Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Theme

Where the model stops

Every picture in physics has a domain of validity, and the interesting physics usually lives at its edge.
Trajectories at one speed and several angles. Projectile paths launched at the same speed and five different angles. The 45° launch travels furthest, and the 20° and 70° launches land in the same place. Mechanics

The angle that throws furthest, and why nobody notices

Forty-five degrees is the answer, and the maximum is so flat that a throw ten degrees off loses almost nothing. Both halves of that are worth drawing.

 Refraction from n = 1 into n = 1.5. A ray crossing a boundary between media of refractive index 1 and 1.5, bending by the amount Snell's law requires. Optics

The bend at the boundary, and what it is really about

Light changes direction when it changes speed. Snell's law is the geometry of that statement, and it can be derived without knowing anything about light at all.

 The field of a dipole. Field lines traced from a positive charge toward a negative one. Every line does eventually close on the negative charge, but the outer ones loop far outside any frame, so this picture is a crop rather than the whole field. Electromagnetism

Field lines are a choice, not a discovery

Nothing in space is arranged in lines. The lines are a drawing convention — and an unusually good one, because three separate facts about the field survive the translation.

 The same field, sampled as arrows. The field at a grid of points, each arrow pointing the way a positive test charge would be pushed and scaled by the strength there. Electromagnetism

The field before the lines were drawn on it

A field is a vector attached to every point of space. Drawing it as arrows on a grid is honest and ugly; drawing it as lines is beautiful and throws information away.

 A spacetime diagram at β = 0.5. Position across, time up, in units where light travels at 45°. The shaded wedges are the future and past reachable by light; the tilted axes belong to an observer moving at 0.5 of the speed of light. Relativity

Two axes, one speed, and a diagram that does the arguing

Put position across and time up, insist that light travels at forty-five degrees for everyone, and nearly every result in special relativity becomes something to read off rather than derive.

 Simultaneity at β = 0.5. Two events on the same horizontal line happen at the same time for the stationary observer. The moving observer slices spacetime along the tilted line, and for them one event happens before the other. Relativity

Now is a choice of slicing

Two events happening at the same time is not a fact about the events. It is a fact about who is asking, and different observers slice spacetime at different angles.

 The pendulum's period against its amplitude. The exact period of a simple pendulum divided by the small-angle period, plotted against amplitude. The small-angle formula is the horizontal line at one; the exact curve leaves it slowly and then climbs without limit as the amplitude approaches a half turn. Mechanics

The period that depends on the swing, computed exactly

A pendulum's period is not independent of amplitude. The exact answer is an elliptic integral, it has no elementary form, and plotting it shows precisely where the famous approximation earns its keep and where it collapses.

 A spacetime diagram at β = 0.5. Position across, time up, in units where light travels at 45°. The shaded wedges are the future and past reachable by light; the tilted axes belong to an observer moving at 0.5 of the speed of light. Relativity

The length that depends on when, and is not really about length

A moving object is measured shorter. The contraction is real, it is not an illusion of light travel time, and it turns out to be a disagreement about simultaneity wearing a different costume.

 Total energy against speed, in units of the rest energy. The total energy of a moving body divided by its rest energy, against speed as a fraction of the speed of light. The Newtonian answer, one plus half v squared over c squared, is drawn beside it: the two agree to 0.004 per cent at a tenth of light speed and disagree by 39 per cent at nine-tenths. The relativistic curve has a vertical asymptote at c, which is why nothing with mass reaches it. Relativity

Mass is a form of energy, which is not the same as a source of it

The famous equation is usually read as a promise that mass can be turned into energy. It says something stricter and stranger — that a mass is an energy already, sitting there, whether or not anything ever releases it.

 The blackbody spectrum, against what classical physics predicted. Spectral exitance against wavelength for a blackbody at 3000, 4000, 5000 kelvin, in kilowatts per square metre per nanometre. Each curve peaks at the wavelength Wien's displacement law gives — 966 nm at 3000 K, 724 nm at 4000 K, 580 nm at 5000 K — and falls to nothing at short wavelengths. Quantum

The curve that would not come down

Classical physics predicted that a warm object radiates infinite power at short wavelengths. Every step of the derivation was correct, the prediction was absurd, and closing the gap required assuming that energy comes in lumps.

 A wavefunction crossing a barrier it has not the energy for. An electron of 2 electronvolts meeting a 3 electronvolt barrier 0.3 nanometres wide, with the four matching conditions solved rather than sketched. Left of the barrier the incident and reflected waves add to a standing pattern; inside it the amplitude decays exponentially; to the right a travelling wave continues with amplitude 0.3912 of the incident one, so 15.3 per cent of the electrons get through. Classically none of them do. Quantum

The wall that is not quite a wall

A particle without enough energy to climb a barrier sometimes appears on the other side of it. The probability falls exponentially with the barrier's width, which is why the effect is invisible at ordinary scales and why it can be turned into a microscope.

 A beam through a chain of analysers. An unpolarised beam of intensity 1 entering 3 analysers oriented at 0°, 90°, 0°, selecting the + then + output each time. The intensities are 0.500 and 0.500 out of analyser 1; 0.250 and 0.250 out of analyser 2; 0.125 and 0.125 out of analyser 3. The last analyser is oriented the same way as the first, and it produces a "−" beam of 0.125 — a beam of exactly the kind the first analyser removed entirely. The middle analyser did not filter the beam; it replaced what the beam had an answer to. Quantum

The answer that was not there before

Send a beam through an analyser and it splits in two. Send one half through a second analyser turned sideways, then through a third pointing the way the first did, and the property the first analyser removed has come back.

 Four answers to one push. Shear stress against shear rate for four fluids. The straight line through the origin is the Newtonian definition and is the only one of the four for which the word viscosity names a number. The Bingham fluid does not move at all until the stress passes 0.4, which is why toothpaste holds a shape on a brush and why wet concrete can be stood in a heap. Fluids

The fluid that answers back

For water, stress is proportional to how fast it is sheared, and the constant of proportionality is its viscosity. For paint, blood, ketchup and cornflour in water, it is not — and once the proportionality goes, so does the idea that viscosity is a number a substance has.

 A path through a crowd. A point crossing a field of 90 scatterers, rebounding off each. The mean length of 4000 such segments is 0.2983 box widths, against the textbook form 1/2nr = 0.3086 — a departure of -3.3 per cent, from a measurement that knows nothing of the formula. It does not agree exactly and should not: the closed form is derived for a vanishingly dilute field and these discs cover 9.2 per cent of the plane. Two finite-density effects pull opposite ways — crowding shortens the path, and discs shadowing one another lengthen it — so which side of the formula a given field lands on is not something the formula can tell. Thermodynamics

How far a molecule gets

A molecule of air travels about sixty-eight nanometres between collisions — some two hundred times its own size, and a ten-millionth of the width of a room. That ratio is the reason a gas can be treated as a continuous substance at all, and the reason it sometimes cannot.

 Two transitions, one shape and one not. The condensate fraction of an ideal Bose gas, 1 − (T/Tc)^3/2, drawn against the superfluid fraction of liquid helium-4, which goes as roughly 1 − (T/Tλ)^5.6. Both reach one at absolute zero and zero at their transition, and in between they disagree everywhere. The ideal calculation says why a transition has to exist; it does not describe the one that does, because its atoms do not interact and helium's do. Quantum

The liquid that will not slow down

Cool helium below 2.17 kelvin and it starts flowing through gaps no ordinary liquid could enter, climbs out of its own container, and circulates for as long as anyone has been willing to watch. The viscosity is not small. As far as any measurement can tell, it is zero.

 Two predictions, a factor of two apart. The deflection of light passing a mass, against impact parameter, on logarithmic axes. The lower line is what a Newtonian photon does — it falls while it crosses, and comes out bent by 2GM/bc². The upper line is what a geodesic does in curved spacetime, which is exactly twice that. At the surface of a body of 1.99·10³⁰ kg the two are 0.88″ and 1.75″. Both are straight lines of slope minus one, so the ratio is two everywhere and the measurement is a choice between two theories rather than a fit. Astrophysics

The bend Newton got half right

A photon treated as a falling body passes a mass and comes out deflected. So does a photon treated as a straight line in curved spacetime — by exactly twice as much. The factor of two is not a refinement; it is the sharpest available statement that gravity is geometry.

 How small each mass would have to be. The Schwarzschild radius of 4 masses, on a logarithmic scale spanning 35 orders of magnitude. A horizon is not something a mass has; it is a size a mass would have to be squeezed inside. For the Sun it is 2.95 km against a real radius of 696,000 km, a factor of 2.36·10⁵. One row has no real size to set beside the number, which is the one case where the horizon is not hypothetical. Astrophysics

The surface that only lets things in

An eighteenth-century calculation asking where the escape speed reaches the speed of light gives exactly the right radius, by reasoning that is wrong in every step. What is actually there is not a surface in space at all, and nothing local happens when it is crossed.

 The classical atom, and how long it lasts. An electron in a circular orbit of 5.29·10⁻¹¹ m loses energy at the rate the Larmor formula gives, so its radius obeys r³ = r₀³ − 4k²t/c³ and reaches zero in 1.556·10⁻¹¹ seconds — 16 picoseconds. It completes about 2.04·10⁵ orbits on the way, so the spiral is far too tight to draw. Nothing in this calculation is wrong: the acceleration is right, the radiated power is right, and the conclusion is that matter cannot exist. The curve is the shape of that conclusion. Astrophysics

A charge that turns must glow

An accelerating charge radiates, and a charge going round in a circle is accelerating. Apply that to an electron orbiting a nucleus and classical physics predicts that every atom collapses in sixteen picoseconds — a calculation with nothing wrong in it except its conclusion.

 The dip that decides it. Two equally bright points seen through a circular aperture, their Airy patterns added, at 0.7, 1, 1.6 times the Rayleigh separation. Below each is the depth of the dip between the peaks, measured off the drawn sum: 0.0%, 26.5%, 91.6%. At exactly the Rayleigh separation the dip is 26.5% — the criterion is a convention about how much of a dip a detector can see, not a threshold anything crosses. Below it the two peaks merge into one and the pair is gone; above it the answer was never in doubt. Optics

How far apart two things have to be

An instrument's ability to tell two things apart is not set by the quality of its glass. It is set by the width of the hole light comes through, by a factor that is the first zero of a Bessel function — and the threshold everyone quotes is a convention laid over a computed dip of 26.5 per cent.

 Two sources 4 wavelengths apart. Circular wavefronts from two sources, with the lines along which they arrive in step drawn through the pattern. Those lines are where the path difference is a whole number of wavelengths. Optics

Why two lamps never interfere

Adding amplitudes is unconditional; fringes are not. What decides is whether the phase difference holds still for longer than a detector takes to record it — and a 10 nm slice of white light holds it for 100 femtoseconds, across a path of 30 micrometres.

 The term that abolishes the inner orbits. The effective potential of the Schwarzschild geometry per unit mass, in units of c², at 4 angular momenta, against radius in Schwarzschild radii. Newton's version has a minimum — a stable circular orbit — at L̃²/GM for every angular momentum there is, however small, and it is the dashed curve at the same L̃, here with its minima at 10.13, 7.61, 6.00, 5.12 rs. General relativity adds one term, −GM L̃²/c²r³, and that minimum stops existing below a definite angular momentum. At L̃ = 4.50 GM/c the barrier and the well are still separate, at 1.83 and 8.29 rs. The two merge at L̃ = √12 GM/c, at 3 rs = 6GM/c² — the innermost stable circular orbit, where the curve drawn here has neither a maximum nor a minimum but a single inflection. Below that momentum — the curve at L̃ = 3.20 GM/c — there is no stationary point anywhere outside the horizon, so no circular orbit exists at all, at any angular momentum whatever. None of that is a property of matter; it is a statement about the geometry, and it fixes the energy of the innermost orbit at √(8/9) = 0.94281 of mc², so 5.719% of the rest mass has been radiated by anything that reached it. Every well drawn here was located on the emitted curve by golden section and checked against the closed form. Astrophysics

The orbit that cannot be made smaller

Newtonian gravity allows a stable circular path at every radius, however tight, and there is no innermost one. General relativity adds a single term to the expression that says so, and below 6GM/c² no stable circular path exists at any angular momentum whatever. Anything arriving there has radiated 5.72% of its rest mass, which is eight times what hydrogen fusion converts.

 Every path the body can take, at one angular momentum. The angular momentum vector, drawn in the body's own frame on the sphere its length confines it to, for a body whose principal moments are 3.068e-3, 6.817e-3 and 9.750e-3 kg m². Each closed curve is one motion, traced by integrating Euler's equations rather than by solving for the intersection of the sphere with the energy ellipsoid, so a curve closes only if the physics closes it. The low-energy curves circle the greatest-moment axis and the high-energy ones circle the least; both sets are small loops that stay near their axis, which is what stability looks like. Between them is the one curve that is not a loop at all — four arcs, drawn heavier, meeting at the intermediate axis and leaving it again. A body spun about that axis is balanced on the crossing point of paths that go somewhere else, which is the whole of why it does not stay. Mechanics

The axis that will not hold

A book spun about its long edge keeps spinning about it. Spun about the axis through its covers, it keeps spinning about that. Spun about the third axis, it flips end over end, again and again, with nothing touching it. Three numbers decide, and what matters is only their order.

 Newton's answer, Laplace's, and the measurement. The speed of sound in 4 gases at 273.15 K. The short bar is Newton's √(RT/M), which assumes the compressions stay at one temperature; the long one is the same multiplied by √γ, which is what they come to if no heat crosses between a compression and the rarefaction beside it; the upright mark is the measured value. Newton's is 15.5% low for air, 22.5% low for helium, 22.5% low for argon, 12.0% low for carbon dioxide, and the corrected one is right to 0.05% for every gas here. Turning it round: γ read off each pair of bars is 1.400 for air, 1.665 for helium, 1.666 for argon, 1.290 for carbon dioxide, which is 1 + 2/f with f = 5.0, 3.0, 3.0, 6.9 ways of holding energy — three for the monatomic gases, five for the diatomic ones, and nearly seven for carbon dioxide, whose bending modes have begun to take a share at this temperature and its stretch has not. A speed measured with a stopwatch counts the ways a molecule can move. Waves

The correction that took a century

Newton derived the speed of sound in 1687 and got 290 metres a second against a measured 340. The arithmetic was right; the assumption was not. Heat cannot cross a wavelength in a period, so the compressions are adiabatic — and the factor that repairs the answer turns out to be a count of the ways a molecule can move.

