The atom casts its shadow
With all this talk about the Higgs boson's possible discovery this week, it's refreshing to also have news about a component of the universe we are intimately familiar with: the atom.
Atoms are the building blocks of everything you see around you. They can be further broken down into protons, neutrons and electrons. Theoretically, they have mass because of the Higgs boson, a particle that may have been detected for the first time at the Large Hadron Collider.
This week Australian scientists released this first-ever image of the shadow of the atom.
Why is that important? It could pave the way for the future of biological imaging, not to mention quantum computing, according to Cosmos. The research was done at the Centre for Quantum Dynamics at Griffith University in Brisbane, Queensland, and published in the journal Nature Communications.
@CNNLightYears on Twitter
People in Orbit
Expedition 36 Commander
Expedition 36 Flight Engineer
Expedition 36 Flight Engineer
Contributors
-
Elizabeth Landau
Writer/Producer -
Sophia Dengo
Senior Designer
I was very ecstatic to uncover this website on yahoo.I wanted to say thank you to you with regard to this fantastic post!! I surelyloved every small little bit of it and I've you bookmarked to look into new things you post. 18650行動電源 http://www.powerbankhq.com
Its like you learn my mind! You appear to understand so much approximately this, like you wrote the ebook in it or something. I believe that you can do with some p.c. to drive the message house a bit, but other than that, this is excellent blog. An excellent read. I'll certainly be back.
Interesting how 150 years ago very few scientists even believed that atoms existed.
No, that's just your reflection on the screen.
Badda-bing!
Where is Eve's shadow?
Ah, ha-ha, I saw what you did there! o_0
Shadow of an atom you say?....Kinda looks like a whispering eye to me.
Ytterbium (pronounced ih-tur-bee-uhm) is a very large atom. It has 70 protons and 103 neutrons in its nucleus, and 70 electrons in 6 shells around the nucleus (including 32 in shell 4). You can see the shadow of the nucleus in black. Are the yellow bands the 6 electron shells? I wonder if they will be able to trap the shadow of a smaller more common atom like oxygen.
The shells aren't actually physical locations but are mathematical constructs representing probability of finding electrons in that region. The same goes for the specific electron shells (e.g., s, the three p, five d and seven f). The lines are probably related to the resolution of the imaging system.
I thought the circles had to do with the lens, but I might be wrong. It did say it was like a lighthouse lens which has rings in it instead of the curve of a normal camera lens. That's just what I as.sumed they were talking about.
OMG, it looks like Jesus!!!
Nice, so we captured a shadow of an atom. So we can send a Maytag washer into space and far off distances. But why in hells dumptruck can't we figure out how to keep my satellite system from going out when it rains.
Do you really have nothing better to do than waste your time posting things that have nothing to do with the topic? I fail to grasp how people don't understand how stupid it makes their opinions look – regardless of their validity. Wait till an actual article on 9/11 comes along before posting this stuff.
I find the continuing discoveries of science and the men and women who work to find them to be remarkable. I find poorly written argumentative comments with baseless facts, facts not pertaining to the article itself, rambling nonsense and evident stupidty from my fellow humans who would comment on said articles to be sad and rediculous. Why don't we just comment with relivant knowledge and not just our hands at the keyboard?
Amazing, simple amazing.....one step closer in understanding the universe we are part of....
Full Of Watermelon!!!!!
Sincerely
Africa
I agree – it is amazing.
@hmmm: I hope you are in the third grade, because I believe it was somewhere around the fourth grade that we learned that Africa is a continent, not a country.
Unless your from Alaska.
It's *you're*
You scientist need to just leave crap alone.. !
Says the guy using a computer and the internet, which wouldn't exist without scientists doing their jobs?
Without Atomic Theory and Quantum Mechanics you wouldn't be using that computer right now.
@ffd
I have to say that this is the first time I've seen someone utilize 'sh1thead' in a post about quantum mechanics. I'm not sure whether it's depressing or heartening.
