Quantum Theory Cannot Hurt You (11 page)

BOOK: Quantum Theory Cannot Hurt You
4.49Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
ads

Minkowski christened this peculiar union of space and time “space-time.” Its existence would be blatantly obvious to us if we lived our lives travelling at close to the speed of light. Living as we do in nature’s ultraslow lane, however, we never experience the seamless entity. All we glimpse instead are its space and time facets.

As Minkowski put it, space and time are like shadows of spacetime. Think of a stick suspended from the ceiling of a room so that it can spin around its middle and point in any direction like a compass needle. A bright light casts a shadow of the stick on one wall while a second bright light casts a shadow of the object on an adjacent wall. We could, if we wanted, call the size of the stick’s shadow on one wall its “length” and the size of its shadow on the other wall its width. What then happens as the stick swings around?

Clearly, the size of the shadow on each wall changes. As the length gets smaller, the width gets bigger, and vice versa. In fact, the length appears to change into the width and the width into the length—just as if they are aspects of the same thing.

Of course, they are aspects of the same thing. The length and width are not fundamental at all. They are simply artifacts of the direction from which we choose to observe the stick. The fundamental thing is the stick itself, which we can see simply by ignoring the shadows on the wall and walking up to it at the centre of the room.

Well, space and time are much like the length and width of the stick. They are not fundamental at all but are artifacts of our viewpoint—specifically, how fast we are travelling. But though the fundamental thing is space-time, this is apparent only from a viewpoint travelling close to the speed of light, which of course is why it is not obvious to any of us in our daily lives.

Of course, the stick-and-shadow analogy, like all analogies, is helpful only up to a point. Whereas the length and width of the stick are entirely equivalent, this is not quite true of the space and the time facets of space-time. Though you can move in any direction you like in space, as everyone knows you can only move in one direction in time.

The fact that space-time is solid reality and space and time the mere shadows raises a general point. Like shipwrecked mariners clinging to rocks in a wild sea, to make sense of the world we search desperately for things that are unchanging. We identify things like distance and time and mass. But later, we discover that the things we identified as unchanging are unchanging only from our limited viewpoint.
When we widen our perspective on the world we discover that other things we never suspected are the invariant things. So it is with space and time. When we see the world from a high-speed vantage point, we see neither space nor time but the seamless entity of spacetime.

Actually, we should long ago have guessed that space and time are inextricably entwined. Think of the Moon. What is it like now, at this instant? The answer is that we can never know. All we can ever know is what it was like 1
1
/
4
seconds ago, which is the time it takes light from the Moon to fly across the 400,000 kilometres to Earth. Now think of the Sun. We cannot know what it is like either, only what it was like 8
1
/
2
minutes ago. And for the nearest star system, Alpha Centauri, it is even worse. We have to make do with a picture that by the time we see it is already 4.3 years out of date.

The point is that, although we think of the Universe we see through our telescopes as existing now, this is a mistaken view. We can never know what the Universe is like at this instant. The farther across space we look, the farther back in time we see. If we look far enough across space we can actually see close to the Big Bang itself, 13.7 billion years back in time. Space and time are inextricably bound together. The Universe we see “out there” is not a thing that extends in space but a thing that extends in space-time.

The reason we have been hoodwinked into thinking of space and time as separate things is that light takes so little time to travel human distances that we rarely notice the delay. When you are talking with someone, you see them as they were a billionth of a second earlier. But this interval is unnoticeable because it is 10 million times shorter than any event that can be perceived by the human brain. It is no wonder that we have come to believe that everything we perceive around us exists now. But “now” is a fictitious concept, which becomes obvious as soon as we contemplate the wider universe, where distances are so great that it takes light billions of years to span them.