 How large a box may be before gravity shows in it. The largest freely falling laboratory in which nothing can be detected, against how long the experiment runs, for an instrument resolving 10⁻⁹ m. Free fall removes the field and leaves the gradient: two masses released a distance apart converge across the fall and separate along it, by (GM/r³)Lt²/2, so the box that stays undetectably flat shrinks as the square of the time. At one second the limits are 1.30 mm at the Earth's surface, 5.07 mm at the Sun's surface, 8.61 nm at a white dwarf, 1.86·10⁻¹⁷ m at a neutron star, 3.88·10⁻¹⁷ m at a stellar black hole, 388 mm at a giant black hole. Two things are worth reading off it. The equivalence principle is local in time as much as in space, on the same footing and with a worse exponent — patience is more expensive than room. And the tidal parameter GM/r³ falls with mass at a horizon, so a large enough black hole is one an experimenter could fall through with a metre-sized laboratory and a very good interferometer and detect nothing at all: the curve for the giant lies above the Earth's, not below it. Astrophysics

The term free fall cannot remove

Fall freely and gravity disappears. It disappears only to the extent that the falling laboratory is small — what survives is the gradient, which pulls two released masses together across the fall and apart along it. Given an instrument, the size of the box in which nothing is detectable is computable, and that number is the whole content of the word "locally".

 Where the sky's blue goes. How many times more strongly a sphere scatters 450 nm light than 650 nm light, against its radius, with the radius on a logarithmic axis running from a couple of nanometres to twenty micrometres. On the left the ratio sits at 4.35, which is the fourth power of the wavelength ratio and the whole reason the daytime sky is blue. It does not stay there. By a radius of 245 nm the preference has halved, and by a micrometre it has essentially gone: a particle comparable with the wavelength scatters every visible colour within a few per cent of equally, which is why a cloud is white, why fog is white, why milk is white and why the exhaust of a cold diesel is white while the smoke of a cigarette — whose particles are ten times smaller — is blue. Nothing about the material changed between one end of this axis and the other; only the size did. Optics

When the particle is the size of the wave

The sky is blue because small things scatter short wavelengths far more strongly. A cloud is made of the same water and scatters every colour alike. Nothing about the material changed — only the size, and one dimensionless number crossing one.

 A peak that leaves before it should have arrived. Two pulses at the far face of a cell, both normalised to the peak the vacuum one reaches. One has crossed empty space; the other has crossed a medium with two gain lines either side of its carrier, whose group index there is -3.85 — negative, so the envelope's peak should emerge early, and it does. Measured off the two curves the advance is 616 in units where the carrier period is 2π, against 582 predicted from the group index alone; the difference is the higher-order dispersion the group index leaves out. The advance is 0.21 of the pulse's own duration, and the peak leaves the far face before the input peak has entered the near one. Nothing has outrun anything. The emergent pulse is a reshaped version of the input's leading edge, which arrived in plenty of time and already contained — for a smooth pulse — everything needed to reconstruct the rest; the medium amplifies it by 1.14× and delivers it early. Give the pulse a genuine front, a moment before which it is exactly zero, and that front travels at the speed of light in every medium there is. Waves

The speed that carries no signal

In the right medium a pulse's peak emerges from the far side before it entered the near one. The measurement is real, it has been made, and nothing has outrun light — because the peak of a smooth pulse was never carrying any information in the first place.

 The part of the curve no fluid follows. Van der Waals' isotherms in reduced units, at 5 temperatures either side of the critical one, so that nothing about any particular substance appears. Above the critical temperature the pressure falls monotonically as the volume grows, which is what a fluid does. Below it the curve develops a loop with a rising section in the middle, and that section says the pressure increases as the substance expands — a material with negative compressibility, which cannot exist, because any fluctuation would run away. What happens instead is drawn as the horizontal line: the substance separates into two phases at one pressure, and the volume moves along the line as the proportions change. Its height, 0.6470 of the critical pressure, is fixed by requiring the two areas the line cuts off to be equal, which is the condition that the two phases have the same Gibbs energy. It meets the curve at volumes 0.603 and 2.349, a ratio of 3.9, and those are the densities of the liquid and its vapour. The two turning points of the loop, at 0.72 and 1.53, bound the part that is not merely unobserved but impossible; between them and the construction the substance can be made to sit, superheated or supercooled, until something nucleates. Thermodynamics

The part of the curve no fluid follows

One equation for a real gas produces isotherms with a rising middle section, which says a substance would expand as the pressure on it grows. Nothing does that. What replaces it is a horizontal line whose height is fixed by making two areas equal, and the condition is not a convenience.

 The bigger the hole, the gentler the horizon. The difference in gravitational pull between the two ends of a 1.8 metre body, at the moment it crosses the horizon, against the mass of the hole. Both axes are logarithmic and the line is straight, of slope -2.00: the tidal acceleration at a horizon falls as the square of the mass, because the tide goes as the mass over the cube of the radius and the radius itself is proportional to the mass. At the low end — a hole of a few solar masses — the stretch is 1.9e+7 times Earth's gravity across a person, which pulls them apart long before they arrive. At the high end it is 1.9e-11, which is nothing at all: crossing the horizon of a large enough hole is locally unremarkable, and an observer would notice no boundary being passed. The two meet at 1.0e+4 solar masses, above which the horizon can be crossed intact. That is the sharpest available statement of what a horizon is and is not. It is not a surface, nothing is there, and nothing local marks it — it is the place from which no future path leads out, which is a statement about the whole of the future rather than about anything present. Astrophysics

The horizon that nothing marks

A falling body is torn apart by the difference in gravity between its ends. At the horizon of a black hole that difference goes as the inverse square of the mass, so a large enough hole can be entered intact — and nothing local happens at the crossing to say it has occurred.

 The reflected beam does not leave from where it arrived. The lateral displacement of a totally reflected beam along the surface, for the two polarisations, at 550 nm from n = 1.5 into n = 1. Geometrical optics puts the outgoing ray at the point where the incoming one struck. It is not there: it is displaced forward along the surface by a distance comparable with a wavelength, which was measured by Goos and Hänchen in 1947 by reflecting a beam many times and looking at the accumulated offset. The displacement is different for the two polarisations — at 42°, 1361 nm for s and 2991 nm for p, at 45°, 350 nm for s and 560 nm for p, at 50°, 237 nm for s and 261 nm for p, at 60°, 183 nm for s and 127 nm for p, at 75°, 161 nm for s and 79 nm for p — which is why an unpolarised beam comes back slightly split. A displacement is only possible if the light spent time on the far side of a boundary it never crossed, and it is the most direct evidence there is that the evanescent field is a real field rather than a bookkeeping term. Optics

The reflection that happens where the glass is not

Total internal reflection sends back every photon, which is why it is called total. It does not send them back from where they arrived — the beam re-emerges displaced along the surface, by a fraction of a wavelength, and a displacement is only possible if the light spent time on the far side of a boundary it never crossed.

 A disc that generates 0.785 V with no changing flux anywhere. The force per unit charge on a carrier in a conducting disc of radius 100 mm spinning at 3000 revolutions a minute in an axial field of 0.5 tesla, against how far out the carrier is. Each carrier is moving through the field at ωr, so v × B pushes it radially with a force per unit charge of ωrB — zero at the axle and largest at the rim. The area under the line is the potential difference between the axle and the rim, which is ½BωR² = 0.7854 volts. Nothing in this calculation mentions a loop, a flux or a rate of change, and the flux through the circuit formed by the disc, the contacts and the external wire does not change at all while the machine runs. Electromagnetism

The rule that is two laws wearing one coat

The flux rule folds two entirely different pieces of physics into one number, and they agree exactly, which is why nobody notices there are two. A disc spinning in a steady field generates a voltage with no changing flux anywhere, and the folding comes apart.

 A siphon's pressure, and the 10.09 m it cannot pass. The absolute pressure of the liquid along a siphon, from the upper surface, over the crown, and down to an outlet 1.2 m below the surface, for 4 crown heights. The profile is hydrostatic and depends on nothing but height: the tube's shape, its length and its bore do not appear. At the crown the liquid is below atmospheric pressure by ρg times the lift, and the whole question of how high a siphon can reach is whether that number stays above the liquid's vapour pressure — 2.34 kPa for water at 20 °C, which puts the ceiling at 10.09 m. a 2 m crown sits at 81.7 kPa and holds, a 6 m crown sits at 42.5 kPa and holds, a 9.5 m crown sits at 8.1 kPa and holds, a 11.5 m crown sits at -11.5 kPa and is below the vapour pressure, so it boils. The ceiling is a property of the liquid, not of the mechanism: a degassed liquid that can be pulled into tension has no such limit, and siphons in a vacuum. Fluids

The height a siphon cannot pass

A siphon will not lift water more than about ten metres, and the usual explanation for the limit is also given as the explanation for the mechanism. It cannot be both. A siphon runs in a vacuum, with degassed water, over a crown no atmosphere could support.

 Stationary, and not always shortest. Three mirrors through the same point, with the same source and the same detector, and the length of the reflected path against where on the mirror the ray strikes. The actual ray is the one at the centre in all three, because the tangent there is horizontal and the two angles are equal whatever the curvature. Its path is a minimum at 0.6× the ellipse's curvature, every path equal at 1× the ellipse's curvature, a maximum at 1.6× the ellipse's curvature. On the most curved mirror every path the light did not take is shorter than the one it did, so the principle cannot be stated as least time and survive; it has to be stated as stationary time, and the difference is not a technicality. Optics

The path that takes the longest time

Light is said to take the quickest route. Put a source and a detector in front of a mirror curved a little more than the ellipse through them, and the route it takes is slower than every route beside it — by construction, not by exception. The principle was never about least; it was about stationary, and the difference is where optics stops being geometry.

 Two straight lines that are not the same line. Half the difference between the liquid and vapour densities, in units of the critical density, against the distance from the critical temperature — both logarithmic, over 5 decades. The van der Waals curve is solved for the coexisting pair at each temperature and its slope in the last decade is 0.500, which is the mean-field ½. Real fluids give 0.326. The two differ by 11 per cent at t = 0.1 and by a factor of 7.9 at the bottom of the axis, which is why an equation with the wrong exponent in it looked right for eighty years. Thermodynamics

The point at which the two become one

Heat a sealed tube of carbon dioxide and the meniscus inside it does not boil away — it fades, the two densities converging until there is nothing to separate. Twenty millikelvin before that happens the fluid turns milky, and the exponent describing the last approach is a number van der Waals got wrong and could not have got right.

 The line that slopes the wrong way. Mean temperature against total energy, for a self-gravitating sphere at nine radii. The points fall on a straight line of negative slope: taking energy away makes the body hotter. The heat capacity read off the drawing is -4.10e+34 J/K against the -4.10e+34 J/K the theorem gives, and the sign is the whole content. The dashed line is an ordinary gas in a rigid box, whose temperature rises when energy is added, as everything one can put a thermometer in does. Astrophysics

The ball of gas that heats up as it cools

Take energy away from a self-gravitating cloud and its temperature rises. Its heat capacity is negative, which nothing else stable does, and the consequence is that a star radiating into cold space is not cooling down — it is running up, and its whole life is a slow fall it cannot stop.

 The field a classical partition function cannot see. The momentum plane of one classical charge, in units of the root-mean-square thermal momentum. With no field the Boltzmann weight is a set of circles about the origin; with a field the same circles sit about p = qA, displaced and otherwise unaltered, because the energy depends on p only through p − qA. Integrating over the whole plane therefore cannot notice the displacement, and the numbers beside the drawing are that integral evaluated at 6 displacements: the largest departure from the zero-field value is 3.3e-16, which is the precision of the arithmetic and not a physical effect. The classical free energy has no B in it, so the classical magnetisation is exactly zero at every field and every temperature — no paramagnetism, no diamagnetism, no ferromagnetism. Every magnetic material is therefore evidence of something classical mechanics does not contain. Electromagnetism

The magnetism classical physics forbids

Write down the partition function of any collection of classical charges in a magnetic field, and the field cancels out. Not approximately, not to leading order — the integral is over all of momentum space and the field only shifts where the middle of it is. So classical statistical mechanics predicts no paramagnetism, no diamagnetism and no ferromagnetism, and a compass needle is a quantum instrument.

 What a coordinate is worth, by the shape of its energy. The mean energy stored in one coordinate, in units of kT, against the power with which that coordinate enters the energy. The curve is 1/n and the points are the same average obtained by integrating the Boltzmann weight numerically, agreeing to 3.3e-7 per cent at worst. an energy going as |x|^1 holds 1.0000 kT; an energy going as |x|^1.5 holds 0.6667 kT; an energy going as |x|^2 holds 0.5000 kT; an energy going as |x|^3 holds 0.3333 kT; an energy going as |x|^4 holds 0.2500 kT; an energy going as |x|^6 holds 0.1667 kT. The familiar half a kT is the case n = 2 and nothing more general than that: a coordinate whose energy is linear in it — the momentum of an ultrarelativistic particle, or a field with no restoring force but a constant tension — carries a whole kT, and one confined by a very steep wall carries almost nothing. Equipartition is a theorem about quadratic terms, and calling it a theorem about degrees of freedom is the substitution that makes it fail. Thermodynamics

The share that is not half a kT

Equipartition is quoted as half a kT for every degree of freedom, and it is nothing of the kind. It is half a kT for every *quadratic* term. A coordinate whose energy is linear in it carries a whole kT, and a gas hot enough that its particles' energy is pc rather than p²/2m therefore holds twice what the counting says — which drops its ratio of specific heats to four thirds and puts a star on the edge of being able to hold itself up.

 The figure a static field is not allowed to close. A spacetime diagram of two clocks held at fixed heights 22.5 metres apart, drawn as though spacetime were flat: time upward, height to the right, light at forty-five degrees. The lower clock sends two pulses; the upper clock receives them. Because the field does not change with time, nothing about the second pulse's journey differs from the first's, so the two null lines are congruent and the four worldlines bound a parallelogram. Opposite sides of a parallelogram in flat spacetime have equal length, so the proper time between emissions must equal the proper time between receptions, and the two clocks must agree. They do not: the measured fractional difference across a tower this tall is 2.455e-15, which Pound and Rebka established in 1960 and Pound and Snider confirmed to one per cent in 1964. Every step above is either a definition, an assumption of staticity, or a theorem of flat geometry — so the measurement refutes the flatness. No field equation has been written down, and none is needed: a laboratory result twenty-two metres tall is already incompatible with a flat spacetime. Astrophysics

The parallelogram that will not close

Two clocks twenty-two metres apart in a lift shaft run at different rates, by two parts in a thousand million million. That measurement, on its own, is enough to prove that spacetime cannot be flat — and the proof needs no field equation, no curvature tensor and no astronomy. It needs one drawing and the fact that opposite sides of a parallelogram are the same length.

