Quantum 'Tornadoes' Spotted in Semimetal May Redefine Electronics
It's almost impossible for electrons to sit still, and their motions can take on some bizarre forms. Case in point: an analysis of electron behavior in a quantum material called tantalum arsenide reveals vortices.
But the story gets weirder. These electrons aren't spiraling in a physical place – they're doing so in a quantum blur of possibility called momentum space. Rather than drawing a map of a particles' potential locations, or position space, momentum space describes their motion through their energy and direction.
Similar vortices have previously been observed in position space. Measuring values of the electrons' momenta and plotting them out on a three-dimensional graph, a striking vortex pattern emerges there as well.
The discovery could help pave the way for a completely new form of electronics: a field called 'orbitronics' that could tap into the twisting power of electrons instead of their electrical charge to carry information in electronic circuits or quantum computers.
The discovery was made in an intriguing semimetal crystal called tantalum arsenide. In a way that's not surprising – it was in this material that the long-predicted Weyl fermion was found for the first time. This massless particle essentially functions like a super-efficient electron, and its discovery required the special quantum properties of tantalum arsenide.
Those properties made the material the perfect choice for hunting quantum tornadoes. The problem arose in figuring out how to observe them.
Scientists at a research center called Complexity and Topology in Quantum Matter (ct.qmat) in Germany led a study that managed to pull it off using a technique called angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES) on a sample of tantalum arsenide.
"ARPES is a fundamental tool in experimental solid-state physics. It involves shining light on a material sample, extracting electrons, and measuring their energy and exit angle," says Maximilian Ünzelmann, experimental physicist at the University of Würzburg.
"This gives us a direct look at a material's electronic structure in momentum space. By cleverly adapting this method, we were able to measure orbital angular momentum."
Each observation, however, only takes a two-dimensional snapshot of the electrons in the material. To confirm that quantum tornadoes form in this realm, the team had to stack each measurement up into a 3D model, like a CT scan. The end result is a colorful model that shows a very clear vortex structure.
"We analyzed the sample layer by layer, similar to how medical tomography works," says Ünzelmann. "By stitching together individual images, we were able to reconstruct the three-dimensional structure of the orbital angular momentum and confirm that electrons form vortices in momentum space."
The team says that further work could lead to not only more efficient electronics, but an entirely new class of devices called orbitronics. This could also work alongside another potential successor of electronic technology – spintronics, which encodes information in the spin of electrons.
The research was published in the journal Physical Review X.
Amazing New Technology Can 'Bend' Sounds Into Your Ears Only
New Heavy Metal Molecule Could Reveal What Goes on Inside Nuclear Waste
Radical Theory Says Black Holes May Spew Matter And Time as White Holes
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Geographic
17-06-2025
- National Geographic
How photo overload might be warping our ability to remember
When Lavania Oluban looks at photos from her childhood, the memories feel incomplete. 'It's hazy around the edges—I'm filling in missing pieces of the puzzle with a memory that's not quite real,' she says. Oluban, 37, has only a handful of birthday photos from when she was young. But her seven-year-old-son, Arlo, has 'easily 200,' captured by different attendees on their smartphones. 'Practically every single second of his life is documented,' she says. 'Arlo's almost got a virtual reality representation of an event because there are so many pictures and videos. I think for him, it's quite vivid.' In 2023, people around the world took an estimated 5.3 billion photos, about 61,400 every second, according to photography data site Photutorial. Oluban alone has more than 140,000 pictures on her phone: selfies with Arlo, sunsets, butterflies, ice cream. They're instantly accessible, searchable, and sharable. 'People record much more data about their lives than any previous generation,' says Fabian Hutmacher, a psychologist at the University of Würzburg who studies how digital media shapes our memories. 'It's natural to ask: does that change anything about the way we remember our lives?' How digital photos are reshaping our memories Autobiographical memory—our recollection of personal life events—is central to how we understand ourselves. 'Memories are crucial for defining who we are,' says Hutmacher. 'They are a sort of reservoir that we refer to whenever we think about our lives.' Memory, however, isn't like playing back a video. Neuroscientific research shows that this type of memory depends on interactions between the hippocampus, which helps consolidate new experiences, and the prefrontal cortex, which organizes them into coherent life narratives. These systems are especially sensitive to attention and emotional engagement—factors that may be disrupted when we're more focused on photographing a moment than experiencing it. 'Our memory is not faithful,' says Julia Soares, assistant professor of psychology at Mississippi State University. 'It's tied up with who you are and your story making throughout your life. It's your autobiography.' Photos can support this reconstructive storytelling. Researchers agree that images often help jog memory by surfacing details or emotions we might otherwise forget. 'I take them partly to document, but also as a way of holding onto moments I know I'll want to revisit,' says 20-year-old Alina Nguyen. 