The space-time of the Universe can be thought of as a vast map. All events—from the creation of the Universe in the Big Bang to your
birth at a particular time and place on Earth—are laid out on it, each with its unique space-time location. The map picture is appropriate because time, as the flip side of space, can be thought of as an additional spatial dimension. But the map picture poses a problem. If everything is laid out—preordained almost—there is no room for the concepts of past, present, and future. As Einstein remarked: “For us physicists, the distinction between past, present, and future is only an illusion.”

It is a pretty compelling illusion, though. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the concepts of past, present, and future do not figure at all in special relativity, one of our most fundamental descriptions of reality. Nature appears not to need them. Why we do is one of the great unsolved mysteries.

E = mc
2
AND ALL THAT

The special theory of relativity does more than profoundly change our ideas of space and time. It changes our ideas about a host of other things too. The reason is that all the basic quantities of physics are founded on space and time. If, as relativity tells us, space and time are malleable, blurring one into the other as the speed of light is approached, then so too are the other entities—momentum and energy, electric fields and magnetic fields. Like space and time, which merge into the seamless medium of space-time, they too are inextricably tied together in the interests of keeping the speed of light constant.

Take electricity and magnetism. It turns out that, just as one person’s space is another person’s time, one person’s magnetic field is another person’s electric field. Electric and magnetic fields are crucial to both generators that make electrical currents and motors that turn electric currents into motion. “The rotating armatures of every generator and every motor in this age of electricity are steadily proclaiming the truth of the relativity theory to all who have ears to hear,” wrote the physicist Leigh Page in the 1940s. Because we live in a slow-
motion world, we are hoodwinked into believing that electric and magnetic fields have separate existences. But just like space and time, they are merely different faces of the same coin. In reality there is only a seamless entity: the electromagnetic field.

Two other quantities that turn out to be different faces of the same coin are energy and momentum.
5
And in this unlikely connection is hidden perhaps the greatest surprise of relativity—that mass is a form of energy. The discovery is encapsulated in the most famous, and least understood, formula in all of science:
E = mc
2
.

1
Strictly speaking, each runner will also appear to rotate, so the spectators will see some of the far side of each of them—the side facing away from the grandstand, which would normally be hidden. This peculiar effect is known as relativistic aberration, or relativistic beaming. However, it is beyond the scope of this book.

2
To be precise, a stationary observer sees time slow down for a moving observer by a factor γ, where γ = 1/√(1 – (
v
2
/
c
2
)) and
v
and
c
are the speed of the moving observer and the speed of light, respectively. At speeds close to
c
, γ becomes enormous and time for a moving observer slows almost to a standstill!

3
To be precise, a stationary observer sees the length of a moving body shrink by a factor γ, where γ = 1/√(1 – (
v
2
/
c
2
)) and v and c are the speed of the moving observer and the speed of light, respectively. At speeds close to
c
, γ becomes enormous and a body becomes as flat as a pancake in the direction of its motion!

4
Actually, there is a subtle flaw in this argument. Since motion is relative, it is perfectly justifiable for your Earth-bound twin to assume that it is Earth that receded from your spacecraft at 99.5 per cent of the speed of light. However, this viewpoint leads to the opposite conclusion than before—that time slows for your twin relative to you. Clearly, time cannot run slowly for each of you, with respect to the other. The resolution of this twin paradox, as it is known, is to realise that your spaceship actually has to slow down and reverse its motion at Alpha Centauri. Because of this deceleration, the two points of view—your spaceship moving or Earth moving—are not really equivalent and interchangeable.

5
The momentum of a body is a measure of how much effort is required to stop it. For instance, an oil tanker, even though it may be moving only a few kilometres an hour, is far harder to stop than a Formula 1 racing car going 200 kilometres per hour. We say the oil tanker has more momentum.

8

E =
MC
2
AND THE
W
EIGHT OF
S
UNSHINE

H
OW WE DISCOVERED THAT ORDINARY MATTER CONTAINS A MILLION TIMES THE DESTRUCTIVE POWER OF DYNAMITE

Photons have mass?!? I didn’t even know they were Catholic.