 A band 3.60 eV wide, and the curvature is the whole story. Energy against wavenumber for one tight-binding band, α + 2β·cos(ka), with α = -4 eV, β = -0.9 eV and a repeat of 300 pm. The band is 3.60 eV from floor to ceiling and periodic in k, so the zone boundary at ka = π is not an edge of anything: it is where the curve turns over. Near the bottom it is a parabola, which is the free-electron dispersion with a different coefficient — a mass of 0.470 m_e rather than one — and near the top it is a parabola the other way up, a mass of -0.470. The inflection between them is at ka = π/2, and it is the point at which a constant force stops producing any acceleration. Quantum

The mass a curve decides

An electron in a solid answers a force with a mass that is nothing to do with the mass of an electron. It is set by how sharply the band bends, it is smaller than the free value in a wide band and larger in a narrow one, and near the top of any band it is negative — which is why aluminium's Hall voltage has the sign of a positive carrier and no adjustment to an electron count can repair it.

 Flat, then exponential, then a power law. Survival probability against time in lifetimes, both logarithmic, for a resonance 20 linewidths above the bottom of its band and 400 below the top. The straight dashed line is exp(−Γt), and the computed curve sits on it through the middle — a fitted rate of 0.9998 per lifetime between one and eight — and leaves it at both ends. Below 1.57e-2 lifetimes the curve is flat, falling as (t/τ_z)² with τ_z = 0.1253 lifetimes; beyond 22.6 lifetimes it is an inverse square, which any exponential eventually loses to. Both departures are forced: the head by the state being normalisable and the tail by the band having a bottom. Quantum

The exponential that is only true in the middle

A decay law is not an assumption about nuclei; it is the Fourier transform of an energy distribution. Do that transform honestly and the exponential fails at both ends — flat at the start, because the state is normalisable, and an inverse square at the end, because no system has states of arbitrarily negative energy. Neither departure is a correction that could be made small.

 N when the phases are random, N² when they are not. Scattered intensity against the number of scatterers, both logarithmic, for two ways of adding the same amplitudes. The lower curve averages 400 draws of N unit amplitudes with independent random phases and grows as N^1.000; the upper one adds them in phase and grows as N². At 3000 scatterers the two differ by a factor of 2921. Nothing about the scatterers is different between the two — same number, same strength, same wavelength. Only the arrangement is, and it is worth three decades here. Optics

Why a litre of water is not blue for the reason the sky is

The same molecules that make the sky blue also make the refractive index of air, and the two numbers agree because the sideways sum has random phases and the forward one does not. Condense those molecules into a liquid and the sideways sum collapses by a factor of sixteen — and what is left is thirty-four times smaller than the absorption that actually colours the water.

 Each stage takes 25.0 per cent of what is left. Entropy against temperature for a spin-½ paramagnet at 0.25 T and 1 T, with the cooling cycle drawn between them: a vertical drop is isothermal magnetisation, a horizontal move is adiabatic demagnetisation. Starting from 1 K the treads are at 1.000 K, 0.250 K, 0.062 K, 0.016 K, 3.91 mK. Each is 0.2500 of the one before — a ratio read back off the drawn treads rather than written into them, and equal to the field ratio 0.25/1 because this refrigerant's entropy depends on the field and the temperature only through their quotient. The steps therefore shrink in proportion to what is left, and no finite number of them arrives. Thermodynamics

The staircase that never reaches the floor

Absolute zero is unreachable, and the reason is not that the apparatus is not good enough. Every stage of cooling removes a fixed fraction of what is left rather than a fixed amount, so the steps shrink in proportion to the distance remaining — and the fixed fraction cannot be made one, because the entropy curves at two field strengths are required to meet where the axis is.

 The self-force matters at 6.27 × 10⁻²⁴ s, and nowhere a charge has ever been. The ratio of the radiation reaction to the applied force, which is τ divided by the time the force takes to change, on a logarithmic axis. τ = μ₀q²/6πmc = 6.266e-24 s for an electron, and light crosses 1.879 femtometres in that time — two thirds of the classical electron radius. a 3 GHz accelerating cavity: 1.9e-14; a 500 nm optical field: 3.8e-9; an electron orbiting a proton, ground state: 4.1e-8; an X-ray at 0.1 nm: 1.9e-5; over a classical electron radius: 6.7e-1. The largest of them, "over a classical electron radius", is still 1.5e+0 times too slow. So the correction is never large for any force anybody can apply, and the only regime where it would be is one in which the charge's own structure has already made the whole description meaningless. Astrophysics

The force a charge exerts on itself

Larmor's formula says how much an accelerating charge radiates and says nothing about who pays. Conservation says the charge does, so there is a force on it — and the equation that force produces has a free particle accelerating for ever with nothing pushing it, or else beginning to move before it is pushed. Both solutions are absurd, and the interval over which they are absurd is smaller than the electron the equation was written for.

 Rough contact grows as W^1.000, and one smooth bump as W^0.667. Real contact area against load, both logarithmic, three ways. Plastic flow of the asperities gives A = W/H, a slope of exactly one, which is the account Bowden and Tabor's argument uses. A single elastic sphere gives Hertz's answer, A ∝ W^(2/3), and a friction coefficient falling as W^(−1/3) — Amontons' law would be false. A rough elastic surface, with many asperities spread exponentially in height and integrated here rather than quoted, gives a slope of 1.0000, because pressing harder mostly recruits new contacts rather than enlarging existing ones. The dotted curve repeats that integration with a Gaussian spread of heights and gives 0.9695 — the upper tail of a Gaussian is nearly exponential, so the answer is nearly and not exactly linear. Amontons' law does not need plasticity. It needs roughness, it is exact for one distribution and good to three per cent for another, and it survives whichever way the individual junctions deform. Mechanics

The grip that is not a coefficient

A friction coefficient is independent of load and of area, and the reason is usually given as plastic flow of the asperities. It is not — a rough elastic surface gives the same law, integrated here to a slope of 1.0000, because pressing harder recruits new contacts rather than enlarging old ones. What breaks the law is a contact that is smooth, or a material that dissipates in its bulk — where μ passes one and stops being a coefficient at all.

 Indistinguishable for 10.2 seconds, then not. The path of the lower bob for two double pendulums released 1e-8° apart, over 11 seconds, with the arms drawn at the final instant. The two traces lie on top of each other for the first 10.2 seconds — the point at which they are two pixels apart on this canvas — and after that they have nothing to do with one another. Neither is more correct: both are exact solutions of the same equations, differing only in a release angle that no apparatus could set apart. The separation is growing at 2.05 per second the whole time, including during the stretch where the picture shows one curve. Mechanics

The error that doubles on a schedule

Two double pendulums released a hundred-millionth of a degree apart follow one curve for ten seconds and then have nothing to do with each other. The separation grows exponentially the whole time, including while the picture shows a single trace — which turns unpredictability into a rate, and makes the length of a forecast the logarithm of the precision rather than anything proportional to it.

 A pore that lifts 100 m has to be 0.1 µm or finer. Capillary rise against pore radius, both logarithmic, for a liquid of surface tension 72.8 mN/m at a contact angle of 20°. The relation is a straight line of slope −1 — halve the pore and double the rise — and the two horizontal marks are the height in question, 100 m, and the 10.3 m that one atmosphere supports. 0.01 µm lifts 1394.7 m; 0.1 µm lifts 139.5 m; 1 µm lifts 13.9 m; 5 µm lifts 2.8 m; 20 µm lifts 69.7 cm; 50 µm lifts 27.9 cm. The conducting vessels of a tree are tens of microns across and lift under a metre; the pores in the membranes between them are tens of nanometres and would lift kilometres. Those are the same expression at two scales, and only one of them is a pipe. Fluids

The column that is pulled, not pushed

A capillary fine enough to lift a hundred metres is far too fine to carry any flow, and one wide enough to carry the flow lifts under a metre. Neither is how the water gets up a tree. The column is under tension — an absolute pressure of −0.88 MPa at the top, which a gas cannot have — held together by cohesion and prevented from tearing by pores a few tens of nanometres across.

 The thickness a paste can hold on a slope. The greatest thickness a yield-stress fluid can rest at without flowing, against the angle of the surface it is resting on, on a logarithmic vertical axis, for four materials. A layer of thickness h puts a shear stress ρgh sin α on its own base; it stays put while that is below the yield stress and flows when it is not, so the critical thickness is τ_y divided by ρg sin α and it depends on nothing else — not on the viscosity, not on how long it is left, not on how it was put there. On a vertical wall the numbers are 1.4 mm of ketchup, 9.2 mm of mayonnaise, 15.7 mm of toothpaste, 15.1 mm of basaltic lava, which is why toothpaste stays on a brush and ketchup does not stay on a plate held up. Read the other way it is a measurement: a lava flow that came to rest 3 centimetres thick on a 30° slope had a yield stress of about 400 pascals, and that is how the rheology of a flow nobody was standing next to is recovered from its shape a thousand years later. The model stops where the layer is thin enough for surface tension to matter and where the material's yield stress depends on how long it has been left alone, which for most of these it does. Fluids

The paste that holds up its own hill

Toothpaste stands on a brush and ketchup does not stand on a plate, and the difference is a single number with the units of a pressure. Below it a material does not flow slowly — it does not flow. That threshold turns a rheological property into a length, and the length is why a lava flow's thickness says what the lava was made of.

 How much of the answer a finite wire gives back. The field beside a straight segment of wire, divided by what the infinite-wire formula would give, against the length of the segment in units of the distance to the field point, on a logarithmic horizontal axis. The field is integrated element by element along the segment rather than evaluated from a closed form. A wire ten times as long as the distance already gives 92.8 per cent of the infinite answer, and one as long as the distance gives 45 — which is the practical content, and the reason the infinite-wire result is used for laboratory wires without apology. The second column is the part that matters for the law rather than for the number. The circulation of this field round a circle of radius d is not μ₀I; it falls short by exactly the fraction the segment fails to subtend. What makes up the difference is the displacement current of the charge piling up at the segment's two ends, and the two terms, both integrated here, sum to μ₀I to within 2.2e-8 per cent at every length. So Ampère's law is not approximately true for an open circuit and exactly true for a closed one — it is exactly true always, and it is a computation only when symmetry supplies the direction and the magnitude along the loop. Symmetry is doing the work; the law is doing the bookkeeping. Electromagnetism

The law that is always true and rarely useful

Ampère's law holds for every loop and every current. Apply it to a wire of finite length and it gives an answer that is wrong by half — until the displacement current of the charge piling up at the wire's two ends is put back in, whereupon the two terms sum to μ₀I exactly at every length. The law was never approximate. It was never a computation either.

 How far a 1-gravity ship gets, against its own clock. The distance covered by a ship accelerating steadily at 1 gravity for half the trip and braking for the other half, against the time on its own clock, on a logarithmic vertical axis. The curve is a cosine hyperbolic and therefore an exponential once the ship is relativistic, which it is after about a year: Proxima Centauri in 3.5 shipboard years, Sirius in 4.6 shipboard years, the Pleiades in 11.9 shipboard years, the galactic centre in 19.8 shipboard years, Andromeda in 28.6 shipboard years. Nothing about this violates anything. The speed never reaches c — it is the hyperbolic tangent of the rapidity and after 3.5 years it is 0.9495 at turnover — and every one of those journeys takes slightly more than the distance in years as measured from home. What is growing exponentially is not the speed but the length contraction, and the traveller's honest description of the trip is that the distance shrank. The rapidity is what accumulates steadily: it grows by one unit every 0.969 years of shipboard time, for ever, with no ceiling anywhere in the arithmetic. That is the whole reason the numbers come out survivable, and the reason the fuel does not. Relativity

The ship that never arrives at c

Accelerate at one gravity and never stop. The speed creeps toward light and never reaches it, and meanwhile the galactic centre is twenty shipboard years away and Andromeda twenty-nine. What makes the journey survivable is that rapidity has no ceiling; what makes it impossible is that the fuel goes as the exponential of the same quantity.

 One sharp kick, heard 6 pulse-lengths away. The signal arriving at a fixed distance from a point source that emits a single short pulse, in one, two and three dimensions, each normalised to its own peak. In three dimensions the arriving signal is the emitted pulse, unchanged in shape: it arrives, and then there is silence. In two dimensions the same kick arrives at the same moment and then keeps arriving — a tail falling as one over the time, which is still at a tenth of its peak 12.1 pulse-lengths after the front has passed. In one dimension it never comes back down at all; the medium is left displaced. The wave equation is the same equation in all three, and the source is the same source; what differs is only how many dimensions the disturbance has to spread into. Sharp arrival is the exception rather than the rule — it happens in three dimensions, and in five, and in seven, and in no even number of them — and every argument that treats a wavefront as the whole of the signal is an argument that has quietly used the fact that we live in three. Waves

The arrival that keeps arriving

A clap heard across a field arrives and stops. The same clap in two dimensions arrives at the same instant and then goes on arriving for ever, fading as one over the time — and the difference is not absorption, or echo, or scattering. It is the number of dimensions, and sharp arrival happens in three of them and in no even number at all.

 The height a 1 mK difference lifts helium. The head of liquid that a temperature difference of 1 millikelvin can support across a superleak — a plug fine enough that the normal fluid cannot pass and the superfluid can — against the temperature it is done at. Only the normal component carries entropy, so warming one side makes the superfluid flow toward the warm side until the pressure difference balances, and equilibrium is at ΔP = ρSΔT. The height that supports is SΔT/g, in which the density cancels exactly; computed both ways here the two agree to machine precision. The numbers are the striking part: 2.0 mm at 1.2 K, 4.6 mm at 1.4 K, 9.2 mm at 1.6 K, 19.4 mm at 1.8 K, 46.9 mm at 2 K, from a temperature step a thousand times smaller than anything a hand could feel. Aim a light at the warm side and the liquid does not merely rise but jets out of the tube, which is the fountain effect Allen and Jones found in 1938 and the most direct demonstration that helium II is two fluids rather than one. The entropies used are measured values; everything else on this chart is computed from them. Fluids

The fountain a lamp can drive

Below two degrees above absolute zero, liquid helium behaves as though it were two fluids occupying the same space — one carrying all the entropy and all the viscosity, the other carrying neither. It is not a metaphor and not a mixture. Shine a light on one side of a fine plug and the liquid jets out of the tube, because a temperature difference of a thousandth of a degree is a pressure of a hundred pascals.

 Which wavelengths grow instead of oscillating. The dispersion relation of a self-gravitating isothermal gas, ω² = c²k² − 4πGρ, with each axis measured in the scale the gas sets for itself. Short wavelengths oscillate: pressure wins, and the disturbance is a sound wave. Long wavelengths do not: ω² is negative, so the disturbance grows exponentially instead of travelling, and the region collapses. The changeover is at λ_J = c√(π/Gρ), and it happens because pressure support acts on a sound-crossing time that grows with the region while gravity's collapse time does not depend on the size at all. Four densities spanning 6 decades are drawn and they lie exactly on top of one another, to 6e-16, because the criterion has no scale of its own: it is the same curve for a diffuse cloud and for a protostellar core, with different numbers written on the axes. In this gas at 10 K those numbers are 2.12 pc and 28.72 solar masses at 10² cm⁻³, 0.21 pc and 2.87 solar masses at 10⁴ cm⁻³, 4372 AU and 0.29 solar masses at 10⁶ cm⁻³, 437 AU and 0.03 solar masses at 10⁸ cm⁻³. Astrophysics

The disturbance that grows instead of travelling

A sound wave in a gas oscillates because pressure restores what the disturbance displaced. Add the gravity the gas exerts on itself and the restoring force acquires a competitor that does not weaken with size — so above one wavelength the sum changes sign, the frequency becomes imaginary, and the disturbance stops travelling and starts growing. It is the same wave equation with one term subtracted.