FWIW, I think that some of the recent processors have gained some R&D help, at least, from the 'older' quantum knowledge. And it's already been a while since quantum encryption has been used in banking transactions; if you consider that part of computing, then it's certainly been put to practical use.
Really, it's kind of like the Euro – you don't know whether you have money until you've looked at it...
Power was provided from kangaroo poo.
I know the name of a GOOD science reporter – (ahem) Miles O'Brien.
BS!! Looks like a booger shown in yellow, orange and black pixels.
Quantum computing!! Unbelievably huge. Don't believe in predicting the future? Check out Quantum computing and the tiny FRACTION of what we know it to be capable of....
CNN needs to hire Kip Thorne (Cal Tech) or Brian Greene (Columbia) – or both – to write these nuclear/subatomic physics articles.
If it sees it's shadow, we will have six more weeks of winter.
Just a quick correction: many people are saying that the Higgs Boson is what gives fundamental particles their mass. That's not true. The Higgs Boson gives some tiny fraction of the mass of fundamental particles. Most mass is created by interactions described by Quantum Chromo Dynamics. Even if the Higgs Boson did not exist, the proton mass would be almost exactly what it is now.
Not true!
I knew it! This is why Weebles wobble but they don't fall down! Amazing!
To everyone below: The CNN article is very stripped down. If you go read the article, you will get some insight into how they setup the experiment, thought from a scientist's perspective I would not take much from that article either. It is poorly written and it is clear that whoever wrote the article has no clue what they are talking about. This sentences from cosmos is especially hilarious, "Current techniques like biomarkers cause severe damage to biological samples, like DNA and cells." I am not familiar with a "biomarker" technique of imaging..lolol. I think something was lost in translation.
Also, no, this is not the first time an atom has been visualized, but it is the first time that a shadow has been mapped out (as the article stats). AFM and STM are perfectly valid at "visualizing" the samples. Probing atoms using atomic force microscopy and scanning tunneling are just as valid as optical approaches (if not more valid) for detecting a single atom.
I suppose this means there will be six more weeks of winter.
No brad thats for groundhogs. For something this small you get six more nano seconds. silly!
William, that's pretty funny.
I'm venturing a guess the 'shadow' is cast in such way as to appear significantly larger than the atom which cast it. I say this because the image is composed of a large number of individual pixels, and even at higher wavelengths I'm not sure any individual pixilation could be substantially 'smaller' than any individual atom. At any rate given the image is what it purports to be, it's fascinating! Especially interesting is the 'wavy' area around the central region. Does this just represent distortion around the image? Or is it 'part and parcel' of the overall image of the atom, which, of course, is largely made up of 'space' around a very much smaller nucleus. I will have to see if I can find a better description of exactly what it is we're supposed to be looking at. Irrespective, this is brilliant work, deserving of high acclaim, however precisely what is claimed, as bringing us farther along the road to extremely high level resolution of microscopic objects, with great potential in many areas of healthcare, biological research, and material science. Bravo!
The shadow of an atom? Not likely. Isn't the wavelength of visible light is longer than the size of an atom, thereby making it impossible to see an atom or its shadow?
More likely it's similar to an echo that is a magnified shadow.
what if you use X-ray?
Dear Sir, as a scientist who specializes in imaging your comment is about 10 years obsolete – I myself have imaged at 20nm, using light microscopy, which is 10 fold shorter than the wavelength, at approx 220nm – it is called super-resolution and has been around since the introduction of Leica's 4Pi of which I used, followed by STED and then the single resolution molecular scopes or PALM scopes, and Biplane as well – so your matter of fact comment is a bit behind by a decade or so
Most people on here know little of the tech. of science,easier to make dumba$$ remarks than read,this is very cool to me a 15 year science hobbiest,sounds like you have a very remarkable career cheers, beam me out here please!!,
I thought this was done before, like over a decade ago.
