Ideal Condensate Question

[PeterJ]

Hi folks. I recently posted the following on my blog more or less as is, in the hope that somebody who knows about such things would be around, but no luck. So I thought I repost it here. Please ignore the idealism references - no need to argue about that. I just want to get a better handle on the properties of an ideal condensate. Thanks for any replies.

 

I have been wondering about the properties of an ‘ideal gas’ in relation to idealism, specifically a ‘Bose-Einstein condensate’. It was a thought put into my head by Schrodinger, who speaks of the mystics as ‘particles in an ideal gas’.

 

It seems that the Pauli-exclusion principle usually limits the number of bosons that can occupy the same energy level. But if the bosons form an ideal condensate then they can all occupy exactly the same energy level. They would no longer interact with each other. That is, they would no longer behave as a multitude of discrete entities causally linked. They would now be in a state of quantum entanglement such that they might as well all be the same boson, a choir in perfect harmony. Or something like this. I wish I had a better grasp of the science.

 

There is some talk of the early universe being a condensate of such a kind. What I am wondering is whether it would be accurate to say, in some sense at least, that a truly perfect Bose-Einstein condensate could be said to be a multitude of things and a singular phenomenon at the same time, depending on how we look at it. If so, then it seems very likely that an ideal condensate would be a useful idea in discussions of global consciousness. This would be a turn up.

 

I’m way out my depths here and wouldn’t dare say much more. Still, I have a feeling this is the right way to go for a physical description of an Idealist universe.

 

But I do not know enough about these condensates. Anyone care to help me understand this better? No need to engage with the idealism topic, which is idle speculation at this point. When I go looking for info it tends to be highly mathematical, which is far more detail than I want and over my head.

Edited August 24, 2014 by PeterJ

[imatfaal]

Hi folks. I recently posted the following on my blog more or less as is, in the hope that somebody who knows about such things would be around, but no luck. So I thought I repost it here. Please ignore the idealism references - no need to argue about that. I just want to get a better handle on the properties of an ideal condensate. Thanks for any replies.

 

Any cross over between ideal gases and an "ideal" gas in a platonic or other philosophical sense is not going to be possible and should be held elsewhere. You thus need to explain in greater depth what you see as an ideal condensate

 

It seems that the Pauli-exclusion principle usually limits the number of bosons that can occupy the same energy level. But if the bosons form an ideal condensate then they can all occupy exactly the same energy level. They would no longer interact with each other. That is, they would no longer behave as a multitude of discrete entities causally linked. They would now be in a state of quantum entanglement such that they might as well all be the same boson, a choir in perfect harmony. Or something like this. I wish I had a better grasp of the science.

 

Pauli exclusion applies to Fermions (half integer spin) and not to Bosons (integer spin). Bosons and Fermions are completely separate. A Bose Einstein condensate is a state of matter is super cooled gas in which bosons do share quantum states.

There is some talk of the early universe being a condensate of such a kind. What I am wondering is whether it would be accurate to say, in some sense at least, that a truly perfect Bose-Einstein condensate could be said to be a multitude of things and a singular phenomenon at the same time, depending on how we look at it. If so, then it seems very likely that an ideal condensate would be a useful idea in discussions of global consciousness. This would be a turn up.

 

This is getting silly. "Global consciousness" - really? After a single demonstration showing a significant possibility of a even some form pf shared consciousness then perhaps we can start to hypothesize about the reasons for its existence. Until then it is pure make believe

Here is a lovely wikipage on BEC and a simple FAQ style discussion at Colorado Uni

[PeterJ]

I'll ignore the personal opinions on philosophy, Imatfaal, but thanks for the link. I'll check it out. It seems from what you say that I am confusing a Bose-Einstein condensate with an ideal condensate, while I had thought one was an example of the other. My mistake.

[MigL]

Don't know what you mean by 'ideal condensate'.and I'm sure, neither does Imatfaal.

An 'ideal gas' is simply a gas where certain simplifying assumptions have been made to ease calculations, so what assumptions are you making about an ideal ( B-E ) condensate ?

 

Pauli Exclusion Principle applies to fermions, not bosons. You can stack as many bosons, such as photons, as you wish into the same state.

You can also combine fermions, in certain ways and conditions,that their spin ( 1/2 )combine to integer values and they act as bosons.

 

So sure, you could combine individuals in ways and conditions ( torture and brainwashing come to mind ),such that they all think and behave similarily with some form of shared conciousness, although neither I nor Imatfaal believe this belongs in a physics forum.

Is that the kind of philosophy you were looking for ?

[imatfaal]

Don't know what you mean by 'ideal condensate'.and I'm sure, neither does Imatfaal.

An 'ideal gas' is simply a gas where certain simplifying assumptions have been made to ease calculations, so what assumptions are you making about an ideal ( B-E ) condensate ?

Agreed completely. The Bose Einstein condensate when initially explained by Einstein was from thoughts on cooling an ideal gas or a quantum mechanical analogue made up of only bosons - the bose gas.

I neglected to mention fermionic condensate as I think the theoretic route and thought path is via liquid and crystal lattice rather than ideal gas. Here is a page on the BCS theory.

[PeterJ]

Thanks Imatfaal. The Wikki article I already knew, but that FAQ link was exactly what I was after. That's the level at which I like to study these things, and you will be amazed to hear that it covers all I wanted to know.

 

I didn't meant to be rude about your philosophical remarks, by the way, but I was asking only about the science, and both you and I know that you have no idea whether idealism is true or false. As it happens, I suspect that your view is on the way out, and I'd enjoy discussing this with you since you usually talk good sense. But I have learnt to stick to science here.

 

Anyway, thanks, my question has been answered.

 

\