Page 3,199«..1020..3,1983,1993,2003,201..3,2103,220..»

These Are the College Majors That Pay Off the Most – 24/7 Wall St.

Special Report

January 7, 2021 9:39 am

Last Updated: January 7, 2021 9:48 am

A college education opens the door to higher-paying jobs. College-educated workers 25 and older earned a median income of $56,344 in 2019, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Workers with no more than a high school diploma earned far less just under $32,000 per year. Yet not all bachelors degrees have the same earning potential with some degree fields generally leading to much higher-income careers than others.

To determine the highest paying college majors that is, the college majors leading to highest-income careers 24/7 Wall St. reviewed data on average annual earnings for 173 undergraduate majors from the Public Use Microdata Sample summary files of the U.S. Census Bureaus 2019 American Community Survey.

The vast majority of the highest paying majors are in STEM science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields. There are eight different engineering majors among the 25 entries on this list as well as a number of medical specialties.

Most of these majors are in fields that require a high level of specialization, such as medicine or research. This means applicants often need advanced degrees a masters or even a doctorate before they can begin working in the field, or in order to advance.

While deciding on a major is important to the future earnings of a student, the college itself is important as well. The quality of the education a college provides, alumni connections, and many other factors can set students up for success or leave them behind their peers. Students must vet their college choices before enrolling to ensure that they are not overpaying for entry to a lackluster college. These are the top ranked colleges that pay off the least.

Click here to see the highest paying college majors.Click here to see our methodology.

Read more here:

These Are the College Majors That Pay Off the Most - 24/7 Wall St.

Read More..

Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University hosted the International Conference on Computing, Mobility, and Manufacturing (CMM 2020) – PRNewswire

The Industry 4.0's movement toward data analytics, machine learning and smart automation in industrial technologies are the cornerstone of the CMM 2020 conference. A complementary AI workshop took place on December 7th.

"We cannot face an industrial revolution by conventional educational methodologies," Al-Ansari said. "Universities today should focus more than ever on human sciences as means to balance the technical outcomes of the 4th Industrial Revolution."

More than 380 people attended with the convenience of the Saudi Arabian time-zone providing greater accessibility especially for those in Europe, Asia and the Middle East.

Prof. Patrick S.P. Wang from Northeastern University gave the first keynote lecture from Boston, Massachusetts and interacted in real-time with enthusiastic participants," following his talk on intelligent pattern recognition and its applications to e-forensics and Smart Cities. Conference organizers worked within the digital platforms like Zoom to facilitate participation and engagement among attendees.

Prof. Vincenzo Piuri from the Department of Computer Science at the Universit degli Studi di Milano, Italy spoke about environmental and industrial applications of artificial intelligence. The second day included an address on the stability of complex networks and relation to power grid applications from Dr. Jrgen Kurths from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, and Humboldt University Berlin's Institute of Physics, followed by Dr. Hong Yan from the Department of Electrical Engineering at City University of Hong Kong speaking about human face tracking and the recognition of facial expressions.

"PMU, like many other institutions around the globe, needs to ensure that the pandemic does not affect the networking and advancement within our academic communities and does not halt our internationalization efforts," Al-Ansari said.

The University's offerings in education and global leadership in the MENA region with events like the CMM 2020 conference contribute to Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030, and provides opportunities to students to engage in global issues and be prepared for complex and challenging futures.

https://pmu.edu.sa/

Contact: Ankit S Bhosale, (+966 13) 849 9346 [emailprotected]

Photo - https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/1393617/CMM_2020.jpg Logo - https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/1393618/PMU_Logo.jpg

https://pmu.edu.sa/

SOURCE Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University (PMU)

View post:

Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University hosted the International Conference on Computing, Mobility, and Manufacturing (CMM 2020) - PRNewswire

Read More..

Birds Have a Mysterious ‘Quantum Sense’. For The First Time, Scientists Saw It in Action – ScienceAlert

Seeing our world through the eyes of a migratory bird would be a rather spooky experience. Something about their visual system allows them to 'see' our planet's magnetic field, a clever trick of quantum physics and biochemistry that helps them navigate vast distances.

Now, for the first time ever, scientists from the University of Tokyo have directly observed a key reaction hypothesised to be behind birds', and many other creatures', talents for sensing the direction of the planet's poles.

Importantly, this is evidence of quantum physics directly affecting a biochemical reaction in a cell - something we've long hypothesised but haven't seen in action before.

Using a tailor-made microscope sensitive to faint flashes of light, the team watched a culture of human cells containing a special light-sensitive material respond dynamically to changes in a magnetic field.

A cell's fluorescence dimming as a magnetic field passes over it. (Ikeya and Woodward, CC BY)

The change the researchers observed in the lab match just what would be expected if a quirky quantum effect was responsible for the illuminating reaction.

"We've not modified or added anything to these cells,"saysbiophysicist Jonathan Woodward.

"We think we have extremely strong evidence that we've observed a purely quantum mechanical process affecting chemical activity at the cellular level."

So how are cells, particularly human cells, capable of responding to magnetic fields?

While there are several hypotheses out there, many researchers think the ability is due to a unique quantum reaction involving photoreceptors called cryptochromes.

Cyrptochromes are found in the cells of many species and are involved in regulating circadian rhythms. In species of migratory birds, dogs, and other species, they're linked to the mysterious ability to sense magnetic fields.

