Theme

What stays the same — part 1 of 3

Conservation laws, and the habit of solving a problem by refusing to look at the middle of it.

The pendulum's phase portrait. Angle plotted against angular velocity. Closed loops are swinging back and forth; the open curves above and below are rotating all the way round; the dashed curve between them is the separatrix.

The pendulum, and the small lie that makes it simple

A pendulum's period does not depend on how far it swings. This is one of the most useful false statements in physics, and it is worth knowing exactly how false.

A collision with restitution 0.6. Two bodies before and after a head-on collision. Momentum is the same on both rows by construction; kinetic energy is only preserved when the collision is elastic.

Mechanics

Collisions are easier than forces, and momentum is the reason

Nobody knows what happens inside a collision. Momentum conservation makes that ignorance irrelevant, which is the whole trick — and energy, deliberately, is not conserved.

A travelling wave, caught at one instant. A sine wave plotted against position at a fixed moment. The wavelength is the distance between repeats. The ghosted curve is the same wave a moment later.

Waves

A wave is a shape that travels, and nothing else does

In a wave on water, no water goes anywhere. What moves is the shape — and separating the two motions is the whole of wave physics.

Equipotentials, with the field lines that cross them. Contours of constant potential, traced by marching squares, with field lines traced along the gradient of the same potential. The two families meet at right angles everywhere, which is a consequence of the field being the gradient rather than a property of the drawing.

Electromagnetism

One number for every point, and nothing at all is lost

The electric field is three numbers at every point of space. Replacing it with one number loses nothing — and the reason it loses nothing is the same reason a hill can be drawn as a contour map.

Pressure, counted as momentum arriving at a wall. Molecules with speeds drawn from the Maxwell–Boltzmann distribution and directions drawn uniformly in the plane of the figure. Those moving toward the wall will bounce off it, reversing the component perpendicular to it and delivering twice that momentum each — and pressure is nothing but the rate at which that momentum arrives. Because the directions here lie in a plane rather than in space, the perpendicular component carries half the energy rather than the third it carries in a real gas.

Thermodynamics

Pressure is a rate of arrival, and the gas law falls out of counting

Nothing in a gas is pushing on the walls. Molecules arrive, bounce, and leave, and pressure is the momentum they deliver per second — from which the ideal gas law follows with no thermodynamics in it at all.

The same 120 N force at 3 different arms. 3 spanners of different lengths, each with the same 120 newton force applied at its end. The torque printed under each is the force times its own moment arm, so it rises with the length while the force does not change.

Mechanics

The same push, further out, and why that is a different quantity

A force is not enough to say whether something turns. What decides is where the line of the force passes, and the distance from the pivot to that line is the whole of the story.

Released together on a 20° slope, 1.1 s later. 3 bodies of different shape, released from the same line on a 20 degree slope and drawn where each has reached after 1.1 seconds. The order is sphere, then disc, then hoop. Each spoke is turned by the distance that body has rolled divided by its radius.

Mechanics

The mass, and where it sits, which is what decides the race

Release a hoop and a marble together on a slope and the marble wins, whatever they weigh and whatever their size. Neither mass nor radius survives the arithmetic; only the arrangement does.

A loop leaving the field. A rectangular loop of wire 0.3 metres by 0.2 metres moving at 1.5 metres per second out of a region of magnetic field of 0.6 tesla directed into the page, marked with crosses. 0.08 metres of the loop's width is still inside the field. The induced current runs clockwise, and the force on the side that is in the field opposes the motion.

Electromagnetism

The field that makes the other, and only while it is changing

A magnet sitting next to a coil does nothing at all. Move it and a current flows. The law is not about the field but about its rate of change, and everything electrical since 1831 rests on that distinction.

$Total energy against speed, in units of the rest energy. The total energy of a moving body divided by its rest energy, against speed as a fraction of the speed of light. The Newtonian answer, one plus half v squared over c squared, is drawn beside it: the two agree to 0.004 per cent at a tenth of light speed and disagree by 39 per cent at nine-tenths. The relativistic curve has a vertical asymptote at c, which is why nothing with mass reaches it.$ 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 wavelength shift against scattering angle. How much longer a scattered photon's wavelength is, against the angle it scattered through. The shift runs from nothing at 0 degrees to 4.853 picometres straight back, passing through the electron's Compton wavelength of 2.4263 picometres at 90 degrees. Nothing about the incident light or the target material appears anywhere on this axis.

Quantum

A photon with a momentum, and a collision that proves it

X-rays bouncing off electrons come back with a longer wavelength. How much longer depends on the angle they turned through, and on nothing else — not the incident wavelength, not the target material, not the intensity.

Quantum

No two in the same state, and why matter has volume

Nothing in the energy levels of an atom says how many electrons may occupy each one. The answer is one per state, it is not derived from any force, and it is the reason a table holds a cup up.

Where the particle is likely to be found. A particle confined between two walls one unit apart. States 1, 4, 16 are drawn, each riding on a line at its own energy — 1E₁, 16E₁, 256E₁ — because the energies go as n². The curves are |ψ|², the probability of finding the particle at each position. The dashed line on each is the classical answer: a ball bouncing between the walls at constant speed is equally likely to be anywhere, and the quantum density oscillates about it and converges onto it as n rises.

Quantum

Where the quantum picture hands back the old one

A confined particle's probability density oscillates violently at every quantum number, and never stops. What makes the classical answer come back is not that the oscillations die away — it is that nothing can resolve them.

Force multiplied, distance paid. Two pistons on one body of fluid, of areas in the ratio 16 to 1. A force of 200 N on the small one holds 3.20 kN on the large one, and pushing the small piston 16 cm raises the large one by 10.0 mm. The two products are the same number: nothing is gained except the shape of the bargain.

Fluids

Force multiplied, and nothing gained

A push on a small piston becomes a much larger push on a large one, in the ratio of their areas, with no machinery in between except the liquid. What the liquid will not do is give anything away — the distances shrink by the same factor the forces grow by, and the product is untouched.

Where the upward force comes from. A block submerged with its top 1.2 m down. The pressure on the bottom face (19.6 kPa) exceeds that on the top (11.8 kPa) by exactly the weight of a column of water as tall as the block, and the sideways pressures cancel in pairs. Nothing has been added to the physics of pressure to get buoyancy out of it.

Fluids

The weight of the water that is not there

A submerged object is pushed up by the weight of the fluid it has displaced — not by something like it, not approximately, but exactly. The reason is that the pressures on its faces do not cancel, and the sum that survives has forgotten everything about the object except its shape.

