The Premature Death of Monopoles?

[GeeKay]

Hi,

 

I have, albeit reluctantly, almost come round to accepting what appears to be a fairly widespread view in the scientific community: that monopoles do not exist, at least according to the current models we have about the universe, post Big Bang. This is to say that the likes of Ampere, Gauss and Maxwell have thus far proved correct, over that of Curie and Dirac. Nonetheless, part of me has always wondered if this will be the full story on the subject of monopoles. I'm also extremely wary about scientists making negative pronouncements before all the the evidence has been examined - or even discovered. Clarke's First Law ("When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong") springs to mind here. The great Lord Kelvin's comment about X-rays being a hoax is a prime example of this ingrained attitude in action. On the other hand we are no longer saddled with obsolete theories harping on about phlogiston or the aether. So will monopole theories seem no less quaintly wrong-headed in another hundred years' time?

 

That was my take on the situation until quite recently, that is to say until I read 'The Eerie Silence' by Professor Paul Davies. He discusses monopoles in some detail in the chapter 'Evidence for a Galactic Diaspora', and although he too hedges his speculations about their existence, what does emerge is a tantalising glimpse into what might be round the next dozen or so corners, were monopoles finally proven to exist. In particular, the potential any such monopole technology would offer humanity - for good or for ill - almost seems to rival the fabled attributes of antimatter as a power source. Could this possibly be true? Or in interpreting the data, am I misreading myself back into the world of Leonardo's helicopters?

 

I have since then scoured the internet for more information of the subject of monopoles as a (potential) power source. Unfortunately, if not altogether surprisingly, the results so far have been meagre in the extreme. I am therefore interested to know what the thoughts are by other members of this forum, and whether anyone is able to throw some fresh light on this subject. Many thanks.

 

 

[imatfaal]

Hi,

 

I have, albeit reluctantly, almost come round to accepting what appears to be a fairly widespread view in the scientific community: that monopoles do not exist, at least according to the current models we have about the universe, post Big Bang. This is to say that the likes of Ampere, Gauss and Maxwell have thus far proved correct, over that of Curie and Dirac. Nonetheless, part of me has always wondered if this will be the full story on the subject of monopoles. I'm also extremely wary about scientists making negative pronouncements before all the the evidence has been examined - or even discovered. Clarke's First Law ("When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong") springs to mind here. The great Lord Kelvin's comment about X-rays being a hoax is a prime example of this ingrained attitude in action. On the other hand we are no longer saddled with obsolete theories harping on about phlogiston or the aether. So will monopole theories seem no less quaintly wrong-headed in another hundred years' time?

 

That was my take on the situation until quite recently, that is to say until I read 'The Eerie Silence' by Professor Paul Davies. He discusses monopoles in some detail in the chapter 'Evidence for a Galactic Diaspora', and although he too hedges his speculations about their existence, what does emerge is a tantalising glimpse into what might be round the next dozen or so corners, were monopoles finally proven to exist. In particular, the potential any such monopole technology would offer humanity - for good or for ill - almost seems to rival the fabled attributes of antimatter as a power source. Could this possibly be true? Or in interpreting the data, am I misreading myself back into the world of Leonardo's helicopters?

 

I have since then scoured the internet for more information of the subject of monopoles as a (potential) power source. Unfortunately, if not altogether surprisingly, the results so far have been meagre in the extreme. I am therefore interested to know what the thoughts are by other members of this forum, and whether anyone is able to throw some fresh light on this subject. Many thanks.

 

 

 

Sure monopoles exist - electric charges are monopoles of a sort; the neat trick that will earn you a nobel prize is to find a magnetic monopole. I haven't read Dirac in any detail - but was he an advocate or did he merely state that if magnetic monopoles exists then electric charge must be quantised. That statement is very different than the other way around or than stating a necessary and sufficient etc. Charge is quantised - but that does not prove magnetic monopoles exists; if we knew of magnetic monopoles and Dirac was right it would show that charge must be quantised - but not vice versa.