Woody Allen

It’s the biggest set of bathroom scales imaginable. And, oh, yes, it’s heat
resistant too. It’s so big in fact that it can weigh a whole star. And today
it’s weighing the nearest star of all: our Sun. The digital display has just
come to rest and it’s registering 2 × 10
27
tons. That’s 2 followed by 27
zeroes—2,000 million million million million tons. But wait a minute,
something’s wrong. The scales are superaccurate. That’s another remarkable
thing about them, in addition to their size and heat resistance! But
every second, when the display is refreshed, it reads 4 million tons less
than it did the previous second. What’s going on? Surely the Sun isn’t
really getting lighter—by the weight of a good-sized supertanker—every
single second?

Ah, but it is! The Sun is losing heat-energy, radiating it into space as sunlight. And energy actually
weighs
something.
1
So the more sunlight
the Sun gives out, the lighter it gets. Mind you, the Sun is big and we’re only talking about it losing about a
10-million-
million
-
millionth
of a per cent of its mass per second. That’s hardly more than 0.1 per cent of its mass since its birth.

The fact that energy does indeed weigh something can be seen vividly from the behaviour of a comet. The tail of a comet always points away from the Sun just like a windsock points away from the gathering storm.
2
What do the two have in common? Both are being pushed by a powerful wind. In the case of the windsock, it’s a wind of air; in the case of the comet tail, a wind of light streaming outward from the Sun.

The windsock is being hit by air molecules in their countless trillions. It is this relentless bombardment that is pushing the fabric and causing it to billow outward. The story is pretty much the same out in deep space. The comet tail is being battered by countless tiny particles of light. It is the machine-gun bombardment of these photons that is causing the glowing cometary gases to billow across tens of millions of kilometres of empty space.
3

But there is an important difference between the windsock being struck by air molecules and the comet’s tail being hit by photons. The air molecules are solid grains of matter. They thud into the material of the windsock like tiny bullets, and this is why the windsock recoils. But photons are not solid matter. They actually have no mass. How then can they be having a similar effect to air molecules, which do?

Well, one thing photons certainly do have is energy. Think of the heat that sunlight deposits on your skin when you sunbathe on a summer’s day. The inescapable conclusion is that the energy must actually
weigh
something.
4

This turns out to be a direct consequence of the uncatchability of light. Because the speed of light is terminally out of reach, no material body can ever be accelerated to the speed of light, no matter how hard it is pushed. The speed of light, recall, plays the role of infinite speed in our Universe. Just as it would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate a body to infinite speed, it would take an infinite amount of energy to push one to light speed. In other words, the reason that getting to the speed of light is impossible is because it would take more energy than is contained in the Universe.

What would happen, however, if you were to push a mass closer and closer to the speed of light? Well, since the ultimate speed is unattainable, the body would have to become harder and harder to push as you get it closer and closer to the ultimate speed.

Being hard to push is the same as having a big mass. In fact, the mass of a body is defined by precisely this property—how hard it is to push it. A loaded refrigerator which is difficult to budge, is said to have a large mass, whereas a toaster, which is easy to budge, is said to have a small mass. It follows therefore that, if a body gets harder to push as it approaches the speed of light, it must get more massive. In fact, if a material body was ever to attain the speed of light itself, it would acquire an infinite mass, which is just another way of saying its acceleration would take an infinite amount of energy. Whatever way you look at it, it’s an impossibility.

Now, it is a fundamental law of nature that energy can neither be created or destroyed, only transformed from one guise into another.
For instance, electrical energy changes into light energy in a lightbulb; sound energy changes into the energy of motion of a vibrating diaphragm in a microphone. What, then, happens to the energy put into pushing a body that is moving close to the speed of light? Hardly any of the energy can go into increasing the body’s speed since a body moving at close to the speed of light is already travelling within a whisker of the ultimate speed limit.

