The 2003 Nobel Prize in Physics

Transcription

2
AAPPS Bulletin Vol. 13, No. 5
Highlight of the Issue
The 2003 Nobel Prize in Physics
The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
1. SUPERFLUIDS AND SUPERCONDUCTORS:
QUANTUM MECHANICS ON A MACROSCOPIC SCALE
Superfluidity or superconductivity—which is the preferred term
if the fluid is made up of charged particles like electrons—is a
fascinating phenomenon that allows us to observe a variety of
quantum mechanical effects on the macroscopic scale. Besides being of tremendous interest in themselves and vehicles
for developing key concepts and methods in theoretical
physics, superfluids have found important applications in
modern society. For instance, superconducting magnets are
able to create strong enough magnetic fields for the magnetic
resonance imaging technique (MRI) to be used for diagnostic
purposes in medicine, for illuminating the structure of complicated molecules by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR),
and for confining plasmas in the context of fusion-reactor
research. Superconducting magnets are also used for bending
the paths of charged particles moving at speeds close to the
speed of light into closed orbits in particle accelerators like
the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) under construction at CERN.
The Royal Swedish Academy of Scinces
(Kung1 Vetenskapsakademien)
Information Department
P. O. BOX 50005
SE-104 05 Stockholm, Sweden
Phone:+46-8-673-95-00
Fax: +46-8-15-56-70
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.kva.se
The content of this Highlight on “The
2003 Nobel Prize in Physics” was released originally by the Nobel Foundation on the website Nobel e-Museum.
Permission for reprinting in the Bulletin this news release was requested
and granted.
1.1. Discovery of Three Model Superfluids
Two experimental discoveries of superfluids were made early
on. The first was made in 1911 by Heike Kamerlingh Onnes
(Nobel Prize in 1913), who discovered that the electrical resistance of mercury completely disappeared at liquid helium
temperatures. He coined the name “superconductivity” for
this phenomenon. The second discovery—that of superfluid
4
He—was made in 1938 by Pyotr Kapitsa and independently
by J. F. Allen and A. D. Misener (Kapitsa received the 1978
Nobel Prize for his inventions and discoveries in low temperature physics). It is believed that the superfluid transition in 4He
is a manifestation of Bose-Einstein condensation, i.e. the tendency of particles—like 4He—that obey Bose-Einstein statistics to condense into the lowest-energy single—particle state at
low temperatures (the strong interaction between the helium atoms blurs the picture somewhat). Electrons, however, obey
Fermi-Dirac statistics and are prevented by the Pauli principle
from having more than one particle in each state. This is why it
took almost fifty years to discover the mechanism responsible
for superconductivity. The key was provided by John Bardeen,
Leon Cooper and Robert Schrieffer, whose 1957 “BCS theory”
showed that pairs of electrons with opposite momentum and
spin projection form “Cooper pairs.” For this work they received the 1972 Nobel Prize in Physics. In their theory the Cooper pairs are structureless objects, i.e. the two partners form a
spin-singlet in a relative s-wave orbital state, and can to a good
approximation be thought of as composite bosons that undergo
Bose-Einstein condensation into a condensate characterised by
macroscopic quantum coherence.
Since both the Cooper pairs of the original BCS theory and
the helium atoms are spherically symmetric objects, they form
isotropic superfluids on condensation. The situation is more
complex—and therefore more interesting—in a third model
superfluid discovered by David Lee, Douglas Osheroff, and
Robert Richardson in 1972. Their discovery of superfluidity
in 3He was rewarded by a Nobel Prize in 1996. While 4He is a
boson, 3He with three rather than four nucleons is a fermion,
AAPPS Bulletin October 2003
3
“for pioneering contributions to the theory of superconductors and superfluids”
©Stephen J. Carrera@Associated Press, AP
Alexei A. Abrikosov
1/3 of the prize
USA and Russia
Argonne National
Laboratory
Argonne, IL, USA
b. 1928
©Alexander Zemlianichenko@Associated Press, AP
Vitaly L. Ginzburg
1/3 of the prize
Russia
P. N. Lebedev Physical Institute
Moscow, Russia
b. 1916
and superfluid 3He is formed by condensation of Cooper pairs
of 3He atoms (or more precisely of “quasiparticles” of atoms
each with a surrounding cloud of other atoms) that have internal degrees of freedom. This is because the two partners form
a spin-triplet in a relative orbital p-state. Both the net spin of
the pair and their relative orbital momentum are therefore different from zero and the superfluid is intrinsically anistropic;
roughly speaking, each pair carries two vectors that can point
in various directions as will be discussed below.
1.2. Broken Symmetry and the Order Parameter
Even before the discovery of superfluid 3He, theoreticians had
been interested in anistropic superfluids. In order to appreciate their significance it is useful to recall the importance of the
concepts of order parameter and spontaneously broken symmetry in the theory of superfluidity. The concept of an order
parameter was introduced by Lev Landau in connection with
his 1937 theory of second order phase transitions. The order
parameter is a quantity that is zero in the disordered phase
above a critical temperature Tc, but has a finite value in the
ordered state below Tc. In the theory of ferromagnetism, e.g.,
spontaneous magnetisation, which is zero in the magnetically
disordered paramagnetic state and nonzero in the spin-ordered
ferromagnetic state, is chosen to be the order parameter of the
ferromagnetic state. Clearly, the existence of a preferred direction of the spins implies that the symmetry of the ferromagnet under spin rotation is reduced (“broken”) when compared to the paramagnet. This is the phenomenon called spontaneously (i.e. not caused by any external field) broken
symmetry. It describes the property of a macroscopic system
in a state that does not have the full symmetry of the underlying microscopic dynamics.
©Bill Wiegand@University of Illinois
Anthony J. Leggett
1/3 of the prize
United Kingdom
and USA
University of Illinois
Urbana, IL, USA
b. 1938
In the theory of superfluidity the order parameter measures
the existence of Bose condensed particles (Cooper pairs) and is
given by the probability amplitude of such particles. The interparticle forces between electrons, between 4He and between 3He
atoms, are rotationally invariant in spin and orbital space and,
of course, conserve particle number. The latter symmetry gives
rise to a somewhat abstract symmetry called “gauge symmetry”,
which is broken in any superfluid. In the theory of isotropic
superfluids like a BCS superconductor or superfluid 4He, the
order parameter is a complex number with two components,
an amplitude
and a phase (“gauge”) . Above Tc the system is invariant under an arbitrary change of the phase
’,
i.e. under a gauge transformation. Below Tc a particular value
of is spontaneously preferred.
1.3. Multiple Simultaneously Broken Continuous
Symmetries
In anistropic superfluids, additional symmetries can be spontaneously broken, corresponding to an order parameter with
more components. In 3He—the best studied example with a
parameter having no fewer than 18 components—the pairs are
in a spin-triplet state, meaning that rotational symmetry in spin
space is broken, just as in a magnet. At the same time, the
anisotropy of the Cooper-pair wave function in orbital space
calls for a spontaneous breakdown of orbital rotation symmetry,
as in liquid crystals. Including the gauge symmetry, three symmetries are therefore broken in superfluid 3He. The 1972 theoretical discovery that several simultaneously broken symmetries can appear in condensed matter was made by Anthony
Leggett, and represented a breakthrough in the theory of anisotropic superfluids. This leads to superfluid phases whose properties cannot be understood by simply adding the properties
4
Vitaly L. Ginzburg, 87, a Russian based at the P. N.
Lebedev Physical Institute in Moscow, looks through
some notes at his institute, Tuesday, Oct. 7, 2003. Two
American citizens and a Russian scientist Ginzburg
won the 2003 Nobel Prize in physics Tuesday for theories about how matter can show bizarre behavior at
extremely low temperatures. The US$1.3 million prize
money will be shared equally among the three winners.
(Photo by Aelxander Zemlianichenko, Associated Press)
of systems in which each symmetry is broken individually.
Such phases may have long range order in combined, rather
than individual degrees of freedom, as illustrated in Fig. 1. An
example is the so-called A phase of superfluid 3He. Leggett
showed, for example, that what he called spontaneously broken spin-orbit symmetry leads to unusual properties that enabled him to identify this phase with a particular microscopic
state, the ABM state (see below).
The microscopic 1957 BCS theory of superconductivity represents a major breakthrough in the understanding of isotropic
charged superfluids (superconductors). The original theory does
not, however, address the properties of anisotropic superfluids
(like superfluid 3He, high temperature superconductors, and
heavy fermion superfluids), which were treated much later with
decisive contributions from Leggett and others. Neither is the
BCS theory able to describe inhomogeneous superfluids with
an order parameter that varies in space as may happen, for
example, in the presence of a magnetic field. A particularly important example of such a phenomenon is the type of superconductor used in the powerful superconducting magnets mentioned
earlier. Here superconductivity and magnetism coexist. The theoretical description of this very important class of superconductors relies on a phenomenological theory developed in the 1950s
by Alexei Abrikosov, building on previous work by Vitaly
Ginzburg and Lev Landau (Landau, who received the Nobel
Prize in physics in 1962, died in 1968).
1.4. Superconductivity and Magnetism
Superconductivity is characterised by electron pairs (or holes)
Nobel Prize winner for physics Alexei Abrikosov, right,
talks with fellow researcher Valerii Vinokour, left, in
Abrikosov’s office at the Argonne National Laboratory in
Argonne III. Tuesday, Oct. 7, 2003. Abrikosov, a Russian,
and two American citizens won the 2003 Nobel Prize in
physics for their work concerning two phenomena called
super conductivity and super fluidity. (Photo by Stephen
J. Carrera, Associated Press)
that have condensed into a ground state, where they all move
coherently. This means not only that the resistance disappears
but also that a magnetic field is expelled from the superconductor (the charged superfluid). This is known as the Meissner
effect. Many superconductors show a complete Meissner effect,
which means that a transition from the superconducting to the
normal state occurs discontinuously at a certain critical external magnetic field Hc. Other superconductors, in particular
alloys, only show a partial Meissner effect or none at all. Work
done in Kharkov by A. Shubnikov and by others elsewhere
showed that the magnetisation may change continuously as
the external field is increased, starting at a lower critical field,
Hc1, while the superconductor continues to show no resistance
up to a much higher upper critical field, Hc2. This effect is
illustrated in Fig. 2. Between the lower and the upper critical
fields the superconducting state coexists with a magnetic field.
The theoretical framework for understanding the behavior
of superconductors in the presence of such strong magnetic
fields was developed in the 1950’s by a group of Soviet
physicists. In a groundbreaking paper, published in 1957,
Abrikosov discovered the vortices in the order parameter of a
superconductor and described their crucial role for the coexistence of a magnetic field and superconductivity in superconductors “of the second group,” or in “type-II superconductors” as we would say today. In the same paper, Abrikosov
provided an amazingly detailed prediction—later to be borne
out by experiments—of the way in which a stronger magnetic
field suppresses superconductivity: vortices, which form a lattice,
come closer to each other, and at some field the vortex cores
overlap, suppressing the order parameter everywhere in the su-
5
(a)
(b)
(d) ”A phase”
(c)
(d) ”B phase”
Fig. 1: The possible states in a two-dimensional model liquid of particles with two internal degrees of freedom: spin (full-line
arrow) and orbital angular momentum (broken-line arrow). (a) Disordered state: isotropic with respect to the orientation of both degrees of freedom. The system is invariant under separate rotations in spin and orbital space and has no
long range order (paramagnetic liquid). (b)—(e) States with different types of long range order corresponding to all
possible broken symmetries. (b) Broken rotational symmetry in spin space (ferromagnetic liquid). (c) Broken rotational
symmetry in orbital space (“liquid crystal”). (d) Rotational symmetries in both spin and orbital space separately broken
(as in the A phase of superfluid 3He). (e) Only the symmetry related to the relative orientation of the spin and orbital
degrees of freedom is broken (as in the B phase of superfluid 3He). Leggett introduced the term spontaneosuly broken
spin-orbit symmetry for the broken symmetry leading to the ordered states in (d) and (e).
perconducting material—hence driving it into the normal state.
Abrikosov’s results came from an insightful analysis of the
Ginzburg-Landau equations, a phenomenological description
of superconductivity published in 1950 by Vitaly Ginzburg
and Lev Landau. One of the motivations behind their work
was the need to develop a theory that would make it possible
to describe correctly the destruction of superconductivity by a
magnetic field or an electric current. The Ginzburg-Landau
equations have proved to be of great importance in physics,
not only for describing superconductivity in the presence of a
magnetic field. In their 1950 paper Ginzburg and Landau were
the first to realize that superconductors can be divided into
two classes with regard to their behaviour in a magnetic field.
They introduced a quantity , now known as the GinzburgLandau parameter, which enabled them to make a distinction
between the two classes. Superconductors with < 1/
do
not allow the coexistence of a magnetic field and superconductivity in the same volume. Superconducting materials with
do allow for such a coexistence. In modern language
is the ratio of the magnetic field penetration
length and the coherence length .
The superconductors known at the time had
<<1, e.g.,
≈ 16 for mercury. That is why Ginzburg and Landau
did not seriously pursue this parameter region beyond showing that if a material with > 1/
is placed in a magnetic
field somewhat larger than the thermodynamic critical value,
the normal phase is unstable with respect to formation of a su-
perconducting state. However, they introduced the crucial notions of a superconducting order parameter, of negative surface
energy of the boundary separating the superconducting from
the normal phase in type-II superconductors, and (in modern
terminology) of the upper critical magnetic field, where superconductivity vanishes in type-II materials. Even so, it was left
to Abrikosov to describe in 1957 the result of this instability
and to formulate the complete phenomenological theory of typeII superconductors. At the same time it is clear that the GinzburgLandau equation and the partial understanding achieved by