'It's like a time capsule—sometimes I remember specific feelings or details I'd completely forgotten until I see an image…I think I've learned a lot about myself just by noticing patterns or changes in the photos over time.' For Hutmacher, though, photos are more than just a cue for memories. He argues that in the digital age, photos are actually changing how we form memories in the first place. Remembering, he says, is no longer purely internal; it's an interaction between our minds and resources like photos, meaning it's built not only from what we store in our brains but also from what we offload onto devices like smartphones. While offloading can reduce cognitive burden, studies suggest it may also weaken our ability to recall details unless we actively review the material later. As a result, when we turn to digital images to reconstruct an event, those files don't just support our memory—they become part of it. This shift raises new questions. If our memories are partly constructed through what we photograph—and what we choose to revisit—then our devices aren't just reflecting our past. They're shaping which moments we remember, how vividly, and supposedly how well we interpret our personal histories. (Are you better than AI at guessing what makes a photo memorable?) When too many photos backfire Still, more pictures don't necessarily mean stronger memories. A 2013 study by cognitive psychologist Linda Henkel found that photographing objects can actually impair memory, with participants appearing to 'rely on the external device of the camera to 'remember' for them.' However, when participants engaged with the objects they photographed, they remembered them better. 'If you go to a concert and you spend 90 minutes filming, focusing on getting a good angle, then it reduces your enjoyment of the situation, as well as the memory you have of it,' says Hutmacher. 'On the other hand, if you record a snapshot because it's your favourite song, then it can improve memory later.' Even so, most people don't regularly revisit their photos. And without reviewing or organizing them, pictures can become overwhelming, making it harder to find the meaningful ones. 'It can be a rose with a thorn,' says Soares. 'Photos provide these incredible memory cues. But if you never review them, you're not capitalizing on that benefit, and you may actually be losing something from the act of taking the photo.' (Want to improve your memory? The MIND diet may help) Parenting expert Kirsty Ketley understands that trade-off. With thousands of images stored on her phone—and backed up to the cloud—she began to feel burdened by her digital archive. 'It does become very overwhelming,' she says. When she was alerted that her storage was running out, she decided to take fewer photographs, focusing on special occasions and events. 'Parents just [take photos] without thinking,' she says. 'I feel I can enjoy the time more because I'm not so worried about whether I've got the positioning right. I'm there in the moment…It does help to keep those memories alive.' Curating what we remember—and what we forget Psychologists have long recognized that forgetting is an essential part of how memory works. But in a world saturated with digital images, what we choose to capture—and what we choose to revisit or erase—may be subtly reshaping that process, says Soares. (Use this ancient technique to remember (almost) anything.) Our photo habits are no longer just about preserving memories; they're part of how we construct them in the first place. For example, when we share photos on social media, evidence shows that we remember the experiences better. Conversely, in her 2023 study, Soares found that deleting photos meant that people remembered their experiences less vividly. Some participants had intentionally deleted photos they wanted to forget, like an ex or a bad night out. 'People are trying to curate their photos to do the type of remembering that they want do,' says Soares. 'These photographed events might create hills, and there may be valleys where non-photographed stories or life events may be. It remains to be seen the extent to which that will be the case.' For Nguyen, the fear of forgetting is enough to keep every photo. 'I do worry about forgetting things that weren't photographed,' says Nguyen, who has 33,000 photos on her phone. 'I think that's why I'm so drawn to taking photos – to make sure some piece of it stays with me. Forgetting can be scary, especially when it comes to people or moments that shaped me.' This article is part of Your Memory, Rewired, a National Geographic exploration into the fuzzy, fascinating frontiers of memory science—including advice on how to make your own memory more powerful. Learn more.
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Yahoo
Researchers Decipher Herculaneum Scrolls Found at Pompeii
Researchers have virtually unfurled a Herculaneum scroll which was rescued from Pompeii after the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 A.D. The Herculaneum scrolls, first discovered within Pompeii's ruins in 1752, have long beguiled scientists. Written on papyrus using carbon-based ink, the scrolls cannot be physically opened without disintegrating. With the advent of digital AI technology, researchers have been given a new opportunity to discover the scrolls' the technology, they were able to decipher the contents and even identify the author of an ancient piece entitled 'On Vices.' The tome, on how to live a virtuous life, was written by Greek Epicurean philosopher Philodemus, who lived in Herculaneum from 110 B.C. until 35 B.C. The discovery of his work within the ruins of Pompeii indicates that Philodemus' work was still highly regarded amongst modern people. 'Finding the full title of a work inside a scroll that has been unread for two millennia is an astonishing achievement,' Richard Ovenden, who works at the library which houses the scrolls, told the Daily Mail. '[It] illustrates the huge potential for AI to transform arts and humanities scholarship, our understanding of the past, and breathes new life into ancient artifacts.' Although the AI technology allows researchers to virtually unroll the scrolls, reading what was inscribed within them is still a difficult task. The document was eventually unfurled and decoded by two separate research teams: Marcel Roth and Micha Nowak from the University of Würzburg, Germany; and Sean Johnson with Vesuvius Challenge, a program which awards cash prizes to those who are able to decipher the scrolls. 'The simultaneous reproduction of the title image from multiple sources, along with independent scholarly review, provides a high degree of confidence in the reading,' the Bodleian Libraries said. As it turns out, their hard work paid off. Roth and Nowak took home the very first Vesuvius Challenge Title Prize, which included a reward of $60,000.