Which grains the light wins. The radiation force on a spherical grain divided by the gravitational force on it, against the grain's radius, on logarithmic axes. Both forces fall as the inverse square of the distance, so the ratio does not depend on how far away the grain is — only on how big it is. Light acts on the cross-section and gravity on the volume, so the ratio goes as 1/a, and the two are equal at 287 nm for material of density 2000 kg/m³. Anything smaller than that is expelled; anything larger stays.

Astrophysics

Light has a pressure

Sunlight pushes on a square metre with about the weight of a grain of sand, which sounds like a curiosity until the object being pushed is small enough. The demonstration in every school cupboard turns the wrong way, and the reason it does is more interesting than the effect it is supposed to show.

Astrophysics

The field that cannot get out

Squeeze a lump of conducting fluid and its magnetic field comes with it, because the flux through any loop that moves with the material cannot change. Halve the radius and the field goes up fourfold; collapse by a factor of seventy thousand and it goes up by five thousand million.

Where a body can no longer be any shape it likes. The tallest mountain a body can carry, against the body's radius, on logarithmic axes, beside the line on which a mountain would be as tall as the body. The first falls as 1/R and the second rises as R, so they cross exactly once — here at 282 km, for rock of 200 MPa strength and density 3000 kg/m³. Below that radius a body's own gravity cannot enforce anything and it stays whatever shape it was made; above it, the shape is decided by gravity and the answer is a sphere. The crossing moves as the square root of the strength, so it is an order of magnitude and not a boundary.

Astrophysics

The size at which a body becomes round

A mountain can be no taller than the height at which the rock beneath it begins to crush, and that height falls as the body gets bigger — so there is a size above which a mountain would have to be taller than the world it stands on. Above it, nothing can be any shape but a sphere.

A spacetime diagram at β = 0.6. 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 0.6 of the speed of light.

Relativity

The twin who comes back younger

If motion slows a clock, and motion is relative, each twin should find the other younger — and yet when they meet, one of them has aged less. The asymmetry is not in the speed and not in the acceleration; it is in which worldline is straight.

Same field, same charge, three momenta. Electrons entering a 10 mT field at right angles to it, at 1, 4, 9 keV, each drawn for a quarter of its turn. The radius is mv/qB — 10.7 mm, 21.3 mm, 32.0 mm — so measuring the curvature of a track measures the momentum of whatever made it, which is how every particle detector since the cloud chamber has worked. The time to go once round is 2πm/qB = 3.57 ns for all three: the faster particle travels a proportionally longer way round and arrives at the same moment.

Electromagnetism

The force that does no work

A magnetic field can turn a moving charge through any angle at all and cannot add a joule to it. Everything a magnet is good for follows from that one prohibition — including the fact that a bent track is a reading of momentum, and that a machine built on it stops working at five kilovolts for an electron.

The same loop, spanned two ways. A 100 cm² capacitor with a 2 mm gap, charged at 1.0 million volts per second. A loop drawn round the wire can be spanned by a flat surface, which the current of 44.271 µA passes through, or by a bag-shaped surface that passes between the plates, which no charge crosses at all. Ampère's law as it stood gave two different answers for one circulation. The rate of change of electric flux between the plates, multiplied by ε₀, is 44.271 µA — the same number to every figure, because C = ε₀A/d is the same ε₀A/d either way. That is the term, and it is not an approximation or a correction: it is what makes the law consistent at all.

Electromagnetism

The term that made light

Ampère's law contradicts itself the moment a current stops being steady, and the contradiction is visible in one picture: two surfaces on the same loop, with a current through one of them and nothing through the other. The term that repairs it turns four equations into a wave, whose speed is two constants measured in a room with the lamps off.

What puts a scale on a tilted axis. A spacetime diagram with a second observer's axes at β = 0.6. The curves are the sets of events at a fixed interval from the origin — c²t² − x² = s², one branch each for s = 0.5, s = 1, s = 1.5 — and the whole point of them is where they cross. A unit of the moving observer's time is wherever the s = 1 curve meets the tilted time axis, and on the page that point is 1.250 times as far from the origin as the stationary observer's own unit. Without the hyperbolae the tilted axes carry no scale at all, and every argument about which of two clocks is behind is unreadable off the diagram. Each drawn crossing reads back as its own interval to 0.0e+0.

Relativity

The quantity nobody argues about

Relativity takes away the length of a rod and the duration of an event and hands back exactly one thing in their place. Its hyperbolae are what put a scale on the tilted axes of a spacetime diagram — without which the diagram is a picture with no units on it.

A collision with restitution 0.4. Two bodies before and after a head-on collision. Momentum is the same on both rows by construction; kinetic energy is only preserved when the collision is elastic.

Mechanics

The point that keeps moving as if nothing had happened

Newton's third law makes every internal force cancel against its own partner, which leaves the external sum governing a single mass-weighted average of positions. In the collision below the total momentum stays at 4.00 kg·m/s while 63 per cent of the kinetic energy leaves, and the average travels at 1.00 m/s throughout, before and after.

Reflected upside down. A pulse arriving at a join where the impedance rises by a factor of 3, drawn at three moments. The amplitudes are read off the marched wave: the reflected pulse is -0.500 of the incident one and the transmitted pulse is 0.500, against (1−Z₂/Z₁)/(1+Z₂/Z₁) = -0.500 and 2/(1+Z₂/Z₁) = 0.500 from the two matching conditions. The reflection is inverted, which is the same fact as a pulse on a string flipping when it reaches a wall: a wall is a medium of infinite impedance, and the inversion is what keeps the displacement at the join equal to zero. Note that the transmitted amplitude exceeds one where the second medium is lighter, and that this is not a violation of anything: amplitude is not energy.

Waves

The equation that lets a shape travel

Newton's second law applied to a piece of string a millimetre long gives T·y″ = µ·ÿ, and the derivation never once asks what the string is made of. Two things fall out immediately: the speed is √(T/µ) and belongs to the medium, and the general solution holds two arbitrary functions rather than one. The second of them is the reflection, which is why a boundary condition can be met at all.

Relativity

The invariant that survives a boost

Energy and momentum are both answers to the question "how fast is it going, and according to whom". One combination of them is not, and that combination is the mass — which is why two photons of 511 keV can be a thing of mass 1.022 MeV or a thing of no mass at all, depending only on the angle between them.

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.