 The charge a plasma hides. The potential around a charge in a plasma, as a fraction of the bare Coulomb potential at the same distance, against distance measured in screening lengths. The electrons crowd toward the charge and the ions move away until the rearrangement cancels the field, and what is left falls as exp(−r/λ_D) on top of the ordinary 1/r. At one screening length the potential is already down to 37 per cent of the bare value, at three to 5 per cent, and at ten to 4 × 10⁻⁵ — so a charge in a plasma is invisible beyond a few λ_D, and the long range of the Coulomb force, which is what makes electrostatics awkward everywhere else, is simply gone. The screening length at 10¹¹ m⁻³ is 3.8 mm at 300 K, 6.9 mm at 1000 K, 21.8 mm at 10000 K, rising as the square root of the temperature because a hotter electron is harder to hold in place. Drawn this way the three curves coincide exactly: the shape is universal and the only thing a plasma's density and temperature decide is the length written on the axis. Astrophysics

The long-range force that does not reach

The Coulomb force falls off as slowly as gravity does, which is what makes electrostatics awkward — every charge is in principle in contact with every other. Put the same charge into a plasma and it becomes invisible beyond a few millimetres, because the mobile charges around it rearrange until its field is cancelled. What is left is a screened potential with a definite range, and that range is what makes a plasma a plasma.

 The brightest anything of a given mass can be. The Eddington luminosity against mass, with the main sequence drawn beside it. Radiation pushes outward on the electrons and gravity pulls inward on the protons, and both go as one over the distance squared — so the radius cancels out of the comparison entirely, checked here at three radii spanning four decades and coming out identical to 1e-20. What is left is a luminosity: L = 4πGMc/κ, which is 1.47 × 10³¹ watts per solar mass, or 3.8·10⁴ solar luminosities. Above it, radiation drives the outer layers away faster than gravity can hold them. The Sun is at 2.6e-5 of its own limit and in no danger; a star of 10 solar masses is at 1.2e-2; and a star of 100 is at 0.83, which is why the two lines converge at the top of the chart and why the most massive stars known are a few hundred solar masses rather than a few thousand. They do not fail to form for lack of gas; they blow away the gas that would have made them heavier, and once formed they shed mass continuously in a radiation-driven wind. The limit is the same expression for an accreting black hole, where it caps not the brightness but the rate at which mass can be taken on. Astrophysics

The brightness a mass cannot exceed

Light pushes outward on the electrons of a star and gravity pulls inward on its protons, and both forces fall off as one over the distance squared. The distance therefore cancels, and what is left is a limit on brightness rather than on size — 3.8 × 10⁴ times the Sun's luminosity for every solar mass, above which a body drives its own outer layers away.

 The temperature of an acceleration. The Unruh temperature against proper acceleration, both axes logarithmic. An observer accelerating through empty space finds it is not empty: the state that an inertial observer calls the vacuum, an accelerated one finds populated, with a thermal spectrum at T = ħa/2πck — which is 4.06e-21 kelvin for every metre per second squared. The line is straight because the relation is exactly proportional, and the numbers on it are what make the effect so hard to see: one gravity gives 3.98·10⁻²⁰ K, a centrifuge at 10⁵ g gives 3.97·10⁻¹⁵ K, an electron in a strong laser gives 40.6 K, the surface of a solar-mass hole gives 6.17·10⁻⁸ K. Reaching one kelvin requires 2.5·10²⁰ m/s², which is 2.5·10¹⁹ gravities and beyond anything that can be sustained. What makes the effect worth taking seriously despite that is not its size but its structure: it says the number of particles present is not a property of the field alone but of the observer as well, and the same expression with a black hole's surface gravity in place of the acceleration is the Hawking temperature exactly, checked here to a part in 10¹². Relativity

The temperature of an acceleration

Empty space is empty for an observer who is not accelerating. For one who is, the same state of the same field is a thermal bath at a temperature proportional to the acceleration — and the constant of proportionality is 4 × 10⁻²¹ kelvin for every metre per second squared, which is why nobody has felt it. What the effect changes is not what can be measured but what a particle is.

 What is lost is exactly what is recorded. Fringe visibility against the distinguishability of the record left in the environment, for six couplings between the interferometer and a marker. The points lie on the quarter circle V² + D² = 1, computed here to a part in 10¹² — the visibility from the output probabilities with the marker traced out, and the distinguishability from the overlap of the marker's two states, with nothing shared between the two calculations. The relation is the quantitative form of complementarity, and it is stronger than the usual statement: interference is not lost because something was disturbed, and not lost only when a measurement is made. It is lost exactly to the extent that the environment could in principle say which way the particle went, whether or not anybody looks at the environment. That is why decoherence is a matter of correlation rather than of disturbance: the coherence has not been destroyed but relocated, into a correlation between the particle and something else. Quantum

Where the interference goes

A superposition does not stop being a superposition when something interacts with it. What happens is that the coherence moves — out of the system and into a correlation between the system and its surroundings — and the interference disappears from any measurement made on the system alone. For a dust grain in air the move takes 10⁻²⁸ seconds, which is why nothing large has ever been seen in two places.

 A sine on its way to a vertical face. One period of a sine, followed by the equation whose only nonlinearity is that the local speed depends on the local height. The profiles are at σ = t/t_b of 0, 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 0.995, each obtained by solving the implicit relation u = u₀(x − (c₀+βu)t) for u at every point by bisection — and checked against the partial differential equation itself, which it satisfies to 2.6e-7. The crest travels faster than the trough, so the descending front leans forward and the ascending one leans back; the wave stays exactly as tall as it started and exactly as long, and only its shape changes. The steepest gradient grows as one over (1 − σ) — measured here as 9.83 times its initial value at σ = 0.9, against ten — so it is infinite at σ = 1 and the curve has a vertical tangent. The picture cannot be drawn past that point, which is not a failure of the drawing: the solution genuinely becomes three-valued, and what actually happens is a jump whose width is set by the dissipation this equation does not contain. Waves

The front that steepens until it cannot

In a linear medium every wave keeps its shape, because every part of it travels at the same speed. Let the speed depend on the height by even a little and the crest overtakes the trough, the front leans forward, and after a time that can be written down the wave demands two values at one place — which is where the description ends and a shock begins.

 The far end that has not been told yet. A rod 3 metres long, pushed at one end at time zero. On the left, position across and time upwards, for the two fastest disturbance speeds drawn here, with the light cone beside them: nothing may lean further to the right than that line, which crosses the rod in 10.0 nanoseconds. A rigid rod would be the vertical dashed line — the far end moving at the same instant as the near one — and it is not a limit that a hard material approaches. It is a signal at infinite speed. On the right, how long the far end actually waits, against how fast the disturbance travels, both logarithmic, with every material on it: 8.8 ms at 3.4e+2 m/s, 600.0 μs at 5.0e+3 m/s, 250.0 μs at 1.2e+4 m/s, 100.0 ns at 3.0e+7 m/s, 20.0 ns at 1.5e+8 m/s. The line has slope −1 and the light cone is a hard floor beneath it. Ordinary materials sit four to five decades above that floor, which is why rigidity is such a good approximation and why it is still not a limit: steel's delay is not small compared with light's, it is 6e+4 times larger. Everything usually derived from rigid bodies survives, because the delay is beneath notice in ordinary circumstances. What does not survive is the use of rigidity in an argument about simultaneity, which is where it does real damage: a rod pushed at one end is compressed for as long as the wave takes to cross it, and there is a frame in which its far end is still at rest while its near end is moving. Relativity

Nothing is allowed to be rigid

A rigid body would move its far end at the instant its near end was pushed, which is a signal at infinite speed. Relativity forbids it — not approximately, and not as a limit that a hard enough material approaches. What follows is a ceiling on how stiff matter may be, and that ceiling caps the mass of every neutron star.

 The set an orbit that never repeats settles onto. 24,000 successive positions of one orbit of the map x' = 1 − 1.4x² + y, y' = 0.3x, after five hundred steps of transient have been discarded. Nearby points separate at e^0.4188 per step, so the orbit is unpredictable in the way the rung below measures; and every one of the 24,000 points lies inside a box 2.558 by 0.767, a diagonal of 2.670, so it is going nowhere. Those two statements are not compatible with a smooth stretching: something has to bring the separated points back, and the bringing back is the visible fold at the left-hand end. The curve is not a curve. Every strand of it is a bundle of strands at any magnification, which is what an area contraction of 0.3 per step leaves behind when the stretching along the other direction is e^0.419. The 24,000 points paint 7,352 distinct marks at the resolution this is drawn at, which is itself a measurement of how little of the plane the set occupies. Mechanics

The fold that has to be there

Two trajectories that separate exponentially, in a region they can never leave, are being asked to do two incompatible things. The resolution is that the motion is folded back on itself over and over, and the object that survives infinitely many foldings is neither a curve nor a patch of surface — it has a dimension between the two, and the number can be measured two entirely different ways.

 The same liquid climbs a thin rod and is thrown off a thick one. The height of the free surface against distance from the axis, for rods of 10.0, 25.0, 60.0 millimetres radius turning at one revolution a second in the same polymer solution, with the Newtonian answer dashed. Two effects compete and they fall off at different rates: a hoop tension along the curved streamlines pulls the fluid inward and lifts it, falling as the fourth power of the distance, while the centrifugal term pushes it outward and lowers it, falling as the second. Near a thin rod the fourth power wins and the liquid climbs — 2.21 millimetres at the thinnest. Beyond a radius of 34.64 millimetres it does not, and the same fluid at the same speed is thrown outward exactly as water would be. The changeover is a property of the fluid and the rod together, so a demonstration that works on a glass stirring rod fails on a spoon handle. Fluids

The liquid that climbs the rod

Stir water with a rod and it is flung outward, leaving a dip at the centre. Stir a polymer solution and it climbs the rod instead. Nothing about the viscosity can produce that, however large it is made — what produces it is a second stress that appears in shear and has no Newtonian counterpart at all, growing as the square of the rate where the familiar one grows in proportion.

 A wave that dies with nothing to rub against. The electric field of a plasma wave at kλ = 0.5, against time in plasma periods, on a logarithmic scale, obtained by integrating the collisionless kinetic equation as an initial-value problem. There are no collisions in the equation, no viscosity and no resistance; the only operator acting on the distribution is a rotation of phase whose rate depends on the particle's speed. The field nevertheless falls exponentially, at 0.1534 per plasma period, against the published root of the kinetic dispersion relation at this wavenumber, 0.1534, and Landau's asymptotic formula's 0.1514. Meanwhile the free energy of the perturbation — the weighted norm of the distribution plus the field energy, which the equation conserves exactly — moves by 2.4e-10. So nothing has been dissipated: every joule the field loses is still in the distribution, and the accounting closes to a part in ten thousand million. The energy has gone into the particles' ordered motion, and the information about the wave is wound into structure at finer and finer scales in velocity. Astrophysics

The wave that dies with nothing to rub against

Every damping in this collection so far removes energy from a wave and puts it somewhere warmer. This one removes it and produces no heat at all: there are no collisions in the equation, the entropy is unchanged, the whole thing runs backwards perfectly, and the wave still dies exponentially. What it dies into is structure in velocity too fine for a field to see.

 A current that falls by a decade for every ångström. Tunnelling current against the width of a vacuum gap, on a logarithmic scale, for three work functions covering the range of clean metal surfaces. The curves are straight because the transmission is an exponential in the gap, and their slopes are 0.833, 0.944, 1.044 decades per ångström — fitted to the drawn curves and agreeing with 2κ/ln 10 to a part in a million. At 4.5 electronvolts a change of ten picometres, a tenth of an atomic radius, changes the current by 24 per cent. That is the sensitivity a scanning tunnelling microscope lives on, and it is why the instrument measures height by holding the current fixed and recording what the piezo had to do: the current is far too steep a function of height to be read as one. Quantum

The last atom does all the seeing

A tunnelling rate falls by a factor of eight for every tenth of a nanometre of extra barrier, which is normally quoted as the reason nothing ever tunnels anywhere. Read the other way it is a microscope: the second-nearest atom of a blunt metal tip carries a two-hundredth of the current the nearest one does, so a tip nobody sharpened resolves a single atom, and the resolution comes from an exponential rather than from any piece of engineering.

 Three copiers, and what each of them costs. How well three copying machines reproduce a qubit, against the state's angle from the pole. The first is a linear machine built to copy the two pole states perfectly; linearity then fixes what it does everywhere else, and on an equal superposition it produces an entangled pair whose overlap with the two copies wanted is exactly 0.500. That is the no-cloning theorem written as a number rather than as an argument: no adjustment is available, because the machine's behaviour on superpositions was decided the moment its behaviour on the basis was. The second measures in a fixed basis and prepares two copies of what it found, which is perfect at the poles and averages 0.6667 over the sphere — two thirds, exactly. The third is the best machine there is, and it manages 0.8333 on every state alike: five sixths, and not one. Quantum

The state that cannot be copied

Every measurement in this collection disturbs what it measures, and the obvious way round that is to make a spare first. It cannot be done, and the reason is not a practical difficulty or a limit on how good an apparatus can be: a copier is a linear machine, so fixing what it does to two states fixes what it does to their superpositions, and what it then does is not a copy.

 A stiffness that does not go to zero — it falls off a cliff. The renormalised stiffness of a two-dimensional superfluid against temperature, obtained by integrating the flow of the bare stiffness and the vortex fugacity, with the bare stiffness drawn for comparison. Below the transition the vortices are bound in pairs, screen one another and leave a finite stiffness; above it they unbind and there is none. What is remarkable is the value at which it disappears: 0.6430, against 2/π = 0.6366. That number does not depend on the material, on the bare fugacity, on the core energy, or on anything else — every two-dimensional superfluid loses its stiffness at exactly two over π times its own transition temperature, and measurements on helium films of widely different thicknesses fall on that line. A transition at which a quantity jumps to zero from a value nobody can adjust is unlike anything the usual classification of transitions describes. Thermodynamics

The transition with nothing to order

Every transition in this collection so far has an order parameter — a quantity that is zero on one side and not on the other. In two dimensions a continuous symmetry cannot break at any temperature above zero, so there is nothing for such a quantity to be, and by the usual reckoning there can be no transition. There is one anyway, and what changes at it is whether vortices are bound in pairs.

