• Question: Have you made any particularly interesting breakthroughs recently?

    Asked by markus15 to Joel, Kristian, Tim, Venus, Zachary on 8 Nov 2013. This question was also asked by david69.
    • Photo: Kristian Harder

      Kristian Harder answered on 8 Nov 2013:


      Yeah, kind of, even though it’s more an engineering and project management breakthrough than actual science, strictly speaking.
      I had spent the last two years or so leading a small group of students and engineers developing electronics that would allow us to test a new particle detector prototype. Other people (in Switzerland) had developed the detector (a silicon pixel detector similar to the CCDs used in digital cameras), and yet other people (from Germany, Taiwan, Austria and CERN) were in charge of setting up the test area, but our job was to develop electronics that essentially connects the detector to a computer that can then analyze the data and check that the new detector is doing what it is supposed to do. I had done similar things, but with less responsibility and less complex.
      This particular project was quite rocky. The first version of our electronics didn’t work very well. Then we figured it out, were asked to build something much bigger (the electronics for the full system, not just the small prototype), but then our funding agency changed their mind and eliminated our project. However, we didn’t want to let our colleagues in Switzerland/Germany/Taiwan down, and so we continued to work on a new version of our system in our spare time. Because we didn’t really have money for this project, and couldn’t use that much staff on it, we barely finished everything in time for the crucial big test taking place in the USA last month. But we did it, and it looks like it all worked.
      Of course enough other things went wrong during the test (water leaks, network problems, and so on, and so on) that even now we still don’t know whether the results are actually useful, but we’ll find out soon, and if we have to, we’ll do it all again. Never give up, never surrender! 🙂

    • Photo: Venus Keus

      Venus Keus answered on 10 Nov 2013:


      Well, I’m still at the beginning of my career, so no major breakthroughs yet. But when you get your PhD you are basically at the edge of science and whatever you do during your PhD and afterwards it pushing the boundaries of known phenomena a bit further.
      Those story-changing giants like Einstein are rare, and I guess every physicists hopes to have a story-changing idea down their path in physics as do I.

    • Photo: Zachary Williamson

      Zachary Williamson answered on 10 Nov 2013:


      Sort of. I’m currently trying to get my PhD in particle physics, and I’ve made some fantastic progress during the course of my work. In a few months I should have cobbled together enough knowledge and discoveries to publish my first independent paper, which for me is a big deal.

    • Photo: Joel Goldstein

      Joel Goldstein answered on 11 Nov 2013:


      This is a really tough question to answer, as what is a “breakthrough” (or even what is “interesting”) is often not clear until a long time has passed. I did some recent work with a student on a new type of X-ray detector, but we won’t know if it actually works until a lot more development and testing has been done.

    • Photo: Tim Hollowood

      Tim Hollowood answered on 11 Nov 2013:


      Well it would be a bit presumptuous to say so, but I believe that I might have
      found a solution to an old problem of how to interpret quantum theory. You may have heard something about quantum theory, it’s the theory that describes everything that is small. For instance all the devices that we now use all the time, computers, phones, TVs, are devices that harness the power of quantum theory. All the electronic inside them involve processes that are described by quantum theory. But there has always been a puzzle about quantum theory which is summed by Schrodinger’s famous cat (please look it up on Wikipedia for an entertaining discussion). It seems that quantum theory allows for superpositions of different states of the cat either alive or dead just like two waves on a pond overlapping.

      I’ve always thought that that was nonsense and now I can back it up with my own ideas. In my “theory” there are only either dead cats or alive cats and no funny superposition. If you are brave take a look at my paper

      http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.4228

      I also have a couple more papers to appears soon.

Comments