The curve that makes both fusion and fission release energy. Binding energy per nucleon against mass number: how much energy would have to be supplied, per particle, to take a nucleus apart into free protons and neutrons. The curve is the semi-empirical mass formula, evaluated at whichever proton number binds most tightly for each mass number rather than at a guessed one; the points are measured values. It rises steeply at the light end, peaks at mass number 58, and falls slowly thereafter. Everything about nuclear energy follows from that shape and from nothing else. Two light nuclei joined move up the curve and release the difference; one heavy nucleus split moves up it too, from the other side. Both directions are downhill in energy because the peak is in the middle, and the peak is in the middle because two effects fight — the surface term, which penalises small nuclei for having most of their nucleons on the outside, and the Coulomb term, which penalises large ones because every proton repels every other. The energy released is the height climbed times the number of nucleons carried, and it is a million times a chemical bond for the same reason the vertical axis is in millions of electronvolts rather than in single ones.

Relativity

The mass that is missing

A helium nucleus weighs less than the two protons and two neutrons it is made of. The shortfall is not an error in the weighing; it is the binding energy, converted at the going rate. One curve of that shortfall against size explains why both fusion and fission release energy.

$Which happened first, asked of several observers. Two events on a spacetime diagram: one at the origin and one 3 light-seconds away and 1 second later, so that light leaving the first cannot reach the second. Through the second event runs a family of lines, each one the set of events some observer calls simultaneous with it; an observer moving at a fraction β of the speed of light has such a line of slope β on these axes. Where a line meets the vertical axis is the time that observer assigns to the second event. For a slow observer that meeting point is above the origin and the second event happens later; for a fast one it is below and the second event happens EARLIER. The changeover is at β = 0.3333, which is the time separation divided by the space separation, and it is a legal speed only because the separation is spacelike. So the order of these two events is not a property of the events. What every observer does agree on is that neither could have caused the other, because the two lie outside each other's light cones — drawn here as the diagonals — and that agreement is what causality rests on rather than on any shared notion of before.$ Relativity

Which came first, and who decides

Two events far apart can happen in either order, depending on who is asked, and both answers are correct. That is not a loophole in causality but the reason causality survives at all — because the pairs whose order is negotiable are exactly the pairs neither of which could have caused the other.

$Buoyancy that falls away as the body sinks. The net upward force on a body containing a little gas, against how deep it has been taken, for 3 gas fractions. The weight does not change with depth. The buoyancy does, because the gas obeys Boyle's law and the pressure rises by an atmosphere every ten metres, so a body that displaced its own weight at the surface displaces less at depth. Every curve therefore slopes downward, and that slope is the whole point: where a curve crosses zero the body is in equilibrium, and the crossing is always from above, which makes every one of these equilibria unstable. Push the body a little deeper and the force does not push back — it turns downward and grows. The crossings drawn are at 8.2 m, 10.0 m, 13.6 m, and a body sitting at one of them is balanced in the sense that a pencil is balanced on its point. This is why a diver at neutral buoyancy has to keep adjusting, why a submarine's depth is held by hydroplanes and not by ballast alone, and why a fish that loses the use of its swim bladder sinks rather than drifting.$ Fluids

The depth past which it must sink

A body carrying a pocket of gas can be trimmed to hang motionless in water at exactly one depth. Push it a little deeper and it does not come back — the gas compresses, the buoyancy falls, and the equilibrium turns out to have been balanced on its point.

$The same start, four force laws. Orbits under 4 different central force laws, every one started at the same radius with the same fraction — 0.72 — of the local circular speed, and every one integrated for 6 radial oscillations. The paths are drawn to different scales because the excursions differ; what is comparable between the panels is whether the curve retraces itself. Under the inverse square it does: the orbit is a closed ellipse and the sixth circuit lies exactly on the first. Under the linear force it does too, and the ellipse is centred on the source rather than focused on it. Under anything in between the path is a rosette that never closes, because the angle between successive closest approaches is not a rational fraction of a full turn. Those angles are 180.0° at n = -2, 145.9° at n = -1.5, 126.4° at n = -1, 90.0° at n = 1. The closure is not a matter of degree — a rosette that nearly closes is not nearly a closed orbit, since after enough circuits it fills the annulus.$ Astrophysics

The orbit that does not come back to itself

A bounded orbit under any central force oscillates between a smallest and a largest radius for ever. That it should also return to the same point is a further demand, and only two force laws in existence meet it — the inverse square, and the linear spring.

Arms in: 4.33× the rate, and 4.33× the energy. A body of 1.2 kg m² carrying two 4 kg masses on arms, spinning freely at 60 revolutions a minute with the arms out at 0.75 m, as the arms are pulled in to 0.12 m. The axis runs right to left, in the direction the arms move. Angular momentum is flat — nothing exerts a torque about the axis, and pulling inward is a force along a radius, which has no moment about the centre. The rate rises as the inverse of the moment of inertia, by a factor of 4.33 here, and the kinetic energy L²/2I rises by exactly the same factor, which is where the usual account stops and where the question starts. The fourth curve is the work done by whoever pulled the arms in, integrated from the force needed to hold each mass on its circle. It lies on the energy curve, to 1.6e-7 joules. Nothing is unaccounted for and nothing is created: the energy is bought, at full price, by pulling against the force that would otherwise fling the arms out.

Mechanics

The quantity that survives a change of shape

A skater pulls her arms in and spins four times faster. Angular momentum is conserved, which is the usual explanation, and it accounts for only half of what happened — because the kinetic energy has gone up by the same factor, and something had to pay for it.

Six observers, six energies, one loss. The kinetic energy of the same collision before and after it, as measured by observers moving at 6 different speeds. No two of them agree about how much energy there was: the totals here range from 5.50 to 25.50 in the same units. Every one of them agrees about how much was lost — the gap between the two curves is 3.413 for all of them, varying by 6.2e-15. Energy is a quantity an observer owns; a change in it is not, and that is why heat, deformation and sound can be counted at all.

Mechanics

The energy that depends on the observer

A moving train has kinetic energy. Watched from a second train alongside it, it has none. Both statements are correct, neither can be corrected, and the whole of mechanics still works — because what conservation laws constrain is not how much energy there is but how much of it changes.

What a boost can and cannot do to a field. The electric and magnetic magnitudes of three fields, plotted against each other as the observer is boosted from -0.98c to 0.98c across them. Each field slides along a hyperbola, because E² − c²B² does not change: the recomputed value drifts by at most 2.6e-15 over every point drawn. The diagonal is E = cB, and which side of it a field starts on is permanent. Below it there is a speed at which the electric field vanishes; above it, one at which the magnetic field does; on it, a wave that no observer can slow, dim or unbalance.

