Jul 30, 2026 05:58 PM
(This post was last modified: Jul 30, 2026 06:22 PM by C C.)
Bizarre new material discovered in Hiroshima bombing debris
https://www.yahoo.com/news/science/artic...00731.html
EXCERPT: In this case, one of thousands or perhaps millions of such "microexperiments" in the Hiroshima explosion formed a metallic alloy mainly made up of iron, chromium, nickel, manganese, molybdenum, silicon and aluminum mixed in a homogeneous cubic lattice. The material and structural composition have never been seen before—typically, this mix of elements would stabilize into a simpler crystal structure with fewer ingredients, but here it retains a complex cubic form.
The new material is made up of iron, chromium, nickel, manganese, molybdenum, silicon, aluminum and more mixed in a homogeneous cubic lattice.
Scientists have found new substances that were formed by nuclear or other extreme conditions in the past. Among them is trinitite, a glassy material that was created by the Trinity nuclear bomb test in July 1945. Trinitite contains a novel, cagelike clathrate crystal and quasicrystals, rare materials, once thought impossible, that contain nonrepeating atomic structures. Quasicrystals have also been uncovered in meteorites. Though the alloy found in Hiroshima Bay is not a quasicrystal, its structure can help us understand them better, Bindi says, because it's similar to some of the atomic arrangements within quasiperiodic materials.
This discovery, published on Wednesday in Science Advances, opens questions around what kinds of substances extreme events can create and whether they are "isolated curiosities" or part of a "more general class of materials," Bindi adds. "If that broader pattern is real, then atomic-blast debris may help us discover principles of matter formation that also apply to meteorite impacts, lightning strikes and other violent events throughout nature."
The finding reflects "a whole world largely untouched" of materials that are difficult to create under thermodynamically stable conditions... (MORE - missing details)
Physicists solve a big quantum mystery. Now, old results don’t add up.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicist...-20260729/
EXCERPTS: For 25 years, physicists have been puzzled by an apparent one-part-in-a-million problem. Their expectations of the way that certain particles should wobble in a magnetic field were clashing with what they saw in experiments. The discrepancy was an electrifying hint that they might be seeing evidence of unknown particles.
Then in 2021, that hint seemed to evaporate. When researchers updated the way they did their theoretical calculations, they found that their predictions matched the experimental results much more precisely than before, to one part in 100 billion.
But that, in turn, has created another puzzle: The old calculations seem perfectly valid. So why don’t they match the new calculations? Those older predictions were not purely based on theory; they were also inferred from other experiments. If the older calculations conflicted with newer results, and the older calculations were based on experimental data, was something strange going on in those old experiments?
One promising clue comes from a particle collider in Siberia, which has recently started seeing its experiments dramatically diverge from what it and other colliders saw in the past. Its results have sparked a flurry of activity as physicists try to determine whether the conflicting measurements are a side effect of different experimental procedures, or a sign that new particles are popping up after all.
[...] All of this leaves physicists wondering what’s really going on in all these collider experiments. The discrepancies point either to signs of unknown particles(opens a new tab) meddling with the quarks, or to overlooked details generating the mistaken impression that quarks are misbehaving. Either way, particle physicists can’t rest until they have solved the new electron-positron mystery, and figured out whether the old pion rate, or the new pion rate, is the right one.
“There are four decades of measurements that preceded that, that were all done in different ways, that were all done by different people, that were all done by different experiments, that all paint a completely different picture,” Keshavarzi said. “There is so much still left to do.” (MORE - missing details)
https://www.yahoo.com/news/science/artic...00731.html
EXCERPT: In this case, one of thousands or perhaps millions of such "microexperiments" in the Hiroshima explosion formed a metallic alloy mainly made up of iron, chromium, nickel, manganese, molybdenum, silicon and aluminum mixed in a homogeneous cubic lattice. The material and structural composition have never been seen before—typically, this mix of elements would stabilize into a simpler crystal structure with fewer ingredients, but here it retains a complex cubic form.
The new material is made up of iron, chromium, nickel, manganese, molybdenum, silicon, aluminum and more mixed in a homogeneous cubic lattice.
Scientists have found new substances that were formed by nuclear or other extreme conditions in the past. Among them is trinitite, a glassy material that was created by the Trinity nuclear bomb test in July 1945. Trinitite contains a novel, cagelike clathrate crystal and quasicrystals, rare materials, once thought impossible, that contain nonrepeating atomic structures. Quasicrystals have also been uncovered in meteorites. Though the alloy found in Hiroshima Bay is not a quasicrystal, its structure can help us understand them better, Bindi says, because it's similar to some of the atomic arrangements within quasiperiodic materials.
This discovery, published on Wednesday in Science Advances, opens questions around what kinds of substances extreme events can create and whether they are "isolated curiosities" or part of a "more general class of materials," Bindi adds. "If that broader pattern is real, then atomic-blast debris may help us discover principles of matter formation that also apply to meteorite impacts, lightning strikes and other violent events throughout nature."
The finding reflects "a whole world largely untouched" of materials that are difficult to create under thermodynamically stable conditions... (MORE - missing details)
Physicists solve a big quantum mystery. Now, old results don’t add up.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicist...-20260729/
EXCERPTS: For 25 years, physicists have been puzzled by an apparent one-part-in-a-million problem. Their expectations of the way that certain particles should wobble in a magnetic field were clashing with what they saw in experiments. The discrepancy was an electrifying hint that they might be seeing evidence of unknown particles.
Then in 2021, that hint seemed to evaporate. When researchers updated the way they did their theoretical calculations, they found that their predictions matched the experimental results much more precisely than before, to one part in 100 billion.
But that, in turn, has created another puzzle: The old calculations seem perfectly valid. So why don’t they match the new calculations? Those older predictions were not purely based on theory; they were also inferred from other experiments. If the older calculations conflicted with newer results, and the older calculations were based on experimental data, was something strange going on in those old experiments?
One promising clue comes from a particle collider in Siberia, which has recently started seeing its experiments dramatically diverge from what it and other colliders saw in the past. Its results have sparked a flurry of activity as physicists try to determine whether the conflicting measurements are a side effect of different experimental procedures, or a sign that new particles are popping up after all.
[...] All of this leaves physicists wondering what’s really going on in all these collider experiments. The discrepancies point either to signs of unknown particles(opens a new tab) meddling with the quarks, or to overlooked details generating the mistaken impression that quarks are misbehaving. Either way, particle physicists can’t rest until they have solved the new electron-positron mystery, and figured out whether the old pion rate, or the new pion rate, is the right one.
“There are four decades of measurements that preceded that, that were all done in different ways, that were all done by different people, that were all done by different experiments, that all paint a completely different picture,” Keshavarzi said. “There is so much still left to do.” (MORE - missing details)