 

Professor Paul Davies is a tenured Professor at a great University - that does not mean that when he steps away from his comfort zone, into bio-chemistry of life (search Paul Davies Arsenic), epistemology/theology (search Paul Davies templeton prize), and into pop-science that he can be taken literally and as authority. Perhaps the fact that Hoyle was his post-doc supervisor might colour our picture of him - brilliant but a bit loopy

 

WE have strung plastic sheeting around various parts of LHCb in the hope of finding magnetic monopoles so the search continues - and no this is not entirely a joke

[GeeKay]

Thanks, imatfaal. I guess the real point I am trying to make has less to do with whether magnetic monopoles exist or not. All I can hope for here is that scientists will eventually discover them, or failing that, make a fundamental discovery in a related field that ends all further speculation about their existence: end of question. Instead, assuming for the sake of this argument that they do exist, my main point of interest here is centred on their properties, especially how these properties may conceivably apply to their potential uses as a future power source. This is the sort of information I am seeking. . . conjectures, if you will. That seems a reasonable question to ask.

[imatfaal]

I think what I was trying to counter with was the point that the discovery of magnetic monopoles would be a new elementary particle - but unlike Higg's boson final discovery we have no real idea about what the new particle is like. I read that we had ruled out the "existence space" under 5-600 GeV - that is 4 times the mass of the Higg's so damn close to beyond our ability to probe. There isn't a widely accepted group of properties backedup in theory for a yet undiscovered particle - we knew so much about the Higg's the only problem was we hadn't got proof. My understanding is that the only things that people agree about the magnetic monopole is that we haven't found one and that divB=0 will be broken for this particle (this is one of maxwell's equations (called gauss' law of magnetism) upon which relativity and most modern physics is based!)

[GeeKay]

Thanks again for the imput. Yes, I get what you say about the Higgs particle. Having read "The Particle at the End of the Universe' by Sean Carroll, I can quite understand the adventures the researchers had tracking down that pesky boson. Whether magnetic monopoles - should they exist at all - involve the same kind of protracted hunt, time will only tell, I guess.

[imatfaal]

If what I have read is correct - and much more importantly correctly remembered and understood - then the LHC is at the sort of energies that are not yet ruled out.

 

I read an article about the time lag between prediction and discovery at the time of the LHC getting the Higgs. And the lead time between theory and finding it is increasing at an increasing rate - between firm prediction and discovery now seems to be measured in decades; but we don't even have the firm prediction yet for the monopole. Maybe this time the path will be shortened or reversed

[GeeKay]

Yes, our reach appears to be growing exponentially longer, but at the expense of our grasp? That question, though, more properly belongs to another thread. . .

There is something else, though. . . one aspect about monopoles that has long intrigued me. I understand that they could (in theory?) speed up the processes inside a fusion reactor by serving as a catalyst. But how this could be achieved in a nuts and bolts sense I still find baffling. In other words, just how - albeit it in layman's terms - can a magnetic monopole catalyse the fusing of hydrogen atoms? Or am I missing out on something important here? Again, many thanks.

[imatfaal]

Some people bemoan this - but frankly I see it as progress.

 

We have moved from being able to do things we don't really understand (which must open the door for dreadful unseen consequences if we had been unlucky) to being able to understand things we cannot yet do (and thus being able to predict dangers and avoid hazards).

 

This will eventually undermine the empirical side of cutting edge science - but any stalling in progress will lead to a self-correcting move of researchers from theory to experimentation to re-narrow the gap. Scientists are curious and will gravitate to the area of most "wonder" - which will be where the greatest leaps can be made; at some points this will be theory, at others experiment, and most of the time groups of both together in unison

[swansont]

It's not that we have no idea what properties a monopole would have. Dirac predicted one, and the Valentine's Day monopole event was consistent with that. Problem is there was only one recorded event, placing an upper bound on how common these might be.

 

http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.48.1378

[MigL]

My understanding of magnetic monopoles comes from Alan Guth's early work which led to inflationary theory.

In GUT they are basically a 'defect' in U(1) gauge theory and are most likely to be created at the boundaries or 'domain walls' of symmetry breaks.

They would be a massive particle, and since we can't see any domain walls of our current universe, I doubt any monopoles would have reached us.

That is, IF they exist.