Ginzburg and Landau was a necessary basis for his work.
Below we describe the main contributions of Abrikosov,
Ginzburg and Leggett, the 2003 Nobel Physics Laureates, in
some more detail. We will do this in the chronological order
the contributions were made. [Readers who want to skip the
next three, somewhat technical sections, can go directly to the
last section on the importance of the contributions.]
2. GINZBURG-LANDAU THEORY
When Ginzburg and Landau formulated their phenomenological theory of superconductivity in 1950, almost 50 years had
passed since Kamerlingh Onnes discovered the superfluid electron liquid in mercury. This was well before the BCS theory
but a certain level of understanding had been reached using
phenomenological methods. Early on, Gorter and Casimir introduced the two-fluid model (a similar model was developed
for superfluid helium). They divided the conduction electrons
into two groups, a superconducting condensate and normal elec-
6
trons excited from the condensate. Later, in 1935, the brothers
Fritz and Heinz London presented a phenomenological theory
that could explain why a magnetic field does not penetrate further into a metal than the London penetration depth , , a concept we have already alluded to. However, the London theory
could not describe correctly the destruction of superconductivity by a magnetic field or current. Nor did it allow a determination of the surface tension between the superconducting
and normal phases in the same material. [Landau had in 1937
assumed the surface tension to be positive in his theory of the
so called intermediate state.] Neither could the London theory
explain why the critical magnetic fields needed to destroy
superconductivty in thin films are different from the critical
fields for bulk superconductors of the same material. These
deficiencies provided the motivation for Ginzburg and Landau.
Their phenomenological Ginzburg-Landau theory of superconductivity was indeed able to solve these problems.
The Ginzburg-Landau (GL) theory is based on Landau’s
theory of second order phase transitions from 1937. This was
a natural starting point, since in the absence of a magnetic
field the transition into the superconducting state at a critical
temperature Tc is a second-order phase transition. Landau’s
theory describes the transition from a disordered to an ordered
state in terms of an “order parameter,” which is zero in the
disordered phase and nonzero in the ordered phase. In the
theory of ferromagnetism, for example, the order parameter is
the spontaneous magnetisation. In order to describe the transition to a superconducting state, GL took the order parameter
to be a certain complex function ( ), which they interpreted
as the “effective” wave function of the “superconducting
electrons,” whose density ns is given by | |2; today we would
say that ( ) is the macroscopic wave function of the superconducting condensate.
In accordance with Landau’s general theory of second-order phase transitions, the free energy of the superconductor
depends only on | |2 and may be expanded in a power series
close to Tc. Assuming first that ( ) does not vary in space, the
free energy density becomes
where the subscripts n and s refer to the contributions from
the normal and the superconducting state respectively. A stable
superconducting state is obtained if is a positive constant
and
(T-Tc ).
0
Since the purpose of Ginzburg and Landau was to describe
the superconductor in the presence of a magnetic field, H, when
the order parameter may vary in space, gradient terms had to be
added to the expansion. The lowest order gradient term looks
like a kinetic energy term in quantum mechanics, which is why
GL wrote it—adding a term for the magnetic field energy—as
Here the magnetic field
is described by its vector potential, A (r), which enters the kinetic energy term as
Fig. 2: (Colour) Magnetisation M (blue) and induced field B (red) as a function of external magnetic field H for superconductors with complete (dashed lines) and partial (full lines) Meissner effect (see text).
7
Fig. 3: Sketch of the border region between a normal and a superconducting phase, illustrating the concepts of penetration
length
and coherence length . If the magnetic field is Hc in the normal phase, it decays to zero in the superconducting phase over a length . At the same time the superconducting order increases from zero at the interface to its full
value inside the superconducting phase over a distance .
required by gauge-invariance. The total free energy Fs is obtained by integrating the free energy density fs over volume.
By minimising the free energy Fs with respect to
the GL equations are obtained. They are
*
and A,
plus a boundary condition.
The second equation has the same form as the usual expression for the current density in quantum mechanics, while the
first—except for a term nonlinear in , which acts like a repulsive potential—resembles the Schrödinger equation for a particle of mass m*, charge e* with energy eigenvalue - . In their
paper Ginzburg and Landau wrote that “e* is the charge, which
there is no reason to consider as different from the electronic
charge.” As soon as they learned about the BCS theory and
Cooper pairs, however, they realized that e*=2e and m*=2m.
The GL equations are capable of describing many phenomena.
An analysis shows, for example, that a magnetic field penetrating into a superconductor decays with its distance from the border to a normal phase region over a characteristic length
,
2
*
*2
where
m /( | | e ). This is the London penetration
length. Furthermore, it is found that a disturbance
from
an equilibrium value of the order parameter, decays over a characteristic length , where
Therefore, the
penetration length and the coherence length are two characteristic lengths in the GL theory. [Although the physics was
clear to them, Ginzburg and Landau used neither this notation
nor this terminology; the concept of a coherence length was
only introduced three years later by B. Pippard]. The two
lengths have the same temperature dependence close to Tc,
where
In 1950 Ginzburg and Landau made a number of predictions
for the critical magnetic field and critical current density for thin
superconducting films and the surface energy between superconducting and normal phases of the same material. These predictions could soon be tested experimentally with positive results.
At this point a short digression about the surface energy
between superconducting and normal phases of the same material is called for. It follows from the GL equations that this
quantity depends on the two characteristic lengths
and
in a way that can be understood from Fig. 3. The penetration
of the magnetic field, a distance of the order , into the superconductor corresponds to a gain in energy, which is proportional to and due to the decreased distortion of the field.
On the other hand, the fact that the superconducting state
vanishes over a distance of the order
close to the border
decreases the gain in condensation energy, and hence gives
an energy increase proportional to . The net surface energy
is the sum of the two contributions and can be expressed as
In terms of the Ginzburg-Landau parameter k = / we see that the surface energy is positive
if k > 1/ and negative if k > 1/ . Ginzburg and Landau were
mainly interested in clean metals for which is much smaller
than unity. Nevertheless, they did note this fact and pointed out
8
that there is a “peculiar” instability of the normal phase
of the metal if k > 1/
, which is associated with this
negative surface energy.
3. THEORY OF TYPE-II SUPERCONDUCTORS
One of the physicists who soon began to test the predictions
of the GL theory was the young N. V. Zavaritzkii. Working at
the Kapitsa Institute for Physical Problems in Moscow, he was
able to verify the theoretical predictions about the dependence
on film thickness and temperature of the critical magnetic field
of superconducting films. However, when he tried to make
better samples by a new technique (vapour deposition on glass
substrates at low temperatures) he discovered that the critical
fields no longer agreed with the GL theory. He brought this to
the attention of his room mate at the university, Alexei
Abrikosov. Abrikosov looked for a solution to this mystery
within the GL theory and started to think about the true nature
of the superconducting state for k > 1/
. In contrast to the
superconductors that were the focus of Ginzburg’s and
Landau’s interest in 1950, the new materials had values in this
parameter regime. In 1952 Abrikosov was able to calculate
the critical magnetic fields for this parameter regime and found
agreement with Zavaritzkii’s measurements.
Abrikosov continued to think about strongly “type-II superconductors” with large values of k. It was clear that superconductivity could not exist in magnetic fields of a certain strength.
But Abrikosov was able to show that when the field is diminished again, small superconducting regions start to nucleate at a
magnetic field Hc2 Hc / , which for k >
is larger than the
Fig. 4: Abrikosov lattice of magnetic flux lines (vortices) in
NbSe2 — a type-II superconductor - visualised by magneto-optical imaging. The first pictures of such a vortex lattice were taken in 1967 by U. Essmann and H.
Träuble, who sprinkled their sample surfaces with
aferromagnetic powder that arranges itselfin a pattern
reflecting the magnetic flux line structure.
thermodynamic critical field Hc. The latter is the critical field that
is relevant for normal, or “type-I” superconductors. We now call
Hc2 the upper critical magnetic field. However, the material is not
completely superconducting in the sense that the magetic field
vanishes everywhere in the material. Abrikosov found that a periodic distribution of the magnetic field, as a lattice, minimised
the total energy. An experimentally observed Abrikosov lattice
of this type is shown in Fig. 4.
The approach that worked for magnetic fields just below
the upper critical field, where the order parameter is small and
the nonlinear term in the first GL equation can be neglected,
does not work for much weaker fields. However, by studying
the nature of the solutions for fields just below Hc2, Abrikosov
realised that they correspond to vortices in the order parameter and that this type of solution must be valid for weaker
fields as well.
The point is that because we require the theory to be gauge
invariant, the vector potential A and the phase
of the order
parameter
=
exp (i ) appear in the combination
in the first GL equation. Now, for the magnetic
field to be constant inside the superconductor A has to grow. If,
for example, we choose a gauge where the y component of A
grows linearly in the x direction, so that Hz = ∂Ay /∂x with
Ay = Hzx , the magnetic field points in the z direction. If the free
energy is not to grow without limit, the growth in the vector
potential has to be compensated by jumps in the phase. It turns
out that this corresponds to vortex solutions in which the order
parameter vanishes at the points of a regular (triangular or
hexagonal) lattice and the phase of the order parameter changes
by 2 on a closed contour around these lattice points.
Abrikosov discovered these solutions in 1953, but they were
unexpected and he did not publish them until 1957. The suggestion by R. P. Feynman in 1955 that vortex filaments are
formed in superfluid 4He had then reached the Soviet Union.
The level of scientific contact between East and West was very
low during the Cold War and the work of Soviet scientists did
not, in general, get much attention from researchers in the West.
The work of Ginzburg-Landau was received with scepticism
until L. P. Gorkov showed in 1959 that the GL equations could
be derived from the microscopic BCS theory in the appropriate limit. Later, P. C. Hohenburg showed that the GL equations are valid not only close to the transition point in temperature or magnetic field but also at temperatures and in magnetic fields where the superconducting order is not small. The
work of Abrikosov was not fully appreciated in the West until
the 1960s, when superconductors with very high critical fields
had been discovered.
4. SUPERFLUID 3He—A MODEL ANISOTROPIC
SUPERFLUID
We have already remarked that 3He with its two electrons and
three nucleons is a fermion. A large class of interacting fermion systems, like the normal electron liquid in many metals,
can be described by Landau’s fermi liquid theory developed
during the 1950’s. At the time of the BCS theory experimentalists had started to investigate the properties of liquid 3He to
see if it could be described by the Landau theory. J.C. Wheatly
played a decisive role here by showing that liquid 3He could
indeed be very well described by Landau’s fermi liquid theory
below 100 mK. This is a much higher temperature than 2.7 mK,
which later proved to be the critical temperature for a transition to the superfluid state. For a quantitative understanding
of the liquid this result was important, since the atoms in liquid 3He interacts strongly with each other.
Landau’s theory is phenomenological and describes a system of interacting fermi particles in terms of “quasiparticles,”
a term he introduced. A quasiparticle can be viewed as a “bare”
particle interacting with a cloud of surrounding particles. The
theory has one parameter, the effective mass m*, which describes
the single-quasiparticle excitation spectrum, and a number of
parameters that describe the effects of external fields. Often it
is sufficient to have a few of these parameters, which can be
determined from experiments. Landau’s theory applies at “low
enough” temperatures—a criterion that for liquid 3He is very
well satisfied at the transition temperature to superfluidity. In
the mid 1960s Leggett was able to extend the Landau theory
to the superfluid phases and calculate the (large)
renormalisation of the nuclear spin susceptibility by interaction effects. His prediction agreed very well with later NMR
measurements (see below).
Liquid 3He was, as we have seen, of considerable experimental interest from the mid 1950s on. Only a few years after
the publication of the BCS theory several authors—among them
Pitaevskii; Brueckner, Soda, Anderson, and Morel; and Emery
and Sessler—suggested that a BCS-like pair condensation into
a superfluid state might occur in liquid 3He. It was immediately
clear that the strong repulsive interaction between the atoms
would favour a relative orbital momentum state corresponding
to p- or d-wave pairing in which the pair particles would be
kept at some distance from each other. The superfluid would
then be anisotropic, as we have discussed earlier in this text.
We now know that the condensed pairs of 3He atoms are in
a relative p-state (L=1), which means that the total wave function is antisymmetric with respect to an exchange of the spatial coordinates of two particles. Since the total wave function
has to be antisymmetric (the Pauli principle) it follows that
the wave function must be even with respect to an exchange
of the spin coordinates of the two particles. The total spin of
the pair must therefore be in a spin triplet state (S=1) with
three possible values of the spin projection (Sz = +1, 0, -1)
9
and ( )
corresponding to the spin states ( ), ( + )/
. Some properties of anistropic superfluids that can form under these circumstances were calculated theoretically. In 1961
P. W. Anderson and P. Morel proposed a superfluid condensate of pairs forming spin triplets with circular polarization
