The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.
Pressure of Light Can Move Liquid
livescience.com — In a first, scientists create a jet of water using nothing but the pressure of light.
Bdog2g2- 1840 diggs
- digg it
- Junn168, on 10/12/2007, -138/+21fgrfgersd
- TheGentleman, on 10/12/2007, -25/+44@Junn168: I totally disagree
- NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -14/+129fhqwgads?
- PRlME, on 10/12/2007, -20/+19do you concur?
- edzieba, on 10/12/2007, -14/+38Percent sign dollar sign ampersand. And colon semicolon too!
- WarpFox, on 10/12/2007, -12/+47@edz
now now, no need for foul language - daedalus1982, on 10/12/2007, -11/+75now now gentlemen considering the statement wasn't:
1) a mispost
2) political in a non political post
3) asininely displaying a superiority complex in pointing out how he "saw this like totally last year on slashdot"
4) profane to the point of being discredited despite provided facts merely because he couldn't come up with more spots to fit the word "*****" in
5) asking a question answered in the first line of the post
6) a right-wing nut-job asking where God fits in
7) a left-wing nut-job responding by telling the right-wing where God can go fit himself
8) a comment about Soviet Russia
9) a comment about welcoming new overlords
10) ASCII art
i say we not digg him down
he has managed to post something on-par with everything else seen here today in the comments section... useless but nonetheless mostly harmless - NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -20/+99You know that Bush will turn this into a reason to go to war with Iran. This was already on Slashdot anyway. What the *****, ***** light can't move ***** *****, assholes. Wait, what kind of pressure was it? God spoke the universe into being by saying "Let there be Light," surely he's responsible for this. Aww, screw it, he's not real anyway. In Soviet Russia, light pushes YOU! I, for one, welcome our new photonic overlords.
.- -.
|o_o |
|:_/ |
//
(| | )
'_ _/`
___)=(___/
EDIT: Whoops, wrong place. Meant this for a reply down the page. - loquax, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4I think this may be a quote from the Voynich Manuscript
- cawpin, on 10/12/2007, -35/+3Let me be the first to say, in response to the actual headline, duh. Light has mass and is moving, so what's so hard to understand.
Edit: @nsmike - I hope you're joking about light not moving *****. It is affected by gravity, so it has mass. - jeffeb3, on 10/12/2007, -14/+8light doesn't have mass....
- drewhenson, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18@cawpin
Light is massless. It is affected by gravity because space-time is warped by gravity, and light continues along its path in space-time, which, when warped, is curved.
For more information please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon . - PleaseJustDie, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7@cawpin
He's obviously making parody of the post above him, since he violates all 10 of the reasons daedalus gives to digg a person down. Mostly in order as well, 2-10 then 1 at the bottom. - Modiga, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Light doesn't have rest-mass, that's certainly true, but whilst it's moving it has energy. Surely E=mc² implies that whilst light is moving it does have some mass?
- InetRoadkill, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4E=mc^2 only describes rest mass. The part that describes momentum isn't there since objects at rest have no momentum.
Light has no mass, but it does have energy and momentum. - drewhenson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Light has relativistic mass while moving, although it is incorrect to say that a proton has mass or invariant mass. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_mass .
@Inet the "m" part is relativisitic mass. - ScottyMo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@edzieba
Dugg up for Sam & Max Hit the Road reference - WaterDragon, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1"Light is massless. It is affected by gravity because space-time is warped by gravity, and light continues along its path in space-time, which, when warped, is curved."
I love how people throw around terms like mass, gravity, and space-time...but they can't ultimately explain what any of them is. They only define unknowns in terms of other unknowns, having no cohesive, underlying theoretical basis with which to pursue their feeble attempts to explain reality in pathetic materialistic terms.
I find materialistic, fake-scientist types to be AS PATHETIC as religious types!
If you can't, first of all, DEFINE TIME, then you have no business speaking of other concepts dependent on that, which you also can't explain!
It's a classic case of people who 'Don't KNOW what they are talking about.'
(Not just the cited comenter, but any who engage in such foolish and pretentious pseudo-knowledge! ) - TrueG, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1@waterdragon
So can you explain it then? - themastersb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Is that?... It is......... It's the seventh swell effect.
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3"Percent sign dollar sign ampersand. And colon semicolon too!"
%$&&:;2!
..I don't get it. Must be some turing tar pit like *****.
- Salgat, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Up the laser to a few gigawatts and see what happens.
- sikosmurf, on 10/12/2007, -7/+70I think about 1.21 jiggawatts should do.
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -9/+41jigga please!
