• This forum is specifically for the discussion of factual science and technology. When the topic moves to speculation, then it needs to also move to the parent forum, Science Fiction and Fantasy (SF/F).

    If the topic of a discussion becomes political, even remotely so, then it immediately does no longer belong here. Failure to comply with these simple and reasonable guidelines will result in one of the following.
    1. the thread will be moved to the appropriate forum
    2. the thread will be closed to further posts.
    3. the thread will remain, but the posts that deviate from the topic will be relocated or deleted.
    Thank you for understanding.​

Physics: Will this poke a hole in the universe?

Introversion

Pie aren't squared, pie are round!
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 17, 2013
Messages
10,771
Reaction score
15,242
Location
Massachusetts
Probably not. Just a click-bait title on this article. Still, there's some interesting boundaries here, with (I'm sure) interesting physics...

Trampoline mirror may push laser pulse through fabric of the Universe

Ars Technica said:
Scientists want to rip the Universe apart. At least that is what a Daily Mail headline might read. Lasers can now reach power in the petawatt range. And, when you focus a laser beam that powerful, nothing survives: all matter is shredded, leaving only electrons and nuclei.

But laser physicists haven’t stopped there. Under good experimental conditions, the very fabric of space and time are torn asunder, testing quantum electrodynamics to destruction. And a new mirror may be all we need to get there.

On average, the amount of power used by humans is about 18 terawatts. A petawatt is 1,000 times larger than a terawatt. The baddest laser on the planet (currently) produces somewhere between 5 and 10 petawatts, and there are plans on the drawing board to reach 100 petawatts in the near future. The trick is that the power is not available all the time. Each of these lasers produces somewhere between 5-5000 J of energy for a very very short time (between a picosecond—10-12s—and a few femtoseconds—10-15s). During that instant, however, the power flow is immense.

The numbers get even more mind blowing when you consider that all of that energy is focused, such that the intensities reach something like 1022W/cm2. To put this in perspective, you start creating a plasma when intensities hit 1012W/cm2. Once intensities get above 1025W/cm2, if the light hits just a single electron, there's enough energy to start a cascade of electron-positron production out of the vacuum. If the laser intensity hits 1029W/cm2, not even that single electron is required—the light will rip virtual electrons out of the vacuum, generating real charges from the apparent nothingness of empty space.

But getting to 1025W/cm2 is tough. The issue is one of material. Or, rather it's the lack of a material that can survive long enough to focus the laser light. This is where plasma mirrors come in.

...
 

shadowsminder

writing in the shadows
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 26, 2018
Messages
487
Reaction score
93
Location
USA
Website
shadowsinmind.carrd.co
"Probably not" isn't reassuring when humans are experimenting with destroying what we barely understand. Why do this? What's the expected benefit to knowing how to destroying as much matter as possible in one spot? I might've missed the reason in the article.
 

Introversion

Pie aren't squared, pie are round!
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 17, 2013
Messages
10,771
Reaction score
15,242
Location
Massachusetts
"Probably not" isn't reassuring when humans are experimenting with destroying what we barely understand. Why do this? What's the expected benefit to knowing how to destroying as much matter as possible in one spot? I might've missed the reason in the article.

Not sure, but I can guess maybe:
* An attempt to understand the fundamental physics that created all matter in the time immediately after Big Bang?
* An attempt to understand what "the nothingness (the so-called fabric) of space" is?

Both are fundamental physics stuff. Neither is aimed at building anything other than a better understanding of, well, what we're all made of.