(Sz= 1), where only the states ( ) and ( ) are involved
(the ABM state). Two years later, however, R. Balian and N. R.
Wertheimer and independently Y. A. Vdovin showed that lower
energy is achieved with a pair state that also involves the spin
state (
)/
(the BW state).
The experimental discovery of the superfluid A, B and A1
phases in 3He was made in 1972 by David Lee, Douglas
Osheroff and Robert Richardson. Investigations, together with
W. J. Gully, of the collective magnetic (i.e. spin-dependent)
properties of the superfluid phases by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) were particularly useful in identifying the order
parameter structure of these phases. In ordinary NMR experiments the system under study is subjected to a strong magnetic field Ho in the z direction, which forces the spin S to
precess around Ho. By applying a weak magnetic field Hrf of
high frequency perpendicular to Ho, it is possible to induce
transitions in Sz, the component along Ho, of magnitude
.
This effect is observed as energy absorption from the magnetic field. If the spins do not interact, these transitions occur
exactly when equals the Larmor frequency
Ho, where
is the gyromagnetic ratio of the nucleus. In fact, as long as
the interactions in the system conserve spin it had been shown
that the resonance remains at the Larmor frequency. On the
other hand, for interactions that do not conserve spin, such as
the spin-orbit interaction caused by the dipole coupling of the
nuclear spins, a shift may occur. Normally this is expected to
be very small, of the order of the line width. The NMR data
published in connection with the experimental discovery of
the superfluid phases was therefore a major surprise since it
was found that although the resonance was still very sharp, it
occurred at frequencies substantially higher than L.
The solution to this puzzling fact was immediately found by
Leggett, who showed that the NMR shifts are a consequence of
the “spontaneously broken spin-orbit symmetry” of the spin-triplet p-wave state. As explained earlier, the meaning of this concept
is that the preferred directions in spin and orbital space are longrange ordered, as illustrated for a simpler model in Fig. 1d and 1e.
The tiny dipole interaction may take advantage of this situation;
the macroscopic quantum coherence of the condensate raises the
dipole coupling to macroscopic importance the dipoles are
aligned in the same direction and their moments add up coherently.
In this way Leggett was first able to calculate the general NMR
response of a spin-triplet p-wave condensate. In particular in the
A-phase the transverse NMR frequency t is given by
2
t
=
2
L
+
2
A
(T)
10
describe this state the ABM state). This only happens at somewhat elevated pressures, when the spin fluctuations become more
pronounced. This left room for the B phase to be identified with
the BW state, which was soon done. Finally, V. Ambegaokar
and N. D. Mermin identified the A1 phase, which appears at
higher magnetic fields, with a state where only one of the spin
states ( ) and ( ) is involved.
5. IMPORTANCE
Fig. 5: Vortex lines in a superfluid are analogous to the flux
lines that occur in a type-II superconductor when it is
placed in a magnetic field (Cf. Fig. 4). The picture
illlustrates vortex lines in rotating superfluid 3He, where
the vortex structure is particularily rich. The vortex lines
are shown in yellow, and the circulating flow around
them is indicated by arrows.
where A2 (T) is proportional to the dipole coupling constant
and depends on temperature but not on H o. Later, Leggett
worked out the complete theory of the spin dynamics, whose
predictions were experimentally confirmed in every detail. One
of the predictions that were confirmed concerned “longitudinal” resonant NMR absorption in both the A and the B phase
of energy from a high-frequency field oriented parallel with
rather than perpendicular to the static field. In the A phase the
resonant frequency of this longitudinal oscillation occurs at
A
(T)
where A(T) is the same frequency that appears in the expression for the transverse frequency.
Leggett identified the ABM state as a candidate to describe
the A phase of superfluid 3He, but noted that the BW state had
been shown to have the lower energy. This, however, had only
been proven within “weak-coupling” theory. After Leggett’s prediction it became necessary to consider “strong-coupling”
effects. The attractive interaction that is responsible for the pair
formation in liquid helium is due to to the liquid itself, unlike
(conventional) superconductors, where the pairing interaction
between electrons is mediated by the lattice. P. W. Anderson
and W. Brinkman showed that there is a conceptually simple
effect that can explain the stabilisation of the ABM state over
the BW state. It is based on a feedback mechanism: the pair
correlations in the condensed state change the pairing interaction between the 3He quasiparticles in a manner that depends on
the state itself. As a specific interaction mechanism, Anderson
and Brinkman considered spin fluctuations and found that a
stabilisation of the state first proposed by Anderson and Morel
is possible (hence the initials of all three authors are used to
The Ginzburg-Landau (GL) theory has been important in many
fields of physics, including particle physics, where it is used
in string theory. Today, the GL theory is extensively used to
describe superconductive properties that are important in practical applications. This theory is able to describe, for example,
spatially varying superconducting order, superconductivity in
strong magnetic fields and fluctuating time-dependent
superconducting order.
Abrikosov’s theory of superconductors in a magnetic field
created a new field of physics the study of type-II
superconductors. After the discovery in 1986 of the ceramic
“high-temperature” superconductors, which are extreme typeII superconductors, by Gerd Bednorz and Alex Müller (Nobel
Prize 1987) research to understand and use these new materials has become a very large activity. The vortex/flux lines discovered by Abrikosov are very important for the properties of
these materials the term “vortex matter” is used.
The work of Leggett was crucial for understanding the order
parameter structure in the superfluid phases of 3He. His discovery that several simultaneously broken symmetries can appear
in condensed matter is, however, of more general importance
for understanding complex phase transitions in other fields as
well, like liquid crystal physics, particle physics, and cosmology.
6. REFERENCES
[1] A. A. Abrikosov: Die Entdeckung der Typ-II-Supraleitung,
Physikalisches Blätter, 57, 61 (2001).
[2] G. W. Crabtree and D. R. Nelson: Vortex physics in high
temperature superconductors, Physics Today, April 1997.
[3] A. J. Leggett: A theoretical description of the new phases
of liquid 3He, Rev. Mod. Phys. 47, 331 (1975).
[4] P. W. Anderson and W. F. Brinkman: Theory of anisotropic superfluidity in 3 He, in “The Helium Liquids”
(Proceedings of the 15th Scottish Universities Summer
School, 1974), ed. J. G.M. Armitage and I. E. Farquhar
(Academic Press, London).
[5] D. Vollhardt and P. Wölfle: The superfluid phases of helium 3,
(Taylor&Francis, London, 1990).
[6] O. V. Lounasmaa and G. R. Pickett: The 3He superfluids,
Scientific American, June 1990.
11
Institution Reports
Research Centre for High Energy Physics at University of Melbourne
Raymond R. Volkas
1. INTRODUCTION
The Research Centre for High Energy Physics (RCHEP), located within the School of Physics at the University of
Melbourne, was established by the Council of the University
in December 1988. Its main aims were to consolidate the research efforts in high energy physics (HEP) at the University,
and in particular to establish a large scale programme in experimental HEP based in Australia but using overseas accelerator laboratories.
Fifteen years on, we can confidently say that HEP research
is healthier than ever at the University of Melbourne, with the
original mission of RCHEP having been fulfilled. RCHEP is
host to the Theoretical Particle Physics and Experimental Particle Physics research groups within the School of Physics. Both
of these groups are very active in research, receive substantial
research funding, and are in high demand by graduate students.
The Experimental Particle Physics group has developed impressively since RCHEP’s inception, having made a major contribution to the neutrino oscillation experiment NOMAD at CERN
during the 1990’s, and at present being heavily involved with
the ATLAS collaboration at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC),
and the Belle experiment at KEK in Japan.
Prof. Raymond R. Volkas
Director & Deputy Head
Research Centre for High Energy
Physics
School of Physics
The University of Melbourne
Victoria 3010, Australia
Email: [email protected]
RCHEP is an important member of the Australian Institute
for High Energy Physics (AUSHEP), an umbrella organization whose purpose is to coordinate Australia’s experimental
HEP activities at the national level. Through AUSHEP, RCHEP
enjoys close and fruitful links with the Department of Physics
and the Special Research Centre for the Subatomic Structure
of Matter at the University of Adelaide, the School of Physics
at the University of Sydney, the Physics Department at the
University of Wollongong, and the Australian Nuclear Science & Technology Organization (ANSTO). The University
of New South Wales and the Australian National University,
through Associate Membership, round out the AUSHEP
grouping.
Having successfully met its initial challenges, an external
review was undertaken in 1999 to update its mission statement.
The revised aims emphasize that the coordination through
AUSHEP of the national HEP research effort remains a priority.
It is seen as a critical player in promoting the health of particle
physics in Australia, a focal point for the nation’s ambitions in
fundamental science. Internally, a need to strengthen the links
between the Experimental and Theoretical Particle Physics
groups was recognised, and it was encouraged to continue
public outreach activities.
2. HISTORY, CONTEXT, AND LINKAGES
Before discussing RCHEP’s scientific research in more depth,
let us take the opportunity to place this relatively new organization in the context of its overall academic and research
environment.
The University of Melbourne is celebrating its 150th anni-
12
versary this year. It was formed in the mid-19th century at the
beginning of a long economic boom driven by the discovery
of gold in what is now the State of Victoria. This good fortune very quickly created an affluent and sophisticated metropolis —Melbourne—from a small settlement established
earlier in that century. The cultural legacies from this auspicious birth are still very much in evidence today, from the
elegant and sometimes ostentatious Victorian architecture of
the inner city through to the intellectual and cultural enthusiasms of its residents. The University of Melbourne, located
just north of the downtown area, has grown from an enrollment of 16 students in 1855 to just under 40,000 today. [The
population of the Melbourne metropolitan area has grown from
about 30,000 in 1851 to 3.6 million in 2003.]
The School of Physics, part of the century-old Faculty of
Science, grew out of the School of Natural Philosophy, a pioneering academic department that drew considerable inspiration from the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom through the conduit of the famous antipodean Ernest
Rutherford, discoverer of the atomic nucleus. It began to mature in the middle of the 20th century, through the advent of a
doctoral research programme and an increasingly cosmopolitan outlook. Historically strong in nuclear physics, it was also
involved in cosmic ray studies in the 1950’s. These strands,
contributing a culture of accelerator-based science and a concern with high-energy collisions, can be viewed as precursors
to the later development of HEP per se. In the late 1960’s and
early 1970’s, both theoretical and experimental particle physics research at Melbourne received a significant boost under
the leadership of Professor David Caro, Head of the School of
Physics, who subsequently embarked on a distinguished career in higher university administration through Vice-Chancellorships at the University of Tasmania, and then again at
Melbourne. The experimental programme in the early 1970’s
undertaken by Caro, G. I. Opat, A. G. Klein and J. W. G.
Wignall focused on bubble chamber work at Brookhaven.
Theoretical HEP research was inaugurated by Bruce H. J.
McKellar, the new Professor of Theoretical Physics, together
with G. C. Joshi and S.-Y. Lo. When Caro moved into higher
administrative office, Stuart N. Tovey was hired from CERN
as his replacement. He established the strong links that RCHEP
enjoys today with CERN, having led Melbourne’s contributions to the UA2 experiment and hyperon work during the late70’s through to the mid-80’s. RCHEP was created after the
UA2 efforts had wound down, and generational change started
to occur within the School of Physics. RCHEP was also fortunate to have the services of Professor Colin A. Ramm toward
the end of his career. Ramm was a pioneer at CERN of bubblechamber neutrino experiments, returning to his native Australia in the 70’s to become Dean of Science at Melbourne.
RCHEP today consists of seven permanent faculty staff,
AAPPS Bulletin Vol.13, No. 5
which will increase to eight in the near future, several postdoctoral fellows, about two dozen graduate students and one
electronic engineer. It is about one-third of the School of
Physics, and is the only Australian organization that has both
theoretical particle physicists and accelerator-based particle
physicists located in the same institute.
Aside from the national administrative and policy role
through AUSHEP mentioned above, RCHEP also engages at
the national level in very active collaborative research
programmes. Over the last decade, on the experimental side, a
very close relationship has developed with the Falkiner High
Energy Physics Department in the School of Physics at the
University of Sydney. RCHEP also has a strong involvement
through instrumentation for medical research, especially the
imaging of brain activity, with the University of Wollongong
and the Howard Florey Institute of Experimental Physiology
and Medicine at the University of Melbourne. RCHEP is thus
an outward-looking organization, open to cross-disciplinary
opportunities, but with its intellectual bedrock being a passionate commitment to fundamental particle physics research
for its own sake. On the theoretical side, links to the Special
Research Centre for the Subatomic Structure of Matter at
Adelaide, especially through lattice gauge theory and computational physics, are also very strong. An important cross-disciplinary link involving theory is through Dr. L. C. L.
Hollenberg to the Centre of Excellence—Centre for Quantum
Computer Technology, a multi-university collaboration with
eight nodes including Melbourne.
In addition to the formal institution-level links to CERN
and KEK, RCHEP has numerous less formal but extremely
important and active international research connections, including several in the Asia-Pacific area. In the last two years
alone, RCHEP theoreticians have published papers with physicists at Arizona U, Ben-Gurion U, Brown U, Delaware U, Delhi
U, Fermilab, Harish-Chandra Research Institute, KIAS, Los
Alamos, National Taiwan University, New Mexico U, SUNY
Stony Brook, Syracuse U, and UCSB.
3. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS 1988-2003