- 0o0Moylan0o0, on 10/12/2007, -8/+18Jigga who?
- rstarr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Wait...Jigga what?
- WaterDragon, on 10/12/2007, -21/+2How original...it is only like the one hundredth time I've read that sequence on digg.
But we always forgive it, as we should welcome all the n00bs who missed it ALL the other times! - Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Just a few? 1.21? God no, you're going to need well over 9000.
- shinynew, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Well damn i guess that makes me a n00b...
also JUST STOP DOING THIS "im a retard...and dont put a space there" its annoying as hell. It turns into links for me.
- moggygetro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+39Why did I suddenly think of lightsabers?
- robdiggity, on 10/12/2007, -1/+108Because you are a nerd and it's Thursday.
- moggygetro, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20Why thank you! :)
- daedalus1982, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17@robdiggity
voted you for the quote of the day. shame this isn't irc chat or you'd have ended up on bash for that one - PRlME, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1yea lets cut tru some ones neck particles
- StacysMom, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19Great Scott!
- MikeWeller, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11This is heavy.
- Tr33fiddy, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3I'd love to be clever enough to delete comments.
- bjohns, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I'd love to be clever enough to delete profiles.
- logic, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7A big day in the history of soapy mixtures.
- kazersoza, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12Now .. just need the frek'n sharks!! ..
Cool story .. dugg.
thanks - toros, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4So thats how Noah split the red sea.
- toros, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22lol check that Moses***
- popltree2, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Hey, he saw his error and corrected it. +digg for you.
- shinynew, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3With a very large boat? I'm not following you.
- dooms13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14For all disbelievers just remember that the photons, the particles of light, have momentum p=E/c, where p is momentum, E is energy and c is the speed of light. So it does need an incredible amount of energy to move an object.
- casta, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_pressure
- WaterDragon, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Last time i checked, momentum was always a product of mass X velocity...so you are in fact claiming that a measure of the Energy of light is the same as its MASS! Guess again!
- cuoops, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3source - http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/07/070327.light.shtml
- drmangrum, on 10/12/2007, -13/+1350 micrometers is a "long jet?"
I can move water 50 micrometers with a strong fart, and it uses a lot less energy. I fail to see any use for this.- Harabeck, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Then I suggest reading the last part of the article...
- drmangrum, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1I read the article in it's entirety, but your over-inflated sense of superiority can't comprehend that there are easier ways to move fluids. This is neat, but highly impractical.
- loquax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I can see the use in applying medicine in precise way into a very, very narrow place. I agree though, you are more likely to see a fart powered speed-boat than a light powered one... But then again, who knows? I could see a sub with no moving propellers with hundreds of thousands of "lasers" (note the quotes are done with my fingers) pushing it along.
- DreKor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Investigative science isn't meant to return practical or applicable results. It is, instead, meant to discover how our world works. There's no way to know where a discovery like this will lead. It's dangerous to suggest that an avenue of study is worthless because no marketable discoveries are immediately present.
- drmangrum, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1@drekor
I think dangerous is the wrong word, I think you meant closed-minded. I'm not suggesting that engineers couldn't find a use for this, but I find it highly doubtful that a similar effect couldn't be produced with a less costly and energy intensive method. It takes a lot of energy for photons to gain enough inertia to move a molecule as large (compared to a photon) as water. It's like trying to move a soccer ball with a stream of fast moving spit wads. Sure, they might get the ball to moving, but there are far better methods to achieve the same task. - DreKor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I agree that there are probably more efficient ways to move things, but that's not what they were looking for here. What they wanted to know was if it was possible for light to move something, specifically a fluid. As it turns out, it works!
- Murdats, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@drmangrum
ok, maybe this technology will be entirely pointless and will never be used, but what about the discoveries made based of this discovery, and the discoveries made based off those? somewhere down the line the brilliance that is future technology can trace part of it to this. just think if people said "pfft, discovering that lighnting will strike a key on a kite, how useless a discovery is that? why bother when it is so inheritinley useless (and it is, who wants to hit a key with lightning)" but the ramifications of the discovery are massive
- valpal, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0future underwater travel
- DeskFlyer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Laser powered squirtgun fight! Pew! Pew!
- popltree2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Oh god! I'm blind! Why would someone make a squirt gun that could blind you?!?
- Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7She blinded me with science!
- TheInfamousOne, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"You would be surprised how much energy is in a beam of light..."
Ok silly, but I loved K-PAX- Murdats, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2ugh, i really didnt like that movie
- PRlME, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10WarpDrive!