I think that was seeing the atom itself with a microscope, though i'm not sure.
It was very intersting that CNN reported that they found the "God Particle" and that the "Apocalypse Gate" was destroyed on the same day. Oh CNN you make me giggle!
It's astounding how every article published must be politicized in one way or another. We, as a culture, need to grow up get over ourselves. In the larger scheme of life here on Earth, out politics are just are not that important.
The fact that an atom has a shadow isn't surprising. The fact that it was able to be recorded is.
In the end, the God-hating scientists of the world will find the "God" particle. And then they will find GOD. For they will find that God made the "God" particle and everything else in the universe. It did not just spontanelously blow up and appear one day on its own like the "Big Bangers" want you to believe. GOD MADE IT HAPPEN !!!
Actually, it is really not necessary to have a 'God' .
I mean we can be moral and decent to each other with out threat of hellfire.
Matter of fact the threat of hellfire to do what I would do anyway is rather offensive.
No one will get into heaven by being afraid of going to hell.
dont need God? why don't you take a look at the bloodshed and hatred in athiests countries like Africa and Russia.
@Hmmmm
Furthermore, European countries that are the MOST atheistic (2005 data) include France, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Belgium, Estonia, Germany, Sweden, Luxemburg, etc. etc. etc... Surely these heathenistic countries are just rife with violence... oh wait... no they're not.
GOD, do you sound like a dope.
You are kind of outdated. No one thinks the universe was "created' by the big bang, but that a previously existing very compact universe rapidly expanded due to quantum variations in the Higgs field in the primordial universe. How long this primordial universe existed before expansion, and where it came from are totally unknown.
If you want, there is still room for God in cosmic science.
Yes, this is known as "the God of the gaps". Unfortunately, saying God dunnit, doesn't advance human knowledge. As long as people accept the gaps in scientific knowledge be filled by God dunnit, when science does finally explain these gaps, God, eventually is displaced to where he belongs: Oblivion.A
Actually the name god particle came from the media not the physicists and other scientist who were trying to discover the particle. They called it the god damn particle because it is so hard to detect. Your argument is moot.
So, if you can't concieve of a universe not created by some god-like being, then answer me this: "Who created God?". Imagining a God to create everything just moves the creation dilemma one step higher. Does God have a God that created Him? How about THAT God? Who created Him? It never ends....once you assume that a God created everything then there are just more Gods higher up the astral plane, so to speak. I prefer to assume there is no God and believe my five senses and intelligence.
I bet it is a giant fractal that keeps repeating itself forever. always has, always will. Can I prove that? No. Can anyone? Probably not. Does it matter? Not to me.
But you have the same dilemma and can be asked the same questions. Where did this 'primordial universe' come from? What caused the 'Big Bang" to happen? Where did the 'stuff' come from that composes our universe? You believe it was just there and I believe in a divine Creator.
I think you misunderstand why they call it the "God" particle. The man who named the Higgs Boson finds calling the phrase "God" particle offensive to religious people, which judging by your sentiment, clearly demonstrates that.
He originally called it the "goddam" particle because it was so hard to find. It was meant to be a joke but it was advertised as the "god" particle for marketing purposes. It actually has nothing to do with God. If you don't believe me, just look it up.
I think you misunderstand why they call it the "God" particle. The man who named the Higgs Boson finds calling the phrase "God" particle offensive to religious people, which judging by your sentiment, clearly demonstrates that.
He originally called it the "g.o.d.d.a.m." particle because it was so hard to find. It was meant to be a joke but it was advertised as the "god" particle for marketing purposes. It actually has nothing to do with God. If you don't believe me, just look it up.
It will be funny if they find that due to Higg's a shadow does in fact have mass.
Looks like an innie belly button to me
Very very awesome. And to think 100 years from now this information will be obsolete. Where will science be then.
Pushed underground by religion, probably.