Relativity

The field nobody can transform away

A wire's magnetic field is an electric field seen from the wrong frame, and a charged plate's electric field is a magnetic one seen the same way. Neither trick works on a light wave. Two combinations of E and B are the same for every observer, and which side of one line a field sits on is a fact nothing about the observer can alter.

Astrophysics

The orbit that has to shrink

Two masses in orbit radiate gravitational waves and lose energy, so the orbit tightens, so they go faster and radiate harder. The runaway takes 10²³ years for the Earth and the Sun and eight minutes for the last thousand kilometres of a black-hole pair — and the same one-line formula gives both.

The most any concentrator is allowed. The greatest concentration a receiver can be given, against the half-angle it accepts, both logarithmically, for a receiver in a medium of index 1. The upper curve is a three-dimensional concentrator, n²/sin²θ; the lower is a trough, which concentrates in one direction only, n/sin θ. The Sun's angular radius is 0.267°, so sunlight can be concentrated by at most 46165 times in a dish and 215 times in a trough — marked. Nothing about glass, mirrors, wavelength or aperture appears in either expression. The bound is thermodynamic: a receiver that accepts light out to θ also radiates out to θ, and the concentration at which what it emits balances what it absorbs is exactly where these curves are.

Optics

The brightness no lens can increase

A lens can make an image smaller and therefore hotter, and there is a temperature at which it stops — the temperature of the source. Every arrangement of glass and mirrors ever built obeys a bound that contains no wavelength, no aperture and no material — only the angle the receiver is allowed to accept — and the bound comes from thermodynamics rather than from optics.

Four predictions no list of answers can keep. The four measurements a three-particle GHZ state predicts with certainty, and what the best possible list of pre-agreed answers does with them. Each row is a choice of which quantity to measure on each of the three particles; the quantum value is not an average but a certainty, so a single run of any row has a determined outcome. Every list of answers assigns a value to X and to Y at each particle, which is sixty-four lists in all, and the enumeration finds that 32 of them get three of the four right and 32 get one. None gets four, and none can: multiplying the four left-hand sides together gives every X and every Y twice, so the product is +1 for any list whatever, while the product of the four quantum values is −1. The column on the right is one such list, which agrees with the first three rows and is then forced into the opposite of the fourth. That is the whole argument, and it needs no inequality, no average and no repetition: measure the first three rows on three copies, and the fourth is predicted with certainty and comes out the other way.

Quantum

The disagreement that one run settles

Bell's argument is a statistical one — a correlation of 2.828 where a pre-agreed list of answers is stuck at 2, dug out of hundreds of coincidences. Add a third particle and the argument stops being about how often. Three measurements predict a fourth with certainty, every list of answers that gets the three right gets the fourth exactly backwards, and one run of the experiment is enough.

What a collision has to spend, against what it is given. The energy available in a proton–proton collision, against the energy of one beam, on logarithmic axes. Against a stationary target the available energy is √(2mE) and the line has slope one half; head-on it is 2E and the slope is one. Bevatron at 6.2 GeV per beam reaches 3.7 GeV; SPS fixed target at 450 GeV per beam reaches 29.1 GeV; LEP at 104.5 GeV per beam reaches 209.0 GeV; Tevatron at 980 GeV per beam reaches 1960.0 GeV; LHC at 6500 GeV per beam reaches 13000.0 GeV. The gap is the whole architecture of the subject: the LHC's beams give 13000 GeV head-on and would give 110 GeV against a stationary proton, a factor of 118. Reaching the same 13000 GeV in fixed-target mode would need a beam of 90.1 million GeV. What the missing energy has gone into is not lost: it is the kinetic energy of the centre of mass, which every product has to carry away and which no experiment can use.

Relativity

The collision that wastes most of the energy

The LHC's two beams carry 6,500 GeV each and 13,000 GeV are available. Fire one of those beams at a stationary block of copper instead and 110 GeV are available — the other 12,890 have gone into the motion of the wreckage and cannot be used for anything. The difference is a square root, and every accelerator built since 1970 is a consequence of it.

The mass of two things that have none. The invariant mass of a pair of photons of equal energy, in units of E/c², against the angle between them. It is computed from the total energy and the vector sum of the two momenta, and agrees with 2E·sin(θ/2) to 1.0e-14. at 0° the pair weighs 0.000 E/c²; at 30° the pair weighs 0.518 E/c²; at 60° the pair weighs 1.000 E/c²; at 90° the pair weighs 1.414 E/c²; at 120° the pair weighs 1.732 E/c²; at 180° the pair weighs 2.000 E/c². Two photons flying in the same direction have no mass between them at all, because their momenta add to exactly the energy over c; anything else and they do. Nothing has been added: the constituents are massless at every angle, and the mass of the system is a property of the arrangement. At 180° the pair weighs 2E/c², which is every joule it contains — the case of a sealed box of light, where the two beams cancel in momentum and the whole energy shows up on the scales.

Relativity

The box of light that weighs something

Two photons flying apart have a mass between them, though neither has one. Seal them in a mirrored box and the box is heavier than it was empty, by exactly the energy inside divided by c². Mass is not a property of stuff and it does not add up — it is a property of a system, and 99 per cent of the mass of everything anybody has ever weighed is of this kind.

Thrust against the air it is supposed to be pushing on. The thrust of one F-1 engine against ambient pressure, in atmospheres. It is 6.78 meganewtons at sea level and 7.77 in vacuum — 14.6 per cent more with the air taken away. The line falls at exactly 9.787 newtons per pascal, which is the nozzle's exit area, because the term is (p_e − p_a)·A_e: the ambient pressure pushes on the exit plane from outside and there is nothing to push back on it. The account in which the exhaust shoves against the atmosphere makes the opposite prediction — thrust falling with the pressure and vanishing in vacuum — and it is not a small disagreement about a coefficient. It has the sign wrong. A rocket works better in vacuum than in air, and every engine ever fired has said so.

Mechanics

The push that needs nothing to push against

A rocket engine produces more thrust in vacuum than at sea level — fifteen per cent more, for the engine drawn here, and the extra is exactly the ambient pressure times the nozzle's exit area. The account in which the exhaust shoves against the atmosphere does not merely overstate a coefficient. It has the sign wrong, and every engine ever fired has said so.

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.