PS i never seen a science article with so much retard comments lol- datastorageguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+30You just added one more congratulations
- FrodoTeeBagins, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1This is amazing. This is the start of GI JOE laser guns !!!
- ThePikey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ah yes, I always hoped we would someday advance technology to the point where bad guys could not shoot anything despite firing continuously.
Now, where the hell did I put my metal piercing, exploding, net ejecting, javlin again?
- ThePikey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ah yes, I always hoped we would someday advance technology to the point where bad guys could not shoot anything despite firing continuously.
- Halifax1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I CONCUR YOU NERD!!!!!
- Klipart, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I don't understand how it couldn't be the heat doing it, the laser they used to do that must of had some crazy ass power and with that power comes some crazy ass heat. Rapid thermal expansion of the liquid would cause an effect like that. I would like to see that photograph taken with an infrared camera.
- ThePikey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I wish more scientists would measure things using "Crazy Ass" as a spot on the chart. They could sprinkle in a few "Holy Crap"s and a "Freakin' Insane" too.
- dustysquareback, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You are (probably incorrectly) assuming that the wavelength of light they are using interacts with the water mixture. If it is perfectly transparent to that particular frequency, then there will be no absorption / heat transfer.
Not really trying to flame here, but it kills me when Diggers second guess scientists that have problem been working in this field for YEARS. Like "Gee, we didn't think of THAT! Thanks Digg!"
- naio21, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1ZOMG, the technology behind the shields of Enterprise was discovered today!
- zacwhite, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Nope. The anti-matter confinement beam for the Enterprise was discovered today. Wow, I'm a nerd.
- 955701, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Always wondered about this.
Is it really that the photons are pushing matter, or are they exciting matter on a single side of it and cause it to behave as though it's being pushed? I.E. if a fine particle is elevated by a laser beam, is it because the beam is pushing it up or because the beam is heating the bottom of it and the air pressure is pushing it up? Does this work in a vacuum?- volantis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The ability for light to move massive objects applies to several areas of physics. Light will move the vanes in a Crookes radiometer and it will also move asteroids in the vacuum of space!
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-03/m-lga030907.php - TheShad0w, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1An interesting question is whether its the particles of light, or the waves of light. Since it exists in as both its a hard one to discern.
- volantis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The ability for light to move massive objects applies to several areas of physics. Light will move the vanes in a Crookes radiometer and it will also move asteroids in the vacuum of space!
- gormenghast, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I loved it!
- 1smartguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Bright idea
- Chaostician, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0Light doesn't have mass. Things behave differently on a quantum level; you can't think of it in the same way as you would in the medium sized world.
- drmangrum, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6high school physics > you.
- kazem, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1This publication came out a year or two ago...or a publication using the exact same method.
- Fishspoons, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0high school phsyics has a higher value then me? Value in what? Soap?
- popltree2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Obviously it is soap. What else would it be?
- sefert, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You know I've heart of this before, I think it's called a Freaking LASER ! ! !
Dr. Evil: You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads! Now evidently my cycloptic colleague informs me that that cannot be done. Ah, would you remind me what I pay you people for, honestly? Throw me a bone here! What do we have?
Number Two: Sea Bass.
Dr. Evil: [pause] Right.
Number Two: They're mutated sea bass.
Dr. Evil: Are they ill tempered?
Number Two: Absolutely.
Dr. Evil: Oh well, that's a start.- WaterDragon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've heard of these sharks with laser beams on their heads...from any a digg commenter. Now, at last, I am getting closer to knowing where the saying originated.
Some movie? - ThePikey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@waterdragon
"Some Movie?"
Nope, Dr. Evil is well known in the science community. He's done advanced research in the field of bio-engineered sharks and the grafting of lazers to their heads. It's been his greatest frustration to never successfully merged the two. However his son has made some advances and, while not a full graft of the lazer to the head, it is a functional merging of the two, such that the lazers will fire at the will of the shark.
The "number two" that is quoted was Dr. Evils right hand man who was often there to console the doctor when his plans fell short of his far reaching intentions. - fireblade278, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0also known the movie Austin Powers
- WaterDragon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've heard of these sharks with laser beams on their heads...from any a digg commenter. Now, at last, I am getting closer to knowing where the saying originated.
- WaterDragon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3FTA:
"Physicists know that the heat of lasers can move liquid. But this test found that the light itself, not heat, did the pushing."
That was exactly my question: how are we to know that the breaking up of the water is not simply caused by soap particles in the liquid absorbing or reflecting the laser's energy, causing vaporisation of the water?
