News
by Eric J. Lerner
pdf version of this article
Plasmon microscopy
Microscopy has moved well beyond
the diffraction limitations of the
wavelength of light by using near-field
scanning—putting a small hole within a
wavelength of the object being scanned.
But such near-field scans have disadvantages;
for one thing, they tend to be slow. A
new technique developed at the University
of Maryland (College Park) and Queen’s
University (Belfast, Northern Ireland)
allows far-field optical microscopy with resolutions
well below the wavelength of light
by using surface plasmons (http://arXiv.org/
abs/cond-mat/?0405098 and http://
arXiv.org/abs/cond-mat/?0403276).
 |
| A nanohole array with 150-nm-diam holes
at 500-nm spacing is illuminated by 502-nm-wavelength laser
light in a plasmon microscope (a), and the image is reconstructed
via ray tracing (b), indicating a resolution of at least 100
nm. (Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University
of Maryland, College Park) |
Surface plasmons are waves of electron
density that move along the interface
between a conductor and a dielectric. They
can be excited by photons, and they can
excite photons in turn. When the frequency
of the exciting radiation is close to the
plasma frequency in the metal, the wavelength
of the plasmons becomes much
shorter than that of the exciting light. This
phenomenon has allowed the use of plasmons
in various techniques that overcome
diffraction limits, such as in creating narrow
beams.
In the new microscope, samples are
placed over a gold film (the conductor) and
are immersed in a droplet of water or glycerin
(the dielectric). Argon laser light at
502 nm excites the plasmons at the gold–glycerin
interface, which produces surface plasmons
with a wavelength of 69.8 nm. The
result is an immersion microscope with an
effective refractive index of 7.14, far higher
than the refractive index of any liquid.
Small holes scratched into the gold foil’s
surface form sources for the plasmons. The
emitted plasmons are focused in the metal
plane by the nearly parabolic edge of the
droplet, thus creating a greatly magnified
image of the holes in the central part of the
droplet. When the plasmons encounter
irregularities on the metal–dielectric interface,
caused by the sample roughness, they
couple to photons, which are then emitted
normal to the surface. A conventional farfield
optical microscope can then view the
magnified image.
Experiments performed by Igor Smolyaninov
of the University of Maryland’s department
of electrical and computer engineering
used an array of nanoholes as a test
pattern, and demonstrated a resolution of
60 nm—comparable to the plasmons’
wavelength and only one-eighth the wavelength
of the illuminating laser. “Theoretically,
such microscopes can reach down to
the few- nanometer resolution level,”
Smolyaninov comments. This would allow
optical imaging of individual viruses or
DNA molecules.
“Optical imaging in an aqueous medium
means that the samples are not destroyed, as
they are with electron microscopy, which is a
big advantage,” says Smolyaninov. Equally
important, the process, when used in reverse,
can reduce lithographic patterns.
Immersion lithography is already in
advanced development to reduce feature
sizes by 30%. A reduction in size of seven- or
eightfold could greatly ease the transition to
the next generation of lithographic tools and
possibly compete with X-ray or extremeultraviolet-
based approaches. The necessity
for a conducting underlayer, however, may
prove a limitation for lithography.
Quantum measurement
Quantum-mechanics textbooks have
mystified several generations of physics
students with the idea that the act of measuring
a quantum-mechanical system produces
a result that is inherently random,
unpredictable, and without cause, even
though the average result of many identical
measurements is precisely predictable. Writers
have spilled much ink in interpreting this
mysterious behavior of nature.
Now an experimental group at Caltech
has demonstrated a way to measure a quantum
system that results in a predictable, not
a random outcome (Science 2004, 304,
270). They achieved this by using a feedback
loop during the process of measurement,
which guided the quantum system into the
desired state. The technique sheds light on
long-simmering controversies over the interpretation
of quantum mechanics and could
make possible ultrasensitive measurements
of magnetic fields.
Until relatively recently, the measurement
of a quantum system was considered an
essentially instantaneous operation. When
not observed, a quantum system evolves
deterministically, as described by the
Schrödinger wave equations. These equations
describe probability waves that determine
the likelihood that, for example, a particle
occupies a specific position or has a
spin oriented in a specific direction. A measurement causes the collapse
of the wavefunction
so that the particle or quantum system
instantly becomes located at a specific
position or orientation that the measurement
instrument detects. Schrödinger’s
equations can predict the results of many
identical measurements, but not that of a
single measurement.