Fluids

The layer a parcel cannot leave

Whether a column of air overturns is not decided by its density but by a difference of two gradients — the rate the environment cools with height, and the rate a lifted parcel cools on its own. Subtract one from the other and what is left is a restoring force per unit displacement, so a stable atmosphere rings at a period of minutes and an unstable one has no period at all.

Phase portraits of the standard map at 2 couplings. The standard map p → p + K sin θ, θ → θ + p, iterated 220 times from 12 starting points, at couplings of 0.6 and 1.3. Both coordinates run from 0 to 2π. An orbit that lies on a curve spanning the picture from left to right is an invariant circle, and nothing can cross it; an orbit that fills an area is chaotic; an orbit that circulates round a centre is trapped in a resonance island. At K = 0.6, orbits launched on p = 0 get no further than 1.55 in p, so a spanning curve is still there. At K = 1.3, orbits launched on p = 0 get no further than 10.78 in p, so a spanning curve is gone and transport is global. The point of the pair is that the change between them is not a change of character in any single orbit — chaotic orbits and regular ones coexist on both sides — but the loss of the barriers that kept the chaotic ones local.

Mechanics

The last curve to go

Chaos does not arrive all at once. Order is destroyed a resonance at a time, and there is a coupling — 0.971635, known to six figures — at which the final barrier separating one part of the phase space from another gives way. Below it a chaotic orbit is still trapped; above it nothing stops it.

Electromagnetism

The potentials that are not unique

Nobody solves Maxwell's equations for the fields. They are solved for potentials instead, and the potentials are not unique — three completely different vector potentials describe the same uniform magnetic field, and one of them changes everywhere the instant a charge moves, at any distance, without anything having outrun light.

Where 4s goes below 3d. The energies of five orbitals of a nucleus of charge 19, solved in a screened Coulomb potential, against how far out the screening extends. Nothing about the ordering is assumed: each level is found by integrating the radial equation outward and bisecting on the energy until the solution has the number of nodes that state is supposed to have, and the same solver returns hydrogen's −1/2n² to 7.3e-12 hartree when the screening is switched off. With no screening the three n = 3 levels would lie on top of one another. With screening they separate, always in the same order — s lowest, then p, then d — because a low angular momentum has no centrifugal barrier keeping it out of the core, so it spends part of its time inside the other electrons where the nuclear charge is unscreened. And at a screening length of 0.41 bohr the 4s level crosses below 3d, which is the fourth row of the periodic table: potassium and calcium put their electrons in 4s before anything goes into 3d, so they are an alkali metal and an alkaline earth rather than the first two transition metals. The model is a caricature — one screening length for every electron, no self-consistency, and no exchange — and it gets the ordering right anyway, which is the argument that the ordering is about penetration and nothing subtler.

Quantum

The order the shells fill

In hydrogen every state with the same principal number has the same energy, and 4s and 3d differ by nothing. In every other atom they do not, and 4s is below 3d — which is why potassium is an alkali metal rather than the first transition metal. The difference is a small piece of probability that an s orbital has inside the innermost shell and a d orbital does not.

The action along a family of paths. On the left, seven paths between the same two events: the true trajectory of a projectile and six deformations of it, each fixed at both ends and differing by one arch of a sine. On the right, the action of each — the time integral of kinetic minus potential energy — against how much it has been deformed. The true path has the least action, 0.45833 in these units, and every neighbour has more. The curve on the right is a parabola about that minimum with curvature 4.935, so the excess action grows as the square of the deformation and its slope at the true path is zero. Nothing here was minimised: the true path was obtained by solving the equation of motion, and every action on the chart including its own is the same quadrature along a stated curve. What the figure establishes is that the two ways of specifying a trajectory — obey a differential equation at every instant, or make one integral over the whole path stationary — pick out the same curve.

Mechanics

Least action, except that it is not least

Mechanics can be stated twice over. Once as a rule about every instant — force equals mass times acceleration — and once as a rule about the whole path at once, which says that one number computed along it is stationary. The two pick out the same trajectory, and the second name for it is wrong — past a certain duration the real path has more action than its neighbours, not less.

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.

A circuit on the sphere of polarisations. The Poincaré sphere, on which every polarisation state is a point: linear states around the equator, circular at the poles, and orthogonal states at opposite ends of a diameter. The triangle is a closed circuit — linear at 0°, then linear at 23°, then left circular, and back — taken along geodesics, which is what a sequence of ideal polarisers does. Bringing a state round it returns it to exactly the state it started in, and multiplied by a phase: 0.3927 radians here, against minus half the enclosed solid angle of -0.7854 steradians. The two agree exactly, and neither calculation knows about the other — the phase is the argument of a product of three overlaps between Jones vectors, and the solid angle is spherical geometry. Nothing about the elements used, their thickness, or the wavelength enters. A phase that depends only on the shape of a path is the signature of a geometric phase, and this is the oldest known example of one.

Optics

The phase that is only a shape

Take a beam of polarised light through a sequence of elements that returns it to the polarisation it started with, and it comes back with a phase it did not have before. That phase is not an optical path length — it does not depend on the thickness of anything, or on the wavelength, or on how slowly the sequence was carried out. It is minus half the area the path enclosed on the sphere of polarisation states, and nothing else.

Every stationary point has a way out. The potential along four lines through the most symmetric point of a symmetric arrangement of 4 equal charges at the corners of a square — the one place a trap might be expected. In the plane of the square the potential rises in every direction; out of the plane it falls. The point is stationary and it is a saddle, which is what Laplace's equation forces: the three second derivatives must sum to zero — computed here as 1.4e-5 against the individual values of order 2e+0 — so if two of them are positive the third must be negative. A particle released here rolls away along the direction that falls. No amount of ingenuity in placing the charges changes this, because the constraint is on the equation rather than on the arrangement, and it is why every real trap for a charged particle either uses time-varying fields, or a magnetic field with a velocity, or a material with a negative response.

Electromagnetism

Nothing can be held still by a static field

However many charges are arranged, however cleverly, a charge placed among them has somewhere to fall. The reason is one line of arithmetic — the potential in empty space satisfies Laplace's equation, and a solution of that equation has no interior maximum or minimum — and the consequence is that every real trap for a charged particle works by breaking one of the assumptions rather than by being cleverer.