The only thing that increases as the body is pushed harder and harder is its mass. This, then, must be where all the energy goes. But, recall, energy can only be changed from one form into another. The inescapable conclusion, discovered by Einstein, is therefore that mass itself is a
form of energy
. The formula for the energy locked up in a chunk of matter of mass,
m
, is given by perhaps the most famous equation in all of science:
E = mc
2
, where
c
is the scientists’ shorthand for the speed of light.

The connection between energy and mass is perhaps the most remarkable of all the consequences of Einstein’s special theory of relativity. And like the connection between space and time, it is a two-way thing. Not only is mass a form of energy, but energy has an effective mass. Put crudely,
energy weighs something
.

Sound energy, light energy, electrical energy—any form of energy you can think of—they all weigh something. When you warm up a pot of coffee, you add heat-energy to it. But heat-energy weighs something. Consequently, a cup of coffee weighs slightly more when hot than when cold. The operative word here is slightly. The difference in weight is far too small to measure. In fact, it is far from obvious that energy has a weight, which is of course why it took the genius of Einstein to first notice it. Nevertheless, one form of energy at least—the energy of sunlight—does reveal its mass when it interacts with a comet.

Light can push the tail of a comet because light energy weighs something. Photons have an effective mass by virtue of their energy. Another familiar form of energy is energy of motion. If you step into the path of a speeding cyclist, you will be left in no doubt that
such a thing exists. Energy of motion, like all other forms of energy, weighs something. So you weigh marginally more when you are running than when you are walking.

It is energy of motion that explains why the photons of sunlight can push a comet tail. An explanation is needed because they actually have no
intrinsic
mass
. If they did, after all, they would be unable to travel at the speed of light, a speed that is forbidden to all bodies with mass. What light has instead is an effective mass—a mass by virtue of the fact that it has energy of motion.

The existence of energy of motion also explains why a cup of coffee is heavier when hot than when cold. Heat is microscopic motion. The atoms in a liquid or solid jiggle about, while the atoms in a gas fly hither and thither. Because the atoms in a cup of hot coffee are jiggling faster than the atoms in a stone-cold cup, they possess more energy of motion. Consequently, the coffee weighs more.

RABBITS OUT OF HATS

So much for energy having an equivalent mass, or weighing something. The fact that mass is a form of energy also has profound implications. Since one form of energy can be converted into another, mass-energy can be transformed into other forms of energy and, conversely, other forms of energy can be changed into mass-energy.

Take the latter process. If mass-energy can be made out of other forms of energy, it follows that mass can pop into existence where formerly no mass existed. This is exactly what happens in giant particle accelerators, or atom smashers. At CERN, the European centre for particle physics near Geneva, for instance, subatomic particles—the building blocks of atoms—are whirled around a subterranean racetrack and slammed together at speeds approaching that of light. In the violent smash-up, the tremendous energy of motion of the particles is converted into mass-energy—the mass of new particles that physicists wish to study. At the collision point, these particles appear apparently out of nothing, like rabbits out of a hat.

This phenomenon is an instance of one type of energy changing into mass-energy. But what about mass-energy changing into another type of energy? Does that happen? Yes, all the time.

A MILLION TIMES THE DESTRUCTIVE POWER OF DYNAMITE

Think of a piece of burning coal. Because the heat it gives out weighs something, the coal gradually loses mass. So if it were possible to collect and weigh all the products of burning—the ash, the gases given off, and so on—they would turn out to weigh less than the original lump of coal.

The amount of mass-energy turned into heat-energy when coal burns is so small as to be essentially unmeasurable. Nevertheless, there is a place in nature where a significant mass is converted into other forms of energy. It was identified by the English physicist Francis Aston in 1919 while he was “weighing” atoms.

Recall that each of the 92 naturally occurring atoms contains a nucleus made from two distinct subatomic particles—the proton and neutron.
5
Since the masses of these two nucleons are essentially the same, the nucleus, at least as far as its weight is concerned, can be thought of as being made from a single building block. Think of it as a Lego brick. Hydrogen, the lightest nucleus, is therefore made from one Lego brick; uranium, the heaviest, is made from 238 Lego bricks.