Only in the US, the Vatican and all the fundementalist Islamic countries.
ROFLMAO
July 6, 2012 at 5:59 pm |
Phil
"I have a little atom, that goes in and out with me..." "The atom's shadow knows...bruhahahaha!" "Without an atom's shadow of a doubt..." "Its now the Atomic Shadow Age!...Yee Haw!" Does this also mean Atom-Ant can now see his shadow? I think the image was made on an Etch-A-Sketch! Are the rings around the dark (ripples) the electrons going around and round?? More funny comments please!!!
July 6, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Reply
vancouverron
Still waiting for the first one.
July 6, 2012 at 5:38 pm | Reply
Phil
"I have a little atom, that goes in and out with me..." "The atom's shadow knows...bruhahahaha!" "Without an atom's shadow of a doubt..." "Its now the Atomic Shadow Age!...Yee Haw!" Does this also mean Atom-Ant can now see his shadow? I think the image was made on an Etch-A-Sketch! Are the rings around the dark (ripples) the electrons going around and round?? Mor funny comments please!!!
July 6, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Reply
Rod C. Venger
Maybe they should have imaged the actual atom instead.
July 6, 2012 at 4:40 pm | Reply
STTM
Individual Xenon atoms were imaged in 1989 and published in Science. It was the very first image of its kind and is still an awsome accomplishment.
July 6, 2012 at 5:44 pm | Reply
Andrew
Since atoms are too small for a light wave lenghth to bounce off of, how is it possible for it to have a shadow?
July 6, 2012 at 4:39 pm | Reply
Phil from MD
Here's some more info for those interested:
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/5756/scientists-capture-world%E2%80%99s-first-atom-shadow
July 6, 2012 at 4:31 pm | Reply
oussu
Phil – the article you referenced is actual reporting. thanks. CNN, you suck.
July 6, 2012 at 5:07 pm | Reply
JJC
Very interesting. I wonder what the shadow is being cast upon. Other atoms of some material? How exactly did they detect the shadow of an atom, more information please. Is it a large atom casting a shadow on a group of smaller atoms?
July 6, 2012 at 4:28 pm | Reply
Timetraveler
It's a single atom. That much is certain. It is lazy journalism. At the very least they should have found out which atom it is.
As for what it's being cast on, my guess is it's a similar technique to electron microscopy. A magnified shadow would be getting cast on a particle detector. I won't make a guess as to what kind of particle. Could be photons, could be electrons, or something more exotic.
July 6, 2012 at 4:39 pm | Reply
Stuff
I think it would be a larger atom like Uranium. Many of you might think, well isn't that radioactive? Well, it is but it is not dangerous at all.
July 6, 2012 at 5:04 pm |
Timetraveler
Since when is the atom a "particle"?
Must be summer intern season again.
July 6, 2012 at 4:22 pm | Reply
thebigmexi
@Timetraveler– I was thinking the EXACT same thing. I can't take this write-up seriously after that first sentence.
July 6, 2012 at 4:38 pm | Reply
STTM
Not all particles are subatomic. Google "particle, definition".
July 6, 2012 at 5:49 pm | Reply
Colin Morgan
If you turn it sideways, you can see an image of the virgin mary.
July 6, 2012 at 4:21 pm | Reply
Lliam1306
It does look like an @ with an "e" instead of an "a" with an echo.
July 6, 2012 at 4:19 pm | Reply
Lliam1306
That's my toilet flushing after my out of character bender in celebration of geek nirvana. .
July 6, 2012 at 4:17 pm | Reply
There. Are. No. Gods!
What an exciting time to live in! All these discoveries at once! Quick question. . . Where is the shadow picture of (insert name of made up god here)? Oh there isn't one? Hmmmm, perhaps that is because one does not exist. There are no gods!
July 6, 2012 at 4:15 pm | Reply
Timetraveler
It's the shadow of the FSM. Finally proof of His existence. May his noodly appendage touch you. FSM be with you.