Three quantities that do not move while everything else does. On the left, an orbit in an inverse-square attraction, integrated from its equation of motion over 2.4 revolutions at an eccentricity of 0.55. On the right, three quantities computed from that same trajectory at every step and plotted against time: the energy, the angular momentum, and the length of the eccentricity vector that points at periapsis. Every one is flat to better than 1.2e-11 in units where the circular speed at r = 1 is 1, and none of them was constrained to be — the integrator was given the force and nothing else. Each is a symmetry seen sideways. The energy is constant because the force law does not mention the time; the angular momentum is constant because it does not mention the direction; and the eccentricity vector is constant because of a symmetry that is not a motion of space at all, which is why the inverse square closes its orbits and its neighbours do not. What the picture cannot show is the direction of the argument: it demonstrates that these three are constant here, and the theorem says something much stronger, that a constant exists for every continuous symmetry whatever the system.

Mechanics

The conservation law a symmetry hands over

Energy, momentum and angular momentum are usually presented as three separate empirical facts that happen to hold. They are one fact three times: every continuous symmetry of a system's action supplies a quantity that does not change, the correspondence is exact, and it runs both ways.

Waves

The pulse two failures keep alive

Dispersion spreads a pulse until it is nothing. Nonlinearity steepens it until it breaks. Each on its own destroys a disturbance, and there is exactly one height for each width at which the two cancel completely — leaving a shape that travels for ever and survives being run into by another one.

Astrophysics

The distance that forgets the moon

A satellite held together by its own gravity comes apart if it orbits too close, and the distance at which it does contains no reference to its size. Both the tide pulling it apart and the gravity holding it together are proportional to its radius, so the radius cancels twice over and what is left is a ratio of two densities.

The hole that holds exactly one particle. How likely a second particle is to be found a distance away from a first, relative to a gas with no correlation at all, for three cases that differ in nothing but the symmetry of the state under swapping the two labels. There is no interaction anywhere in this calculation: no Coulomb term, no potential, no force. Distinguishable particles give a flat line, which is what no interaction ought to give. Identical fermions dig a hole that reaches exactly zero at zero separation and fills back in over about a wavelength. Identical bosons do the opposite and pile up to twice the density. Integrating the fermion hole gives 0.9992 particles missing from around each one — exactly one, and the sum rule holds at any density, because raising the density narrows the hole in exact proportion. That is what makes the effect worth a name of its own. It is often called an exchange force and it is not a force: nothing carries momentum between the particles, and no term in the energy is proportional to a distance. It is a statement about which states exist. What follows from it is most of chemistry — the reason two atoms with filled shells repel, the reason a metal's electrons cost so much less Coulomb energy than a random arrangement would, and the reason matter takes up room.

Quantum

The force with no force in it

Two identical fermions keep apart and two identical bosons crowd together, and neither is being pushed. The Hamiltonian contains no interaction at all: what produces the hole and the pile is which many-particle states exist, and the hole it digs around each electron holds exactly one particle at any density whatever.

Two loops, two calculations, one number. The coupling between a circular loop of radius 10 cm and a rectangle of 5 by 3 cm tilted at 35° and offset sideways, against how far apart they are along the axis. The two loops differ in area by a factor of 21 and in shape entirely. Two quantities are plotted and they lie on top of one another. One is the flux through the rectangle when a current runs in the circle, obtained by integrating the circle's Biot–Savart field over the rectangle's tilted surface. The other is the flux through the circle's disc when the same current runs in the rectangle, integrated over a disc a hundred times the area. Nothing is shared between the two calculations except the positions of the wires, and they agree to 0.075 per cent — a difference which is the quadrature's, not the physics's. This is reciprocity, and it is not obvious: there is no reason from the geometry why a small loop should catch as much of a big one's field as the big one catches of the small one's. It follows from the double line integral the two quantities can both be reduced to, which is symmetric in the two loops — and that reduction is the argument, not this figure, which is the check that the argument is true of the actual fields.

Electromagnetism

The coupling that is the same both ways

A small loop and a large one catch the same fraction of each other's field. Nothing in the geometry suggests it — one has twenty-one times the area of the other — and the two quantities are computed here by two integrals with nothing in common, over two surfaces of different shapes, agreeing to seven parts in ten thousand.

$The fuel a starship needs, which is most of the universe. The mass of fuel a rocket must start with, divided by the mass it ends with, against the final speed as a fraction of light's — the vertical axis being the number of decades in that ratio, because the numbers do not fit on any other scale. Each solid curve is one exhaust speed, and each dashed one beside it is what Tsiolkovsky's Newtonian formula would have said. Below about a tenth of light speed the two are indistinguishable; above it they part, and the relativistic curve turns upward without limit as the final speed approaches light's, because what adds linearly is the rapidity rather than the velocity. The photon rocket — exhaust at exactly the speed of light, which is the best any engine can do — needs a mass ratio of 1.7321 to reach half light speed, which is √3 exactly, and 4.4 to reach nine tenths. Those are modest numbers and they are the whole of the good news. A chemical exhaust at 4 km/s needs 10^2968 even to reach a tenth of light speed, which is not a difficult engineering problem but an arithmetic impossibility — there are about 10⁵⁰ atoms in the Earth. What the chart cannot show is the other half of the trip: stopping at the far end squares the ratio, and coming home squares it again.$ Relativity

The fuel a starship needs

Tsiolkovsky's logarithm survives relativity with one substitution: what adds is the rapidity rather than the velocity. The result is that a photon rocket reaches half light speed on a mass ratio of the square root of three, and a chemical one reaches a tenth of it on a mass ratio with three thousand digits.

Two angles a film is not allowed to depart from. The two junctions Plateau's laws permit, drawn at the angles a balance of equal tensions requires. A soap film pulls equally in every direction along itself, so where films meet the pulls must sum to zero — and equal vectors summing to zero fixes the geometry completely. Three films can only meet along a line, at 120.0000° to one another, because three equal coplanar vectors sum to zero at 120° and at no other angle. Four such lines can only meet at a point, at 109.4712° — arccos(−1/3), the tetrahedral angle — for the same reason in three dimensions. Both numbers are found here by solving the balance rather than by drawing what is expected, and neither depends on the liquid, the temperature or the size of the foam. A junction of four films along a line, or of three lines at a point, is not merely unusual: the tensions cannot balance there, so it rearranges within milliseconds into the two arrangements drawn.

Fluids

The angles a film has no choice about

A soap film pulls equally hard in every direction along itself, so wherever films meet the pulls have to sum to zero — and equal vectors summing to zero fixes the geometry completely. Three films meet at a hundred and twenty degrees and four edges at a hundred and nine point four seven, in every foam, of every liquid, at every scale, and nothing about the material appears in either number.