In fact, while most of us can't see magnetic fields, our own cells definitelycontain cryptochromes.And there's evidence that even though it's not conscious, humans are actually still capable of detecting Earth's magnetism.

To see the reaction within cyrptochromes in action, the researchers bathed a culture of human cells containing cryptochromes in blue light caused them to fluoresce weakly. As they glowed, the team swept magnetic fields of various frequencies repeatedly over the cells.

They found that, each time the magnetic filed passed over the cells, their fluorescent dipped around 3.5 percent - enough to show a direct reaction.

So how can a magnetic field affect a photoreceptor?

It all comes down to something called spin - a innate property of electrons.

We already know that spin is significantly affected by magnetic fields. Arrange electrons in the right way around an atom, and collect enough of them together in one place, and the resulting mass of material can be made to move using nothing more than a weak magnetic field like the one that surrounds our planet.

This is all well and good if you want to make a needle for a navigational compass. But with no obvious signs of magnetically-sensitive chunks of material inside pigeon skulls, physicists have had to think smaller.

In 1975, a Max Planck Institute researcher named Klaus Schulten developed a theory on how magnetic fields could influence chemical reactions.

It involved something called a radical pair.

A garden-variety radical is an electron in the outer shell of an atom that isn't partnered with a second electron.

Sometimes these bachelor electrons can adopt a wingman in another atom to form a radical pair. The two stay unpaired but thanks to a shared history are considered entangled, which in quantum terms means their spins will eerily correspond no matter how far apart they are.

Since this correlation can't be explained by ongoing physical connections, it's purely a quantum activity, something even Albert Einstein considered 'spooky'.

In the hustle-bustle of a living cell, their entanglement will be fleeting. But even these briefly correlating spins should last just long enough to make a subtle difference in the way their respective parent atoms behave.

In this experiment, as the magnetic field passed over the cells, the corresponding dip in fluorescence suggests that the generation of radical pairs had been affected.

An interesting consequence of the research could be in how even weak magnetic fields could indirectly affect other biological processes. While evidence of magnetism affecting human health is weak, similar experiments as this could prove to be another avenue for investigation.

"The joyous thing about this research is to see that the relationship between the spins of two individual electrons can have a major effect on biology," says Woodward

Of course birds aren't the only animal to rely on our magnetosphere for direction. Species of fish, worms, insects, and even some mammals have a knack for it. We humans might even be cognitively affected by Earth's faint magnetic field.

Evolution of this ability could have delivered a number of vastlydifferent actionsbased on different physics.

Having evidence that at least one of them connects the weirdness of the quantum world with the behaviour of a living thing is enough to force us to wonder what other bits of biology arise from the spooky depths of fundamental physics.

This research was published in PNAS.

See more here:

Birds Have a Mysterious 'Quantum Sense'. For The First Time, Scientists Saw It in Action - ScienceAlert

Read More..

How understanding light has led to a hundred years of bright ideas – The Economist

Jan 7th 2021

ALBERT EINSTEIN won the 1921 Nobel prize for physics in 1922. The temporal anomaly embodied in that sentence was not, alas, one of the counterintuitive consequences of his theories of relativity, which distorted accustomed views of time and space. It was down to a stubborn Swedish ophthalmologistand the fact that Einsteins genius remade physics in more ways than one.

The eye doctor was Allvar Gullstrand, one of the five members of the Nobel Committee for Physics charged with providing an annual laureate for the Swedish Royal Academy of Sciences to approve. Gullstrand thought Einsteins work on relativity an affront to common sense (which it sort of was) and wrong (which it really wasnt). Every year from 1918 on, the committee received more nominations for Einstein than for any other candidate. And every year, Gullstrand said no.

By 1921 the rest of the committee had had enough of settling for lesser laureates: the only decision which could be made unanimously was not to award the prize at all. Amid great embarrassment the academy chose to delay the 1921 prize until the following year, when it would be awarded in tandem with that of 1922. This gave Carl Wilhelm Oseen, a Swedish physicist newly appointed to the committee, time for a cunning plan. He nominated Einstein not for relativity, but for his early work explaining lights ability to produce electric currents. Though Gullstrand was still peeved, this carried the day. In November 1922 Einstein was awarded the 1921 prize for his services to theoretical physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect.

This adroit bit of face-saving also seems, a century on, fully justified. Einsteins first paper on the nature of light, published in 1905, contained the only aspect of his work that he himself ever referred to as revolutionary. It did not explain a new experiment or discovery, nor fill a gap in established theory; physicists were quite happy treating light as waves in a luminiferous aether. It simply suggested that a new way of thinking about light might help science describe the world more consistently.

That quest for consistency led Einstein to ask whether the energy in a ray of light might usefully be thought of as divided into discrete packets; the amount of energy in each packet depended on the colour, or wavelength, of the light involved. Thus the law mentioned in his Nobel citation: the shorter the wavelength of a beam of light, the more energy is contained in each packet.