 A circumference that is more than 2π times the radius. The ratio of a rotating disc's measured circumference to 2π times its measured radius, against the speed of the rim, together with the rate of a clock carried on the rim. Rulers laid round the rim lie along their own direction of motion and are contracted; rulers laid along a radius lie across it and are not. So the circumference takes more of them than a stationary observer counts and the radius takes the same number, and the ratio is γ: 1.091 at β = 0.4, 1.400 at β = 0.7, 2.294 at β = 0.9. The geometry a rotating observer measures is therefore not Euclidean, and it is not Euclidean by an amount that depends on where on the disc the measurement is made. That is the observation Einstein said set him on the road to describing gravity with curved geometry: here is an accelerated frame, and here is a geometry in it that no choice of Cartesian coordinates can flatten. The rim's clock runs slow by the same factor, so a rotating frame has neither a common time nor a flat space. Relativity

The disc that cannot be spun

Set a disc turning and measure its circumference with rulers carried on the rim. They lie along their own direction of motion and are contracted, so more of them fit; rulers along a radius lie across the motion and are not. The ratio of circumference to radius is therefore not two pi, in a frame where nothing is happening but rotation — and Einstein said that was what set him looking for gravity in geometry.

 The reaction that reaches zero, and where the bead lets go. The force the sphere pushes back with, in units of the bead's weight, against the angle from the top. It starts at 1.000 and falls, because the speed the bead has gained needs more centripetal force than gravity's component along the radius can supply. At 48.19° it reaches zero, and past that the surface would have to pull inward to keep the bead on it — which a surface cannot do. So the bead leaves there, and the departure angle is a statement about the sign of a constraint force rather than about a speed or a height. The multiplier is what carries that sign: solve the motion in the angle alone and the reaction is absent from every equation, so nothing in the solution knows that the constraint has stopped holding, and the bead is drawn happily circling a sphere it has already left. Mechanics

The force a coordinate cannot see

Writing a pendulum in terms of its angle is the first good move anybody learns, and it deletes the tension from every equation that follows. The string still breaks. Recovering the force that the clever choice of coordinate threw away turns out to be a computation with a sign in it, and the sign is where the bead leaves the sphere.

 The boundary of everywhere a given speed can reach. Trajectories at one speed and five launch angles, with the curve that bounds all of them. The boundary is not one of the trajectories and is not the 45° launch: it is the envelope of the whole family, the locus of points where two neighbouring launches cross. Distances are in units of v²/g, so the greatest range is one and the greatest height a half, and the envelope is the parabola y = ½ − x²/2 joining them. Two things about it are worth having. Its focus is the launch point exactly — every point on it is as far from the gun as from the line y = v²/g — so the safety parabola is a conic with the same focus as the trajectories themselves. And a boundary made of crossings of neighbouring members of a family is a caustic: the same construction that makes the rainbow's edge bright, drawn here with cannon shells instead of light rays. Mechanics

Everywhere a throw can reach

Fix the speed and let the angle be anything. The trajectories fill a region, and the region has an edge — a curve that is not one of the trajectories, that touches each of them exactly once, and that turns out to be the same kind of object as the bright rim of a rainbow.

 The only part of the field that can pull. A dielectric slab part-way into a parallel-plate capacitor. Everywhere except at the slab's edge the field is perpendicular to the plates and therefore perpendicular to the direction the slab can move, so it exerts no force along that direction at all: inside the parallel-plate model, which is uniform between the plates and zero outside them, nothing pulls the slab anywhere. The force lives in the bowed lines drawn at the edge, where the field leaks past the end of the dielectric and acquires a component along the plates. Those lines are what the model throws away as a small correction near the boundary, and they are the entire mechanism. The energy method sidesteps the drawing altogether: differentiate the total energy with respect to the insertion and the answer is 1.328e-3 newtons, inward, without ever asking where on the slab the force is applied. Electromagnetism

The force that lives where the model is not

A slab of glass held at the mouth of a charged capacitor is pulled in. Inside the parallel-plate model there is no force at all — the field is perpendicular to the slab's motion everywhere — and the same model's energy nevertheless gives the pull exactly right. The mechanism is entirely in the part of the field the model throws away.

 An average that follows Newton's law exactly. The centre of a wavepacket in a harmonic well, and the classical orbit started from the same place, drawn on top of each other. They agree to 5.5e-6 over 2.2 periods, which is the split-step integrator's own error and not a physical gap. This is exact and it is exact for every state of a harmonic oscillator, however wide, however lumpy, however far from classical: the theorem needs ⟨−V′(x)⟩ = −V′(⟨x⟩), which for a linear restoring force is true term by term. It is worth being suspicious of how strong that looks. The harmonic oscillator is the one potential where the average force over a state and the force at the state's centre cannot differ, so it is the worst possible example from which to conclude that quantum averages follow classical paths. Quantum

The average that obeys Newton

Ehrenfest's theorem says the centre of a wavepacket moves according to the average force over the state. That is exact, it is often quoted as the reason classical mechanics survives, and the two statements are not the same — because the average of a force is the force at the average only when the force is linear, which is to say almost never.

 The turnaround, made gentler and gentler, and the difference that does not move. A round trip to a star 4 light-years away at 0.6c, with the turnaround done at nine different accelerations from a tenth of a gravity to a thousand. The upper curve is the age difference between the twins and the lower one is how much of that difference the turnaround itself contributes. At 0.1 g the turn accounts for 51 per cent of it; at 1000 g it accounts for 0.00 per cent, and it keeps falling. The total does not follow it down: it tends to 2.67 years, which is what the instantaneous-turnaround cartoon gives. So the acceleration is not what makes the twins differ. It is what makes one twin's path the bent one, and a bent path through spacetime is shorter for the same reason a bent path on a map is longer — but the amount is in the legs, not in the corner, and the corner's contribution can be made as small as anyone likes without the difference going away. Relativity

The clock that does not feel the turn

Proper time is the integral of dt over gamma, which presumes that a clock's rate depends on its speed and on nothing else — not on its acceleration, not on how long it has been accelerating. That is an assumption about clocks rather than a theorem about spacetime, and the twin result is empty without it.

 The one place in a plasma where the charges do not balance. The potential and the two densities through a sheath, in Debye lengths from the sheath edge, for a plasma of hydrogen ions. The potential is measured downward in units of the electron temperature and reaches 2.84 at the wall — the value at which the two fluxes balance. The layer is 15.1 Debye lengths thick — for 3 eV electrons at 1e+16 per cubic metre, a Debye length of 129 µm and a sheath of 1.9 mm. Inside it the electron density falls as the Boltzmann factor while the ion density falls only as the ions speed up, so the two separate: at the wall the ion density exceeds the electron density by 85 per cent of itself. That is the whole of the difference between a sheath and the plasma it borders — quasineutrality is not an assumption that can be made here, and Poisson's equation has to be solved instead of replaced. Astrophysics

The wall a plasma builds against itself

A plasma is quasineutral everywhere except where it touches something. Electrons are faster than ions by the square root of the mass ratio, so any surface is struck by far more of them, charges negative, and goes on charging until the two arrivals balance — leaving a layer a few Debye lengths thick in which the charges do not cancel at all.

 5 balls whose contact force goes as the overlap to the three halves, touching. The velocity of every ball in a line of 5, against time in units of one binary contact, with the first arriving at unit speed. Nothing about collisions is assumed: neighbours push on each other with k times their overlap raised to the power 1.5, and the equations of motion are integrated. With the balls touching there is no such separation — several overlaps are non-zero at once and the disturbance crosses the line as a single compression wave. The far ball leaves at 0.989 of the striking speed and the others keep 0.011 between them, which is why a real cradle's balls do not quite come to rest. Momentum and energy are conserved to 4.4e-16 and 4.1e-8, so the difference between the two cases is the contact law and not the bookkeeping. Mechanics

Five balls, and the law that does not choose

The usual account of a Newton's cradle says that momentum and energy conservation force one ball out at the striking speed. For three balls or more they do no such thing: the two laws leave a whole curve of possible outcomes, and what picks one is the shape of the force between two touching spheres.

 How much of μ₀N²A/ℓ a real coil actually has. The inductance of a 140-turn coil of radius 10 mm, divided by the long-solenoid formula μ₀N²A/ℓ, against how long the coil is compared with its diameter. The inductance is computed as a sum of Maxwell's mutual inductances between every pair of turns plus each turn's own, so the long-coil formula appears nowhere in it. At a length equal to the diameter the real coil has 68% of what the formula promises, and at a quarter of the diameter about a third. The reason is that the formula assumes every turn is threaded by the full interior field, and near the ends of a short coil the field has already begun to spread. The ratio is Nagaoka's coefficient, tabulated since 1909, and the computed points agree with the table. Electromagnetism

The circuit that fights its own change

Every circuit is threaded by the field its own current makes, so every circuit resists having that current altered. It is the reason a coil takes time to start and the reason breaking one makes a voltage a thousand times the supply's.

 A magnetisation curve, and the same curve magnified. On the left, the position of a domain wall against the applied field, over the whole of a crystal. It looks like a curve. On the right, a window 2.0% of its width, taken 42% of the way across, at the magnification a sensitive measurement reaches: the wall does not move at all while the field rises, then jumps, then stops again. The largest jump in the window covers 0.67 units of wall position in no field change at all. There is nothing smooth underneath this — the smooth curve on the left is a staircase with 1400 steps in it, drawn small. Electromagnetism

The curve that is really a staircase

A magnetisation curve is drawn as a smooth line and is nothing of the sort. Measured finely enough it is a sequence of jumps of every size, audible as a crackle in a coil, with no typical jump and no smooth motion underneath.

 One measurement that separates unpolarised from polarised. What a rotating linear polariser passes, against its angle, for beams of the same total intensity and degrees of polarisation 0, 0.35, 0.7, 1. Every curve has the same average — a polariser passes half of any beam over a whole turn, whatever its state — and they differ only in how deeply they modulate. The depth of the modulation is the degree of polarisation, exactly: a fully polarised beam goes to zero at one angle and a beam with no preferred direction gives a flat line at a half. That is the whole measurement, and it is why "unpolarised" is a statement about a modulation depth rather than about what a wave is doing. Optics

The light with no direction of shaking

Unpolarised light is not a state of a wave; it is the absence of one, and no description of a single wave can represent it. What can is a set of four numbers, all of them powers a detector reads — and they describe every beam there is, including the ones that are neither polarised nor not.

 The surface that focuses 1 into 1.52 with no error at all. A Cartesian oval: the locus of points for which 1 times the distance from the object plus 1.52 times the distance to the image is a constant. Every ray drawn takes exactly the same optical path, so every one arrives at the image point — not nearly, and not for small angles, but exactly, for rays at any angle the surface reaches. There is no spherical aberration because there is no approximation: this is what Fermat's principle asks for, solved rather than expanded. The surface is not a sphere, not a conic in general, and not anything a grinding machine makes easily, which is most of why lenses are spherical and aberrated instead. Optics

The surface that images one point exactly

Fermat's principle says every ray from an object to its image must take the same time. Written as an equation, that is a curve Descartes found — a surface with no aberration at all, at any angle. It exists, it is easy to compute, and it images exactly one pair of points and nothing else.

 The cross term, and the fact that it averages to nothing. The intensity of two waves of amplitude 1 and 0.7 added together, against the phase difference between them, in turns. A detector reads the square of the summed amplitude, which is the sum of the two intensities plus a cross term that swings between plus and minus twice the product. At no phase difference the reading is 2.89 and at half a turn it is 0.09; the flat line is what the two would give with no interference, 1.49, and it is exactly the average of the curve over a whole turn. Interference redistributes and does not create — which answers the question of where the energy goes at a dark fringe by saying that it never left. Waves

What adding does to the energy

Waves add their amplitudes and detectors read squares, so two waves together do not deliver the sum of what each delivers. Where the two get dimmer, the natural question is where the energy went — and the answer depends entirely on whether the sources can feel each other.

 The chain's dispersion, and the frequency it stops at. Frequency against wavenumber for a chain of equal masses joined by equal springs, in units where the spacing, the mass and the spring are one. At long wavelength the curve is a straight line through the origin — the chain behaves as a continuous string with a sound speed, and the departure from the line is second order in the wavenumber, which is why a lattice is invisible until the wavelength approaches the spacing. At the zone edge, where neighbouring masses move in exact opposition, the curve flattens: the frequency stops rising, the group velocity falls to zero, and the mode is a standing wave that carries nothing. Above that frequency there is no travelling solution at all. Waves

The frequency a lattice cannot carry

A continuous string carries every note. A row of masses joined by springs does not: there is a highest frequency, set by nothing but the time one mass takes to be pushed back by its neighbours, and above it a disturbance does not travel at all.

 A ratio in the exponent. The Boltzmann factor against the energy of a state measured in units of kT, with the logarithm up the axis so that the straight line is the whole content. Every kT of energy costs a factor of e, so 5, 12, 20 times kT are factors of 10^-2.2, 10^-5.2, 10^-8.7. At 295 K, kT is 25.4 meV, so a barrier of 0.4 eV is 15.7 kT and a factor of 1.5e-7. That is the sense in which a third of an electronvolt is not a small energy: it is small compared with a chemical bond and enormous compared with kT, and it is the second comparison that decides whether anything happens. Thermodynamics

The temperature a molecule does not have

Temperature fixes a system's average energy and nothing more. The actual energy wanders, by an amount tied to the heat capacity, and the relative size of the wandering falls as one over the square root of the number of degrees of freedom — so a mole has a temperature and a molecule does not.

 The delay that stops caring how thick the wall is. The Wigner phase time — how late the transmitted packet's peak arrives, compared with a free particle covering the same distance — for an electron under a 3 eV barrier, at 0.2 nm, 0.5 nm, 1 nm thick. 0.2 nm: 0.3728 fs at half the barrier height; 0.5 nm: 0.4372 fs at half the barrier height; 1 nm: 0.4388 fs at half the barrier height. The widths span a factor of 5.0 and the times span 1.18. A thicker barrier is exponentially harder to cross and the delay in crossing it barely moves — which is either a remarkable fact about tunnelling or a sign that the phase time is not a traversal time, and the rest of the essay is about which. Quantum

How long the crossing takes

Tunnelling has a probability, and asking how long it takes turns out to be a different kind of question. The delay a transmitted packet shows stops growing once the barrier is opaque, so a thicker wall is crossed in the same time — and several defensible clocks give several different answers.

 Two pairs, and only one of them may cheat. The CHSH value a party shares with a second, against the value the same party shares with a third. Every quantum state lies inside a quarter circle whose radius is Tsirelson's bound, 2.8284, because the sum of the two squared values cannot exceed eight. The classical limit is 2 on each axis, and the square that would hold both violations sticks out of the circle everywhere except at its corner: the best both can manage at once is exactly 1.999998, which is the classical value and no violation at all. So a party maximally entangled with one other is correlated with everybody else exactly as a classical object would be. Nothing about the measurement or the apparatus was assumed; this follows from the state alone. Quantum

What two have they cannot give a third

Entanglement will not be shared. A pair that violates a Bell inequality is correlated with everything else exactly as a classical object would be, and the trade is exact enough to be drawn: two CHSH values must fit inside a circle of radius 2√2.