3.1. Experiment
In 1987, the Melbourne experimental particle physics group
became an institutional member of the UA2 experiment.
[Previously Stuart Tovey and his student Gary Egan had
worked on UA2, but as visitors within the CERN group.] The
Melbourne contingent worked on the silicon detectors at the
core of the UA2 upgrade, and gained some basic experience
with that technique.
On the basis of their contributionts to UA2, the Melbourne
experimentalists, by now part of the newly created RCHEP,
were invited to join three experiments:
oscillation search at CERN that ran
• NOMAD, a to
from 1993 to 1999.
• RD2, a generic ‘research and development’ experiment
testing the radiation hardness of silicon detectors.
• EAGLE, a proposal for an experiment at the planned LHC.
13
• Leanne Guy investigated the sensitivity of ATLAS to Bs mixing.
• Sandor Kazi is studying the sensitivity of ATLAS to new
exotics.
• Gaby Bright is studying the sensitivity of ATLAS to B
+ ll .
It is interesting to note that all three experiments were led
by UA2 physicists, so these later invitations demonstrated the
good standing the Melbourne/RCHEP physicists gained within
UA2.
In 1987, Geoffrey N. Taylor was lured back to Australia,
where he is now both the leader of the Melbourne experimental particle physics group and the current Head of the School
of Physics. At the time of his recruitment, Geoff Taylor was
involved in a number of deep-inelastic scattering experiments
involving neutrinos and muons at Fermilab and CERN. He
subsequently became a key member of the Radiative Muon
Decay experiment at TRIUMF, Vancouver while maintaining
involvement with the European and New Muon Collaborations
at CERN.
Fig. 2: A graphic of the assembled ATLAS detector.
In 1995, EAGLE merged with another proposed LHC experiment and was renamed ATLAS. Under Taylor’s leadership,
the RCHEP group is constructing semiconductor tracker (SCT)
modules for the inner part of the ATLAS detector. The expertise gained with silicon at UA2 continues to strongly influence the activities of the group. GRID computing is another
strong component of our ATLAS programme. As well as contributing to hardware and GRID development, RCHEP staff
and graduate students are also very involved with simulations
of the new physics ATLAS will explore when the LHC starts
in 2006. In particular:
• Fawzi Fares investigated the sensitivity of ATLAS for
searches for the Higgs particle via H Z0Z* decays.
• Brendan Dick investigated the sensitivity of ATLAS for
—
searches for the Higgs particle via H bb decays.
Fig. 3: A graphic of the inner part of the ATLAS detector, showing the location of the semiconductor tracker (SCT)
modules.
Fig. 1: Aerial view of the LHC accelerator ring at CERN near
Geneva, Switzerland.
Fig. 4: The assembly station in Melbourne for assembling the
semiconductor tracker (SCT) modules for the ATLAS
experiment.
14
Fig. 5: The precision metrology station in Melbourne for surveying and verification of assembled SCT modules produced in Melbourne.
Fig. 8: Example of the many circuit boards being produced
in Melbourne for the SCT.
tector at TRIUMF, being the spokesperson for experiments
on pion-induced pion production and dibaryon searches.
Fig. 6: An assembled prototype SCT detector module.
In about 1996 it became clear that RCHEP needed an experiment to bridge the gap in time between the end of NOMAD and the start of ATLAS. A perennial challenge for university groups is to have a balanced suite of collaborative
commitments, so that graduate students always have actual
data to analyse in addition to whatever hardware-development
and simulation efforts are required. A short-list of four experiments was drawn up. After considerable discussions, RCHEP
accepted an invitation to join the Belle collaboration at the
KEK B-factory.
Once again, RCHEP’s silicon expertise was at the fore: on
the hardware side, our group is a major source for the silicon
vertex detector (SVD) modules sited at the centre of the detector.
The precise location of decay vertices is a key requirement of
the CP violation physics at the heart of the Belle programme.
Fig. 7: Screen capture of the visual alignment software for
precision assembly of SCT detector modules.
In 1993, Tovey and Taylor were joined by Dr Martin Sevior,
who had been working for several years on the CHAOS de-
RCHEP staff and graduate students have made major contributions to analysis within Belle. The following provides brief
descriptions of these projects, with the name of the principal
graduate student appended:
• Measurement of branching ratio for B X s (Leon
Moffitt).
• Measurement mB and limits on CPT violation (Nick
Hastings).
• Measurement of branching ratio for B
(Ascelin
Gordon).
• Measurement of branching ratio of B mesons to doubly
charmed final states (Eric Heenan).
• Upper limits for
(Craig Everton).
• Measurement of branching ratios for B0
and B0
(Jasna Dragic).
15
Fig. 9: Aerial view of the KEKB accelerator in Tsukuba, Japan.
• Measurement of Vub via B Xu l (Antonio Limosani).
0 0
• Ongoing studies of B
and B K* 0 (Rohan Dowd).
• Ongoing studies of B0 D*D*Ks (Jeremy Dalseno).
RCHEP and the School of Physics was delighted to recently
recruit Dr. Elisabetta Barberio, who will join the experimental
wing in October 2003 after considerable experience at CERN
on electron-positron collider experiments (LEP/LEPII).
We have been very fortunate for a number of years to have
the services of two superb research-only post-doctoral
associates, Dr. Gareth Moorhead and Dr. Glenn Moloney, as
well as an electronic engineer, Mr. Steve Gregory. It would be
impossible to run the group without them.
C. L. Hollenberg, Dr. Girish C. Joshi and Professor Raymond
R. Volkas. Senior research-only personnel include Dr. Robert
Foot, Dr. A. Yu. (Sasha) Ignatiev, Dr. John McIntosh and Dr.
Cameron Wellard (qc). (Personnel devoted to entirely to quantum computation research are flagged by “qc.”)
The theoretical group has always been blessed with a talented pool of graduate students. The current group consists of
Joo-Chew Ang (qc), Ben Carson, Vince Conrad (qc), Jared
Cole (qc), Andrew Dusza, Austin Fowler (qc), Catherine Low,
James McCaw, Kristian McDonald, Ivona Okuniewicz, Matthew Testolin (qc) and Tim Starling (qc).
As ever, the army of graduate students is the heart-and-soul
of the experimental group. The present-day contingent is Tom
Atkinson, Gaby Bright, Joanne Culpepper, Jeremy Dalseno,
Rohan Dowd, Jasna Dragic, Craig Everton, Ascelin Gordon,
Sandor Kazi, Toni Limosani, Caitlinn Loftus, and Leon Moffitt.
3.2. Theory
The theoretical physics group within RCHEP has active interests in a diverse research portfolio from mathematical physics
through lattice gauge theory, extensions of the standard model,
particle cosmology and astrophysics to cross-disciplinary studies in condensed matter physics, quantum computation and
environmental decoherence.
The present-day permanent faculty members are Bruce H.
J. McKellar (the Professor of Theoretical Physics), Dr. Lloyd
Fig. 10: A wire bonding machine is used to assemble silicon
vertex detector (SVD) modules for the Belle detector
at the KEK B-factory.
16
While the diverse nature of the group’s research interests
make it difficult to provide a comprehensive summary, it is
worthwhile to highlight some of the main themes.
There has been a real preoccupation with extensions of the
standard model, both from the model-building and phenomenological perspectives. McKellar has a long-standing interest in CP violation in the standard model and beyond. Both
Volkas and McKellar have worked extensively in all aspects
of neutrino theory, including early universe cosmology, neutrino mass models, the interpretation of tritium end-point
measurements, and solar and atmospheric neutrino
phenomenology. Of particular note is the seminal work performed around 1990 on neutrino quantum kinetic theory by
McKellar and his then student Mark J. Thomson, which was
later taken up for independent reasons by Foot and Volkas and
his students, especially Nicole F. Bell and Yvonne Y. Y. Wong.
This research continues to strongly influence studies of the
effect of neutrino oscillations on primordial or big bang
nucleosynthesis.
Around 1990, Foot, Joshi, Volkas and their former colleague
Dr. Henry Lew discovered a way to understand electric charge
quantization using classical and quantal (anomaly cancellation)
constraints, without the necessity of grand unification.
Also around that time, Foot, Lew and Volkas developed an
explicit gauge theoretic description of mirror matter, a hypothetical set of particles whose properties exactly parallel those
of ordinary particles that had been speculated about from the
time of Lee and Yang in the late 1950’s. This simple extension
of the standard model continues to have interesting implications for neutrino physics and the dark matter problem.
Recently, Ignatiev, Joshi and McKellar have been exploring B-physics phenomenology, nicely complementing the experimental side of RCHEP’s activities. They also have a strong
interest in the phenomenology of theories with large extra
dimensions.
Joshi has had a long-standing interest in the use of novel
mathematical structures in physics, especially quaternions,
octonions and Jordan algebras. He and his students have explored their possible utility in a wide variety of contexts, from
fundamental quantum mechanics through to string theory and
even in deterministic chaos.
Our interest in the phenomenology of hadronic weak interactions led us to work on non-perturbative field theory.
Hollenberg and McKellar have worked on the development
and application of new methodologies to strong coupling gauge
theories. Their 1991 computation of light-cone mesonic states,
using Discretized Light Cone Quantisation (DLCQ), was one
of the first applications of DLCQ to 3+1 dimensional field
theory. Hollenberg then worked on the analytic application of
Lanczos diagonalisation to the general many body problem and
derived and applied the “plaquette expansion”—a way of computing properties of low lying states of a system from an analytic asymptotic form for the Hamiltonian in a tridiagonal basis.
The plaquette expansion method was applied to the Hamiltonian formalism of lattice field theory, which had previously
lain relatively dormant compared to the Lagrangian version.
Hollenberg carried out a first order analytic diagonalisation of
the full lattice QCD theory with staggered fermions and found
exressions for the ratio of rho mass to nucleon mass as function of coupling strength, giving a ratio close to the experimental one in the continuum limit. McIntosh and Hollenberg
found scaling behaviour for the mass gap of 2+1D U(1) lattice
gauge theory to high precision using sophisticated trial states.
Carlsson and McKellar have shown how to obtain improved
Hamiltonians for lattice gauge theory, and have obtained analytic results for the integrals used in variational calculations
for SU(N) gauge theories in 2+1 dimensions. This enables
estimates of the mass gap for large N, which suggest the infinite N limit behaves as a 2 dimensional harmonic oscillator.
Since 1999 Hollenberg has worked on quantum information processing and the physical implementations of quantum
computing.
4. THE FUTURE
RCHEP will continue to redefine itself as will the frontiers of
particle physics research also. Clearly, though, the experimental programme will maintain its commitment to the ATLAS
collaboration, and we very much look forward to advent of
the LHC, which will operate for about a decade. The Higgs
boson is the missing link in the experimental verification of
the standard model, and its discovery (or otherwise!) is eagerly awaited by both the experimental and theoretical halves
of RCHEP. GRID computing will become increasingly
important. Belle will wind down on a shorter time scale, so an
important decision on its replacement will need to be made.
Interesting opportunities will always be seriously considered,
and the cross-disciplinary efforts in medical imaging and quantum computation will continue to evolve. On the theoretical
side, we anticipate that the increasing interdependence of particle physics, astrophysics, and cosmology will loom large in
our planning. An imminent challenge is to manage the generational change that will come with the retirements of
McKellar and Joshi. The School of Physics will continue to
support research at the theoretical frontiers, and the present
Director looks forward to welcoming two new theoretical colleagues in the relatively near future.
17
Institution Reports
Department of Physics at Tsinghua University, Beijing
Bang-Fen Zhu
1. HISTORY
Since its foundation in 1926 the Department of Physics at
Tsinghua University has earned a reputation as one of best
Physics Departments in China. Led by Professor Qi-sun Ye
(Ch’i-Sun Yeh), the first department head, this Department recruited several most distinguished physicists in China, including You-xun Wu (Y. H. Woo), Pen-Tung Sah, Pei-yuan Zhou
(Pei-yuan Chou), and Zhong-yao Zhao (Chung-Yao Chao), and
cultivated a large number of outstanding physicists, such as
Gan-chang Wang (K. C. Wang), Wei-chang Qian (Wei-zang
Chien), San-qiang Qian (San-Tsiang Chien), Chia Chiao Lin,
Huan-wu Peng, Da-heng Wang (Ta Heng Wang), and Zhu-xi
Wang (C. C. Wang) et al., in early 1930s.
In 1937, because of the Japanese Invasion, Tsinghua was
forced to move from Beijing to Changsha, Hunan Province,
and was merged into the “National Changsha Temporary University” with Peking University and Nankai University. In 1938
it had to move to Kunming, Yunnan Province, again and with
its name changed to the “National Southwest Associate
University.” In the World War II a great amount of outstanding scholars was educated in the Department of Physics, such
as C. N. Yang (Nobel Laureate), T. D. Lee (Nobel Laureate),
Kun Huang, Jia-xian Deng, Guang-ya Zhu, et al., which was
one of the most magnificent achievements in the history of
Chinese modern education.
Professor Bang-Fen Zhu
Center for Advanced Study and
Chairman, Department of Physics
Tsinghua University
Beijing 100084
In 1952 this Department dissolved and most of its faculty
members and students joined Peking University, because during that time the China’s education system followed the former
Soviet Union, and Tsinghua University was designed to be a
polytechnic university. Thus the remained and later-recruited
faculty members were concentrated on the university-physics
teaching for undergraduate students. In 1956 the Department
of Engineering Physics aiming at nuclear technology was set
up, in which two groups on nuclear physics and theoretical
physics were growing.
The Department of Physics at Tsinghua was reestablished in
1982 responding to the demand of modernization and
internationalization, and Guang-zhao Zhou (Kuang-Chao Chou),
a Physics alumnus and the then President of Chinese Academy
of Sciences, assumed the department head. Two years later, the
department was entitled “Department of Modern Applied
Physics,” and renamed as “Department of Physics” in 1999.
After great efforts have been made for more than twenty
years, now the Department of Physics has become one of the
most important research centers and physicist cultivating bases
in China.
2. STATUS
Situated in the northwest of Tsinghua campus, which is surrounded by a few historical sites in northwest Beijing, is the
Science Building of the Physics Department. Together with
the nearby Department of Chemistry, Department of Biology,
and Department of Math, the Department of Physics constitutes the Science School of Tsinghua University.
Among the Department’s most significant resources is its