July 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm | Reply
who cares
YES LOL
July 6, 2012 at 4:44 pm |
Hmm..
Are you trying to convince us?.....or just yourself?....
July 6, 2012 at 5:02 pm | Reply
Emeljay
Atom gets EVEn.
July 6, 2012 at 5:56 pm | Reply
Evan
I'm pretty sure this is actually the shadow of Sanjay Gupta's intellect.
July 6, 2012 at 4:00 pm | Reply
TheOriginalMe
For sure a lot bigger than yours
July 6, 2012 at 4:20 pm | Reply
MikeForNewYawk
Does this mean we get 6 more weeks of winter?
July 6, 2012 at 3:59 pm | Reply
who cares
LOL
July 6, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Reply
sam
Well done.
July 6, 2012 at 4:59 pm | Reply
oussu
6 billion more years for the cosmos.
July 6, 2012 at 5:02 pm | Reply
STTM
More like 6 more years of funding for the Large Hadron Collider and it is well deserved.
July 6, 2012 at 5:51 pm | Reply
laughing horse
Now that was funny!
July 6, 2012 at 6:00 pm | Reply
ArthurP
So is the atom is a shadow of its former self.
July 6, 2012 at 3:53 pm | Reply
who cares
It always amazes me how everyone knows what a stom is and what it is made of yet no one has ever seen one before. Its nice to see the shadow now lets see a real atom!
July 6, 2012 at 3:53 pm | Reply
ArthurP
Google Images and you will see all kinds of pictures of atoms.
July 6, 2012 at 3:54 pm | Reply
StanD
Yes, but aren't those pictures taken using electrons? This article here has very little detail. If it's a "shadow," that seems to imply that we can now capture how a single atom affects visible light. That would mean we can now see down to atomic level without using electrons.
July 6, 2012 at 4:21 pm |
who cares
thank you stan, I didn't think it needed to be explained but people have taken for granted that no one has visibly seen an atom we have just assumed what they look like and what they have in them though various diffrent means that we believe make sense. We should never forget that the atom as we know it is a theroy that is almost provable.
"the only things humans have consistantly gotten right is the fact they have always been wrong" never be foolish enough to think that what our generation knows to be correct will be remain that way in the future. After all not that long ago everybody knew the sun travled around the Earth.
July 6, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
AGuest9
Stan, there are various devices used to image atoms, but because they almost always involve current or force, we haven't yet optically imaged individual atoms. One reason is that photons are given off and absorbed by electrons as they move between energy levels. So far, the two prevalent mechanisms for viewing atoms are as follows:
Scanning Tunneling Microscopes show images of atoms on the surface of metals and semiconductors based on the electron current between the probe tip and the orbital clouds of the atoms, while Atomic Force Microscopy measures the mechanical deflection of the probe as it moves across the surface, rather than measuring the current. Therefore, AFM works on any material, not just conducting materials such as metals and semiconductors, however, because it may contact the materials, the probe tip can become contaminated or damaged, which is a significant drawback.
July 6, 2012 at 5:15 pm |
AGuest9
*haven't yet optically imaged individual atoms in detail.
July 6, 2012 at 5:16 pm |
Pppa
It is an absorption image, showing "how much light (or information) is absent in the presence of an object". Read the Cosmos article, not this CNN dribble...
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/5756/scientists-capture-world%E2%80%99s-first-atom-shadow
July 6, 2012 at 5:50 pm |
Spaghetti Monster (Not to be confused with the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster)
Photoshopped, I should know, I've been on the interwebz. And you can clearly see the pixels....
July 6, 2012 at 3:52 pm | Reply
james
So what is it good for?
July 6, 2012 at 3:49 pm | Reply
Rod C. Venger
Aaaabsolutely nothing! Say it again!