Eight years earlier, in 1897, experiments carried out by J.J. Thompson had convinced his fellow physicists that the cathode rays produced by electrodes in vacuum tubes were made up of fundamental particles which he called electrons. Over time, Einsteins energy packets came to be seen as photons. The electron showed that electric charge was concentrated into point-like particles; the photon was a way of seeing energy as being concentrated in just the same way. Work by Einstein and others showed that the two particles were intimately involved with each other. To get energy into an electron, you have to use a photon; and when an electron is induced to give up energy, the result is a photon. This mutualism is embodied in some of todays most pervasive technologies; solar cells, digital cameras, fibre-optic datalinks, LED lighting and lasers. It is used to measure the cosmos and probe the fabric of space and time. It could yet send space probes to the stars.

The settled view of light which provided a context for Einsteins work dated from 1864, when James Clerk Maxwell rolled everything physics knew about electric and magnetic forces into a theory of electromagnetic fields produced by objects carrying an electric charge. Stationary charged objects created electric fields; those moving at a constant speed created magnetic fields. Accelerating charged objects created waves composed of both fields at once: electromagnetic radiation. Light was a form of such radiation, Maxwell said. His equations suggested there could be others. In the late 1880s Heinrich Hertz showed that was true by creating radio waves in his laboratory. As well as proving Maxwell right, he added the possibility of wireless telegraphy to the range of electrical technologiesfrom streetlights to dynamos to transatlantic telegraph cablesthat were revolutionising the late 19th century.

Scientists have since detected and/or made use of electromagnetic waves at wavelengths which range from many times the diameter of Earth to a millionth the diameter of an atomic nucleus. The wavelengths of visible light380 nanometres (billionths of a metre) at the blue end of the spectrum, 700nm at the red endare special only because they are the ones to which human eyes are sensitive.

The reason Einstein found what he called Maxwells brilliant discovery incomplete was that Maxwells fields were described, mathematically, as continuous functions: the fields strength had a value at every point in space and could not jump in value from one point to the next. But the material world was not continuous. It was lumpy; its molecules, atoms and electrons were separate entities in space. Physics described the material world through statistical accounts of the behaviour of very large numbers of these microscopic lumps; heat, for example, depended on the speed with which they vibrated or bumped into each other. It was a mathematical approach quite unlike Maxwells treatment of electromagnetic fields.

Yet matter and electromagnetic radiation were intimately associated. Every object emits electromagnetic radiation just by dint of having a temperature; its temperature is a matter of the jiggling of its constituent particles, some of which are charged, and the jiggling of charged particles produces electromagnetic waves. The spread of the wavelengths seen in that radiationits spectrumis a function of the bodys temperature; the hotter the body, the shorter both the median and highest wavelengths it will emit. The reason the human eye is sensitive to wavelengths in the 380-700nm range is that those are the wavelengths that a body gives off most prolifically if it is heated to 5,500C, the temperature of the surface of the Sun. They are thus the wavelengths that dominate sunlight (see chart).

If wavelengths and temperature were so intimately involved, Einstein believed, it had to be possible to talk about them in the same mathematical language. So he invented a statistical approach to the way entropya tendency towards disordervaries when the volume of a cavity filled with electromagnetic radiation changes. He then asked, in effect, what sort of lumpiness his statistics might be explaining. The answer was lumps of energy inversely proportional to the wavelength of the light they represented.

In 1905 Einstein was willing to go only so far as suggesting that this light-as-lump point of view provided natural-seeming explanations of various phenomena. Over subsequent years he toughened his stance. His work on relativity showed that Maxwells luminiferous aether was not required for the propagation of electromagnetic fields; they existed in their own right. His work on light showed that the energy in those fields could be concentrated into the point-like particles in empty space. Light was promoted from what he called a manifestation of some hypothetical medium into an independent entity like matter.

This account was not fully satisfying, because light was now being treated as a continuous wave in some contextswhen being focused by lenses, sayand as something fundamentally lumpy in others. This was resolved by the development of quantum mechanics, in which matter and radiation are both taken to be at the same time particulate and wavy. Part of what it is to be an electron, or a photon, or anything else is to have a wave function; the probabilities calculated from these wave functions offer the only access to truth about the particles that physics can have.

Einstein was never reconciled to this. He rejected the idea that a theory which provided only probabilities could be truly fundamental. He wanted a better way for a photon to be both wave and a particle. He never found it. All these 50 years of conscious brooding, he wrote to a friend in 1951, have brought me no nearer to the answer to the question, What are light quanta? Nowadays every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows it, but he is mistaken.

Though Einstein was probably not thinking of him specifically, one of those Dicks was Richard Feynman, one of four physicists who, in the late 1940s, finished off the intellectual structure of which Einstein had laid the foundations: a complete theory of light and matter called quantum electrodynamics, or QED. It is a theory in which both matter and radiation are described in terms of fields of a fundamentally quantum nature. Particleswhether of light or matterare treated as excited states of those fields. No phenomenon has been found that QED should be able to explain and cannot; no measurement has been made that does not fit with its predictions.

Feynman was happy to forgo Einsteins brooding and straightforwardly assert that light is made of particles. His reasoning was pragmatic. All machines made to detect light will, when the light is turned down low enough, provide lumpy its-there-or-its-not readings rather than continuous ones. The nature of quantum mechanics and its wave functions mean that some of those readings will play havoc with conventional conceptions of what it is for a particle to be in a given place, or to exist as an independent entity. But that is just the way of the quantum, baby.