 The point that does not notice the collision. Two bodies of rest mass 1 and 2, approaching at 0.8c and -0.3c, colliding elastically and leaving at -0.6168c and 0.5969c — speeds obtained by reversing the motion in the zero-momentum frame, with the total energy and momentum checked to a part in a million million. The third line is the energy-weighted centre. It runs straight through the collision at 0.1872c, which is the total momentum divided by the total energy, and it has no kink — verified at two hundred instants. Nothing here is the centre of mass: the rest masses are unchanged by the collision but the energies are redistributed, and it is the energies that do the weighting. Relativity

The centre that is not a place

The centre of mass is replaced in relativity by the centre of energy, which moves uniformly and does everything the old point did — except be the same point for everybody. Boost a spinning body and its centre moves, so a spinning object has no centre at all.

 The wedge that proves it. A wedge of water 4 mm on its vertical side, at a depth of 3 m, with the pressure on each of its three faces as an unknown. The two force balances decide them. Horizontally, the sloping face's push has a component that must exactly cancel the vertical face's, and since the sloping face is longer by exactly the factor its slope reduces the component by, the two pressures are equal — the geometry cancels, at every angle, for every size. Vertically the same cancellation happens except for the wedge's own weight, which needs the bottom face to carry 0.0667 per cent more. That excess falls in proportion to the size of the wedge, so at a point it is nothing and the three pressures are one number. Pressure being the same in every direction is the conclusion of that argument, not an assumption in it. Fluids

The push that has no direction

That the pressure at a point in a still fluid is the same whichever way the surface faces is not a definition. It is a theorem, and its proof is an argument about how two kinds of force scale with size — which is also the exact statement of when it stops being true.

 The hourglass that keeps time. Discharge against how much is left above the opening, for grain and for liquid through the same 40 mm hole, each as a fraction of its own rate at a full hopper. The grain rate is a horizontal line: it does not appear in Beverloo's law at all, because the pressure at the outlet does not depend on the head — the walls carry the weight, which is what Janssen's argument establishes, so the grains at the opening are pushed by their immediate neighbours and by nothing else. The liquid falls as the square root of the head and is down to 32 per cent by the time a tenth is left. That is why an hourglass keeps time and a water clock does not, and why the water clocks that worked were built with a float and an overflow to hold the head constant. Fluids

The hourglass that keeps time

Grain leaves a hopper at a rate that does not depend on how much is above it, and that goes as the orifice to the five-halves power rather than the one half a liquid gives. Both facts follow from the same thing: the weight is carried by the walls, not by the grains at the opening.

 Colder the bigger it is. The Hawking temperature against mass, on logarithmic axes, with the microwave background drawn across it. The slope is minus one exactly, so a heavier hole is colder — a negative heat capacity, which is the fact everything else here follows from. The two lines cross at 4.50e+22 kg, about a hundredth of the Moon's mass. Anything heavier than that is colder than the sky it sits in and absorbs more than it emits, so it grows rather than evaporates. A stellar-mass hole is at 6.2e-8 kelvin and will not begin to lose mass until the background has cooled below that, which takes something like 10¹² years. Evaporation is not something happening now to any hole anybody has observed. Astrophysics

The hole that outlives everything and then does not

A black hole radiates at a temperature that rises as it shrinks, so losing energy makes it lose faster. The whole history follows from that one sign: a life proportional to the cube of the mass, nearly nothing happening for almost all of it, and an end that arrives in a second.

 The power at stake, which is none. The power an electron radiates by Larmor's formula, against its acceleration, with 5 cases marked. a charge on a table: 9.8e+0 m/s², 5.49e-52 W; a laboratory centrifuge: 1.0e+6 m/s², 5.71e-42 W; a proton at the LHC: 1.9e+16 m/s², 2.06e-21 W; an electron in a linac: 2.0e+19 m/s², 2.28e-15 W; an electron in a hydrogen atom: 9.0e+22 m/s², 4.62e-8 W. The slope is two, measured on the drawn line. A charge held at one gravity radiates 5.49e-52 watts, which over the whole age of the universe comes to 2.39e-34 joules — far less than one photon of any kind. So the question of whether it radiates is not an experimental question about a charge on a table, and never has been. Every number here is a straight line on logarithmic axes with an exponent the figure measures. Astrophysics

Whether a charge on a table glows

The equivalence principle says a charge at rest in a gravitational field is a charge accelerating in empty space, and an accelerating charge radiates. Nothing is supplying the energy. The argument has run for eighty years, and its resolution is that radiation is not something a single observer can define.

 Two terms, and the distance neither can beat. The smallest distance a probe of a given momentum can resolve, as the sum of two terms. The falling one is the uncertainty relation: more momentum, shorter wavelength, finer resolution. The rising one is gravity: the probe's own energy curves the region it is probing, and past a point it makes a horizon larger than the thing being looked at. With the gravitational term at 1× the Planck area, the least resolvable distance is 2.286e-35 m — each located by scanning the drawn curve over four hundred thousand momenta rather than by substituting into a formula. There is no momentum at which the resolution is better than that, so the ordinary procedure for measuring a distance has a floor, and the floor is the Planck length up to a factor of order one. Astrophysics

The length no experiment can resolve

Measuring a small distance needs a short wavelength, a short wavelength needs a large energy, and a large energy in a small region makes a horizon. Past a point, pushing harder makes the probe bigger — and the distance where that turns round is the Planck length.

 The energy a spin is allowed, and the only direction it can go. A body with principal moments 1.000, 3.000, 4.000 spinning with a fixed angular momentum. Every possible motion has an energy somewhere in the band drawn here, and the three marks are the three principal-axis spins: energy L²/2I, so the largest moment of inertia gives the smallest energy. The band runs from 0.1250 to 0.5000 in units where the momentum is one — a ratio of 4.0. Anything inside the body that flexes and warms takes energy out and leaves the momentum untouched, so the state can only move leftwards along this band, and there is exactly one place for it to stop. A spin about the axis of least inertia is at the far right: it is a perfectly good solution of the equations of motion, stable against small disturbances in a perfectly rigid body, and it sits at the top of a hill the smallest leak will roll it off. Mechanics

The axis a leak of energy chooses

A body spinning with nothing pushing on it keeps its angular momentum exactly, and keeps its kinetic energy only while nothing inside it flexes. At fixed momentum the energy is least for a spin about the axis of greatest inertia — so any leak, however small, has a destination. The first American satellite found this out in orbit.

 The bowl a lens actually focuses onto. Where a lens of 50 mm focal length brings each part of a flat scene to a focus, against distance from the centre of the field, out to 21.6 mm — the corner of a 35 mm frame. The surface of best focus is a sphere of radius 76 mm curving towards the lens, and the corner of the frame sits 3.13 mm in front of the plane the centre is focused on. The shaded band is the depth of focus at f/8, which is 0.070 mm — 45 times smaller than the sag it has to cover. The curvature is not an error in the lens. It is what Σ1/nf comes to for this stack, and it depends on the powers and the glasses and on nothing else: bending the surfaces, moving the stop or stopping down changes every other aberration and leaves this one exactly where it was. Optics

The flat scene that comes back curved

A lens does not image a plane onto a plane. It images it onto a bowl, and the curvature of that bowl is fixed by the powers and the glasses alone — not by the shapes of the surfaces, not by where the stop is, and not by stopping down. Everything a designer usually plays with leaves it exactly where it was.

 One temperature, four pawls, and nothing gained. The net rate of a ratchet whose gas and whose pawl are at the same temperature, against the load, for notches 2, 5, 10, 20 times the thermal energy deep. Every curve passes through zero at zero load and is negative everywhere else. The device is not merely unable to lift a weight; under any load at all it turns the wrong way and lets the weight down, converting its potential energy into heat in the gas. Making the notch deeper slows everything down — an exponential in the depth — and does not change the sign anywhere. That is the second law arriving as a mechanism rather than as a prohibition. Nothing was assumed about entropy; the pawl was simply allowed to be as warm as everything else, and its own fluctuations undo exactly the rectification it was there to provide. Any rectifier small enough for thermal noise to matter has this problem, and the rectifier being clever does not help, because the same noise reaches the cleverness. Thermodynamics

The engine a fluctuation cannot run

A ratchet lets a shaft turn one way and not the other. Put a paddle in a gas on the same shaft and molecular collisions appear to become a lifted weight — an engine running on one reservoir. It does not work, and following exactly why turns the second law from a prohibition into a mechanism: the pawl is as warm as the gas, and it lifts whenever it is asked to.

 The temperature a planet ought to be. Each body's measured surface temperature against the temperature at which it would radiate away exactly the sunlight it absorbs — computed from two numbers, the sunlight reaching it and the fraction it reflects, with no other property of the body used. Points on the diagonal are bodies the one-line argument gets right. the Moon: balance 270 K, surface 250 K, −20 K with no atmosphere; Mercury: balance 433 K, surface 340 K, −93 K with no atmosphere; Mars: balance 210 K, surface 210 K, +0 K; Earth: balance 255 K, surface 288 K, +33 K; Venus: balance 227 K, surface 737 K, +510 K. The airless bodies fall below the line rather than on it, and the reason is the fourth power: a surface running from noon heat to night cold radiates like its hottest parts and averages like its coldest, so a mean thermometer reading is lower than the temperature that matches the emitted flux. Mars, whose atmosphere is thin and whose surface is nearly isothermal by comparison, sits on the line. Everything with a substantial atmosphere sits above it, by tens of kelvin on Earth and hundreds on Venus, and always in the same direction. Nothing here explains why. What the figure fixes is the size and the sign of what has to be explained. Thermodynamics

The height a planet is seen from

A body in sunlight settles where it radiates away what it absorbs, and that takes two numbers and one line of arithmetic. It gets the Moon right and Earth wrong by thirty-three kelvin. The correction is not that the atmosphere traps heat but that it moves the level space sees the planet from, and the rest is done by a lapse rate that is not a radiative quantity at all.

 One boost, three constants, three pictures. The axes of a frame moving at 0.5 in units where the constant is one, drawn for the three signs the constant can have. The faint cross is the original frame's axes; the two heavy lines are the moving frame's, obtained by boosting them rather than by tilting them by hand. With a positive constant the two axes close in on one another symmetrically, and the line they are closing on is the invariant speed. With a zero constant only the time axis tilts and the space axis stays where it was, which is absolute simultaneity — every frame agrees which events are at the same time. With a negative constant the pair rotates rigidly, like a pair of axes turned in a plane. Nothing about light has been used to draw any of them. The three are the whole of what homogeneity, isotropy, the group property and the relativity principle permit, and choosing between them is a measurement rather than a postulate. Relativity

The transformation that never mentions light

Assume space and time are homogeneous, that space is isotropic, that two changes of frame compose into a third, and that the relativity principle holds. Those four leave exactly one free constant — and three possible worlds, one of them Galileo's and one of them Einstein's. Light appears nowhere in the derivation; it enters only when the constant has to be measured.

 Two solutions, and nothing in the equations to choose between them. A spherical pulse leaving a point and a spherical pulse arriving at one, each drawn at three times 0.35, 0.6, 0.85 in units where the speed is one. Both are exact solutions of the same wave equation, which is checked here by differencing the drawn samples twice in space and twice in time and requiring the residual to vanish for each. The one on the left is what is always used; the one on the right is discarded, and the equations do not do the discarding. The incoming pulse grows as it converges for the same reason the outgoing one decays as it spreads — the same energy through a smaller sphere — and it is as consistent with conservation as its mirror image is. Electromagnetism

The solution that is thrown away

Maxwell's equations admit a field that converges on a charge exactly as readily as one that leaves it, and nothing in them prefers either. Retardation is a boundary condition rather than a law. Which boundary condition is right has been argued about for a century, one of the answers makes the arrow of time a property of there being absorbers, and the laboratory version of the question — whether an atom emits at all — has a measured answer that depends on what is listening.

 Two intersections, and the rule that picks one. The phase-matching construction for light arriving at 40° from a medium of index 1 into one of index -1. The circles are each medium's own relation between wavevector and frequency; the vertical line is the tangential wavenumber, which the boundary conserves. The line crosses the second circle twice, and the construction alone does not say which point is the answer — the rule that does is that energy must travel away from the interface. For a positive index the energy runs along the wavevector and the upper point is taken. For a negative one the energy runs against it, so the lower point is taken, the wavevector points back toward the boundary, and the ray leaves at -40.0° — on the same side of the normal as it arrived. Nothing in the drawing has changed except which intersection is circled. Optics

The ray on the wrong side of the normal

The phase-matching construction draws a circle and a line, and the line crosses the circle twice. Every earlier construction silently took the upper intersection. Which one is physical is decided by where the energy goes rather than by where the wavevector points, and in a medium whose group velocity opposes its phase velocity the answer is the other one — so the refracted ray leaves on the same side of the normal it arrived on, a flat slab focuses, and a lens can beat the diffraction limit until loss stops it.

 The half-life that depends on the electrons. Half-lives of 3 nuclides as neutral atoms and as bare nuclei, measured at a heavy-ion storage ring where fully stripped ions can be kept circulating for months. The changes are not corrections. ¹⁸⁷Re goes from 41.6 billion years to 32.9 — a factor of 1.26 billion — because a beta decay whose available energy is only 2.5 keV cannot put an electron into the continuum but can put one into an empty K orbital, and stripping the atom opens that channel. ¹⁶³Dy is stable as an atom and decays in 47 days as a bare nucleus, for the same reason. The rate is a property of the nucleus and of what surrounds it, and the rung below this one says otherwise. Quantum

The half-life that chemistry can change

The first rung of this ladder said a nucleus has no clock and that nothing outside it touches the rate. That is very nearly true and it is not exactly true. Electron capture takes an electron from the nucleus's own position, so its rate is proportional to how many electrons are there — which is chemistry, worth a per cent. And a nucleus stripped of every electron can gain a decay channel it did not have: rhenium-187 goes from forty-two billion years to thirty-three.

