This is a bit of the idea - imagine the information potential even in such 'small' physics. The fields they measure are so-called hotspots that form at the surface of metals or around metallic nanostructures such as nanoparticles or nanoscale bow tie structures. There, collective movements of the electrons – the surface plasmons – can create huge electromagnetic fields. This is very much in analogy to the way any other antenna works: oscillating electrical currents create electromagnetic radio waves. On the surface of metal nanostructures, the same happens; but because the geometry is so small the effect is much larger.
These hotspots are very efficient antennas indeed. Light that is directed on the hotspot with a frequency close to the resonance of these plasmons is very tightly focussed into this tiny space. If a molecule happens to be in that hotspot, the interaction with this highly concentrated light is very strong. It is no surprise that this effect is explored for sensing applications such as surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS). The efficiency of SERS and other applications, however, depends on the precise distribution of electromagnetic fields at these hotspots. It is a somewhat surprising drawback that the electromagnetic field of these hotspots couldn’t be measured so far. In their experiments, Xiang Zhang now use the ultimate analogue to iron filings to visualize the electromagnetic field of hotspots: single molecules. They take a dilute solution of dye molecules and pour this on the hot spots. Then, they turn the light on. Due to the antenna effect of the plasmons the light gets focussed into the hotspot, where it excites the dye molecules and causes them to emit light. But the dye molecules can only emit light for a little while before their electronic states become saturated. Each dye molecule only sends out a brief flash of light before it goes dark again for a certain period of time. The researchers then made sure that the dye solution is so dilute that on average only one molecule at a time emits a flash, which they are able to measure with an accuracy of 1.2 nanometres. Furthermore, due to the random movement of the dye molecules, the flash from the dye molecules always occurs at a different location. The intensity of the light emission of the molecule, however, is the same all the time. But the light intensity the camera sees depends strongly on the antenna effect of the hotspot, which in turn depends on the local electromagnetic field at the position of the dye molecule. In that way the location and intensity of the light flashes from the dye molecules provides a direct map of the electromagnetic fields in the hotspot – with nanometer resolution. At the moment, the technique only is able to measure two-dimensional images of the hotspots, but three-dimensional sensing seems not too unlikely. Nevertheless, already at this stage this tool provides very useful feedback for the study of hotspots and the further development of applications such as SERS. If we move to Einstein-Bose Condensates and 'distanced' entanglement (done I understand) the information possibilities leap away from the 'smallness'. On Jun 7, 12:15 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote: > Physicists are experimenting with cavities Carlos. I'll get back - as > a mere biochemist I need to codge up. > > On Jun 6, 7:08 am, awori achoka <awori.ach...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I call it zapping and visioning. I will share with you something i wrote > > towards that end. > > > Thank you. > > > On Jun 6, 2011 7:56 AM, "Lonnie Clay" <claylon...@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > Try introspection and self realization, proceed onwards to reprogram your > > > own mind as you see fit. I started the process in the third grade with > > > mnemonic associative memory retrieval techniques, for which I thank Mrs. > > > Dowd, who would likely be in her 80s by now if not dead. My earlier > > teachers > > > before the AT program regarded me as a pestilential nuisance, but AT > > program > > > teachers regarded us all as a challenge to their own ability to take raw > > ore > > > and turn it into glittering blades of intellectual incisiveness. Somewhere > > > along the way I became distracted by entertainment rather than pondering, > > > but I THINK that I have shaken off the death grip of frivolousness. To > > > clarify a point regarding my posts elsewhere, I use frivolity to see if I > > > can prod unguarded responses from others goaded into replying. The problem > > > with being intelligent is that your wits become dull if you fail to clash > > > swords with similar talents. > > > > If you have a child at hand to manipulate, be cautious, because there is > > > untapped potential in even the most obviously dim-witted of youths. Did > > you > > > ever stop to think that perhaps a so called dimwit merely finds the > > outside > > > world dull and lacking challenge, sunken into introspective apathy from > > > boredom? I suspect that lacking brain damage in the womb, all infants are > > > more or less intellectually equal, what varies widely is the traction > > gained > > > by the environment upon the infant's attention. If you want a child to > > > succeed with worldly interaction, then