The precise manipulation of photons has shed much light on non-locality, decoherence and other strange quantum-mechanical phenomena. It is now making their application to practical problems, through quantum computation and quantum cryptography, increasingly plausible. But this Technology Quarterly is not about such quantum weirdness (for that, see our Technology Quarterly of January 2018). It is about how photons interactions with electrons have been used to change the world through the creation of systems that can turn light directly into electricity, and electricity directly into light.

That light and electricity were linked was known long before Einstein. In the 1880s Werner von Siemens, founder of the engineering firm that bears his name, attached the most far reaching importance to the mysterious photoelectric effect which led panels of selenium to produce trickles of current. Einsteins theory was taken seriously in part because it explained why a faint short-wavelength light could produce such a current when a bright longer-wavelength light could not: what mattered was the amount of energy in each photon, not the total number of photons.

Technology built on such ideas has since allowed light to be turned into electricity on a scale that would have boggled Siemenss mind. It lets billions of phone users make digital videos and send them to each other through an infrastructure woven from whiskers of glass. It lights rooms, erases tattoos, sculpts corneas and describes the world to driverless cars. Ingenuity and happy chance, government subsidies and the search for profit have created from Einsteins suggestion a golden age of lighta burst of innovation that, a century on, is not remotely over.

This article appeared in the Technology Quarterly section of the print edition under the headline "The liberation of light"

Visit link:

How understanding light has led to a hundred years of bright ideas - The Economist

Read More..

Quantum Nanodevice Can Be Both a Heat Engine and Refrigerator at the Same Time – SciTechDaily

A multitasking nanomachine that can act as a heat engine and a refrigerator at the same time has been created by RIKEN engineers. The device is one of the first to test how quantum effects, which govern the behavior of particles on the smallest scale, might one day be exploited to enhance the performance of nanotechnologies.

Conventional heat engines and refrigerators work by connecting two pools of fluid. Compressing one pool causes its fluid to heat up, while rapidly expanding the other pool cools its fluid. If these operations are done in a periodic cycle, the pools will exchange energy and the system can be used as either a heat engine or a fridge.

It would be impossible to set up a macroscale machine that does both tasks simultaneouslynor would engineers want to, says Keiji Ono of the RIKEN Advanced Device Laboratory. Combining a traditional heat engine with a refrigerator would make it a completely useless machine, he says. It wouldnt know what to do.

But things are different when you shrink things down. Physicists have been developing ever smaller devices, sometimes based on single atoms. At these tiny scales, they have to account for quantum theorythe strange set of laws that says, for instance, an electron can exist in two places at the same time or have two different energies. Physicists are developing new theoretical frameworks and experiments to try to work out how such systems will behave.

The quantum version of the heat engine uses an electron in a transistor. The electron has two possible energy states. The team could increase or decrease the gap between these energy states by applying an electric field and microwaves. This can be analogous to the periodic expandingcompressing operation of a fluid in a chamber, says Ono, who led the experiment. The device also emitted microwaves when the electron went from the high-energy level to the lower one.

By monitoring whether the upper energy level was occupied, the team first demonstrated that the nanodevice could act as either a heat engine or as a refrigerator. But then they showed something far strangerthe nanomachine could act as both at the same time, which is a purely quantum effect. The researchers confirmed this by looking at the occupancy of the upper energy level, which combined to create a characteristic interference pattern. There was an almost perfect match between the experimental interference pattern and that predicted by theory, says Ono.

This may allow rapid switching between the two modes of operation, Ono explains. This ability could help create novel applications with such systems in the future.

Reference: Analog of a Quantum Heat Engine Using a Single-Spin Qubit by K. Ono, S.N. Shevchenko, T. Mori, S. Moriyama and Franco Nori, 15 October 2020, Physical Review Letters.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.166802

Read more:

Quantum Nanodevice Can Be Both a Heat Engine and Refrigerator at the Same Time - SciTechDaily

Read More..

Tokyo Institute of Technology: Quantum Mysteries: Probing an Unusual State in the Superconductor-Insulator Transition – India Education Diary

Scientists at Tokyo Institute of Technology approach the two decade-old mystery of why an anomalous metallic state appears in the superconductor-insulator transition in 2D superconductors. Through experimental measurements of a thermoelectric effect, they found that the quantum liquid state of quantum vortices causes the anomalous metallic state. The results clarify the nature of the transition and could help in the design of superconducting devices for quantum computers.

Uncovering Quantum Fluctuations Leading to an Anomalous State in 2D Superconductors

The superconducting state, in which current flows with zero electrical resistance, has fascinated physicists since its discovery in 1911. It has been extensively studied not only because of its potential applications but also to gain a better understanding of quantum phenomena. Though scientists know much more about this peculiar state now than in the 20th century, there seems to be no end to the mysteries that superconductors hold.

A famous, technologically relevant example is the superconductorinsulator transition (SIT) in two-dimensional (2D) materials. If one cools down thin films of certain materials to near absolute-zero temperature and applies an external magnetic field, the effects of thermal fluctuations are suppressed enough so that purely quantum phenomena (such as superconductivity) dominate macroscopically. Although quantum mechanics predicts that the SIT is a direct transition from one state to the other, multiple experiments have shown the existence of an anomalous metallic state intervening between both phases.