 The entropy a substance keeps depends on how fast it was cooled. The entropy of a supercooled liquid in excess of its crystal's, against temperature, for a substance melting at 305 K with an entropy of fusion of 43 joules per kelvin per mole and a liquid heat capacity exceeding the crystal's by 62. The equilibrium curve — the one the liquid follows while it can still relax — falls steadily and would reach the crystal's entropy at 152.4 kelvin. It never gets there, because the liquid falls out of equilibrium first, at a temperature that depends on how long it is given: 0.01 s/K freezes at 196.1 K with 15.61 left, 1 s/K freezes at 188.1 K with 13.03 left, 100 s/K freezes at 182.1 K with 11.03 left. Ice's residual entropy is a count and does not move; a glass's is whatever it happened to have when it stopped being able to change, and that is a property of the experiment. Thermodynamics

The entropy that depends on how fast it was cooled

Ice's residual entropy is a count, and it comes out the same whoever measures it. A glass's does not. A glass keeps whatever entropy it happened to have when its own relaxation time crossed the experiment's, so cooling ten times more slowly leaves less behind — and extrapolating the equilibrium liquid below that point takes its entropy under the crystal's at a finite temperature, which cannot happen and does not, for a reason that is still argued about.

 A hill that is always ahead of the atom. The light-shift potentials of the two ground sublevels of a spin-½ atom in two counter-propagating beams with crossed linear polarisations, over one and a half wavelengths, in units of the well depth. The polarisation of the light turns from σ+ to linear to σ− every quarter wavelength, and the two sublevels see sinusoidal potentials a quarter wavelength out of step. Optical pumping transfers the atom from one sublevel to the other fastest exactly where its own potential is highest — the fastest pumping and the hilltop coincide, which the figure checks — and that is the bottom of the other potential. The heavy line is an atom that starts with 3.3 well depths of kinetic energy: each time it reaches a hilltop it is pumped down by exactly one well depth, climbs the next hill, and is pumped down again, 3 times, until it no longer has the energy to reach a hilltop and is left oscillating in one well. The energy is carried off by the pumping photon, which leaves bluer than the light that drove it by the depth of the well. Astrophysics

The limit that belonged to a simpler atom

The theory of laser cooling predicted a floor, and the first careful measurement came in six times below it. Nothing was wrong with the measurement or the arithmetic. The floor belonged to an atom with one ground state, and real atoms have several — which lets the light build a hill in front of every atom, move it to the bottom before it can roll back, and repeat the trick until the atom is a few microkelvin from rest.

 Radiated while the push holds, paid for when it stops. The power a charge radiates, the power the radiation reaction force takes from its motion, and the rate of change of the Schott term mτ a·v, through a push that rises over the first 20 per cent of its duration, holds steady, and falls away over the last 20, in units of mτa₀² where a₀ is the steady acceleration. Radiated power is a², the reaction force's take is −ȧv, and the Schott rate is found by differencing a·v along the trajectory; at every instant the first equals the sum of the other two. While the push is steady the reaction force is exactly zero and the charge still radiates at the full rate, all of it drawn from the Schott term. When the push stops, ȧ is large and negative while the charge is moving fast, and the reaction force takes 0.775 units, more than the 0.750 radiated over the whole push. The difference is what it handed back while the push was starting: then the charge is still slow, the reaction force points along the rising acceleration, and it does 0.025 units of work on the charge instead of taking any. The totals agree to a part in a hundred thousand. Astrophysics

The bill that arrives when the pushing stops

A charge accelerating steadily radiates at the full Larmor rate while the radiation reaction force on it is exactly zero, so for as long as the push holds, nothing about the charge's motion pays a single watt. The energy is lent by the field that travels with the charge, the loan is called the Schott term, and it is repaid the moment the acceleration changes.

 Above a half, the chains stop letting go. The extensional viscosity of a dilute polymer solution, as a multiple of its zero-shear viscosity, against the accumulated stretch (Hencky strain, the stretch rate times the time), on a logarithmic axis, for stretch rates whose product with the relaxation time is 0.1, 0.4, 0.6, 1. The polymer carries 90 per cent of the viscosity. Dashed curves are the Oldroyd-B dumbbell, integrated from its conformation equation and matching its closed form; solid curves are the same chains with a finite length, FENE-P with L² = 400. At 0.1 the Oldroyd-B viscosity reaches 3.37 and the finite chain 3.37 by a strain of 6; at 0.4 the Oldroyd-B viscosity reaches 9.49 and the finite chain 9.25 by a strain of 6; at 0.6 the Oldroyd-B viscosity reaches 58 and the finite chain 49 by a strain of 6; at 1 the Oldroyd-B viscosity reaches 725 and the finite chain 329 by a strain of 6. Below one half the viscosity settles at a few times the shear value. Above it the Oldroyd-B chain stretches without limit and its resistance grows exponentially, while the finite chain grows until it is nearly fully extended and then stops, hundreds of times higher than it began. Fluids

The stretch a chain cannot outrun

A Newtonian liquid pulled into a thread resists exactly three times as hard as it resists being sheared, whatever it is made of. A polymer solution resists three times as hard only until the stretch rate passes one over twice its relaxation time. Past that, its chains can no longer recoil as fast as they are pulled apart, and the same liquid that is barely thicker than water in a stirred beaker becomes hundreds of times stiffer in a thread.

 The floor a state's survival cannot go below. The probability that a quantum state is still found in its initial state, against time measured as its energy spread times time over ħ, for four states with the same spread. The shaded region under cos²(ΔE t/ħ) is forbidden by Mandelstam and Tamm's theorem, and every curve — each a sum of phases over the state's energies — stays out of it. Two equally weighted levels run along its edge and reach an orthogonal state at exactly π/2, the fastest any state with this spread can. The same two levels driven off resonance, with the same spread, never get further than a survival of 0.500. Three equally spaced levels become orthogonal only at 1.7101, 1.0887 times the limit, and a coherent state never does, bottoming out at 0.0183. A spread of energy is permission to change, not an obligation. Quantum

The fastest a state can stop being itself

Time has no operator, so the energy–time relation cannot be the commutator inequality it resembles. What stands in its place is sharper: a state whose energy is spread by ΔE cannot become a different, orthogonal state in less than πħ/2ΔE, and cannot do it faster than its mean energy above the ground state allows either. Two equally weighted levels reach both limits exactly. Nothing else does.

 How close a network gets to a load that stores charge. The fraction of a wave's amplitude reflected from a resistance shunted by a capacitance, with RCωc = 2, against frequency in units of the band edge ωc, for the load alone and for networks of inductors and capacitors whose values, with an ideal transformer at the source, were optimised numerically to keep the reflection low across the band. The bare load holds it to 0.707 across the band; the 1-element network holds it to 0.392 across the band; the 2-element network holds it to 0.320 across the band; the 3-element network holds it to 0.289 across the band. The dashed line is Bode and Fano's floor, exp(−π/RCωc) = 0.208, which no network of any size can go beneath over the whole band; each added element brings the design closer to it, and each buys its flatter band with a reflection that climbs to total just beyond the band edge. Waves

The mismatch no network can remove

A quarter-wave layer or a taper can match a resistance to a resistance as well as anyone likes. Put a capacitance across the load and that stops being true for every network that could ever be built from lossless parts: Bode and Fano proved that the total amount of match available is fixed by the load's resistance and capacitance, so a network can only move it about — and a flat match across a band can never be better than e to the minus π over the load's time constant times the band.

 One slit, four distances, one multiplication. The intensity across the beam behind a slit 5 wavelengths wide, at distances of 0.5, 5, 25, 100 wavelengths, each computed by multiplying the slit's plane-wave spectrum by the phase each wave accumulates and transforming back — no approximation about angles. Close to the slit the pattern is the slit's own shape with ripples at its edges; further out the ripples move inwards and the beam develops a bright centre; far away it spreads into the diffraction pattern. The travelling part of the field keeps its power to 10⁻¹⁰, running it back 100 wavelengths recovers it to 5 × 10⁻¹⁴, and at 100 wavelengths the result matches a direct Fresnel integral to 2.75 per cent rms. Near field and far field are not two theories; they are one multiplication at different distances. Waves

The fan of plane waves inside every beam

Huygens added up wavelets from every point of a front. The same content can be written as a sum over plane waves travelling in every direction, and then propagation stops being an integral and becomes a multiplication: each plane wave picks up a phase in proportion to the distance. One square root in that phase holds all of diffraction, near field and far field alike — and when the square root turns imaginary, it holds the reason no instrument a wavelength away can see detail finer than half a wavelength.

 The interaction that orders a magnet is not the magnetic one. For six ordered magnets, two temperatures on a logarithmic scale: the energy of the magnetic interaction between two neighbouring moments, expressed as a temperature, and the temperature at which the material actually orders. iron orders at 1043 K against a dipolar scale of 0.201 K, a factor of 5182; cobalt orders at 1394 K against a dipolar scale of 0.117 K, a factor of 11961; nickel orders at 627 K against a dipolar scale of 0.015 K, a factor of 42312; gadolinium orders at 293 K against a dipolar scale of 0.790 K, a factor of 371; europium oxide orders at 69 K against a dipolar scale of 0.615 K, a factor of 112; lithium holmium fluoride orders at 1.53 K against a dipolar scale of 1.230 K, a factor of 1.24. The five ferromagnets order between a hundred and forty thousand times above the only interaction their moments have with each other, so whatever aligns them is not magnetism. The sixth is the control: lithium holmium fluoride is a magnet whose ordering really is dipolar, and its two temperatures agree. Electromagnetism

What holds a magnet together is not magnetism

Two neighbouring moments in iron interact magnetically with an energy worth a fifth of a kelvin, and iron keeps its order to 1,043 kelvin. Whatever aligns them is five thousand times stronger than the only force they exert on one another — and it is electrostatic, with the exclusion principle deciding which of two spatial arrangements two electrons may use.

 Four tolerances, four elastic answers, one collapse load. The force in each of a table's four legs against the load on it, for four different manufacturing errors, with the legs made of a material that yields at 25 kilonewtons. While everything is elastic the short diagonal pair takes more than its share by a fixed amount that depends on the error and not at all on the load, so the load at which the first leg reaches its capacity runs from 25 to 100 kilonewtons — a spread of more than a factor of three. Past that point the yielded legs hold a constant force and the others take the rest, and the difference the tolerance made is erased. Every one of the four cases collapses at 100 kilonewtons, which is four times one leg's capacity, checked here to a part in a million across the four. The quantity nobody could compute and the quantity that decides whether the structure stands are not the same quantity. Mechanics

The one number the tolerances cannot touch

A redundant structure's load sharing depends on stiffnesses and manufacturing errors that nobody knows. Its collapse load does not depend on either. Once members yield they hold a known force instead of a force proportional to a displacement, the compatibility equations that needed the unknowns drop out, and the load at which the structure becomes a mechanism follows from a work balance with no stiffness in it at all.

 Two temperatures for the same sunlight. Sunlight described two ways, against how much it has been concentrated. The flat line is the temperature its spectrum belongs to — 5,762 K, the Sun's surface, which concentration does not change because a mirror does not alter a photon's energy. The rising curve is the temperature a blackbody would need in order to radiate the flux actually arriving: 394 K unconcentrated, 2213 K under a parabolic dish, and 5771 K at the geometric limit, where the two meet — computed here and checked against the Sun's own temperature, because a perfect concentrator reproduces the source's radiance and cannot exceed it. The gap between the two curves is the dilution, and dilution is entropy: the same energy spread over a hundred thousand times more directions occupies a hundred thousand times more modes. That is what a converter has to carry, and it is why the ceiling on solar conversion is not the Carnot efficiency between 5,762 K and 300 K. Optics

The work a diluted beam will not do

Sunlight at the top of the atmosphere has the spectrum of a body at 5,762 kelvin and the energy flux of one at 394. The mismatch is not an accident of units: the light has been spread over a hundred thousand times more modes than it left in, and that dilution is entropy. Run it through a heat engine unconcentrated and five per cent of it is available as work.

 The condition three modes never quite satisfy. By how much three modes of a thirty-two mass chain fail to be in resonance — the sum of two mode frequencies minus the frequency of their sum, on a logarithmic scale, against the second of the two modes for four choices of the first. The leading nonlinear term couples modes in threes and the exchange accumulates only where this quantity is zero. It never is: the chain's dispersion is a sine, a sine is concave, and the sum of two of its values always exceeds the value at their sum. The smallest mismatch anywhere on the chain is at the two lowest modes and equals 2.156e-4 — which the scan finds and which is the cube of pi over four times the cube of one more than the mode count, checked here on chains from eight masses to two hundred and fifty-six. That closed form is the whole of why this is a finite-chain problem: the mismatch falls as the cube of the length, so a long enough chain is arbitrarily close to resonant and the continuum limit is exactly resonant, which is where the solitary waves come from. Thermodynamics

The condition three modes never meet

Whether two modes of a chain can hand energy to a third is arithmetic on the dispersion relation, and for a chain of masses the answer is never: a sine is concave, so the sum of two frequencies always exceeds the frequency of their sum. The smallest shortfall anywhere on a chain of N masses is π³/4(N+1)³ — never zero, and never far from it — and a shortfall turns a transfer into a beat.

 The one prediction the Planck scale makes. The energy density the vacuum should have, from summing the zero-point energy of a field's modes up to a cutoff, against where that cutoff is put — thirty decades of cutoff energy and a hundred and thirty of density, both logarithmic. The horizontal line is what is measured: 5.34e-10 joules per cubic metre, the dark energy that accounts for sixty-nine per cent of the universe. Cutting the sum off at the Planck energy — which is where dimensional analysis says every description available runs out — overshoots it by 10^121. That is the largest disagreement between an estimate and a measurement anywhere in physics, and the slope of the line is why it cannot be argued away: the density goes as the fourth power of the cutoff, so cutting off at the electroweak scale still overshoots by 10^54 and cutting off at one electronvolt — below which no physics is in doubt at all — still overshoots by 10^8. The cutoff that would give the right answer is 8.0e-3 electronvolts, which is a wavelength of about a tenth of a millimetre and corresponds to no known physics whatever. Astrophysics

The estimate that misses by a hundred and twenty

Every argument about the Planck scale is an argument about consistency rather than about data, with one exception. The zero-point energy of the quantum fields gravitates, dimensional analysis at the Planck cutoff says how much, and what is measured is 10¹²¹ times smaller. It is the largest disagreement between an estimate and a measurement anywhere in physics, and lowering the cutoff does not rescue it.

 How large the hidden dimensions would have to be. The size extra dimensions would need, for gravity's true scale to be at a TeV rather than at 10¹⁹ GeV, against how many of them there are — a logarithmic axis of metres, for three choices of the true scale. The relation is the one that makes the arrangement work: the Planck mass observed in four dimensions is M_*^(2+n)Rⁿ, so gravity is weak because its field spreads into a volume nothing else can enter. Solved for R at a true scale of a TeV: 1 dimension needs 2.9e+13 m, 2 dimensions needs 2.4e-3 m, 3 dimensions needs 1.0e-8 m, 4 dimensions needs 2.2e-11 m, 5 dimensions needs 5.4e-13 m, 6 dimensions needs 4.5e-14 m. The two horizontal lines are where experiment has been. One extra dimension would have to be of order a hundred astronomical units, which would have wrecked the orbits of the planets and is excluded absolutely. Two would have to be of order a millimetre — which is what made the arrangement famous, because a millimetre is a distance a laboratory can test, and torsion balances have since verified the inverse-square law down to fifty-two micrometres and excluded it. Three or more sit below a nanometre, where no gravitational measurement reaches, and are untouched. Astrophysics

The scale that may not be where it looks

Every Planck number assumes gravity is four-dimensional all the way down. If it is not — if the field spreads into dimensions compact enough to have escaped notice — the true scale where gravity becomes strong could be at a TeV, and the whole remoteness of the Planck scale would be an artefact of where the field lines go. It is the one part of the subject an experiment can address, and the experiments have addressed it.