Past the critical angle, all that is left of a reflection is its phase. The phase each polarisation acquires on total internal reflection at an index ratio of 1.518, against angle of incidence, together with the difference between them. Below the critical angle of 41.19° there is a transmitted beam and the reflection coefficients are real; above it the transmitted wavenumber is imaginary, the coefficients have modulus exactly one — every photon comes back — and the only thing that distinguishes one angle from another is the phase. The two polarisations acquire different phases, and their difference peaks at 46.533° at an incidence of 51.05°, which the closed form puts at the same place. That difference is a retardation: a wave plate made out of an angle, with no birefringent material anywhere in it, and — because the expression contains only the index ratio — one that barely changes with colour.

Optics

The retarder with no crystal in it

A wave plate turns linear polarisation into circular by making one component travel a little further than the other, which requires a birefringent crystal cut to a thickness and works properly at one wavelength. Total internal reflection does the same job with a phase that comes from the geometry instead — and because a refractive index barely changes across the visible where a wavelength changes by a factor of two, the same block of ordinary glass is a quarter-wave plate for every colour at once.

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.

The size of the quantum says what is carrying the current. What the flux quantum would be for each candidate carrier charge, in units of 10⁻¹⁵ webers, against the measured value drawn as a line. A single electron would give 4.1357, a pair 2.0678, a triple 1.3786. The measurement is 2.0678, which picks the pair and excludes the others by a factor of two — not by a few per cent, so no question of experimental accuracy arises. The whole of the argument is that the condensate's wavefunction must come back to itself round the ring, which makes the enclosed flux a multiple of h over the carrier's charge; measuring the multiple therefore measures the charge, without any charge ever being measured. That is how the pairing was established in 1961, four years after it was proposed and by an experiment that looks nothing like a measurement of a charge.

Electromagnetism

The two in the flux quantum

A superconducting ring cannot hold whatever flux is applied to it. It holds a whole number of quanta and drives a current to make up the difference, and the size of that quantum is Planck's constant divided by twice the electron's charge. The factor of two was measured in 1961, four years after somebody predicted that the carriers are pairs — by an experiment in which no charge is measured at all.

Two quantities that are never computed and never change. A two-dimensional field integrated for 110 steps using only the two equations that contain a time derivative — Faraday's and Ampère's. The two that do not, Gauss's law for the electric field and the statement that there are no magnetic charges, are never imposed and never checked during the run. Their residuals are plotted: the divergence of B stays below 2.4e-16 of the field's own size and the divergence of E below 2.4e-16, over the whole run, while the field itself moves and changes by a factor of 8.59. That is not a numerical coincidence. Taking the divergence of Faraday's law gives the divergence of a curl, which vanishes identically, so ∂(∇·B)/∂t is zero whatever the fields are doing; the same manoeuvre on Ampère's law gives ∂(∇·D)/∂t = −∇·J. So the two constraints are initial conditions, propagated for ever by the two that are laws of motion, and Maxwell's four equations are two dynamical ones and two statements about how the field was set up.

Electromagnetism

The two equations that are not laws of motion

Maxwell's equations are usually presented as four laws of equal standing. Two of them contain no time derivative at all, which means they cannot be evolution equations: they are conditions on the field at one instant. What makes them consistent with the other two is that the other two preserve them exactly — and one of the two preservations holds only because charge is conserved.

Thermodynamics

The gas that nobody counted

A box of gas holds however many molecules were put in it. A box of radiation holds however many photons the temperature says, because the walls make and destroy them until the free energy is least — and one dropped assumption changes every result. The pressure becomes a third of the energy density instead of two thirds, the entropy goes as the cube of the temperature, and the adiabatic index comes out at exactly four thirds.

Two experiments, two computations, one coefficient. The Seebeck coefficient of a resonant conductor against where its resonance sits relative to the chemical potential, together with the Peltier coefficient divided by the temperature. The first is obtained by applying a temperature difference and finding the voltage that stops the current; the second by applying a voltage at uniform temperature and taking the ratio of the heat flow to the current. Different driving, different measurement, different integral — and the two curves agree to 3.8e-7 of the sweep's own scale across the whole of where they pass through zero and change sign. That equality is Kelvin's relation Π = ST, guessed in 1854 from an argument its author knew was not sound and proved by Onsager in 1931 from microscopic reversibility. It is not a property of this conductor; it holds for every one.

Thermodynamics

The second experiment that cannot disagree

Heat one end of a wire and a voltage appears across it. Pass a current through the same wire at uniform temperature and it carries heat. Those are two different experiments with two different apparatus, and the coefficient in front is the same number in both — not approximately, and not for some materials. The reason is that the equations of motion underneath look the same run backwards.

The same source, seen coming and seen going. The observed flux of a moving source, relative to the same source at rest, against the angle between its motion and the line of sight, on a logarithmic scale, at β = 0.5, β = 0.9, β = 0.99. The curves span 8.1e+1, 1.3e+5, 1.6e+9 between the approaching and receding directions, which is ((1+β)/(1−β))⁴ exactly. The fourth power comes from the one quantity every observer agrees about: the specific intensity divided by the cube of the frequency. Three powers of the Doppler factor come from that invariance and the fourth from integrating over frequency. Two consequences are worth reading off. A source seen side-on is fainter than the same source at rest, by γ⁴ — a factor of 2.5e+3 at the fastest speed drawn. And half the light arrives inside a cone of 60.0°, 25.8°, 8.1°, which for a fast source is one over γ.

Relativity

The brightness that is not the same for everyone

A moving source is not merely shifted in colour. Its light is concentrated forwards, so the same lamp is enormously brighter seen coming than seen going — by the fourth power of one number, which for a jet at ninety-nine per cent of light speed is a factor of a thousand million. The reason is that only one combination of intensity and frequency is the same for every observer, and everything else follows from it.

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.

Four modes of a string that is heavier in one place. The first four modes of a string whose mass per unit length rises to 5 times the light end's over a smooth bump centred 62 per cent of the way along, drawn beneath them. Nothing is symmetric any more: the shapes bunch up over the heavy region, where the local wavelength is shorter, and the amplitudes there are smaller. The frequencies are 1.70, 4.01, 6.10, 8.12, which are in the ratios 1.000, 2.361, 3.590, 4.779 rather than 1, 2, 3, 4 — this string has no harmonics and would sound like a bell rather than a violin. What has not changed is the one thing an ordering needs: the interior zeros, marked, run 0, 1, 2, 3 exactly as they do on a uniform string. That is Sturm's theorem, and the nodes here are counted on the computed shapes rather than assumed.