So far, the origin of this mysterious intermediate state has eluded scientists for over two decades. Thats why a team of scientists from the Department of Physics at Tokyo Institute of Technology(Tokyo Tech), Japan, recently set out to find an answer to the question in a study published in Physical Review Letters. Assistant Professor Koichiro Ienaga, who led the study, explains their motivation, There are theories that try to explain the origin of dissipative resistance at zero temperature in 2D superconductors, but no definitive experimental demonstrations using resistance measurements have been made to unambiguously clarify why the SIT differs from the expected quantum phase transition models.

The scientists employed an amorphous molybdenumgermanium (MoGe) thin film cooled down to an extremely low temperature of 0.1 K and applied an external magnetic field. They measured a traverse thermoelectric effect through the film called the Nernst effect, which can sensitively and selectively probe superconducting fluctuations caused by mobile magnetic flux. The results revealed something important about the nature of the anomalous metallic state: the quantum liquid state of quantum vortices causes the anomalous metallic state. The quantum liquid state is the peculiar state where the particles are not frozen even at zero temperature because of the quantum fluctuations.

Most importantly, the experiments uncovered that the anomalous metallic state emerges from quantum criticality; the peculiar broadened quantum critical region at zero temperature corresponds to the anomalous metallic state. This is in a sharp contrast to the quantum critical point at zero temperature in the ordinary SIT. Phase transitions mediated by purely quantum fluctuations (quantum critical points) have been long-standing puzzles in physics, and this study puts us one step closer to understanding the SIT for 2D superconductors. Excited about the overall results, Ienaga remarks, Detecting superconducting fluctuations with precision in a purely quantum regime, as we have done in this study, opens a new way to next-generation superconducting devices, including q-bits for quantum computers.

Now that this study has shed light on the two-decade old SIT mystery, further research will be required to get a more precise understanding of the contributions of the quantum vortices in the anomalous metallic state. Let us hope that the immense power of superconductivity will soon be at hand!

Read this article:

Tokyo Institute of Technology: Quantum Mysteries: Probing an Unusual State in the Superconductor-Insulator Transition - India Education Diary

Read More..

Illumination at the limits of knowledge – The Economist

Jan 7th 2021

ALL THE technologies discussed in this report are moving forward apace. The companies which provide machinery to solar-cell manufacturers are ceaselessly trying to make more efficient use of silicon and less costly modules. In universities and elsewhere researchers are looking at ways to add a second layer to such cells so as to capture energy at wavelengths silicon ignoresthough their best attempts so far do not last very long outdoors.

Advances in manufacturing and design are making LEDs ever better sources of illumination. In more and more screens they backlight the liquid-crystal shutters which brighten pixels by detenebration. Some screens already do without shuttering, using liquid-crystal-free arrays of micro-LEDs to produce images that offer better contrast and use less energy. In information technology the division of labour that sees data processing done by electrons and data transmission by photons is under attack; switches that could be programmed to do some information processing while keeping that information in the form of photons would allow data to flow around data centres more quickly and efficiently. Laser beams of slightly different wavelengths are being packed ever more densely into optical fibres, with more bits encoded into every symbol stamped on to their light. The current record for data transfer down a single fibre, held by researchers at UCL, a British university, is 178 terabits a second.

But if you want to see lasers which push the boundaries of the possible in the most dramatic of ways, you have to turn to those made, not for practical applications, but to further science. Wherever researchers require ludicrous amounts of power or precision, theres every chance that they are using a laser, some sort of digital photon detector, or both. To see the cutting edge of what light can do, head for a lab.

The National Ignition Facility (NIF) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California is a case in point: walking its halls evokes a sense of the technological sublime which is all but visceral. The 192 laser beams from the 100-metre-long, xenon-pumped beamlines that fill its two warehouse-sized clean rooms converge on a peculiarly perforated spherical chamber. When NIF is operational a tiny bubble at the centre of that chamber is illuminated with 500 terawatts, which is to say 500,000GW.

Given that the worlds total electricity generating capacity is less than 5TW, how is a 500TW system possible? The answer is brevity. Because power is energy divided by time, a relatively small amount of energy can provide a huge amount of power if it is delivered quickly enough. The NIF fires for only a few tens of nanoseconds (billionths of a second) at a time. Each blink-and-you-miss-it 500TW blast thus delivers only a kilowatt-hour or so of energy.

Using such a gargantuan device to provide such a modest amount of energy seems bizarre. But NIFs job requires the energy to be delivered with great spatial precision and almost instantaneously. Only then can it heat the lasers tiny targets to temperatures and pressures otherwise reached only in the centres of stars and the blasts of nuclear weaponsconditions which can fuse atomic nuclei. Congress paid billions for the NIF on the basis that it might open the way to making nuclear fusion of this sort a practical energy source. It has not delivered on those dreams. But it has provided new insights into astrophysics as well as experimental data relevant to the design and maintenance of hydrogen bombs, which is Lawrence Livermores main concern.

Physicists are not the only scientists entranced by lasers. One of the workhorses of genetic engineering is green fluorescent protein (GFP). The instructions for making GFP are easily added to genes for other proteins. When poked with finely focused lasers these modified proteins fluoresce, thus revealing their whereaboutsa handy way of learning which proteins cells put where.

A remarkable refinement of this technique, first demonstrated in 2011, is to turn the cell itself into a laser. Engineer a cell to produce GFP, put it between two mirrors and pump energy in and the proteins light will be amplified in just the same way as it would in a piece of ruby or neodymium-doped glass. Light-emission microscopy based on this possibility amplifies the light given off by fluorescent proteins and other light-emitting markers.

