Stories with Tag Nature (Journal)

• Can Earth's rotation generate power? Physicists divided over controversial claim

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-03-30 18:41:46

  Verbose tl;dr

  A recent paper claims Earth's rotation could be harnessed for power using a "gravity engine," theoretically generating terawatts of energy by raising and lowering massive weights as the Earth rotates. This concept, building on decades-old physics, hinges on the Coriolis effect. However, many physicists are skeptical, arguing that the proposed mechanism violates fundamental laws of physics, particularly conservation of angular momentum. They contend that any energy gained would be offset by a minuscule slowing of Earth's rotation, effectively transferring rotational energy rather than creating it. The debate highlights the complex interplay between gravity, rotation, and energy, with the practicality and feasibility of such a gravity engine remaining highly contested.

  A recent scientific discourse has ignited a debate within the physics community regarding the potential to harness energy from the Earth's rotation. The central argument revolves around a proposed device, conceived by researchers at the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, which seeks to exploit the Coriolis force, an inertial effect observed in rotating reference frames like our planet. This force, responsible for the deflection of moving objects (like air currents and projectiles) to the right in the Northern Hemisphere and to the left in the Southern Hemisphere, is typically considered a "fictitious force" in classical mechanics, meaning it arises from the frame of reference itself rather than a direct physical interaction.

  The proposed mechanism, as detailed in the researchers' published work, envisions a large, rotating platform analogous to a carousel. Theoretically, by carefully controlling the angular velocity of this platform relative to the Earth’s rotation, one could potentially generate usable energy from the interaction with the Coriolis force. This concept, while seemingly intriguing, has drawn considerable skepticism from other physicists who argue that the Coriolis force is not a true source of energy but rather a consequence of the Earth’s rotational inertia. They contend that any apparent energy extracted from the Coriolis effect would, in reality, be derived from the energy required to maintain the rotation of the platform itself, ultimately resulting in a zero-sum or even negative energy gain when accounting for system losses.

  The core of the disagreement stems from differing interpretations of the Coriolis force and its role in energy transfer. Proponents of the energy-harvesting concept posit that the Earth’s rotation represents a vast reservoir of kinetic energy, a portion of which could be tapped into via a cleverly engineered device. Their calculations suggest that under specific conditions, the Coriolis force could induce a net torque on the rotating platform, thereby generating mechanical energy. However, critics argue that this interpretation misrepresents the fundamental nature of the Coriolis force. They maintain that while the Coriolis force can influence the motion of objects within a rotating frame, it cannot perform work in the same way as a true force like gravity or electromagnetism. Therefore, they argue, any attempt to extract energy from the Coriolis effect would be analogous to attempting to extract energy from inertia itself, a fundamentally flawed proposition.

  The ongoing debate highlights the complexities of understanding and applying fundamental physical principles, particularly in rotating reference frames. While the possibility of harnessing the Earth’s rotation for energy generation remains a tantalizing prospect, the current consensus within the physics community leans towards skepticism. Further research and rigorous experimental validation are necessary to definitively settle the controversy and determine the true potential, if any, of this novel approach to energy harvesting.

  • Earth's Rotation
  • Energy Generation
  • physics
  • Geophysics
  • Controversial Claim
  • scientific debate
  • renewable energy
  • Rotational Energy
  • Nature (Journal)
  • scientific research
  • earth science

  Summary of Comments ( 130 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43526443

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discuss a Nature article about a controversial claim that Earth's rotation could be harnessed for power. Several commenters express skepticism, pointing to the immense scale and impracticality of such a project, even if theoretically possible. Some highlight the conservation of angular momentum, arguing that extracting energy from Earth's rotation would necessarily slow it down, albeit imperceptibly. Others debate the interpretation of the original research, with some suggesting it's more about subtle gravitational effects than a large-scale power source. A few commenters mention existing technologies that indirectly utilize Earth's rotation, such as tidal power. The overall sentiment seems to be one of cautious curiosity mixed with doubt about the feasibility and significance of the proposed concept. A few users engage in more playful speculation, imagining the distant future where such technology might be relevant.

  The Hacker News post "Can Earth's rotation generate power? Physicists divided over controversial claim" sparked a discussion with several interesting comments. Many commenters engaged with the core concept of extracting energy from Earth's rotation, exploring its theoretical feasibility and practical implications.

  Several commenters pointed out the existing methods of harnessing energy derived from Earth's rotation, primarily through tidal power. Tides are a direct consequence of the gravitational interaction between Earth, the Moon, and the Sun, and their cyclical nature allows for predictable energy generation. This led to discussions about the distinction between directly tapping into rotational energy versus utilizing its indirect effects.

  Some users questioned the novelty of the proposed mechanism in the linked Nature article, arguing that any method of extracting energy from Earth's rotation would necessarily involve interaction with another celestial body, thereby slowing Earth's rotation. They emphasized the fundamental principle of conservation of angular momentum, implying that extracting usable energy would require transferring some angular momentum away from the Earth.

  A significant point of contention revolved around the scale of energy that could realistically be extracted and its impact on Earth's rotation. Some commenters expressed skepticism about the practicality of generating substantial power without causing significant, albeit extremely gradual, changes to the length of a day.

  A few commenters delved into more technical aspects, referencing concepts like Lenz's law and the inherent inefficiencies involved in energy conversion processes. They also discussed the potential environmental impact of any large-scale attempt to harness rotational energy.

  Finally, some users expressed a general sense of caution regarding sensationalized scientific claims, emphasizing the importance of peer review and rigorous validation before drawing definitive conclusions. They also highlighted the difference between theoretical possibilities and practical, economically viable implementations.