July 6, 2012 at 4:40 pm | Reply
STTM
It is evidence of physical properties that were mere speculation until the data were acquired. That makes it very good as many things that affect our societies such as religions have vanishingly little proof of their very foundation concepts. I believe in the verified properties of matter. I do NOT believe in the concept of gods, which have never been demonstrated in actual form or to have ever cast a shadow. Perhaps the technology doesn't exist yet to gather those data but I'm not expecting that to happen.
July 6, 2012 at 5:59 pm | Reply
snowdogg
Yup... sure looks like an atom shadow to me.
July 6, 2012 at 3:47 pm | Reply
who cares
YES LOL
July 6, 2012 at 4:44 pm |
Hmm..
Are you trying to convince us?.....or just yourself?....
July 6, 2012 at 5:02 pm | Reply
Emeljay
Atom gets EVEn.
July 6, 2012 at 5:56 pm | Reply
Evan
I'm pretty sure this is actually the shadow of Sanjay Gupta's intellect.
July 6, 2012 at 4:00 pm | Reply
TheOriginalMe
For sure a lot bigger than yours
July 6, 2012 at 4:20 pm | Reply
MikeForNewYawk
Does this mean we get 6 more weeks of winter?
July 6, 2012 at 3:59 pm | Reply
who cares
LOL
July 6, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Reply
sam
Well done.
July 6, 2012 at 4:59 pm | Reply
oussu
6 billion more years for the cosmos.
July 6, 2012 at 5:02 pm | Reply
STTM
More like 6 more years of funding for the Large Hadron Collider and it is well deserved.
July 6, 2012 at 5:51 pm | Reply
ArthurP
So is the atom is a shadow of its former self.
July 6, 2012 at 3:53 pm | Reply
who cares
It always amazes me how everyone knows what a stom is and what it is made of yet no one has ever seen one before. Its nice to see the shadow now lets see a real atom!
July 6, 2012 at 3:53 pm | Reply
ArthurP
Google Images and you will see all kinds of pictures of atoms.
July 6, 2012 at 3:54 pm | Reply
StanD
Yes, but aren't those pictures taken using electrons? This article here has very little detail. If it's a "shadow," that seems to imply that we can now capture how a single atom affects visible light. That would mean we can now see down to atomic level without using electrons.
July 6, 2012 at 4:21 pm |
who cares
thank you stan, I didn't think it needed to be explained but people have taken for granted that no one has visibly seen an atom we have just assumed what they look like and what they have in them though various diffrent means that we believe make sense. We should never forget that the atom as we know it is a theroy that is almost provable.
"the only things humans have consistantly gotten right is the fact they have always been wrong" never be foolish enough to think that what our generation knows to be correct will be remain that way in the future. After all not that long ago everybody knew the sun travled around the Earth.
July 6, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
AGuest9
Stan, there are various devices used to image atoms, but because they almost always involve current or force, we haven't yet optically imaged individual atoms. One reason is that photons are given off and absorbed by electrons as they move between energy levels. So far, the two prevalent mechanisms for viewing atoms are as follows:
Scanning Tunneling Microscopes show images of atoms on the surface of metals and semiconductors based on the electron current between the probe tip and the orbital clouds of the atoms, while Atomic Force Microscopy measures the mechanical deflection of the probe as it moves across the surface, rather than measuring the current. Therefore, AFM works on any material, not just conducting materials such as metals and semiconductors, however, because it may contact the materials, the probe tip can become contaminated or damaged, which is a significant drawback.
July 6, 2012 at 5:15 pm |
AGuest9
*haven't yet optically imaged individual atoms in detail.
July 6, 2012 at 5:16 pm |
Pppa
It is an absorption image, showing "how much light (or information) is absent in the presence of an object". Read the Cosmos article, not this CNN dribble...
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/5756/scientists-capture-world%E2%80%99s-first-atom-shadow
July 6, 2012 at 5:50 pm |
Spaghetti Monster (Not to be confused with the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster)
Photoshopped, I should know, I've been on the interwebz. And you can clearly see the pixels....