Photons can also be used to change how cells behave. By engineering proteins to be sensitive to light and then turning that light on and off, researchers can change what cells doincluding the ways they do, or dont, transmit nerve impulses. Laser light flashed on to the nerves of a suitably engineered flatworm, or shone down optical fibres into the brain of a mouse, allows researchers to turn different parts of the nervous system on and off and observe the changes in behaviour that follow. This optogenetic puppeteering provides all sorts of new insights into the machinery of the brain. With all due respect to those using photons to explore the strange interconnectedness of things in quantum mechanicswhich Einstein famously described as spookyphotons that can literally change a mind in mid-thought may be the spookiest of all.

The degree to which light-based techniques are changing sciences across the board can be seen in the past decades decisions by the Nobel Physics Committee. In 2014 the committee recognised a physical breakthrough in the production of lightthe development of blue LEDs, a technical tour de force which made the production of white light cheaper and easier than ever before. Since then the physics prize has been awarded to three different ways of using lasers either for experiments in the lab or observations of the world. A tour of these prize-winning accomplishments allows a last celebration of this golden age of light.

Start with pure power. A technique called chirped-pulse amplification, developed by Donna Strickland and Grard Mourou when they were both at the University of Rochester, allows lasers far more powerful than the NIFlasers which work in the petawatt range. It provides a way around the unfortunate fact that, above a certain power level, even a very short pulse will melt any laser trying to amplify it further. Chirp amplification solves the problem by stretching pulses out in both space and time. An intense packet of photons that is, say, a millimetre long, and thus passes through any machine in just three trillionths of a second, can be chirped into one that is a metre long and lasts a full three billionths of a second. This stretched pulse is low-power enough to be amplified, after which it can be compressed back into its original form as a burst just as short as ever but now containing many more photons.

Labs around the world now use this technique to produce bursts of light both far shorter and far more powerful than those at NIF using much cheaper equipment. This allows them to study nuclear processes that are even more extreme than fusion. If the pulses can be made 1,000 times shorter stillwhich Dr Mourou, at least, thinks is possible, given a decade or sothey could achieve something no other technology has yet managed: the creation of matter (and antimatter) from scratch.

Einsteins work dispensed with the need for an all-pervading luminiferous aether. But the fields evoked by quantum electrodynamics (QED), the mid-20th-century culmination of work on electromagnetism, quantum theory and relativity, populate empty space with something else instead: very faint possibilities. And QED says that, if light gets sufficiently intense, its photons will interact with these possibilities to bring forth brand new electrons from empty space. Einsteins insight that mass can be converted into energy has been proven many times, most terribly in nuclear weapons. Creating material particles from massless light alone would be a remarkable turning of the tables, and one that ought to provide new insight into the quantum fields involved.

After power, pressure. The momentum of photons is tiny; but when applied to tiny things it can do useful work. In the 1960s Arthur Ashkin of Bell Labs realised that, if a small transparent object is placed on the edge of a laser beam it will move to the beams centre (provided that the beam is brighter at the centre than the edge). This is because the photons that pass through the object have their path bent outward, away from the beam: conservation of momentum requires the object thus diverting them to move in the opposite direction. If, once caught up in the beam, the object strays from its bright centre, the light pressure will bring it back.

In the 1970s Dr Ashkin put this idea into practice, using laser beams as optical tweezers with which to manipulate microscopic beads. In the 1980s he got the technique to work on individual bacteria and virus particles, while his student Steven Chu used a variant to trap individual atomswork that won Dr Chu and colleagues a Nobel prize in 1997. The increasing use made of his tweezers in biology saw Dr Ashkin follow in his students footsteps in 2018, sharing the prize with Dr Strickland and Dr Mourou.

And then there is precision. Einsteins general theory of relativity, promulgated in 1915, explains gravity in terms of the distortions masses impose on spacetimespacetime being, to Einstein, simply the thing that clocks and rulers measure. His special theory of relativity had laid out the case for light being the ultimate ruler, a view that measurement professionals now share; the General Conference on Weights and Measures defines the metre not as the length of a specific rod in a vault in Paris, as it once did, but as the distance a photon in a vacuum travels in 1/299,792,458 of a second. Thus if you want to see ripples in spacetimesuch as those which relativity says must be produced when two very large masses pirouette around each otherlight is the best sort of ruler to use.

The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) consists of two such rulers. Its twin detectors, one in Louisiana and one in Washington state, both feature 4km-long perpendicular arms along which laser beams of truly phenomenal stability bounce back and forth (see chart). Instruments mounted at the point where the beams cross compare their phases in order to detect transitory differences in the arms lengths. Their precision is equivalent to that which would be needed to detect a hairs-breadth change in the distance to a nearby star.

On September 14th 2015 LIGO picked up the shiver in spacetime produced by the merger of two black holes 1.3bn light-years away. In 2017 the Nobel Physics Committee, free of naysaying ophthalmologists, awarded the prize to Rainer Weiss, Kip Thorne and Barry C. Barish, the three scientists who had done most to make that observation happen.

Their extraordinary measurement was treated, quite rightly, as a slightly late 100th-birthday present for Einsteins truly remarkable intellectual achievement. It was also an extraordinary demonstration of what can be done with photons. A century of work by scientists and engineers has taken the energy packets that Einstein first imagined in 1905 and produced a range of technologies with capabilities little short of the miraculousa collective achievement far greater than any single act of genius. Relativity is remarkable. Putting photons to use has been revolutionary.