Now, there had been a suspicion since the beginning of the 19th century that perhaps the Universe had started out with only one kind of atom—the simplest, hydrogen. Since that time, all the other atoms have somehow been built up from hydrogen, by the process of sticking together hydrogen Lego bricks. The evidence for the idea, which
had been proposed by a London physician named William Prout in 1815, was that an atom like lithium appeared to weigh exactly six times as much as hydrogen, an atom like carbon exactly 12 times as much, and so on.

However, when Aston compared the masses of different kinds of atoms more precisely with an instrument he invented called a mass spectrograph, he discovered something different. Lithium in fact weighed a shade less than six hydrogen atoms; carbon weighed a shade less than 12 hydrogen atoms. The biggest discrepancy was helium, the second lightest atom. Since a helium nucleus was assembled from four Lego bricks, by rights it should weigh four times as much as a hydrogen atom. Instead, it weighed 0.8 per cent less than four hydrogen atoms. It was like putting four 1-kilogram bags of sugar on a set of scales and finding that they weighed almost 1 per cent less than 4 kilograms!

If all atoms had indeed been assembled out of hydrogen atom Lego bricks, as Prout strongly suspected, Aston’s discovery revealed something remarkable about atom building. During the process, a significant amount of mass-energy went AWOL.

Mass-energy, like all forms of energy, cannot be destroyed. It can only be changed from one form into another, ultimately the lowest form of energy—heat-energy. Consequently, if 1 kilogram of hydrogen was converted into 1 kilogram of helium, 8 grams of mass-energy would be converted into heat-energy. Amazingly, this is a million times more energy than would be liberated by burning 1 kilogram of coal!

This factor of a million did not go unnoticed by astronomers. For millennia, people had wondered what kept the Sun burning. In the 5th century BC, the Greek philosopher Anaxagoras had speculated that the Sun was “a red-hot ball of iron not much bigger than Greece.” Later, in the 19th century, the age of coal, physicists had naturally wondered whether the Sun was a giant lump of coal. It would have to be the mother of all lumps of coal! They found, however, that if it was a lump of coal, it would burn out in about 5,000 years. The
trouble is that the evidence from geology and biology is that Earth—and by implication the Sun—is at least a million times older. The inescapable conclusion is that the Sun is drawing on an energy source a million times more concentrated than coal.

The man who put two and two together was English astronomer Arthur Eddington. The Sun, he guessed, was powered by atomic, or nuclear, energy. Deep in its interior it was sticking together the atoms of the lightest substance, hydrogen, to make atoms of the second lightest, helium. In the process, mass-energy was being turned into heat and light energy. To maintain the Sun’s prodigious output, 4 million tons of mass—the equivalent of a million elephants—was being destroyed every second. Here, at last, was the ultimate source of sunlight.

This discussion conveniently skirts over the matter of why making a heavy atom out of a light atom converts so much mass-energy into other forms of energy. A digression may help.

Imagine you are walking past a house and a slate falls from the roof and hits you on the head. Energy is released in this process. For instance, there is the whack as the slate hits your head—sound energy. Maybe it even knocks you over. Then there is heat energy. If you could measure the temperature of the slate and your head very accurately, you would find they were slightly warmer than before.

Where did all this energy come from? The answer is from gravity. Gravity is a force of attraction between any two massive bodies. In this case, the gravity between Earth and the slate pulls them closer together.

BOOK: Quantum Theory Cannot Hurt You
4.49Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
ads

Other books

Come and Get It by Beyond the Page Publishing
Celeste Files: Unlocked by Kristine Mason
Justice Incarnate by Regan Black
The Last Alibi by David Ellis
The Great TV Turn-Off by Beverly Lewis
Tiger of Talmare by Nina Croft
My Mother Got Married by Barbara Park
Bachelor's Puzzle by Judith Pella