July 6, 2012 at 3:52 pm | Reply
james
So what is it good for?
July 6, 2012 at 3:49 pm | Reply
Rod C. Venger
Aaaabsolutely nothing! Say it again!
July 6, 2012 at 4:40 pm | Reply
snowdogg
Yup... sure looks like an atom shadow to me.
July 6, 2012 at 3:47 pm | Reply
so we can smash atoms together and photograph the shadow but the premise is just a theory?????
ttwom, It's only a theory (to me) that you exist. Should only be a theory (to you) that I exist. So, yes, chemists study the "atomic theory" and not the "atomic fact."
You use the word theory, but I don't think you understand what it means.
In science a theory is an explanation of the behavior or existence of something in the natural world. While a law may describe WHAT something does or is, there will be a THEORY to explain why it does that, or HOW it came to be.
Here, for reference, this article from the National Academies of Science explains it well:
http://www.nationalacademies.org/evolution/TheoryOrFact.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120307132216.htm
3 months ago scientists in Ohio say they took a picture of an atom – Why is this "the first picture of an atom"?
Xenon atoms arranged to spell "IBM" were imaged and published in Science in 1989.
I thought that since the atom is smaller than the wave length of light it could not be seen. Perhaps a physicist reading this can help explain. Thanks.
Google "atomic force microscopy" and "scanning tunneling transmission electron microscopy". You have now been empowered.
thanks....will check it out
They're using electrons to "see" it, not photons of light.
The atom is a Ytterbium ion............
This was the Australian physics conference that was interrupted for the July 4th announcement by CERN. We all watched it live.
we just dust in the wind, nothing to see here, please moved along
Looks like my colonoscopy picture
With that kind of detail, it could be a PIMPLE for all we know.
It's a friggin' atom...! How detailed do you want it to be???
ROFLMAO
Well said and funny.
"I have a little atom, that goes in and out with me..." "The atom's shadow knows...bruhahahaha!" "Without an atom's shadow of a doubt..." "Its now the Atomic Shadow Age!...Yee Haw!" Does this also mean Atom-Ant can now see his shadow? I think the image was made on an Etch-A-Sketch! Are the rings around the dark (ripples) the electrons going around and round?? More funny comments please!!!
Still waiting for the first one.
"I have a little atom, that goes in and out with me..." "The atom's shadow knows...bruhahahaha!" "Without an atom's shadow of a doubt..." "Its now the Atomic Shadow Age!...Yee Haw!" Does this also mean Atom-Ant can now see his shadow? I think the image was made on an Etch-A-Sketch! Are the rings around the dark (ripples) the electrons going around and round?? Mor funny comments please!!!
Maybe they should have imaged the actual atom instead.
Individual Xenon atoms were imaged in 1989 and published in Science. It was the very first image of its kind and is still an awsome accomplishment.
Since atoms are too small for a light wave lenghth to bounce off of, how is it possible for it to have a shadow?
Here's some more info for those interested:
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/5756/scientists-capture-world%E2%80%99s-first-atom-shadow
Phil – the article you referenced is actual reporting. thanks. CNN, you suck.
Very interesting. I wonder what the shadow is being cast upon. Other atoms of some material? How exactly did they detect the shadow of an atom, more information please. Is it a large atom casting a shadow on a group of smaller atoms?
It's a single atom. That much is certain. It is lazy journalism. At the very least they should have found out which atom it is.
As for what it's being cast on, my guess is it's a similar technique to electron microscopy. A magnified shadow would be getting cast on a particle detector. I won't make a guess as to what kind of particle. Could be photons, could be electrons, or something more exotic.
I think it would be a larger atom like Uranium. Many of you might think, well isn't that radioactive? Well, it is but it is not dangerous at all.
Since when is the atom a "particle"?
Must be summer intern season again.