This situation has led to endless arguments
by theoreticians and philosophers
about what constitutes a measurement,
whether a conscious observer is required,
and how such essentially acausal randomness
can be fit into a deterministic universe.
But over the past decade, experimenters
have taken a different approach to the problem
of measurement by attempting to study
and control it in the laboratory.
In the Caltech experiments, carried out by
JM Geremia, John K. Stockton, and Hideo
Mabuchi of the department of physics and
control and dynamical systems, the quantum
system consisted of a cloud of 100 billion
cesium atoms cooled to 1 µK. At that
temperature, the quantum wavefunctions of
individual atoms overlapped in the 0.1-cm3
cloud so that they became a single quantum
system with a single spin orientation.
The experimenters extended the measurement
process so that far from being
instantaneous, the collapse of the wavefunction
lasted more than 100 µs. They
stretched out the
process by using a
weak laser beam for
measuring the spin
orientation. The photons
interacted with
the atoms in the
cloud and became
polarized, and the
measurement of the
photons’ polarization
indicated the
z component of
the cloud’s spin orientation.
However,
because of the weakness
of the laser
beam, polarization
measurements fluctuated,
and an accurate
measurement of the magnitude of the
spin’s z component could be obtained only
by averaging over about 100 µs, which
accounted for the measurement time.
Physics and Control & Dynamical Systems,
Norman Bridge Laboratory of Physics, California Institute of Technology
“As the laser beam interacts with the
cloud, the quantum state of the atoms
becomes entangled with that of the light. As
the probe laser polarization is detected, the
atoms settle into a state with a more definite
spin z component,” explains Geremia.
Only the z component is measured because
under the quantum uncertainty principle,
as the z component becomes more definite,
the x and y components become less so, a
process known as spin squeezing.
Normally, spin squeezing would lead to a
random measurement of the z component—
many measurements would average
to 0 but each would be unpredictable.
However, the Caltech technique uses the
fluctuating polarization signal during the
100-µs-long measurement as a feedback
signal to a magnetic coil. When the polarization
changes, the magnetic field does
too. The magnet field, in turn, changes the
direction of the cloud’s spin. This gradually
moves the z component to 0 for each measurement.
“With quantum measurement
and classical feedback, we can determine
not just the average result of many measurements,
but the actual result of each
measurement,” Geremia emphasizes.
Practically, the technique could be
applied to the measurement of ultrasmall
magnetic fields. The amount of current
needed to return the z component of the
spin to 0 can be used as a measurement of
the change in the z component of the ambient
magnetic field. From a theoretical
standpoint, the ability to control quantum
measurement to obtain a deterministic
result takes a good deal of the mystery out
of the process. With such control, there
would be no doubt about the fate of
Schrödinger’s cat.
Quantum entanglement
The potential for quantum computing
(QC) rests on the process of quantum
entanglement. Entangled states occur when
two or more particles or quantum systems
share a single quantum state, and what
happens to one system is linked to what
happens to the other. For example, if one
electron’s spin is up, the other entangled
electron’s spin is down. With photons,
much effort has focused on producing
entangled states, but once made, sending
entangled photons to distant locations is
relatively easy because the photons are
always in motion. But several QC schemes
in the solid state require entangled electrons
as well, and that has necessitated
putting them in close proximity to each
other so that their quantum wavefunctions
overlap. This has made the design of practical
QC devices difficult.
 |
| Electron quantum entanglement (represented
at left) has been demonstrated over distances in microcircuits
by a device illustrated above with a scanning electron micrograph,
in which the schematic ovals indicate the location of three
quantum dots. (Departmentof Physics, Harvard University, photo
by Andrew Davidhazy) |
A Harvard University–University of California,
Santa Barbara, collaboration led by
Harvard’s Charles M. Marcus has demonstrated
a way to convey electron quantum
entanglement over distances in microcircuits
(Science 2004, 304, 565). The
researchers used an interaction between the
spins of electrons with the unwieldy name
of Ruderman-Kittel-Kasuya-Yoshida (RKKY),
which is based on the Pauli exclusion principle.
That principle prohibits electrons
with the same spin orientation from occupying
the same position in space.
The new device uses quantum dots,
which contain only a few free electrons.
Two conventional quantum dots are placed
to the left and right of a central, larger quantum dot and connected
through it.
The central dot’s electrons freely interact
with a large conductor, which creates a sea
of electrons.