highly respected faculty, including 46 full professors and 31
18
Department of Physics at Tsinghua University, Beijing
associate professors. 5 professors have been elected as the
Members of Chinese Academy of Science. Many faculty members have received various international and national awards
for their research achievements, including the National Award
in Natural Sciences, China’s Prestigious Chang-Jiang Scholar
Award, Chang-Jiang Chair Professorship, Outstanding Youth
Scholar Prize from Hong Kong Qiushi Foundation, Alexander
von Humboldt research fellow, etc. Three professors are the
winners of National Science Fund for Distinguished Young
Scholars. Most noticeably, Nobel Laureate C. N. Yang is a
full professor as well as a member of the Advisory Committee
of this Department.
Authorized by the Ministry of Education in 1999, this Department can confer doctoral degree in all sub-fields in physics,
including Condensed Matter Physics, Atomic and Molecular
Physics, High Energy and Nuclear Physics, Optics, Theoretical Physics, Acoustics, and Plasma Physics. In addition, it is
also allowed for this Department to confer the Ph. D. degree
in Astrophysics.
The guideline of the curriculum is to cultivate first-rate
physical specialists who have both plenty of fundamental
theory and experiment skills. It is emphasized that the students should be able to catch up with the fast advancing modern physics and related technology, and apply them in different fields. In addition, students who are interested in fundamental physics are specially trained aiming for promotion of
corresponding fundamental subjects. About 211 graduate students and 475 undergraduate students, including several National and International Physics Olympiad winners, are currently enrolled in this Department. Since 1984, 1354 students
have been conferred bachelor degree, 419 students have been
conferred master degree, and 62 students have been conferred
doctor degree. Our graduates at all levels have distinguished
themselves in academic, industrial, and governmental careers.
The Department of Physics has attracted more than tends
million Chinese Yuan each year in State and private grants,
most from the National Natural Science Foundation, National
Key Program of Basic Research Development, National High
Technology Research and Development Program, and so on.
In recent years, more than 300 research papers are published
each year in refereed international and domestic journals and
proceedings of international conferences.
There exist broad collaborations between this Department
and its counterparts abroad. Every year, a large number of faculty members visit foreign Institutions and participate in international conferences; meanwhile many outstanding scholars from abroad are invited to work or lecture in the
Department.
Research institutions and their interest:
Institute of Condensed Matter Physics
Computational condensed matter physics and new materials design
Theoretical and experimental studies in condensed matter
physics, in particular for nano- and low-dimension structures
New novel materials growth and characterization
Acoustic and ultrasonic applications
Institute of High Energy Physics and Nuclear Physics
Theoretical and experimental particle physics
High energy astrophysics
Theoretical and experimental studies of nuclei under extreme conditions
Nuclear technology and its applications
Institute of Atomic, Molecular and Optic Physics
Detecting, identifying and manipulating single atom and
molecule
Atomic and molecular structures and dynamical processes
Near-field Optics and Micro-spectroscopy
Laser cooling and ultra-cold atomic physics
Nonlinear optics
Quantum optics
Interdisciplinary research centers:
Center of Atomic, Molecular and Nano Science
Structure of atoms, molecules and nano systems
Fundamental research of detecting, identifying and manipulating single atom and molecule
Synthesis, characterization, and Application of Quasi onedimensional material
Center for Astrophysics
Observation and Investigation of High Energy Radiation
from the Space
Constructing high energy astrophysics database and data
analysis system
Applied Superconductivity Research Center
PIT BSCCO wires
Coated Conductors
Characterization of superconducting materials
Superconductor devices
New materials, new process methods
Key laboratories
Atomic and Molecular Nanosciences Laboratory
(Ministry of Education of China)
New technique and method in detecting and manipulating
atoms and molecules
Properties of material in nano scale
Application of molecular nano-science in biomedicine,
zoology, and resource exploration
Virtual Laboratory for Material Design
(Ministry of Science and Technology of China)
Simulate new materials
Develop software for materials calculation and database
Predict novel properties of new materials
Quantum Information and Measurements Laboratory
(Ministry of Education of China)
Quantum correlation and entanglement
Quantum cryptography and teleportation
Quantum computation
19
3. OUTLOOK
With strong support from the University, relying on the mighty
engineering background of Tsinghua University and the advantage of its talented student resource, the Department of
Physics is forming its own characteristic. The department focuses on enhancing experimental physics, and creating interdisciplinary research programs such as biophysics,
cosmography, and quantum information science on the basis
of consolidating the traditional subjects. Facing unprecedented
opportunities and challenges, this department is reforming its
system and aspires to become a first rank department in the
world in the near future.
20
Institution Reports
Department of Physics at Tsinghua University, Hsin-Chu
Hsiu-Hau Lin
1. TSINGHUA IN TAIWAN
The story of Tsing-Hua reflects a piece of modern history in
Asia. The university was established in 1911, the year before
the birth of the first democratic government in Asia. Later,
after the civil war in China, it was re-established in 1956, located at Hsinchu city in Taiwan. Since then, National TsingHua University (NTHU) in Taiwan took off and grew rapidly.
Now it has become one of the top universities in Taiwan. In
fact, the favorite graduates, embraced by industrial
recruitments, are nicknamed “Tai-Tsing-Chao.” The name
comes from the names of three top universities in Taiwan and
‘Tsing’ stands for National Tsing-Hua University.
Hsinchu, where the university is located, is famous as the
Silicon Valley in Taiwan. With Science-Based Industrial Park
nearby, the development of NTHU has a good balance between creative academic atmosphere and solid scientific
trainings for practical operations. Furthermore, being exposed
to the open and democratic developments in recent decades in
Taiwan, the campus provides an excellent environment of her
faculty members and students to excite and exchange novel
ideas and thoughts, to advance explorations in research frontiers and to cultivate the essential ingredients of modern citizens with a heart of humanity.
2. PHYSICS DEPARTMENT
Shortly after NTHU was established in Taiwan, the importance of natural science came to vision and the physics department was set up in 1965. The original scope of the department concentrated on undergraduate programs. A year later,
the graduate program for Master degrees kicked off and eventually evolved into the current scope with full undergraduate,
Master and Ph.D. programs. Due to the growing importance
and local research strength in astronomy and cosmology, the
institute of astronomy for graduate programs was established
in 2001. Currently, there are about 250 undergraduates and
150 graduate students (about 100 in master program and 50 in
Ph.D.) at the physics department.
The department locates at a seven-floor high building, with
total area over 12,562 square meters. Currently, there are 33
faculty members plus about 10 adjunct professors, working in
various research areas including cosmology and astronomy,
particles and fields, experimental and theoretical condensed
matter physics, atomic and molecular physics, optical physics,
microwave and plasma physics, and some other areas in applied physics. While being a relatively young department, the
physics department is among one of the best and competitive
institutes in Taiwan. In fact, the department was evaluated as
the best physics department in a poll hold by a well-known
Taiwanese magazine in 1998. A year later, it was again selected to be the best research department in physics by another poll conducted by another magazine in Taiwan. It is of
no doubt that the physics department at NTHU has the best
reputation in either research activities or educational trainings.
The keen competition among the physics departments in NTHU
and National Taiwan University and the institute of Physics at
Academia Sinica has played a crucial role in pushing the research standard forward in the past decades.
The excellence of our faculty members can be seen by the
international and domestic recognitions through many honors
and awards. We are the only physics department in Taiwan
with three distinguished Fellows of Academy of Science: Prof.
Kwo-Ray Chu, Prof. Frank Shu and Prof. Mow-Kuen Wu.
21
Fig. 1: Physics Building at NTHU.
After joining the Physics Department of NTHU in 1983,
Prof. Chu set up a laboratory where, with L. R. Barnett and a
team of graduate students, he embarked on experimental research addressing the key physics issues of the electron cyclotron maser (ECM). The culmination of the NTHU group’s research has been the award winning work on the fundamental
properties of the ECM, as was reported in six Physical Review Letters from 1989 to 1998. Professor Chu’s most recent
research, with S. H. Chen and T. H. Chang, has focused on the
theory of, and experimentation with, electron cyclotron maser
interaction involving backward waves. This work has revealed
the unique feature of nonlinear field contraction in the saturated stage, which has opened up a new horizon for nonlinear
science research.
Professor Chu was the recipient of the 2001 K. J. Button
Medal and Prize of the British Institute of Physics, which cited
him for “pioneering contributions to the theoretical formulation and fundamental understanding of electron cyclotron
maser interactions and the technology development of novel
coherent radiation sources with unprecedented capabilities.”
Also in 2001, he received the Plasma Science and Application
Award of the IEEE Nuclear and Plasma Sciences Society for
“seminal plasma physics investigations yielding fundamental
insight into coherent radiation processes, thereby significantly
advancing the state of the art of relativistic electron beam driven
gyro devices.” In recognition of his contributions to, and leadership in, ECM research, Prof. Chu was recently invited by
the Reviews of Modern Physics to author an extensive review
article on the physics, history, and technological advances in
this field of research.
Prof. Shu is the President of NTHU now. He is regarded as
one of the world’s top theoretical astrophysicists and the leading theorist in star formation. He is former president of the
American Astronomical Society and a member of the National
Academy of Sciences. In addition he is known as an excellent
teacher. His notes from an introductory astronomy class were
turned into an undergraduate text, “The Physics Universe,”
which has been described as the “Feynman Lectures” of
astrophysics.
Among Prof. Shu’s contributions have been major innovations in our understanding of spiral structure in galaxies and in
Saturn’s rings, the transfer of mass in binary star systems, the
formation of stars and the origin of the solar system. In recent
years he has looked at the geochemical composition of meteorites,
in search of clues to the early history of the solar system.
Prof. Shu received numerous awards in recognition of his
groundbreaking research including Warner Prize, Brouwer
Award and Heineman Prize from American Astronomical
22
Fig. 2: Front entrance of the Physics Building.
Society. He is also Fellow of National Academy of Sciences
in United States and in Taiwan, Fellow of America Philosophical Society and American Academy of Arts and Sciences. In
1999, he was elected to be University Professor of the nine
Universities of California. This honorable position is attribute
to his outstanding performance in research, teaching and
services. Later, Prof. Shu decided to come back to Taiwan and
become the President of NTHU since 2002, devoting his talents and experiences to lead the university.
Prof. Wu is a worldwide known physicist on high-temperature superconductivity. Together with Prof. C. W. Chu, Prof.
Wu is the discoverer of YBCO superconducting cuprate oxides with critical temperature above the boiling point of liquid
nitrogen. Their original paper in Physical Review Letters has
become the classic in field of high-temperature superconductivity.
In 1990, Prof. Wu returned to Taiwan to organize a research
team working on high Tc superconductors and other oxide
compounds that exhibit strong electron-correlated effect at
NTHU. He has set up a world-class laboratory at the department and remains influential in the international community.
In addition to the great academic achievements, Prof. Wu
also devotes his time to promote the research environment in
Taiwan. He has served as the director of Material Science
Center and the chairman of Research and Development at
NTHU. During the period of 2000-2002, Prof. Wu becomes
the vice-chairman of National Science Council in Taiwan. He
has initiated the Wu Ta-You Research Awards for junior sci-
entists and helps to establish the study abroad programs for
post- and pre-doctoral fellows. Moreover, he also initiated the
modification of the NSC Research Awards program and a new
interdisciplinary research program, which involves all the NSC
academic divisions. After his service at National Science
Council, he took the directorship of Institute of Physics at
Academia Sinica (March 2002-present).
It is worth mentioning that over 1/3 of the faculty members
at the department are recognized by the outstanding awards
(1-2 awards in physics every year and each award lasts three
years) of National Science Council. In particular, Prof. Darwin Chang, Prof. Huan-Chiu Ku, Prof. Juh-Tzeng Lue, Prof.
Shih-Lin Chang received the outstanding awards more than
three times and become the distinguished Invited Principal Investigator of NSC research projects.
Prof. Chang is the world-class expert in CP violation since
his Ph.D. thesis. With more than 100 publications, his recent
work on “New two-loop contribution to electric dipole moment in supersymmetric theories” [Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 900
(1999); ibid. 83, 3972 (1999)] has been the must-cite paper in
this area. He continues his efforts in formulating interesting
CP models and applies them to important systems [Phys. Rev.
Lett. 87, 211601 (2001) and Phys. Rev. D 67, 075013 (2003)].
Prof. Ku is a well-known expert on high-temperature superconductor [Appl. Phys. Lett. 76, 3795 (2000)] and strongly correlated electron systems [Phys. Rev. B 51, 420 (1995) and Phys.
Rev. B 50, 351 (1994)]. He has set up a top-class laboratory in
23
Taiwan and pioneered in many interesting experiments in magnetic properties in high-temperature superconducting materials.
Prof. Lue works on solid-state electronics and recently develops interests in nanoclusters. His recent works on the quantum
size effects in nanoparticles [Phys. Rev. B 49, 17279 (1994),
Phys. Rev. B 51, 2467 (1995) and J. Phys. Chem. Solids 62,
1599 (2001)] attract lots of attentions and demonstrate novel
