoin is poised to continue its meteoric ascent and become the fourth-largest crypto asset by market cap.

Smart Contracter, who correctly predicted Bitcoins bottom in 2018, tells his 161,000 Twitter followers that Solanas market capitalization is destined to exceed that of Binance Coin (BNB).

Currently, the fourth-placed Binance Coin boasts a market cap of nearly $75 billion while the seventh-placed Solana has a market cap of about $43 billion, according to CoinGecko.

SOL flipping BNB is a matter of when, not if.

The widely-followed trader references a tweet that he posted last month where Solana was exhibiting the same vibes, same narrative as Binance Coin. If Solana were to follow BNBs trajectory, he highlighted that it would first surge to around $240 before correcting by around 40%, and then resume rallying.

To overtake Binance Coin, Solana, which is currently trading at $149.75, will need to ignite an 80% rally to $270 while BNB stays stagnant.

For now, Smart Contracter says that the path of least resistance for Solana is up.

SOL easily going to $200 [in my opinion], probably higher.

This really does feel like an easy set and forget long-term play, path of least resistance is up.

Featured Image: Shutterstock/Sergey Nivens

Continue reading here:
Trader Who Called Bitcoin Bottom Predicts This Blazing Altcoin Will Overtake Binance Coin - The Daily Hodl

Read More..

Time To Be Cautious on Cardano? Analyst Michal Van De Poppe Looks at Whats Next for the Explosive Altcoin – The Daily Hodl

Crypto analyst Michal van de Poppe is looking at Cardano, which has surged a staggering 116% over the past 30 days and 2,400% in one year, according to CoinGecko.

Van de Poppe says theres now a massive chance that Cardano will retrace significantly after its epic breakout.

If you want to buy Cardano right now, the chances of a significant drop and drawdown on your entry based on the daily time frame is massive. This means that it can easily correct 25-30% and still be bullish. But you have been going down 25%, while potentially a better entry is granted on those lower levels.

At the time of writing, Cardano is trading at slightly below $3.00 and Van de Poppe says he would prefer buying at or below $2.45 since such an entry point offers a better risk-reward ratio.

The actual pain is on the downside. Doesnt mean that Cardano cant keep on running. It can. But you have to wait or look for levels that are interesting to watch in order to actually take the entry

I would be looking around $2.45 and second, I would be looking around the area that we have around $2.

Van de Poppe says that the target zones for profit taking are at or above $4.40.

What is the next target zone for Cardano based on the impulse waves? Well, obviously you can use the Fibonacci extension based on the previous impulse wave, through which you can target $4.75 and $6.80. You can also do it based on the recent run, and then you get to $4.40 and $6.50.

The analyst says that signs of a retracement for the third-largest cryptocurrency by market cap are also evident on the Cardano/Bitcoin (ADA/BTC) chart.

Is Cardano done with running at this point? I dont believe that it is. But it shows that we might be getting such a corrective move at this point, given the fact that also the daily [time frame] on the Bitcoin pair [ADA/BTC] is not really granting any strength at all. So the scenario that we have here is showing us a potential corrective move.

Featured Image: Shutterstock/Design Projects/Andre Boukreev

Follow this link:
Time To Be Cautious on Cardano? Analyst Michal Van De Poppe Looks at Whats Next for the Explosive Altcoin - The Daily Hodl

Read More..

This Mid-Cap Altcoin Is Surging After Announcing Massive $318,000,000 Incentive Program – The Daily Hodl

A $318,000,000 incentive program is fueling the fast rise of the crypto asset Fantom (FTM).

The team behind the smart contract platform and 70th-ranked altcoin says its committing the funds to support developers who want to build on the platform.

We have decided to introduce a different kind of program to better align incentives between users, builders, and the network.

We believe that builders are the best ones to judge where funds should be allocated, whether they should be provided to build the protocol, or if they need to be used for liquidity mining.

Rather than playing favorites and providing a majority of our resources to a handful of protocols, were opening this up to every dev team that will deploy on Fantom.

Protocol teams will be able to apply for rewards from the Fantom Foundation.

Upon approval, protocols can expect to begin receiving monthly awards after an initial two-month cliff.

Along with the smart contract platforms incentive program, Coinbase recently integrated FTM into its digital wallet, which will allow Coinbase users to easily interact with the Fantom network and utilize its range of decentralized applications (Dapps).

From this past weeks local low of $0.42, FTM has rallied more than 137%, topping out at $0.93 before resting at its current price of $0.86, according to CoinGecko.

Featured Image: Shutterstock/dwphotos

Continue reading here:
This Mid-Cap Altcoin Is Surging After Announcing Massive $318,000,000 Incentive Program - The Daily Hodl

Read More..