When the left quantum dot contains an
odd number of electrons, an unbalanced
spin (say, directed upward) results. This
upward spin repels similarly aligned electrons
in the central dot’s electron sea, creating
a region with opposite-directed
(downward) spin. This spin, in turn, affects
neighboring electrons, so a standing wave
of up and down spin spreads across the
central dot. If the right dot also has an odd
number of electrons, the spin wave puts
the right dot into a spin state determined
by the left-hand dot’s spin and the distance
between them. “The spin states can thus
be readily entangled, even when separated,”
explains Marcus.
To measure the coherent spin-state
between the two quantum dots, and to link
it to conventional circuitry, the device uses
a second spin-related quantum phenomenon
called the Kondo effect. In an isolated
quantum dot, conductance through the
dot is low because the energy level inside it
is not matched to the energy level of the
conduction electrons outside. However,
once the spin of the dot’s electrons link to
the spin of those in the sea of electrons, a
new resonance appears, which allows a
measurable change in conduction.
This resonance condition occurs only if
the spins of the electrons are not otherwise
entangled, as, for instance, with another
localized spin. So, if the left-hand quantum
dot has a zero spin—an even number of
electrons—then the right-hand dot’s spin is
free to entangle with the sea of electrons,
and the conductance is high. However, if the
left-hand quantum dot has an odd number
of electrons and, thus, a spin of 1/2, then
the spin wave locks the right-hand dot’s
spin in place, which destroys the resonance
and reduces the conductance. By measuring
the conductance of one dot, the spin of the
other can be determined, a necessary condition
for quantum computation.
Smoke spun into fiber
Rumplestiltskin may have been able to
spin straw into gold thread, but even
in fairy tales no one spun thread from
Electron quantum entanglement (represented at left) has
been demonstrated over distances in microcircuits by a
device illustrated above with a scanning electron micrograph,
in which the schematic ovals indicate the location
of three quantum dots. This feat has now been accomplished
in a laboratory at the University of
Cambridge in England, where a research
team has spun an elastic smoke cloud into
nanotube fibers, which these days may be
more valuable technically than gold (Science 2004,
304, 276).
Nanotube fibers have previously been
formed from a polymer-based solution (see
The Industrial Physicist, October/November
2003, pp. 21–22, item 3). But the resulting fibers,
although exceedingly strong, were a mix of
nanotubes and polymer glue. For many
applications, especially those exploiting
nanotubes’ unique electrical properties,
pure nanotube fibers would provide more
benefit. The Cambridge team succeeded in
producing such fibers for the first time,
forming them in the furnace that generated
the nanotubes.
 |
| A fiber of carbon nanotubes spun directly
from an elastic smoke cloud in the reaction zone where the
nanotubes were formed. (University of Cambridge, Department
of Materials Science and Metallurgy)
|
Alan H. Windle and his colleagues fed a
solution of ethanol and a few percent ferrocene
and thiophene into a furnace at a
temperature between 1,050 and 1,200 °C.
They injected the solution at 0.08 to 0.25
mL/min into a stream of hydrogen gas flowing
at 400 to 800 mL/min. The oxygen in
the feed had the effect of burning away the
non-nanotube soot particles, and the iron
particles from the ferrocene acted as nucleation
sites to form the nanotubes. “There
had to be a fine balance in the hydrogen
and solution flow rates so that only nanotubes
formed, but no other carbon particles,” said Windle, whose
team included Ya-Li Li and Ian A. Kinloch.
The nanotubes rapidly linked together as
they formed into a diaphanous web or aerogel,
which had the appearance of an elastic
smoke cloud a few centimeters in diameter.
The aerogel had a density of only tens of
micrograms per cubic centimeter but
enough strength that
it could be wound
into a filament. The
team used two methods
to spin fibers.
Inserting a rotating
rod at an angle into the cloud produced a
twisted fiber, and winding the cloud onto a
spindle perpendicular to the gas flow produced
either a fiber or an aligned nanotube
film. The iron particles, concentrated on
the outside of the fibers, were cleared off
with hydrochloric acid.
The resulting 30-µm-diameter fibers,
depending on the rate of hydrogen flow,
consisted of single-walled or multiwalled
nanotubes. Individual nanotubes within the
fiber, each one a few nanometers across,
extended up to 10s of µm in length. Windle
believes that better process control and
postprocessing treatment will improve the
fibers’ mechanical properties. “We’re working
to increase the stability of the conditions
in the furnace,” he explains.
|