quantum effects in nanometer scales. Prof. Lin is a world-known
leader in X-ray diffraction and its application to other physical
systems. In a series of important papers [Appl. Phys. Lett. 65,
1720 (1994), Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 301 (1998) and Phys. Rev.
Lett. 86, 2026 (2001)], Prof. Lin developed a groundbreaking
method to measure the triplet phase directly, which can be used
to extract useful information about atomic/molecular configurations in the system. He is now applying this novel technique
to probe several interesting/proposed phases in high-temperature superconducting materials.
Recently, Prof. Ray-Nien Kwo, NTHU/TSMC distinguished
chair professor, joined the department in the fall of 2003. She
discovered the modulated magnetic properties [Phys. Rev. Lett.
55, 1402 (1985)] and observation of long-ranged magnetic
order in synthetic magnetic superlattices, which led to the subsequent discovery of the giant magnetoresistance effect, and
revolutionalized the entire magnetic read/storage industry. Her
series of works on high-temperature superconductors are influential [Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2975 (1992) and Phys. Rev. Lett.
72, 2636 (1994)]. Recently, with Prof. Hong, she initiated the
dielectrics as alternative gate oxide replacthrust on high
ing silicon dioxide for nano CMOS [Science 283, 1897 (1999)].
Not only our senior faculty members are well recognized,
the junior members at the department are also developing their
own reputations. Our junior faculty, Prof. Shangjr (Felix) Gwo
pioneered several breakthroughs in scanning-probe based
nanofabrication [Appl. Phys. Lett. 75, 2429 (1999)], self-assembly phenomena of quantum dots and nanocrystals [Phys.
Rev. Lett. 90, 249901 (2003) and Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 185506
(2003)], nitride-based optoelectronic materials [Appl. Phys.
Lett. 74, 1090 (1999) and Appl. Phys. Lett. 76, 360 (2000)].
Starting from 2003, he is the principal investigator of National
Research Program for Nanoscience and Technology, “Nano
Sensing and Manipulations.”
Besides, our junior faculty members, Prof. Chung-Sun Chu,
received Wu Ta-Yu Award from NSC in 2003 and Prof. Lo
received Outstanding Junior Award of Academia Sinica in
2001. Since the spring in 2003, Prof. Hsiu-Hau Lin became
Wu TY Fellow at the National Center for Theoretical Sciences,
which is a prestigious three-year position for junior researchers.
3. FEATURES
3.1. Curriculum
While being identified as one of the major research institutes
in Taiwan, the department also has an excellent tradition and
reputation for scientific education. As the modern sciences and
Fig. 3: Physics camp organized by students.
24
technology grow, the department also adjusts its trainings of
course work and experimental operations to prepare students
for the fast-pace changing world. The curriculum is flexible in
the spirit that the students can adjust their directions or/and
put more attentions on the interested subfields after receiving
solid and basic training in physics. For instance, in addition to
the basic courses, the department provides introductory course
on nanoscience, computational physics, biophysics and so on,
to bring the students to the research frontiers. We put special
emphasis to enlarge students’ scopes, meanwhile, keeping their
heads and hands down to earth and being familiar with basic
background knowledge and techniques.
3.2. Mentor System
A unique tradition at the department is that every newly enrolled student is assigned to a ‘family’ of elder students acting
as their mentors. The typical size of each family is four or five
students and sometimes larger if two families decide to merge.
The mentor system not only helps the fresh students to get on
track for course work in a short time. It also serves as a social
stage for students with different backgrounds, talents and personalities to interact and work together. The members of the
‘family’ usually keep their close friendship even after they
graduate from Tsing-Hua. With this unique tradition, not only
being familiar with their classmates (horizontal relations), the
students also develop interactions between different classes
(vertical relations). This has been the major bridge, holding
all students at the department together coherently.
3.3. Physics Research Promotion Center
At the developing stage of the department, the National Science Council decided to set up the Physics Research Promotion Center (PRPC) at NTHU, in the goal to build a competitive research environment efficiently. The Physics Center has
helped the department to develop dramatically from its sketchy
period in many aspects. One of the most important impacts is
that the library at the physics department is abundantly funded
Fig. 4: A corner in the library.
and carefully managed through all these years. So far, the library holds more than 45 thousand of books and over 500 journals in paper or/and electronic formats. It is the best physics
library in Taiwan without doubt. In addition, the library also
provides precious services to other universities and institutes
for interlibrary loans, data/references search, electronic journal service and so on.
3.4. National Center for Theoretical Sciences
In 1997, the National Center for Theoretical Sciences was established at NTHU and NCTU (another top national university neighboring to Tsing-Hua), after keen domestic competitions and numerous international refereeing/reviewing
processes. The center has two divisions devoted to physics
and mathematics. The physics building is the host for the Physics Division since 2001. Being modeled after the successful
Institute for Theoretical Physics at Santa Barbara, NCTS has
provided a vivid research environment for both theorists and
experimentalists to present fresh research results, exchange
and discuss ideas, and eventually creates mutual collaborations.
Not only being a spotlight stage for domestic interactions, the
center increases its international visibility through workshops
and conferences in the past years.
4. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS
4.1. Astronomy
The group currently contains three faculty members: HsiangKuang Chang, Dean-Yi Chou and Frank Shu. As mentioned
previously that President Shu is regarded as one of the world’s
top theoretical astrophysicists and the leading theorist in star
formation. Besides, Prof. Chang and Prof. Chou have cooperated to develop a remarkable method to construct the threedimensional image of a region of the solar interior [Nature
389, 825 (1997)]. This influential breakthrough in the wellknown project of Taiwan Oscillation Network (TON) is included in the Encyclopedia of Astronomy and Astrophysics.
In fact, in a recent review of the physics department, the astronomy group is evaluated as “the leading group in Taiwan
and also being competitive international wise.” After the setup
of Institute of Astronomy, we expect the group would grow in
size and certainly in the depth and scope of frontier research.
4.2. Condensed Matter Experiments
Experimental condensed matter physics is a traditionally strong
research field at the department. So far, this research branch
has the largest number of faculty members, graduate students
and funding resources. Also, the research performance has been
renowned for many years. At present, there are five major research areas: (1) Superconductivity and strongly correlated
electron systems by Prof. Cheng-Chung Chi, and Prof. HuanChiu Ku; (2) Surface physics and scanning probe of microscopy by Prof. Tom Chen, Prof. Ya-Chang Chou, Prof. Shangjr
25
Gwo, Prof. Rong-Li Lo; (3) Solid-state electronics by Prof.
Lue; (4) X-ray diffraction and its application in biophysics by
Prof. Shih-Lin Chang and Prof. Tian-Huey Lu; (5) Interdisciplinary research in nanomaterials and thin films by most of
the members in this group.
From 2000-2003, a major four-year research project is supported through the program for Promoting Academic Excellency of Universities, supported by Ministry of Education. One
of the main emphases of the project is concentrated on the
field of nanomaterials and thin films that combine expertise of
members in the group. [Note that there are only TWO projects
in Taiwan focusing on condensed matter experiments.] Starting from 2003, Prof. Gwo, with other faculty members at the
department, would kick off a brand new research investigated,
known as part of the National Project on Nanoscience and
Technology in Taiwan. It is expected that the physics department at NTHU would play a major role in this national wise
project.
4.3. Condensed Matter Theory
The condensed matter theory group has been one of the fields
that made the department play an influential role in Taiwan.
This reflects in the fact that, constantly in the past, there was
at least one representative from the group in the review committee for physics in National Science Council.
Currently there are 7 faculty members: Hsin-Hsiung Chen,
Felix J. Lee and Keh-Ying Lin, working in statistical physics
and Tzay-Ming Hong, Hsiu-Hau Lin, Chung-Yu Mou and WenKai Shung working on the so-called hard condensed matter
theory. These two categories also mark the two age groups.
Members working in statistical physics are more senior and
quite established in Taiwan. With the relatively long history,
this field is now merged into the soft condensed matter physics,
including the fast-developing biophysics. On the other hand,
the hard condensed matter physics group is relative young with
research emphasis on the strongly correlated electron systems,
including high-temperature superconductivity, low-dimensional correlated systems, magnetism and nanoscale physics.
Even though this is a young group, nevertheless, it is quite
strong combining with the local experimental group and already obtained firm reputation in domestic society. The hosted
NCTS also helps to improve the international visibility and
creates international collaborations in the past years.
4.4. Particles and Fields
Currently there are six faculty members working in this field:
Darwin Chang, Kingman Cheung, Chong-Sun Chu and ChaoQiang Geng, working on high-energy theory, Shiu-Chin Wu
on nuclear experiment and Shew-Ching Yeh on particle
experiment. Prof. Wu operates a 95DH Tandem Accelerator
on campus. Beside service to surface physics in Taiwan, the
Fig. 5: National Center for Theoretical Sciences (Physics
Division).
machine is also used to search for new analyzing methods in
material sciences. Prof. Wu also works on nuclear structure
data evaluation, in close collaboration with Lawrence Berkeley National Lab in the United States. Prof. Yeh was a member of L3 group at LEP of CERN, led by Nobel Laureate Prof.
Samuel C. C. Ting. She is also the pioneer of developing silicon vertex detectors in Taiwan.
Prof. Chang is the world-class expert in CP violation as
described in the preceding paragraph and has been switching
toward condensed matter and computation physics. In the past
few years, he has collaborated with condensed matter theory
group at the department and carried out several exciting results in low-dimensional correlated electron systems.
Meanwhile, he continues his efforts in formulating interesting
CP models and in applying to important systems. Prof. Cheung
just recently joined the department. He is known to be the best
collider physics phenomenologist in his generation. In the past
few years, he has finished a series of highly cited papers on
constraints on contact interactions, experimental probes of large
extra dimensions, as well as some supersymmetry papers. Prof.
Chu, although being young, is well known in the community
26
of string theorists. His most famous work in non-commutative string theory is highly cited and receives a lot of respect,
with citations over 300 times. Prof. Geng is an expert in Kaon
and B meson physics, in particular the T and CP violations.
His works in T violation have received lots of attentions
internationally.
4.5. Plasma Physics
The plasma group consists of three faculty members: KwoRay Chu, Tsun-Hsu Chang and Chwung-Shan Kou. In the past
decides, Prof. Chu has established a world-class laboratory
with Prof. Chang. His researches on gyrotron device are pioneering and top-notched in this field worldwide. In addition
to fundamental plasma physics studies, Prof. Chu has applied
his expertise to some important applications, such as developing millimeter wave source for space project in Taiwan and
the high-power source for national defense projects. Prof.
Kou’s research focuses on the interaction between electromagnetic wave and plasma so as to device new plasma sources.
He has invented a large area planar microwave plasma source
and a plasma metallic ion source.
4.6. Atomic/Molecular and Optical Physics
There are four members in this area: Chen-Shiung Hsue, YiWei Liu, Jow-Tsong Shy and Ite Yu. Prof. Hsue is one of the
founders of Synchrotron Radiation Center in Taiwan and an
expert in B-spline calculation. In recent years, he has devoted
to the ab initio calculations and computational physics. Prof.
Liu is a talented and skillful experimentalist. His ambitious
plan is to search for permanent electric moment (PEDM) in
atoms, an experiment with difficulty at the Nobel-prize level.
Prof. Shy has been the leader of the group and is now serving
as the department Chairman. Precision measurement of frequency in Prof. Shy’s group has achieved 1 part in 10 billions,
which can compete with other group worldwide. In addition
to the academic achievements, he has severed in committees
of National Science Council, National Center for Theoretical
Sciences and was the director of Physics Center. Prof. Yu is
the pioneer of the cold-atom study in Taiwan. He succeeds the
first magneto-optical trap, producing laser-cooled atoms and
certainly plays a crucial role of BEC community in Taiwan.
5. SUMMARY
The physics department at NTHU is a place full of enthusiastic and joyful physicists. Not only enthusiastic about explorations in physics wonderland, we also pass on the mission and
training to the next generation, with flexibility for them to
adjust the brand new world and lots of room to cultivate their
creativity. Open and vivid discussions with passions are the
common scenes you would constantly run into at our
department. For more and updated information, please visit
our website http://www.phys.nthu.edu.tw.
27
Departments
Special Reports
Report on the 34th International Physics Olympiad in 2003
Ming-Juey Lin
1. 54 COUNTRIES PARTICIPATED IN THE 34TH
IPhO
The Thirty Fourth International Physics Olympiad (IPhO) was
held from August 2 to 11 in 2003 in Taipei, Taiwan. It was cohosted by the Ministry of Education and National Science Council and organized by National Taiwan Normal University. A total of 379 participants, including 238 contestants and 141 leaders,
observers and visitors, from 54 countries attended the annual
global competition. The competition was originally scheduled
to be held in the mid-July, but postponed two weeks to the beginning of August owing to the unexpected outbreak of SARS
(Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) in April, which affected
some parts of Asia and lasted for about three months. Despite of
the adverse impact and difficult situation caused by SARS, the
Organizing Committee was able to make the Physics Olympiad
a great success as praised by all of the delegates. The following
is the list of the participating countries:
Armenia
Australia Azerbaijan Belarus
Belgium
Bolivia
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Bulgaria Canada
Colombia
Brazil
Croatia
Cuba
Denmark
Czech
Germany
Estonia