@Timetraveler– I was thinking the EXACT same thing. I can't take this write-up seriously after that first sentence.
Not all particles are subatomic. Google "particle, definition".
If you turn it sideways, you can see an image of the virgin mary.
It does look like an @ with an "e" instead of an "a" with an echo.
What an exciting time to live in! All these discoveries at once! Quick question. . . Where is the shadow picture of (insert name of made up god here)? Oh there isn't one? Hmmmm, perhaps that is because one does not exist. There are no gods!
It's the shadow of the FSM. Finally proof of His existence. May his noodly appendage touch you. FSM be with you.
YES LOL
RAMEN BROTHER!!!
Pasta be upon Him. Garrrrr!
Are you trying to convince us?.....or just yourself?....
Atom gets EVEn.
I'm pretty sure this is actually the shadow of Sanjay Gupta's intellect.
For sure a lot bigger than yours
Does this mean we get 6 more weeks of winter?
LOL
Well done.
6 billion more years for the cosmos.
More like 6 more years of funding for the Large Hadron Collider and it is well deserved.
Now that was funny!
So is the atom is a shadow of its former self.
It always amazes me how everyone knows what a stom is and what it is made of yet no one has ever seen one before. Its nice to see the shadow now lets see a real atom!
Google Images and you will see all kinds of pictures of atoms.
Yes, but aren't those pictures taken using electrons? This article here has very little detail. If it's a "shadow," that seems to imply that we can now capture how a single atom affects visible light. That would mean we can now see down to atomic level without using electrons.
thank you stan, I didn't think it needed to be explained but people have taken for granted that no one has visibly seen an atom we have just assumed what they look like and what they have in them though various diffrent means that we believe make sense. We should never forget that the atom as we know it is a theroy that is almost provable.
"the only things humans have consistantly gotten right is the fact they have always been wrong" never be foolish enough to think that what our generation knows to be correct will be remain that way in the future. After all not that long ago everybody knew the sun travled around the Earth.
Stan, there are various devices used to image atoms, but because they almost always involve current or force, we haven't yet optically imaged individual atoms. One reason is that photons are given off and absorbed by electrons as they move between energy levels. So far, the two prevalent mechanisms for viewing atoms are as follows:
Scanning Tunneling Microscopes show images of atoms on the surface of metals and semiconductors based on the electron current between the probe tip and the orbital clouds of the atoms, while Atomic Force Microscopy measures the mechanical deflection of the probe as it moves across the surface, rather than measuring the current. Therefore, AFM works on any material, not just conducting materials such as metals and semiconductors, however, because it may contact the materials, the probe tip can become contaminated or damaged, which is a significant drawback.
*haven't yet optically imaged individual atoms in detail.
It is an absorption image, showing "how much light (or information) is absent in the presence of an object". Read the Cosmos article, not this CNN dribble...
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/5756/scientists-capture-world%E2%80%99s-first-atom-shadow
Photoshopped, I should know, I've been on the interwebz. And you can clearly see the pixels....
So what is it good for?
Aaaabsolutely nothing! Say it again!
It is evidence of physical properties that were mere speculation until the data were acquired. That makes it very good as many things that affect our societies such as religions have vanishingly little proof of their very foundation concepts. I believe in the verified properties of matter. I do NOT believe in the concept of gods, which have never been demonstrated in actual form or to have ever cast a shadow. Perhaps the technology doesn't exist yet to gather those data but I'm not expecting that to happen.
Why did we go to the moon ? Why do any kind of science what so ever, whats it good for ? Really ? What is it good for. Lets put it this way if you cant see the potential and the advancement from something like this then there is no point what so ever trying to explain it to you. Go back to watching FOX News, listening to Beck and live your life. If you ever need any kind of advanced medical treatment just write it off as magic. Thats it think of it as magic and leave it at that. WOW !!
Yup... sure looks like an atom shadow to me.