Follow this blog:
RSS

Scientists say electrons are spectacularly round

By | May 28, 2011, 8:54 AM PDT

Scientists have found that electrons are basically perfect spheres.

So perfect that if the subatomic particle were blown up to be the size of our solar system, any imperfection would be less than the width of a human hair.

Put another way, any deviation of roundness would be less than a billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a centimeter across.

That’s mind-bogglingly round.

The six scientists at Imperial College London measured the electron’s roundness by training a measuring system of red and green lasers on a special molecule orbited by a single electron. They then put the molecule in an electrically charged place and looked to see if the electron would wobble.

Just as an egg placed on your dining table would flop over, an imperfectly round electron would be expected to flop over, or wobble.

They ran this experiment 25 million times and blinded themselves from its results until after the 25 millionth run of the experiment so they would not be biased in interpreting the results.

The Guardian, quoting researcher Jony Hudson, reported,

They found no sign of the electron wobbling in the field, meaning it is more spherical than any previous experiment had shown. “To the best of our knowledge, with the experimental precision we have, the electron appears to be round,” Hudson said.

Their results, published in Nature, call into question theories that posit the electron is not perfectly round. A slightly aspherical electron would help explain why antimatter has disappeared since the Big Bang created the universe 12 to 14 billion years ago. An imperfectly round electron could also provide proof for a relatively new theory of physics called supersymmetry in which the particles of nature must come in pairs.

This recent finding could be a blow to the theory of supersymmetry, but even more precise measurements are necessary, because the electron could be egg-shaped at a scale smaller than this experiment examined.

Nature, quoting lead researcher Edward Hinds, reported,

Hinds reckons that by increasing the number of molecules per pulse and reducing their speed, his group should be able to raise the sensitivity of measurement by a factor of ten “over the next few years”, and, ultimately, by a factor of 100. … “We would pretty much rule out all current theories if we went down by a factor of 100 and saw nothing,” he says.

[via Nature]

Photo: Flickr/Lawrence Rayner

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Laura Shin

About Laura Shin

Laura Shin is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

Laura Shin

Laura Shin

Contributing Editor

Laura Shin has been published in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Los Angeles Times, and is currently a contributor at Forbes. Previously, she worked at Newsweek, the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and LearnVest. She holds degrees from Stanford University and Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism.

Follow her on Twitter.

Laura Shin

Laura Shin

In the unlikely event that Laura has a professional or financial relationship with a company she writes about, it will be prominently disclosed.

She writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
14
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
0 Votes
+ -
Electron's roundness
I always thought the electron was a point object dimensionless in all respects, so how can you measure demensions of a point object?
Posted by mastahl01
28th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
If it exists, it can't be dimensionless.
Hi Mastahl01,

Maybe what you are thinking of is the fact that since it is so much smaller compared to normal objects we see every day, it seems dimensionless to us. But it's not, it's just so much smaller we cannot perceive it with the naked eye.

Laura
Posted by laurashin
29th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
How can a point be round
mastahl01: that's a good point. Since all good points must be perfectly balanced, then all good points must be perfectly round.!! Something like that? I suspect the real answer will not make a whole lot more sense than that!

Actually, try this joke on a physicist. ---An electron and a proton go into a bar. The proton says to the electron "Your round!" . The electron says "are you sure?" . The proton replies "I'm positive!"
Posted by Davidpun
29th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
what's the point"
better is to do it in two steps:
Two protons are sitting in a bar and one says, "I've lost my electron". The other says, "are you sure". The first replies "I'm positive" and goes off to look for his electron. The remaining proton finishes his drink and looks to the bartender for the bill. The bartender looks over and says, "for you, no charge".
Posted by mahlon.rhoades
31st May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
electron, proton bar joke
Since there only a proton left, with no mention of its electron, either the joke is flawed or the electron is under the bar stool, drunk.
Posted by thylawyer
1st Jun 2011
0 Votes
+ -
I thought it was cloudlike
And therefore it cant have a surface from which to measure it's roundness. Besides, measuring that many billionths of billionths of billionths can't be done with something that small.
Posted by Dukhalion
Updated - 31st May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Cloudlike & pointlike
That's just one of the oddities of quantum theory -- that depending on how you examine an object, it may act as a particle or as a probability wave (often described using the "cloud" analogy).
Posted by bradhansen@...
1st Jun 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Since they mention the "Big Bang Theory"
The Big Bang Theory is a feeble attempt by scientists to explain something they totally don't understand. If the big bang created the universe as we know it, then what existed before the big bang? If you believe that a big explosion created what we know as the universe today, then I've got some land in South Florida I want to sell ya. We may be able to explain why a lot of things exist, but the universe is going to be one those things that will remains a mystery.
Posted by nevertells@...
31st May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
perfectly round electron
If the electron is indeed a point, it will always appear to be perfectly round until it vanishes as the tests approach the limits of testing.
Posted by thylawyer
1st Jun 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Physical "pointilism" cannot exist...
...unless we excuse the "physical" requirement. The conundrum is the same as if we substituted the abstract calorie count of a food for the food itself. Food calories cannot exist without the food itself. To think otherwise is to confuse abstract math with reality.

An electron is more than a point. It is a charge entity with a physical form determined (at least from the distance we observe it from) BY its charge characteristic. And as such, here we may find the solution to this seeming paradox. A charge -- so long as the shaping object itself is round and uniform -- is by definition also round.

What we see here is simply the confirmation of expectation. There is no reason (besides the fact that it possesses a spin) to think that an electron is in any sense asymmetrical. Now that this experiment is producing results, it seems that we can assume that the spin does not alter the basic symmetry.

There is also good reason to suspect that subatomic particles are simply "bubbles" of energy that manifest "as" matter at that small scale. But that energy still operates over a physical dimensional span -- not as a single "point."
Posted by Lightning Joe
Updated - 2nd Jun 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Re: Scientists say electrons are spectacularly round
Hmm. maybe the universe was designed intelligently after all.

Scientist: "Just as soon as I create life in this test tube, I will prove that no intelligence is required to create life."
Posted by bb_apptix
8th Jun 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Roundness
"Orbiting" implies a steady-state relationship between larger and smaller objects. In the scale discussed, one has to wonder if the dynamics of the relationship also imply a gravity-like effect on the samller particle, leadidng to a shape less than spherical. And, by implication, both particles must be spherical, otherwise the imperfections in one would affect the other, such as variations in apogee of the smaller due to variations in attraction from the larger.
And, one would have to speculate that, at some level, the constant background of energy in all it's forms affects each and every electron, if only from the romantic perspective of mutual attration; If there were only two atoms in an otherwise empty universe, they would eventually "find" each other.
Posted by SocratesRedux
28th Jul 2011
0 Votes
+ -
no no no
It's only round when you're looking at it.
Posted by opcom
30th Aug
0 Votes
+ -
point particle symmetry
If the electron were not a point particle, there would be relativistic effects - i.e. asymmetries in the EM field of an electron moving extremely fast, and also internal stresses under acceleration. I think what they really mean here is that the electron is symmetric in all directions, to the degree that they can measure..
Posted by lexchis
30th Aug
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!