Finland
Georgia
Iceland
Indonesia
Hungary
India
Italy
Iran
Ireland
Israel
Kazakhstan Kuwaut
Kyrgyzstan Latvia
Netherlands
Liechtenstein Moldova Mongolia
Pakistan
Norway
Philippines Poland
Serbia & Montenegro
Portugal
Romania Russia
Singapore
Slovakia South Korea Spain
Thailand
Switzerland Taiwan(ROC)
Turkey
Ukraine
Vietnam
USA
2. BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO IPhO
The International Physics Olympiad was originated in east EuProfessor Ming-Juey Lin
Department of Physics
National Taiwan Normal University
Taipei, Taiwan
rope in 1967. It aims to enhance the development of international
contacts in the field of school education in physics and promote
the quality of physics education for science-talented students. The
contestants must be in their high school and can not be older than
twenty years on June 30th of the year of the competition. Each
participant country can send a team of five students and two accompanying leaders at most. The host country is responsible for
the cost of organization of IPhO, food, accommodation, and transportation associated with the Olympiad. However, the medical
costs and travel expenses of the delegations are the responsibility
of the participating country. The official language of the Olympiad is English. The competition tasks including theoretical and
experimental problems are prepared by the host country and have
to be discussed and accepted by the international board. The leaders are responsible for translating the problems into their mother
tongues. It is emphasized in the Statutes that the competition is
among individuals.
3. THE PRESIDENT ATTENDED THE OPENING
CEREMONY
The opening ceremony of the 34th IPhO was held on Sunday,
Aug. 3 and was highlighted by the address of the President of
Republic of China, Mr. Chen Shui-Bian. He warmly welcomed
every delegate from the world by quoting a Taiwanese old
saying, “Fate has brought us together.” He declared that Taiwan would continue her enthusiastic support for the search of
scientific truth and the promotion of international exchanges.
The logo of the 34th IPhO features the portraits of Newton
and Einstein and the number three, which symbolizes both of
the year of the competition and the hope that the third giant in
physics will be coming soon. Based upon the significance of the
logo, the President of the Taiwan Physical Society, Dr. Lee ShihChang, encouraged all the competitors to pursue careers in physics in hope that one of them would become this third great physics giant. He asked: “If you have the ability to become a Newton or an Einstein, why become a doctor or an engineer?” The
Vice Chairman of National Science Council, Dr. Liao ChunChen and the Minister of Education, Dr. Huang Jong-Tsun, also
delivered their welcome speeches. Minister Huang reminded the
students that friendship is even more important than competition,
28
Fig. 1: A group photo of all of the participating students and their guides in the 34th IPhO in front of Taipei Grand Hotel.
and that there is a link between physics and Formosa (beauty).
Finally, he declared the official opening of the 34th IPhO.
The speeches were interspersed with cultural performances:
Chinese Classical Music by Taipei Youth Chinese Orchestra,
Taiwanese Folk Dancing by the Department of Dance of National Taiwan College of Physical Education, and Traditional
Lion Dancing by a local professional group, Ching-Ho. After
the Opening Ceremony, the Mayor of Taipei, Dr. Ma YingJeou welcomed all of the delegates with a luncheon party.
4. THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL COMPETITIONS
problem, a large mass was placed on the other end, and the bob
and the mass were allowed to move freely. The second problem
dealt with both of the mechanical and electrical properties of a
piezoelectric quartz crystal. They were asked to describe the
charge distribution when a voltage is applied to electrodes attached to the crystal. The third problem consists of two separate
parts. The students were required to analyze neutron decay if
the anti-neutrino has a small mass and then to find the laser
power needed to levitate a small glass hemisphere. It is generally commented that the difficulty of the theoretical problems is
close to the level of Ph. D. qualifying examination in physics.
The students took the five-hour theoretical examination on
Monday, August 4. The first problem requires students to do a
dynamical analysis of a swing with a falling weight. Initially,
the string was held horizontal with one end attached to a pendulum bob and the other end to a cylinder. In a latter part of the
The experimental competition, consisting of three parts, was
held on Wednesday, August 6. Students were first required to
determine the appropriate operating range of a laser by measuring laser light intensity using a photodetector. They were asked
to determine how this intensity varied with the current supplied
to the laser. In the second part, students analyzed the electro-
Fig. 2: In the logo of the 34th IPhO, the number “3” symbolizes
the hope that the third physics giant will be coming soon!
Fig. 3: The President of Republic of China, Mr. Chen ShuiBien addressed in the Opening Ceremony.
29
Fig. 4: The Mayor of Taipei City, Dr. Ma Ying-Jeou welcomed
all of the delegates with a luncheon party.
Fig. 6: A scene of the experimental examination held at the
auditorium of the Science College of National Taiwan
Normal University.
optical switching characteristics of a 90-degree Twisted Nematic Liquid Crystal cell, a device that rotates the polarization of
light by 90 degrees. The students placed the cell between two
parallel polarizers and applied an electric field to the cell. A
significant electric field causes the molecules to align with the
field which diminishes the cell’s polarizing guiding effect. The
students had to measure the light intensity as a function of applied voltage. Finally, they analyzed a homogeneous parallelaligned Liquid Crystal cell which has different indices of refraction for rays with their polarizations parallel and perpendicular to its molecular orientation. Students needed to investigate the birefringence of the cell and determine the voltage which
causes a phase retardation of 180 degrees.
sity of Science and Technology), gave very interesting talks.
Aside from the examinations and international board
meetings, students and leaders toured museums, scenic areas,
and recreation parks.
Professor Ting addressed the audience on “My Experience
as a Physicist.” He presented four life lessons: (1) Do not always follow the opinions of experts. (2) Always keep faith in
yourself. Do what you think is right. (3) Be prepared for
surprises. (4) More importantly, be curious. Enjoy what you are
doing and try to work hard to achieve your goal.
Professor Chu described the development history of superconductivity entitled “An Odyssey in the World of Nothingness.” His
group has found stable superconductor at a record high temperature.
6. CLOSING CEREMONY AND FAREWELL
BANQUET
A special science colloquium was arranged on Friday, August 8, in
which all students and leader were present. Two speakers, Professor
Samuel Chao-Chung Ting (the 1976 Nobel Laureate in physics) and
Professor Paul Ching-Wu Chu (the President of Hong Kong Univer-
The closing ceremony, held on Sunday, August 10, featured cultural performances by the symphony orchestra of National Taiwan Normal University, by Taipei Chamber Singers, and by the
Department of Dancing of Taipei National University of Arts.
The highlight was the presentation of medals and special prizes.
According to the Statutes of IPhO, the awarding of Gold, Silver,
Bronze Medals and Honorable Mention are stipulated as follows:
(a) The minimum suggested by the organizers for the Gold
Medal should ensure that the Gold Medal would be ob-
Fig. 5: A scene of the theoretical examination held at the gymnasium of National Taiwan Normal University.
Fig. 7: Students toured Yeliu, a scenic spot in the north coast
of Taiwan.
5. TWO GREAT PHYSICISTS GAVE TALKS IN
SCIENCE COLLOQUIUM
30
Fig. 8: Professor Samuel C. C. Ting answered questions from
the audience in the science colloquium of 2003 IPhO.
Fig. 10: A group photo of all the twenty gold medalists of 2003
IPhO.
tained by 6% of the contestants.
(b) The minimum suggested by the organizers for the Silver Medal should ensure that the Gold or Silver Medals
would be obtained by 18% of the contestants.
(c) The minimum suggested by the organizers for the Bronze
Medal should ensure that the Gold, Silver or Bronze
Medals would be obtained by 36% of the contestants.
(d) The minimum suggested by the organizers for the Honorable Mention should ensure that an Olympic Medal or Honorable Mention would be obtained by 60% of the contestants.
gratulated the organizers for the great success of the Olympiad.
The next host country, South Korea, presented an exciting
audio-video preview of the 35th IPhO that will be held in
Pohang next year. At last, Dr. Y. T. Lee declared that the 34th
IPhO was officially closed.
The farewell banquet was held in the evening at Chung-Shan
Hall, a historical building in suburban Taipei. A twelve-course
Chinese cuisine was served. The banquet was conducted in a
delightful and enjoyable atmosphere. In addition to a variety of
musical entertainment, students were invited to perform on the
stage. It came to the end of 10-day exciting and memorable
physics Olympiad amid the students’ exchange of e-mail address and saying goodbye to their new friends.
Gold medals were awarded to twenty students from twelve
countries. Both of the teams of USA and South Korea won
three gold and two silver medals. The host team of Taiwan
won three gold, one silver, and one bronze. The first prize was
presented to Mr. Pavel Batrachenko from USA by Dr. YuanTseh Lee, the President of Academia Sinica in Taiwan and the
1986 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry. Dr. Lee gave the keynote
address. He paraphrased Dr. Linus Pauling’s exhortation that
science makes progress when young students tell older
professors, “You are wrong.” He also encouraged students
that “the more mistakes you make, the more you learn.” At the
end, the President of IPhO, Dr. Waldemar Gorzkowski, thanked
the support and cooperation of all the delegations and con-
Among the many compliments sent by leaders after they returned home, the Finnish Secretary of IPhO, Professor Maija
Ahtee said: “ I want to thank you again about all the work you
have done to organize the 34th International Physics Olympiad.
And I also want to congratulate you as you succeed so well. I
can say from my very long experience that this Olympiad was
the best organized so far. And all this despite the worries of
SARS and that you had to change the time. I want also to thank
you very specially on my own behalf as the Secretary of IPhO.”
Fig. 9: Professor Paul C. W. Chu gave a talk on development
of superconductivity in the science colloquium of 2003
IPhO.
Fig. 11: Taiwan team won three gold medals, one silver , and
one bronze.
31
Special Reports
The Twelfth International Competition
First Step to Nobel Prize in Physics
Institute of Physics at Polish Academy of Sciences
1. FIRST STEP TO NOBEL PRIZE IN PHYSICS
This is an International Competition in Physics Research Projects
for High School (Lyceum) Students. The competition targets
high school (lyceum) students who are interested in physics and
are willing to perform their own research works in physics. At
times, their results are very interesting and valuable. The Institute of Physics (in the Polish Academy of Sciences) organises
the twelfth competition in the 2003/2004 academic year, and
invites the participation of students based on the rules given
below. The title of the competition expresses dreams of all the
physicists, especially of young physicists. We, however, feel
necessary to underline that the FIRST STEP is a quite independent competition, without any links to any Nobel institution.
1.1. General Rules
(1) All the high school (lyceum) students regardless of the
country, type of the school etc. are eligible for the
competition. The only conditions are that the school cannot be considered as a university college and the age of
the participant should not exceed 20 years on March
31, 2004.
(2) There are no restrictions concerning the subject matter of
the papers, their level, methods applied etc. All these are
left to the participants’ choice. The papers, however, have
to have a research character and deal with physics topics
or topics directly related to physics.
(3) Every participant can submit one or more papers but each
paper should have only one author. The total volume
(i.e. text + figures + captions + tables + references) of
each paper should not exceed 25 normal typed pages
(about 50,000 characters).
(4) The papers will be refereed by the Organising Committee
and the best will be awarded. The number of awarded
papers is not limited. All the awards will be considered equivalent. The Authors of the awarded papers will
be invited to the Institute of Physics (or to institutions cooperating with the Institute of Physics) for one month’s
research stay (the stays are scheduled for November 2004).
The necessary stay expenses (without expenses for travel)
will be paid by the organisers. Unfortunately, the travel
expenses to and from Poland cannot be paid by the
organisers and the winners will have to find some sponsors.
(5) In addition to the regular awards the Organising Committee may establish a number of honourable mentions. The
participants who won the honourable mention receive
diplomas, but they are not invited to the research stay.
(6) The participants should send their papers in two copies in
English only by March 31, 2004 to:
Mrs. Maria Ewa Gorzkowska, M. A.
Secretary of the FIRST STEP
Institute of Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences
al. Lotnikow 32/46, (PL) 02-668 Warszawa
(7) Each paper should contain the name, birth date and home
address of the Author and the name and address of his/her
school.
(8) IMPORTANT: The papers that do not conform to the
above mentioned formal conditions are not evaluated. In
particular that refers to the following papers:
• written in language different than English or written by
hand,
• received after the deadline (the participants should have
sent the papers out to the organisers early enough),
• submitted without copy or without required data about
the author,
• in which physics does not play a basic role,
• which do not have a research character (descriptive
papers, essays, papers without any own results received
by the Authors etc. are rejected in the first pass of
evaluation).
32
We hope that our competition will provide the pupils with
an opportunity to compare their own achievements with the
achievements of their colleagues from other countries. Also
we hope that the stay of young scientists in our Institute will
result in friendly relationship among them, what seems especially valuable for the future.
On behalf of the Organising Committee:
Dr. Yohanes Surya, Vice-President of the Organising Committee (Jakarta, Indonesia)
Dr. Waldemar Gorzkowski, President of the Organising
Committee (Warsaw, Poland)
Additional information on the competition and on the proceedings of the past competitions can be obtained from Dr. Waldemar
Gorzkowski phone: (48)22-8435212; fax: (48)22-8430926;
e-mail: [email protected] or from Dr. Yohanes Surya e-mail:
[email protected] or from any of the following Members
of the International Advisory Committee (IAC):
Mr. Can Altineller, [email protected] (also Turkish)
Dr. Marta Brajczewska, [email protected] (also Portuguese)