The laser vaporizes some of the water along its trail, and the vapor distributes,causing separate droplets to appear in this elongated vapor-field.
The article CLAIMS that this is not the case, but fails to explain it.
It seems likely that the 'soapy water' is less than perfectly clear, so at least some of the laser beam's energy is captured in the water, causing the effect.
I am sure that answering these questions and tying up all the 'loose ends' will require MORE Grant MONEY, as is the case with most pseudo-scientists laboring under the pathetic illusions of a philosophy of physical materialism.
But, like too many digg members, who also enjoy suppressing an open exchange of ideas, they can simply disregard any disturbing ideas by 'modding them down', ignoring them -- as an effective way to preserve one's own ignorance.
Fake science is so immensely boring, to anyone who actually knows the difference.- Bdog2g2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3and I assume you know the difference?
For ***** Sake: IT WAS A NEWS ARTICLE!!!! Would you expect the NYTimes to have a 4 page science journal excerpt detailing Quantum Entanglement? Or how about the Washington Post giving you all the equations needed for a shuttle launch? Or how about Neurology Now explaining the exact chemical processes that are involved when you determine that "Fake science is so immensely boring,"
- Bdog2g2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3and I assume you know the difference?
- hotinhurr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Neato!
- TheToecutter, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I kind of assumed that since light can burn through steel plates and turn it into molten liquid that it can probably move water/liquid too.
- sikosmurf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You're thinking of heat, not light.
- ibzz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0this is really so boring
- WaltDismal, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0I, for one, do not welcome our new optical WMD liquid overlords
- jake3988, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well, light is energy. And lasers are concentrated light... makes perfect sense. Pretty neat.
- ASSASSYN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Also, a fart can create bubles in the water.
- jerryn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0OK. Now I have a project for my 20mw HeNe laser. Time to by some Mr. Bubble
I thought photons have no mass. at least that's what you learn in high school physics.
is this bad science here? Did they measure the energy emitted by the photons? Maybe it
was not "pressure". It could have been an electrostatic field generated from the coherent path
of photons. - edvedder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0old news
- Bdog2g2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"The work, done in cooperation with French scientists at the University of Bordeaux I, is detailed in the March 30 issue of the journal Physical Review Letters."
So the fact that the journal, this technique is detailed in, comes out on tomorrow March 30 doesn't even qualify it new enough for you.
Hey Doc, can I borrow your Dellorian? I need to seen Saturday's lotto numbers.- edvedder, on 02/01/2008, -0/+0This actual study may be new, but the fact that light can have a significant force on things is old news
http://www.physics.byu.edu/faculty/peatross/levita ...
- edvedder, on 02/01/2008, -0/+0This actual study may be new, but the fact that light can have a significant force on things is old news
- Bdog2g2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"The work, done in cooperation with French scientists at the University of Bordeaux I, is detailed in the March 30 issue of the journal Physical Review Letters."
- jerryn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Damn.. are students stupid these days? I bet it wasn't mass from the photons, or an elactrostatic field. You know what it was boys and girls?
HEAT! DAMN IT. HEAT!!!!!
My HeNe is only 20mw, but I can project pretty pictures on rain clouds at night in the dark. now I don't do it as much because some jackass flying overhead may think I'm a terorist! - jerryn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Also this article got me wanting one of these:
http://www.wickedlasers.com/catalog/Green_Lasers-3-1.html
But it will never come close to the 1,000,000 joule Yag Laser I had access to at my first job. we had a lens that focused the beam down to a micron.
bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzbang! We ionozed air and blew a hole through sheet metal. Fun stuff! - chipwar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Can I use light to move my furniture? Or to move money out of the bank and into my greedy fingers?
Can I make a light board, that will let me cruise the streets, with awesome light style and tricks?
Can light be used to move my bowels?- phiya, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ever heard of a solar sail? you can use light to move a ***** space ship
- chipwar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yes, but can I use it to poop. You didn't answer my question, hotshot.
- pyrates, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Another technology Star Trek inspired, the tracter beam. It could happen.
- GCarden, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I can't wait for them to implement this into SuperSoakers.
- fireblade278, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Genius idea! give the five year olds guns with fricken lasers beams to shoot at each other. plus the water will make it look fun!
- prh99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Not surprising, I imagine its the same force that solar sails, in theory, use.
- iStunT, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1no video, it didnt happen.
- Seph7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@toros "So thats how Noah split the red sea."
I havnt laughed so hard all day rofl - megalopata, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Very strange. I can't open the link.
- mvannatter, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0orly? I've done smth like this in university...
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is