This article appeared in the Technology Quarterly section of the print edition under the headline "New enlightenments"

Read more here:

Illumination at the limits of knowledge - The Economist

Read More..

Bitcoin hits new all-time high of $41000 as investors shrug off recent volatility and pile into cryptocurrency – Business Insider

  1. Bitcoin hits new all-time high of $41000 as investors shrug off recent volatility and pile into cryptocurrency  Business Insider
  2. The worlds cryptocurrency is now worth more than $1 trillion  Ars Technica
  3. Indian crypto exchanges freeze suspicious accounts as bitcoin crosses $40,000  Mint
  4. White-Knuckle Bitcoin Rally Powers Cryptos Best Week Since 2017  Bloomberg
  5. Cryptocurrency market value tops $1 trillion as Bitcoin surges  New York Post
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

See the article here:
Bitcoin hits new all-time high of $41000 as investors shrug off recent volatility and pile into cryptocurrency - Business Insider

Read More..

What is a hot wallet for cryptocurrency? Everything you need to know – TechRadar

If youve ever used a cryptocurrency exchange then you might have come across the term Hot Wallet. You may also have heard how risky they can be and, if youve looked into it any further, read horror stories about hackers stealing silly amounts of cryptocurrencies straight from exchanges.

So what exactly is a hot wallet? And what distinguishes it from its opposite number: a cold wallet? What are they used for and, if you already own any cryptocurrency, is it currently stored in a hot wallet? You might, if youve just stumbled across this article, be wondering what temperature has to do with wallets in the first place!

About the author

Nick Percoco is Chief Security Officer at Kraken

Lets start from the beginning. In many ways, cryptocurrencies, like Bitcoin, are very similar to the cash you keep in your back pocket. They are divisible into tiny exchange units that can be used for private transactions. Just like cash, cryptocurrencies can be sent directly between two parties without an intermediary a bank, say having to process or approve the transaction for you.

But just as how you keep cash in your pocketbook, cryptocurrencies have to be held somewhere. This is where a wallet comes in. At its most basic, a cryptocurrency wallet is a bit of software that contains a public and private cryptographic key; sort of comparable to an account number and PIN number. In any transaction, the receiver shares their public key with the sender, so they know where to send the money to. The sender then signs the transaction with their private key, which effectively authorizes it. Once everything matches up, the transaction completes and the crypto is transferred from the senders wallet to the receivers wallet much like taking out a banknote from your pocketbook and handing it over to someone else, who puts it in theirs.

So while the public key identifies wallet addresses, a private key is the crucial bit of information that confirms the transaction is actually valid. Just like a PIN number, its vital that wallet holders never disclose their private keys, as this effectively allows anyone, anywhere, with an internet connection to easily access the cryptocurrency and use it as if it was their own.

This is crucial for understanding what exactly makes a cryptocurrency wallet hot. Essentially a hot wallet is one thats connected to the internet. They come in many shapes and sizes, and include mobile wallet apps, as well as the wallets used to hold your crypto when you log in to an exchange.

Because hot wallets are connected to the internet, they can easily be used to buy and sell cryptocurrencies. Thats important: back in the early days, sellers very often had to connect with buyers in real life in order to make transactions. What makes a hot wallet so useful is that transaction parties can buy and sell directly with one another. Without them, Bitcoin would be a very difficult asset to trade.

But, of course, what makes hot wallets so valuable, as a way to seamlessly buy and sell cryptocurrencies, also makes them vulnerable. By being connected to the internet, both the public and private keys of a hot wallet are stored online. This means they can be and are targeted by hackers.

As with other cybersecurity, the risks largely depend on how well the wallet owner has implemented sufficient security measures. Poor password management, using a simple phrase that has also been used for other internet accounts, say, makes hot wallet owners much more vulnerable to attacks; as does a lack of two-factor authentication. A promising development in recent years has seen cryptocurrency holders begin to use multisig wallets that require two or more private keys, making them that much more secure.

The fact that exchanges hold hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars worth of cryptocurrencies means they are often targets for hackers. Exchange attacks unfortunately remain commonplace. You can have all the security you want in place, but you need to ensure your exchange also has proper protection too. If theyre hacked, theres no guarantee youll ever see your cryptocurrencies again. Its very important that you thoroughly research any trading venue make sure they take the security of your assets as seriously as you do.

But whats cold storage and what separates it from a hot wallet? Thats simple: a cold wallet holds cryptocurrencies, just like a hot wallet, but keeps the cryptographic keys offline. They can take many forms: some of the most popular are the hardware wallets that look a little bit like USB memory sticks. Oftentimes, the wallet owner keeps the private keys on an encrypted flash drive, a smartcard, a computer that isnt connected to the internet, or even just on a bit of paper. By keeping private keys off the internet, cold wallets are secured against hacking attempts. If a cryptocurrency holder is using a hardware wallet, they simply plug the device into the computer whenever they need to access their cryptocurrencies. As the private keys remain offline, the wallet is secure even when its plugged into a computer.