Prof. Dr. Hiroshi Ezawa, [email protected] (also
Japanese)
Dr. Zbigniew Gortel, [email protected]
Prof. Dr. Ibrahim Gunal, [email protected] (also Turkish)
Dr. Avi I. Hauser, [email protected]
Prof. Dr. Si-zhao Jin, [email protected] (also Chinese)
Dr. Hans Jordens, [email protected] (also Dutch)
Prof. Dr. Stanislav Kozel, [email protected] (also Russian)
Dr. Juan Leon, [email protected] (also Spanish)
Prof. Dr. Ming-Juey Lin, [email protected] (also
Chinese)
Prof. Dr. Leonid Markovich, [email protected] (also
Belorussian)
Prof. Helmuth Mayr, [email protected] (also German)
Mr. Markus Mueller, [email protected] (also German and
French)
Prof. Dr. Shigetoshi Nara, [email protected] (also
Japanese)
Dr. T. S. Natarajan, [email protected]
Dr. Dwight E. Neuenschwander, [email protected],
[email protected]
Prof. Dr. Seong-Ik Park, [email protected] (also
Korean)
Prof. Dr. Igor Pinkevych, [email protected] (also
Ukrainian)
Dr. Ammar Sarem, [email protected] (also Arabic)
Prof. Dr. Viktor Urumov, [email protected]
(also Macedonian)
Mr. Srdan Verbic, [email protected] (also Serbian)
Prof. Dr. Paolo Violino, [email protected] (also Italian)
Prof. Dr. Ivo Volf, [email protected] (also Czech)
Prof. Dr. Arthur K. West, [email protected]
Mr. Zhong-da Zhang, [email protected] (also Chinese)
Prof. Dr. Dong-pei Zhu, [email protected] (also Chinese)
The competition papers MUST be written in English, but
to get an information about the competition the participants
may contact the Members of the IAC also in other languages
as shown in parentheses. Please remember that the Members
of the IAC are not supervisors and they do not help in any
concrete participants’ research.
Complete information on the First Step can be found on
our home page http://www.ifpan.edu.pl/firststep (you may see
also the mirror page maintained by Mr. Johnny Hadryanto:
http://tofi.or.id/firststep).
1.2. Description of First Step to Nobel Prize in Physics
First Step to Nobel Prize in Physics is an annual international
competition in research projects in physics. All the secondary
(high) school students regardless of the country, type of the
school, sex, nationality etc. are eligible for the competition.
The only conditions are that the school cannot be considered
as a university college and the age of the participants should
not exceed 20 years on March 31 (every year March 31 is the
deadline for submitting the competition papers). There are no
restrictions concerning the subject matter of the papers, their
level, methods applied etc. All these are left to the participants’ choice. The papers, however, have to have a research
character and deal with physics topics or topics directly related to physics.
The project belongs to the out-of-school education. Participation in the competition does not need any agreement from
the school or educational authorities. The pupils conduct their
research in the way and conditions which are the most convenient to them.
2. HISTORY OF THE FIRST STEP TO NOBEL
PRIZE IN PHYSICS
2.1. Introduction
About 15 years ago the Institute of Physics, Polish Academy
of Sciences, in co-operation with the Polish Children’s Fund
started to organise the so-called Research Workshop on
Physics. During the Workshop pupils selected by the Fund
partook in various “adult” research projects being carried out
at the Institute. Some results obtained by the Workshop participants were extremely valuable and were later published
[e.g.: K. Giaro, et al., A Correct Description of the Interaction between a Magnetic Moment and Its Image, Physica C,
168 (1990) 479 - 481; M. Braun, et al., Vibration Frequency
and Height of a Magnet Levitating over a Type-II
Superconductor, Physica C, 171 (1990) 537 - 542].
2.2. National Competition
Many scientists employed in the Institute of Physics are involved in both national and international Physics Olympiads
since their beginnings and are in permanent touch with pupils
33
and teachers. During our time with the pupils at both the Workshop and the Physics Olympiads we discovered that some of
the high school pupils tried to carry out physical research by
themselves—at schools, in some laboratories and even at
home. It was then—under permission of the Authorities of
the Institute of Physics—that I decided to organise the National Competition in Research Projects on Physics for High
School Students. The aims of the competition were obvious.
We wanted to recognise pupils’ efforts and provide them with
an opportunity to compare their own achievements with those
of their colleagues. The first competition of this type started
in 1991/2. The number of papers submitted was 59 with many
of them being of a surprisingly high level. In this first competition 7 papers won prizes and 19 received honourable
mentions. Given the difficulty in comparing papers on, for
example, chaotic behaviour with the papers on theory of
networks, all prizes were deemed to be of equivalent value.
The honourable mentions were divided into two categories:
research papers and contributions. Similarly, inside each category the honourable mentions were considered equivalent as
well. The prizes in our competition were not typical. Instead
of buying items for our winners, such as cameras, computers,
sport equipment, etc., we decided to invite them to our Institute for a two-week long research stay. It was felt that in the
case of those whose main hobby is physics such a prize is
more valuable and more instructive than anything else.
Since the first competition was a success we decided to repeat the national competition every year. The second competition was organised in 1992/3. Its level was also very high,
perhaps even higher than the previous year. The number of
participants and winners increased also: 81 papers, 8 winners,
21 honourable mentions in two categories. Table 1 presents a
statistics of the first six national competitions.
National Competition
No.
Statistics
Number of Honourable mentions
No. of
Awards
Research
papers
Contributions Didactic
papers
aids
I
59 (66)
7 (7)
II
81 (94) 8 (10)
III 88 (106) 10 (14)
IV 86 (108) 10 (11)
V
98 (113)
8 (9)
VI 141 (168)
6 (9)
Total 553 (655) 49 (60)
8 (8)
8 (9)
5 (6)
6 (8)
8 (9)
16 (18)
51 (58)
11 (13)
13 (16)
9 (14)
24 (28)
24 (25)
21 (26)
102 (122)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
6 (11)
6 (11)
Table 1: Without brackets: numbers of papers; in brackets:
numbers of authors (in the national competition the
papers may be prepared by several authors). (*)
honourable mentions in category “Didactic aids” were
introduced at the VI competition.
Every year the information on the national competition is
published in the brochure with the problems of the Polish Physics Olympiads. The brochure is disseminated to all the high
schools in Poland. Additionally, the information on the competition is disseminated by the Polish Children’s Fund and
published in three very popular journals: Fizyka w Szkole,
.
Wiedza i Zycie and S’ wiat Nauki. Due to these actions high
school students know about the competition. On behalf of the
Organising Committee I would like to express our deep thanks
to all the institutions and people who help us in distributing
information about the competition. Without this help any efficient work would certainly be impossible.
It is, however, quite obvious that only a small part of the
total number of high school students is interested in conducting their own research and has appropriate conditions for that.
It is proper to mention here that conducting research needs a
special kind of talent, different than talent to solve well formulated by other people Olympic problems with known
solutions. In the national competition in research projects the
participants have to formulate the topic of investigation by
themselves, they have to create appropriate research workshop,
choose methods, collect literature etc. The participants work
for a long time but without any time limit, characteristic for
the Olympiads. Due to that the work does not cause as big
stress as participation in the Olympiads. For these differences
the national competition in research papers and the Olympiads are not rivals. They are complementary to each other as
they involve different kinds of talents.
What are criteria applied when evaluating the papers? First
of all we look for new, original and own achievements of the
participants. The papers without any new elements have no
chance to be awarded. In the first turn essays, philosophical
dissertations on different aspects of physics, descriptive papers,
papers popularising physics etc. are rejected. The competition
is in research and it is quite natural that we look for new results.
The papers may be of theoretical or experimental character.
Also papers devoted to constructing some new interesting and
original devices are recognised. All the achievements of the
authors should be presented in an appropriate way characteristic for research papers (including literature). We do not apply any discount for young age of the authors.
2.3. International Competition: First Step to Nobel Prize
in Physics
Analysis of the papers submitted to the first national competition stimulated me to organise a similar competition in an international scale. Taking into account that the projects should be
real research papers we named it First Step to Nobel Prize in
Physics. Due to kindness and assistance of the Director of the
Institute of Physics and the Scientific Council of the Institute of
Physics the international competition has started in 1992/1993.
Like the national competition the international one is growing
up very quickly and becomes to be more and more popular.
34
The First Step, like the national competition, belongs to the
out-of-school education. Participation in the competition does
not need any agreement from the school or educational
authorities. The pupils conduct their research in the way and
conditions, which are the most convenient to them.
2.3.1. Characteristic Features of the First Step
(1) The criteria used when evaluating the papers are quite
adult we do not apply any discounts for the young age
of the participants.
(2) There are no prizes such as cameras, video, etc. Also there
are no financial prizes. Instead the winners are invited to
our Institute for one month for research stays (usually in
November). During the stays they are involved into real
research works going on in the Institute.
(3) Every year the proceedings with all the awarded papers
are published.
The competition is guided by the Organising Committee
and consists of all the members of the Scientific Council of
the Institute. The papers are evaluated by the Evaluating
Committee, which is nominated by the Organising Committee.
In the first two competitions only Polish physicists participated in the Evaluation Committee. In the third competition
one foreigner took part in evaluation of the papers. In the fourth
competition the number of physicists from foreign countries
was 10. In the fifth competition number of foreigners in the
Evaluating Committee was 14, etc. In the future we are still
going to enlarge the number of foreign physicists in the Evaluation Committee. Two years ago an International Advisory
Committee (IAC) has been established. At present if consists
of 25 physicists from different countries.
The materials on the competition are disseminated to all the
countries via diplomatic channels. The competition is also
advertised in different physics magazines for pupils and
teachers. (Every year about 30 articles on the First Step are
published in different countries). Also different private channels are used. In the first eight competitions the pupils from
67 countries participated.
The First Step (as far as we know) is the only competition
that publishes proceedings with practically all the awarded
papers. Due to that all our most important decisions may be
verified.
2.3.2 The Main Aims of the Competition
(1) Promotion of scientific interests among young pupils;
(2) Selection of outstanding pupils (this point is especially important in case of pupils from countries or regions in which
access to science is difficult) and their promotion (very
often our winners enter better universities and receive appropriate financial help from the local authorities);
(3) Enhancing motivation of pupils to scientific work;
(4)Stimulation of the schools, parents, local educational
centres, etc. for greater activity in work with pupils interested in research (we know that in some countries, some
regions and even in some schools a preliminary local selection in organised, sometime such selections involve
great numbers of participants);
(5) Establishing friendly relations between young physicists
(recently all the winners are invited to the institute in the
same time, they are accommodated in the same place, they
cooperate with each other, etc.).
Waldemar Gorzkowski
President of the Organizing committee
[email protected]
APPENDIX:
This is a typical form filled by the judges. Usually several judges judge the competition papers. We include this form to our page to present you the criteria used when evaluating the papers.
General criteria for evaluating the competition papers:
Award:
Papers should be of regular research character in physics (physics should dominate in the papers—that refers to all the recognised
competition papers, not to the awarded papers only). They should contain new, original and interesting results obtained by the
Author either in theory or in experiment or in constructing devices (or instruments), the results should be presented in an
appropriate way, characteristic for research papers. The papers should be ready for publication without any changes or after
minor changes of editorial character only.
Honourable Mentions:
Category: Research papers
The same as above, but the paper is not ready for publication without more or less important changes that exceed editorial
character only.
35
Category: Contributions
Interesting contributions or interesting descriptive papers or interesting papers aiming to popularise some topics (the papers in
this category should contain at least a new approach to the topic of the paper). The papers should be correct with regards to
physics contents and written in good English. (Good English is required from all the recognised papers, but its role in this
category is somewhat greater.)
Category: Instruments
Interesting devices, instruments and other constructions that—at least in principle—are not absolutely new. They, however,
should contain some interesting solutions or other interesting details. (The new constructions may be awarded.)
First Step to Nobel Prize in Physics
No. of the paper: _____________ Country: ______________________
Author of the paper: ___________________________________________
Title of the paper:
Suggested result:
Award
Honourable mention in category:
Research paper
Contribution
Instruments
Nothing
Short description of the paper should be written on the opposite side (please underline own achievements of the Author).
Date: __________________;
Signature: _________________________

The 2003 Nobel Prize in Physics

Transcription

Similar documents

Workshop on Case Method of Teaching at ICFAI University

08 - Rohrbasser - Electrophorese capillaire_projet PHARMELP

details - Jamia Millia Islamia

Muon Spin Rotation as a Probe of Superconductivity

Exhibition–Bazaar of New Russian and West Literature

BEACONSFIELD ASBESTOS PROSPECT

News Letter - Ashokrao Mane Group of Institutions, Vathar Tarf

View paper - Romanian Neurosurgery

transport Infrastructure Development and natural Hazards Mitigation

Circulara - Departamentul de Geografie

Egzotyczne aspekty nadprzewodnictwa w układach fermionów