 How far the vacuum is from being a nonlinear medium. The size of the vacuum's departure from linearity, as a fraction, against the electric field it is subjected to — thirteen decades of field and twenty-eight of correction, both logarithmic. The scale is the Schwinger field, computed here from the electron's mass and the fundamental constants as 1.32e+18 volts per metre: the field at which a pair gains its own rest energy over a Compton wavelength, and therefore the field at which the vacuum stops being a passive backdrop. The marks are the strongest fields that exist. a laboratory magnet, 10 T is 2.3e-9 of it; a hydrogen atom's own field is 3.9e-7 of it; a 10²² W/cm² laser focus is 2.1e-4 of it; the Schwinger field is 1.0e+0 of it; a magnetar, 10¹¹ T is 2.3e+1 of it. So a laboratory is twenty-eight decades from making the effect large, and a magnetar's field is above the critical one — which is why the only places the vacuum's nonlinearity has been seen are the two where the fields are not human: the ultraperipheral collision of two heavy nuclei, and the surface of a neutron star. Waves

The one medium that was supposed to add exactly

Superposition holds because an equation is linear, and every material stops being linear at some amplitude. Empty space was the exception: Maxwell's equations are linear exactly, and two beams cross with no interaction of any kind. Quantum electrodynamics says otherwise — light scatters light, and a strong field makes the vacuum birefringent — at a field of 1.3 × 10¹⁸ volts per metre, which no laboratory has come within four decades of.

 The edge that is a straight line, not a step. The absorption of gallium arsenide near its own band gap of 1.424 electronvolts, on a logarithmic axis, at 4 temperatures. Below the gap the absorption does not stop; it falls exponentially, along a straight line whose slope is an energy, and the straightness holds over several decades. Raising the temperature makes the line shallower — the tail reaches further below the gap — and the slope runs from 5.6 millielectronvolts at 10 kelvin to 7.5 at 300, a factor of 1.33. The lines pivot about a point just above the gap rather than rotating about nothing, which is what makes the slope a single number worth quoting. The band gap's own shift with temperature has been removed here, so that the fan is the tail's doing and not the gap's. Waves

Below the gap, where there is nothing to absorb

A semiconductor is supposed to be transparent below its band gap, and it is not. The absorption falls exponentially instead, over seven decades, along a straight line whose slope is an energy of a few millielectronvolts — and the description that produces that line has no states in the gap at all. What the slope measures is how much the gap itself is moving about.

 The pressure at which an oil becomes a glass. Viscosity against pressure for 4 liquids on a logarithmic axis, from Barus's rule with the pressure coefficient each one actually has. The rule is an exponential, so a gigapascal multiplies an ordinary oil's viscosity by a hundred million or more, and the curves cross the line conventionally taken to mark a glass — a million million pascal-seconds — at 1.37 GPa for a mineral oil, 0.98 GPa for a traction fluid. The vertical line is the peak pressure inside the loaded contact this figure is about, 1.32 gigapascals, computed from the Hertz solution for that geometry and load. Water is drawn for contrast: its pressure coefficient is thirty times smaller, it never approaches a glass over this range, and that is why it is useless as a lubricant in a rolling contact however clean it is. Each curve is drawn solid up to the glass line and dashed above it, because past that point the material is not a liquid and its viscosity is not what decides how it shears — the exponential continues, and the substance it was written for does not. Fluids

The oil that is a glass for a quarter of a millisecond

Every other account of viscosity here varies the temperature. Pressure does something larger and in the same direction for every liquid: viscosity rises exponentially, by a factor of ten to the eight or more at the gigapascal inside a loaded gear tooth. That is not a curiosity — it is the only reason there is a film there at all. Remove the pressure dependence from the calculation and the predicted film is five nanometres, under the roughness, and the surfaces touch.

 14 decades of fluid, and a floor none of them reaches. The ratio of viscosity to entropy density for 8 substances, in units of the proposed lower bound, on a logarithmic axis. The quantity is a viscosity divided by how much entropy a cubic metre of the substance holds, and it has the dimensions of Planck's constant over Boltzmann's — so a bound on it is a statement with no material properties in it at all. The span here is a factor of 1.6e+14, from pitch at 20 °C at the top to the quark–gluon plasma at the bottom, which sits a factor of 1.6 above the floor. The values marked as computed are worked out from a viscosity and a tabulated entropy; the rest are quoted from the compilations, because a minimum along an isobar is an inference from many measurements rather than a single one. Fluids

Whether a fluid can be made arbitrarily thin

Viscosity has no units anybody would call fundamental, and nothing obviously stops it being as small as you like. Divide it by the entropy in a cubic metre and the units become Planck's constant over Boltzmann's — and a conjecture from 2005 says that ratio has a floor. Across fourteen decades of ordinary fluid nothing has been measured below it, the closest thing to it is the hottest matter ever made, and a kinetic-theory argument reaches the same number from the opposite direction.

 The ring does not come back. A ring of freely floating masses at four phases of a passing gravitational wave and once after it has gone. The first four are the familiar picture: stretched one way, then the other, with the area unchanged. The fifth is the one the standard picture does not draw — the ring is permanently deformed, by 25 per cent of the largest deformation the wave itself produced, and nothing brings it back. The masses are not oscillating about a new centre; they are at rest, at new separations. Both the oscillation and the offset are exaggerated enormously: the real strain at 440 megaparsecs is 9.9e-22 and the real permanent offset is 2.5e-22, so the drawing magnifies both by about 2e+20. What is honest in the picture is the ratio between them. Astrophysics

The ring that does not come back

Every picture of a passing gravitational wave shows a ring of free masses stretched, squeezed and let go. The last frame is wrong. The ring ends a different shape — permanently, with the masses at rest at new separations — by about a fifth of the largest distortion the wave itself produced. What sources the offset is the energy the wave carried away, so the wave is remembering itself, and nobody has measured it.

 The peak that is lost to a fraction of a wave. The height of the central peak, relative to a perfect pupil of the same size, against the root-mean-square error of the wavefront in waves, for four kinds of error — each computed from the transform and each normalised to the same rms. The dashed curve is the usual approximation, the exponential of minus the square of two pi times the error. What the figure shows is that to a good approximation it does not matter WHAT the error is, only how large it is in the mean square: four quite different shapes of wavefront give nearly the same peak. A fourteenth of a wave leaves 80 per cent of the peak, which is the conventional definition of diffraction-limited, and it corresponds to a quarter of a wave peak-to-valley for a simple defocus — which is where Rayleigh's quarter-wave rule comes from and why it is a convention laid over a computed number rather than a threshold in the physics. Optics

How accurate a mirror has to be

The pupil's amplitude decides the rings; its phase decides the peak. A wavefront error of a fourteenth of a wave root-mean-square leaves eighty per cent of the peak intensity, which is the whole of what 'diffraction-limited' means — a convention laid over a computed number. And the number barely depends on what the error is, only on how large: four quite different aberrations of the same magnitude give nearly the same answer.

 No beam is narrow enough and wide enough at once. Three lengths at the far end of a Stern-Gerlach magnet 10 centimetres long with a gradient of 1000 tesla a metre, against the width of the beam entering it, for an electron at 100 electronvolts. The spin splitting is a horizontal line at 2.9e-6 metres: it does not depend on the beam's width. The Lorentz blurring rises in proportion to the width, because the field a particle sees depends on where in the beam it is, and the divergence-free condition ties a gradient in one component to a gradient in another. It overtakes the splitting at 1.0e-9 metres. Narrower than that and diffraction has already spread the beam by 3.9e-3 metres, which is larger still. There is no width at which the splitting is the largest of the three, and the magnet's length and gradient cancel out of the comparison entirely — so no magnet helps. Quantum

The experiment that defines spin and cannot be done on it

A Stern–Gerlach magnet separates magnetic moments and is how spin was discovered. It cannot be made to work on a free electron, and the obstruction is not the apparatus: the field gradient that splits the beam also deflects the charge by an amount that varies across it, and the ratio of the splitting to that blurring comes out as the de Broglie wavelength over the beam width — with the magnet's length and gradient cancelling exactly.

 One dimensionless group between an engine and Carnot. The efficiency of a thermoelectric couple against the temperature of its hot side, with the cold side at 300 kelvin, for 4 values of the figure of merit, and the Carnot ceiling drawn above them. The expression has exactly one material quantity in it — the dimensionless group formed from the Seebeck coefficient squared, the electrical conductivity, the temperature and the thermal conductivity — and everything else is the two temperatures. At 600 kelvin, a figure of merit of one gives 10.8 per cent against a Carnot ceiling of 50.0, and a figure of merit of four gives 22.6. The approach to the ceiling is slow: every doubling of the group buys less than the last, so the difference between a good material and a perfect one is smaller than the difference between a poor material and a good one. Thermodynamics

An engine with one number in it

A thermoelectric couple has no moving part and no working fluid, and its efficiency is the Carnot value multiplied by a factor containing exactly one dimensionless group of material properties. Sixty years of effort have moved that group from about one to about two, and the reason it is hard is that its three ingredients are not independent: raising the conductivity ruins the coefficient it is squared against, and the only lever that is really free is the heat the lattice carries.

 A blackbody in every direction, at a different temperature in each. The spectrum of a blackbody at 100 kelvin in its own frame, seen by an observer it is moving past at 0.5 of the speed of light, in 5 directions. Each curve is a Planck spectrum exactly — the Planck form survives a Doppler shift, with the temperature multiplied by the shift — and the temperatures run from 57.74 kelvin looking one way to 173.21 looking the other. So the body is a perfect blackbody in each direction and has no single temperature. A thermometer placed in the radiation reads something between, and what it reads depends on where it is put and on how much of the sky it sees — which is the reason a transformation law for temperature was argued about for sixty years without being found. Relativity

The body that has no temperature when it moves

Energy, momentum, length, duration and field strength all change when the observer moves. Temperature was argued about for sixty years, with three transformation laws proposed and each defended by people making no mistake. The resolution is that a moving blackbody is a perfect blackbody in every direction at a different temperature in each — so a thermometer's reading depends on where it is put, and the quantity the law was for is not there.

 The launches that go in, and one thrower's scatter over them. Every free throw as a point: launch angle across, launch speed up. The dark curve is the launches that put the ball's centre through the centre of the hoop, lowest at the least-speed launch, 51.4° and 7.17 m/s. The shaded band is every launch that passes cleanly through, found at each angle by moving the speed until the ball touches the rim. It does not exist below 46.9°, is a hair thick near the bottom of the curve, and thickens as the launches steepen. The two ellipses are one thrower who scatters ±0.05 m/s in speed and ±1° in angle, drawn at two standard deviations and centred on two aims: the least-speed launch, and 58.5°, the aim that makes a clean pass most likely for that thrower. At the first, the ellipse lies across a band far thinner than itself; at the second, more of it lies inside, although the band there slopes more steeply. Mechanics

The throw most likely to go in

A free throw can be launched at 51.4° with less speed than at any other angle, and there a small error of angle hardly moves the ball at all. It is still not the best aim. Once the question is which throw most often goes in rather than which is cheapest, the thrower's scatter has to be laid over the launches that succeed — and for a hoop the answer moves steeper, while for a board the same scatter moves it flatter.

 The paths in space: orbits of one period, and a throw straight up. The same free falls drawn in space around the Earth, which is the filled disc. All start at the marked point 2 Earth radii from the centre. The circle is the circular orbit. The ellipses, of eccentricity 0.2 and 0.4, have the same period, so they come back to the start at the same moment. The straight line is the thrown clock's path: straight up to 4.46 Earth radii and back down the same line, arriving as the orbits complete one revolution. The Earth's rotation is ignored and it is treated as a point mass for the paths that pass close to it. Relativity

The orbit that ages less than a throw

A clock in orbit and a clock thrown straight up leave the same point at the same moment and meet there again one period later. Both fall freely the whole way, so both follow paths of stationary proper time — and the thrown clock comes back 4.1 microseconds older. Even a clock held still by a rocket, which is not falling at all, beats the orbit. Free fall picks out a path that is stationary, not one that is longest.

 Four states of light, each with the same area of noise. The field of a single mode of light drawn as a point in a plane whose two axes are its two quadratures — the parts of the wave in step with a reference and a quarter-cycle out of step. The distance from the centre is the amplitude and the angle is the phase. Each state is a cloud of 400 sampled measurements with its two-standard-deviation outline, in units where the vacuum's noise is one in every direction. The vacuum is a round cloud at the centre. Steady laser light is the same round cloud moved away from the centre. Light squeezed by 4 dB is an ellipse of the same area: narrower than the vacuum by a factor of 0.63 in one direction and wider by 1.58 in the other. Pointed along the direction from the centre it is quiet in amplitude; pointed across it, quiet in phase. The sampled spreads were checked against each state's widths. Quantum

The noise pushed below the floor

A perfectly steady laser beam still flickers, by an amount set by the vacuum itself, and for most of the twentieth century that flicker was treated as the floor of any optical measurement. It is a floor only for one shape of noise. Light can be made quieter than the vacuum in one property by being made louder in another — and the price, the fragility and the use of that trade are all visible in how the noise is shaped, which is why the world's gravitational-wave detectors now run on it.

 Three bodies of one mass, one field outside, three fields inside. The gravitational field against distance from the centre, both in units of the body's surface values, for 3 spherical bodies of the same mass and radius: a uniform ball; a dense core under a light mantle; a hollow shell. Outside the surface the three curves are one curve — checked at 1.7 radii by adding up the pull of every mass element in each body, which agrees with the pull of a point of the same mass to better than a part in five hundred. Inside they part: the uniform ball's field falls in a straight line, the layered body's rises to 1.24 times the surface value at the top of its core, and the hollow shell's is zero throughout its cavity. Their moment-of-inertia factors are 0.400 (uniform ball), 0.330 (dense core under a light mantle), 0.551 (hollow shell) — a number that no measurement of the field outside can supply. Electromagnetism

The field outside that cannot find the core

Gauss's law gives the field outside a body from what it encloses, and read backwards it is a limit. A uniform ball, a planet with an iron core and a hollow shell of the same mass have identical gravity everywhere outside. The field fixes a list of numbers — the mass, the flattening, higher moments — and leaves free everything else, including the moment of inertia; the Earth's core was weighed by its wobble, not by its pull.

All themes