provide a stimulus rich > > environment. > > > To attain failure, place into a white crib in a soundless white room and > > > initiate sensory deprivation protocols. > > > > As an adult you will probably be forced to employ more sophisticated > > tricks > > > to derail old habits of thought. Couple the activities which provide > > maximum > > > reinforcement of changed protocols with reinforcing rewards. Pavlov knew a > > > trick or two. As a revised mental process gains strength through usage, > > vary > > > the reinforcing rewards so that the specificity of cues is diminished. > > > Eventually you will be able to shake loose from semi-compulsory > > associations > > > and range freely within your own mind, cultivating your programmed > > processes > > > with any applicable mental tool at hand rather than having to employ a > > > specific trick. > > > > Lonnie Courtney Clay > > > > On Sunday, June 5, 2011 4:57:16 AM UTC-7, Awori wrote: > > > >> We are there...if not almost! > > > >> On Jun 5, 2011 2:51 PM, "Lonnie Clay" <clayl...@comcast.net> wrote: > > >> > Mmmhhhmmm... It Goes something like this : > > > >> > [Context -> Interaction -> Events] -> > > >> > [Observations -> Abstractions -> Prioritization and Categorization -> > > >> > Memorization -> Recall -> Pondering and Correlation] > > > >> > Lonnie Courtney Clay > > > >> > On Sunday, June 5, 2011 3:55:24 AM UTC-7, Awori wrote: > > > >> >> Good. That is...before the fact..there is fact. The existence of > > >> >> phenomena..'data'...is independent of the conscious fact that, it is > > >> there. > > > >> >> On Jun 5, 2011 12:29 PM, "Lonnie Clay" <clay...@comcast.net> wrote: > > >> >> Oof Misunderstanding! Information continuously cycles within an > > >> awareness > > >> >> between the so called "conscious mind", the "memory", and the > > >> >> "subconscious". Furthermore there are often many layers within each of > > >> those > > >> >> broad categories, each of which exchanges content within its own realm > > >> of > > >> >> control. For example, when I want to fetch a particular datum from > > >> memory > > >> >> due to a fleeting wisp of recollection, I must follow a path of > > >> mnemonically > > >> >> associated compactions to attain retrieval. If I have secreted the > > >> memory to > > >> >> prevent unauthorized extraction, then I must also follow a keying > > >> sequence > > >> >> of permissible windows of synchronization, such that I am not diverted > > >> into > > >> >> false leads which provide bogus imitations of the buried data. > > >> Information > > >> >> exists as datums taken WITHIN CONTEXT in my mind. Perhaps I could > > >> clarify by > > >> >> saying that every transitional exchange of a datum is information > > >> regardless > > >> >> of whether the transmitter and receiver are located within the same > > >> >> awareness? As extraction proceeds, the information attains a solidity > > of > > > >> >> form which approaches clarity of its true meaning, until the final > > stage > > >> is > > >> >> attained with the clarity at which the datum was stored. This begs the > > >> >> question of how much subtext is contained in the clarified > > information, > > >> and > > >> >> how many associated datums must be synthesized together within the > > >> conscious > > >> >> mind to attain a true vision of the meaningfulness of the data. > > > >> >> So far as derived conclusions go based upon the gibberish which I > > spout > > >> - > > >> >> Arrggghhhh Yaarrr, Good Luck Pilgrim! > > > >> >> Lonnie Courtney Clay > > > >> >> On Saturday, June 4, 2011 8:01:57 AM UTC-7, Awori wrote: > > > >> >>> > Interesting...but the assumption is that data only becomes > > >> information > > >> >>> when it is transmitted f... > > > >> >>> > On Jun 4, 2011 4:54 PM, "Lonnie Clay" <cla...@comcast.net> wrote: > > >> >>> > > Wonderful to hear from ... > > >> >>> > To post to this group, send email to epi...@googlegroups.com. > > >> >>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > >> >>> epist...@googlegroups.com. > > > >> >>> > > For more options, visit this group at > > >> >>>http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. > > > >> >> -- > > >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > >> Groups > > >> >> "Epistemology" group.... > > >> >> To view this discussion on the web visit > > >> >>https://groups.google.com/d/msg/epistemology/-/MFh5Q3JvSFB3UVFK. > > > >> >> To post to this group, send email to epis...@googlegroups.com. > > >> >> To unsubscribe from this group,... > > > >> > -- > > >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups > > >> "Epistemology" group. > > >> > To view this discussion on the web visit > > >>https://groups.google.com/d/msg/epistemology/-/LWstQTBZenJvZ3NK. > > >> > To post to this group, send email to episte...@googlegroups.com. > > >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > >> epistemology...@googlegroups.com. > > >> > For more options, visit this group at > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > > "Epistemology" group.> To view this discussion on the web visit > > >https://groups.google.com/d/msg/epistemology/-/TDlHTnFBaUo2djRK.> To post to > >this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.> For more options, visit this > > group at > > >http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