• Microsoft quantum computing claim still lacks evidence

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-03-18 22:28:29

  Verbose tl;dr

  Nature reports that Microsoft's claim of creating a topological qubit, a key step towards fault-tolerant quantum computing, remains unproven. While Microsoft published a paper presenting evidence for the existence of Majorana zero modes, which are crucial for topological qubits, the scientific community remains skeptical. Independent researchers have yet to replicate Microsoft's findings, and some suggest that the observed signals could be explained by other phenomena. The Nature article highlights the need for further research and independent verification before Microsoft's claim can be validated. The company continues to work on scaling up its platform, but achieving a truly fault-tolerant quantum computer based on this technology remains a distant prospect.

  In a recent development within the contentious field of quantum computing, an article published in Nature meticulously examines Microsoft's persistent claim of having achieved a pivotal breakthrough: the creation of Majorana zero modes, exotic quasiparticles that are theorized to be crucial for building fault-tolerant topological quantum computers. This claim, originally published in 2021, has been met with considerable skepticism from the scientific community, and the Nature piece delves into the ongoing debate surrounding the validity of Microsoft's evidence.

  The article elucidates the complexities of identifying Majorana zero modes, highlighting the subtle nature of the required experimental signatures and the potential for misinterpretation of data. It carefully dissects the initial Microsoft publication, pointing out that while the presented data showcased certain characteristics consistent with the theoretical predictions for Majorana zero modes, alternative explanations for these observations, not involving the elusive quasiparticles, remain plausible. The core issue revolves around the difficulty of definitively excluding these alternative interpretations, leaving room for doubt about the true nature of the observed phenomena.

  Further contributing to the ongoing scientific discourse, the Nature article describes a preprint, released subsequently by two of the authors involved in the original Microsoft study, which seemingly acknowledges certain limitations and ambiguities in the initial data analysis. This preprint, while not a full retraction, appears to concede that further investigation is necessary to definitively confirm the presence of Majorana zero modes. This acknowledgement underscores the inherent challenges involved in this cutting-edge research and the rigorous scrutiny required to validate such groundbreaking claims.

  The overall tone of the Nature article emphasizes the importance of cautious interpretation and the need for further experimental verification before the scientific community can definitively accept Microsoft's claim. The article carefully avoids drawing definitive conclusions itself, instead presenting a nuanced overview of the ongoing debate and the complexities of the underlying scientific questions. It emphasizes the inherent iterative nature of scientific progress, highlighting the crucial role of critical analysis and independent verification in advancing our understanding of this nascent and highly promising technological frontier. The search for Majorana zero modes remains a significant and active area of research, and the scientific community eagerly awaits further experimental evidence to definitively settle the question of their existence and their potential for revolutionizing quantum computation.

  • Quantum Computing
  • Microsoft
  • Majorana Fermion
  • topological quantum computing
  • Qubit
  • Superconductivity
  • Scientific Evidence
  • peer review
  • physics
  • Research
  • Controversy
  • Nature (Journal)

  Summary of Comments ( 7 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43405918

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discuss Microsoft's quantum computing claims with skepticism, focusing on the lack of peer review and independent verification of their "majorana zero mode" breakthrough. Several commenters highlight the history of retracted papers and unfulfilled promises in the field, urging caution. Some point out the potential financial motivations behind Microsoft's announcements, while others note the difficulty of replicating complex experiments and the general challenges in building a scalable quantum computer. The reliance on "future milestones" rather than present evidence is a recurring theme in the criticism, with commenters expressing a "wait-and-see" attitude towards Microsoft's claims. Some also debate the scientific process itself, discussing the role of preprints and the challenges of validating groundbreaking research.

  The Hacker News post titled "Microsoft quantum computing claim still lacks evidence" (linking to a Nature article about skepticism surrounding Microsoft's quantum computing advancements) has generated a substantial discussion. Many of the comments revolve around the difficulty of verifying claims in the quantum computing field, the hype surrounding the technology, and the potential implications of a genuine breakthrough.

  Several commenters express skepticism about Microsoft's claims, echoing the sentiment of the Nature article. Some highlight the lack of peer-reviewed publications and independent verification of Microsoft's results. One commenter points out the historical trend of overpromising and underdelivering in the field of quantum computing, suggesting a cautious approach to Microsoft's announcements. Others discuss the specific technical challenges involved in creating a topological qubit, the type Microsoft is pursuing, and the inherent difficulty in scaling such a system.

  Another line of discussion focuses on the difference between scientific breakthroughs and practical applications. Some commenters argue that even if Microsoft's claims are valid, it doesn't necessarily mean that practical quantum computers are imminent. They emphasize the significant engineering hurdles that still need to be overcome before quantum computers can be used for real-world problems.

  A few commenters discuss the potential impact of quantum computing on various industries, including cryptography, medicine, and materials science. They acknowledge the transformative potential of the technology but also caution against overhyping its near-term prospects.

  Some commenters delve into the technical details of Microsoft's approach, comparing it to other quantum computing platforms like superconducting qubits and trapped ions. They debate the relative merits and challenges of each approach, highlighting the uncertainty surrounding which technology will ultimately prove most successful.

  A recurring theme in the comments is the need for more transparency and rigorous peer review in the quantum computing field. Several commenters call for greater scrutiny of claims and a more cautious approach to publicizing research results before they have been thoroughly vetted by the scientific community. They express concern that excessive hype could damage the credibility of the field and hinder its long-term progress.

  Finally, a few commenters offer more optimistic perspectives, suggesting that even incremental progress in quantum computing is valuable and that Microsoft's research could contribute to the eventual development of practical quantum computers. They emphasize the importance of continued investment and research in the field, despite the challenges and uncertainties.