Forbes
27-04-2025
- Forbes
Building The AI Polygraph
With all of the things that AI can now do, it stands to reason that we would ask ourselves, whether these technologies can revolutionize the field of analyzing humans for suspect statements – or in short, lies. The polygraph machine is a dinosaur by any standard. A needle attached to an arm band that spits out a printed stream representing someone's vital signs and body responses is not going to be especially precise in catching people in lies. That's why polygraph results are, famously, often not admissible in court, although they have sent more than one innocent person to jail. By contrast, AI is a powerful data engine that works on the principle of total observation. That means there are really multiple paths for scientists to take in order to apply AI to a truth-seeking application. One would be analyzing the vital sign responses of the interrogation suspects the way the polygraph does, but applying much more detailed and precise comparative analysis. Another one would involve using language tokens to look at what people are actually saying, and apply logic and reasoning. There's the old saying that one lie feeds into another, and eventually you get trapped in a web of false statements, because the truth is the simplest thing to describe. In any case, people are working on applying AI to this purpose. An MIT technology piece from last year covers the work of Alicia von Schenk and her colleagues at the University of Würzburg in Germany, scientists on a team who set up a trial of an AI trying to catch false statements. The calculation they arrived at is that AI can catch a lie 67% of the time, where humans can only spot one 50% of the time. This math seems strange, because if you're looking for binary results – lie versus no lie – you would be right 50% of the time, even if you didn't apply any analysis at all. By that same token, 67% isn't a great track record, either. And the scientists pointed out something even more important – in the race to get more precise about human lying, you might actually undermine the vital system of trust that humans have as social creatures. 'In some ways, this is a good thing—these tools can help us spot more of the lies we come across in our lives, like the misinformation we might come across on social media,' writes Jessica Hamzelou for MIT. 'But it's not all good. It could also undermine trust, a fundamental aspect of human behavior that helps us form relationships. If the price of accurate judgements is the deterioration of social bonds, is it worth it?' In other words, you don't want a lie detection system that's too accurate, or at least you don't want to apply that universally to someone's personal interactions. It turns out we humans are a lot more nuanced, in some ways, that we give ourselves credit for. Von Schenk also provides a note on scaling: 'Given that we have so much fake news and disinformation spreading, there is a benefit to these technologies. However, you really need to test them—you need to make sure they are substantially better than humans.' So maybe we're not quite ready for the AI polygraph after all. As I was researching this piece, I came across you had another aspect of what researchers are dealing with AI that goes into that troublesome world of simulated emotion. Basically, research teams found that AI systems will 'become anxious' or 'show signs of anxiety' if they are given human responses that center on war and violence. Specifically, scientist have applied something called the State-Trait Anxiety Index too these interactions. This uses two sets of elements: statements applying to what a person feels in the moment, and others that apply to how he or she feels more generally. In the inventory, you can see items like 'I feel stressed,' or 'I feel confused,' as well as other statements that respondents are asked to answer on a four point spectrum, like 'I generally distrust what I hear' or 'I often feel suspicious.' So apparently, the AI can answer these with anxiety indicators after discussing scary things. One would presume that this 'anxiety' is created by the AI going and looking at training data from the web, and seeing that when people are talked to about violence and gore, they get anxious, and that the AI is simply replicating that. But even if the AI engines themselves don't have these complex emotions naturally, some of these researchers still find it notable that the machines can display this kind of response. It makes you think about the difference between human social interaction and AI output – are these new questionnaires and responders just telling us what we want to hear? In any case, it seems like there are a number of domains – like lying and spreading fear – that are still mainly in the jurisdiction of humans and not machines, at least for now, even as we continue to cede ground to AI in terms of brightness and creativity. We'll probably be doing a lot of game theory as the year goes on, and as we're coming across ever more sophisticated models, to try to figure out if AI will try to cheat and deceive humans. Figures like Alan Turing and John Nash set the stage for these kinds of interactions – now we have to apply that objective analysis to these ideas being implemented in practice. Are we ready?