There is, of course, a tradeoff. As its not connected to the internet, accessing and moving crypto in and out of a cold wallet can be a cumbersome process. Thats why many holders use them in conjunction with hot wallets. Holders transfer the small amounts they need to trade on a hot wallet and keep the rest of their crypto wealth secure in a cold wallet. Indeed, thats also broadly what exchanges do although on a much bigger scale to minimize the risk of attack.

So what should you take away from this piece? First and foremost, if youre interested in buying cryptocurrencies, adopt a security-first mindset. Check who youre buying your coins from and ensure that you never ever disclose your private keys to anyone.

Secondly, consider, if you havent already, moving any crypto assets you have that you arent using off your exchange account. Hot wallets are a valuable part of the crypto infrastructure, without them trading would be burdensome and time consuming, but they arent watertight from a security perspective.

The single best way you can protect yourself from having your assets stolen is by getting a cold wallet. So long as you follow basic security protocol when it comes to your private keys not posting them on Facebook, for example youll keep your private keys secure from hackers.

See the rest here:
What is a hot wallet for cryptocurrency? Everything you need to know - TechRadar

Read More..

OCC Regulator Implements Groundbreaking Cryptocurrency Guidance For Banks And The Future Of Payments – Forbes

When Brian Brooks took the role of Acting Comptroller of the Currency for the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) in May 2020, many in the industry knew some of Brooks focus would be on fintech and blockchain technology.

Brian Brooks, OCC

Since that time, the OCC has provided interpretive letters and guidance clarifying that banks can custody cryptocurrency and stablecoins, as well as engage in stablecoin activity. The OCC also created a Special Purpose Payments Charter for FinTech companies. In December the Chief Economist of the OCC, Charles Calomiris, published a paper titled Chartering the FinTech Future, in which Calomiris set out the benefits of the OCC providing bank charters to stablecoin providers.

Todays Interpretive Letter

Today the OCC published Interpretive Letter 1174, which explains banks may use new technologies, including independent node verification networks (INVNs) and stablecoins, to perform bank-permissible functions, such as payment activities. Said simply, a bank may use stablecoins (cryptocurrencies designed to minimize the price volatility) to facilitate payment transactions for customers.

In doing so, a bank may issue stablecoins, exchange stablecoins for fiat currency, as well as validate, store, and record payments transactions by serving as a node on a blockchain (INVN).

Rationale

Todays OCC news is innovative and exciting. Not because it is a huge pivot from how banks have traditionally functioned but because the OCC is doing a notable job keeping up with the changing technology and landscape. Many criticize the US for stifling innovation and not allowing companies to evolve with innovative technology that would improve our financial system. Well, the OCC is doing just the opposite. Brooks continues to move carefully but quickly.

As todays OCC interpretive letter notes, over time, banks financial intermediation activities have evolved and adapted in response to changing economic conditions and customer needs. Banks have adopted new technologies to carry out bank-permissible activities, including payment activities. . .The changing financial needs of the economy are well-illustrated by the increasing demand in the market for faster and more efficient payments through the use of decentralized technologies, such as INVNs, which validate and record financial transactions, including stablecoin transactions.

Banks have always been a place where customers could store valuables for safe-keeping and, over time, became a critical part of our financial and payments infrastructure. The history of the American banking system (from the passage of the National Bank Act in 1863, Federal Reserve Act in 1913 and the creation of the FDIC in the Banking Act of 1933) tells a story of regulation adapting to economic realities and changing technology.

HONG KONG, HONG KONG - JULY 13:A man holds a smart phone with PayPal application is displayed on ... [+] July 13 2018 in Hong Kong, Hong Kong. (Photo by S3studio/Getty Images)

Stephen Palley, a partner in the Washington D.C. law firm of Anderson Kill drew the analogy to demand for internet banking, explaining early internet banking was met with approval by the OCC and is now ubiquitous, in spite of early concerns about the safety or practicality of such technology for secure banking services.The OCC continues to show an interest in and desire to engage with new financial technology that consumers demand.

Seen against this historical backdrop, the OCCs latest letter fits squarely into the framework of a conservative prudential regulator creating rules of the road for new and powerful technology and adapting to changing times and customer needs.

What It Really Means

So what does this really mean for the payment systems as we know it today?

While the United States financial system functions relatively smoothly, traditional payment rails are still slow, expensive and subject to banking hours and holidays.

The OCCs guidance opens the possibilities that banks will use INVNs and stablecoins to transfer funds between financial institutions faster and without the need of a government intermediary.

Kristin Smith, Executive Director of the Blockchain Association noted to me, The OCCs interpretive letter shows that there are those in government who actually understand that cryptocurrency networks are the foundation of a next generation payments system. Stablecoins, like USDC, can power faster, 24-hour real time payments in a way that existing US payments infrastructure cant handle.

Nic Carter, Partner of Castle Island Ventures added, this will allow banks to take advantage of the always-on features of public blockchains.

Banks adopting the use of INVNs and stablecoins could also vastly increase the efficiency of cross-border transactions, but that will require banks in the US and abroad to implement a lot of technology.

Carter cautioned, I don't see stablecoins imminently replacing traditional financial rails, but this is a vital first step in normalizing the notion of public blockchains as an alternative settlement infrastructure that banks can freely adopt.

The future of finance looks bright.

Read more:
OCC Regulator Implements Groundbreaking Cryptocurrency Guidance For Banks And The Future Of Payments - Forbes

Read More..