Waves

The count that cannot be cheated

A string with a lump in it has no harmonics, no symmetry and no obvious order to its modes. It has one thing left: the nth mode crosses the axis exactly n−1 times, whatever the string is made of. Ordering by frequency and ordering by node count turn out to be the same operation, and in two dimensions the equality quietly becomes an inequality.

Nine slabs, no symmetry, and one transmission. A stack of 9 slabs of random wavenumber and random thickness, with no symmetry anywhere in it. Send a wave in from the left and the amplitude that emerges on the right is 0.6694240937; turn the stack round and send it in from the right and the amplitude is 0.6694240937. The two agree to every digit the arithmetic has. This is not a property of the stack — it survives any arrangement, any number of layers, any amount of internal reflection — but of the equation, which is unchanged when the sign of time is reversed, and the phase is protected as well as the modulus, which is the stronger statement and the one an interferometer would notice. The reflections are a different matter. Their moduli are equal too, at 0.742880, but only because nothing here absorbs; their phases differ by 1.621 radians, because the wave meets a different first surface from each side. What the theorem protects is the pair of ends, and not what the wave does on its way between them.

Waves

Swap the ends and nothing changes

Put a source at one end of the most complicated arrangement of materials anybody can build and a detector at the other, then exchange them. The reading is identical — not approximately, not on average, but to every digit the arithmetic has. Two things in physics break it, and neither of them is a shape.

$Where the refracted ray comes from, drawn with a compass. Wavevectors in units of the vacuum wavenumber, for light arriving at 30° from a medium of index 1.5 at a medium of index 1. Every direction available in the first medium lies on the circle of radius 1.5 and every direction available in the second on the circle of radius 1; the horizontal axis lies in the interface. The boundary cannot change the component along itself, because the two sides have to agree on the phase at every point of the interface, so the refracted wave is fixed by the vertical line at 0.7500 — and where that line cuts the smaller circle is the refracted direction, 48.59° from the normal. Nothing about least time or about wavefronts enters, and the ratio of sines is what the construction reads when the two radii are written as indices. The normal component is not conserved and is not meant to be: it goes from 1.2990 to 0.6614, which is the whole of the difference between the two rays.$ Optics

The law that only asks about one component

A boundary between two media cannot change the part of a wave that runs along it, because both sides have to agree on the phase at every point of the surface at every instant. That single restriction produces the refracted ray, the critical angle, the evanescent field and every order of a diffraction grating, out of one drawing made with a compass.

Three curves that can only meet at a point. Water's phase diagram within a kelvin of its triple point, with each boundary drawn at the slope Clausius and Clapeyron give it from measured latent heats and densities: 44.4 Pa/K for boiling, 50.3 for sublimation, and -135 bar per kelvin for melting — negative, and so steep that it is drawn vertical here, because ice is the less dense phase and pressure therefore melts it. Two things follow that no amount of measurement could adjust. The three slopes are not independent: the sublimation and vaporisation curves differ in slope by 5.92 Pa/K, which is exactly what the fusion latent heat predicts, because going solid → gas directly and solid → liquid → gas must cost the same enthalpy. And the sublimation curve is the steeper of the two, so the two cross rather than touch — which is why the triple point is a crossing and not a tangency, and why ice sublimes below it and melts above it.

Thermodynamics

Why the triple point is a point

Three phases of one substance coexist at one temperature and one pressure and nowhere else, and the reason is arithmetic rather than chemistry: count the numbers that describe the state, count the conditions equilibrium imposes, and subtract. The same subtraction says four phases of one substance are impossible, and it says so without knowing what the substance is.

Relativity

Everything from an exchange of pulses

Send a flash every second and ask how often the far observer receives them. That one measured ratio generates time dilation, the composition of velocities and the twin result, with no coordinate transformation written down anywhere and no convention chosen about what "at the same time" means far 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 same top, let go four ways. The path traced by the top of the axis, seen from directly above, over 1.2 precession periods. The dashed circle is the tilt the top was released at and the outer circle is 46.8° from the vertical. Released from rest the axis falls, and the fall is what generates the sideways motion: the path comes to a cusp each time it returns to the starting tilt, because at that instant the precession rate is momentarily zero. Launched at exactly the steady rate the path is a circle and the nutation is absent. Launched slower it waves; launched faster it loops: at 0× the steady rate the path comes to cusps, at 0.45× the steady rate the path waves, at 1× the steady rate the path stays a circle, at 1.9× the steady rate the path waves. Every one of these is the same equation with the same top and the same spin.

Mechanics

The top that nods before it settles

A spinning top let go from rest does not begin to precess. It falls, catches itself, and comes back up, over and over, at a frequency that has nothing to do with gravity — and the steady precession every textbook draws is what is left after friction has removed the nod.

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.

Mechanics

The principle that fixes the energy instead of the clock

There are two principles of least action, they compare different sets of paths, and they are not the same statement. One holds the duration fixed and lets the energy vary; the other holds the energy fixed and lets the duration vary — and written that way, mechanics turns into optics with a refractive index.

The rotation that mixes electricity into magnetism. The two Lorentz invariants of a field — E² − c²B² across and 2E·cB up — as the field is rotated by the duality transformation that takes E into cB and cB into −E. Every configuration moves on a circle, so the combination of the two invariants is preserved while neither is. A light wave sits at the origin and stays there, which is why a wave cannot be turned into anything else by this rotation; a static charge starts on the positive axis and is carried round to a pure magnetic field a quarter turn later. The source-free equations are unchanged by the whole family, so a universe with no charges in it has no way to say which field is which.

Electromagnetism

The symmetry one missing charge would complete

Maxwell's equations with no sources are unchanged by rotating the electric field into the magnetic one. With sources they are not, and the only thing missing is magnetic charge — which, if one existed anywhere, would force every electric charge in the universe to be a multiple of a fixed unit.

A loop at rest carrying 2.2e-12 kg m/s. A square loop of area 100 cm² carrying 20 amps, sitting still in a uniform electric field of 1.00 megavolts a metre. The carriers going up the field on one side cross 100 kilovolts on the way, so the ones in the top wire are less energetic than those in the bottom by that much per unit charge. The current is the same all the way round, so the same number of carriers pass per second in each wire — but they carry different energy, and momentum is energy times velocity over c². The two wires therefore contribute unequally, and the difference is 2.23e-12 kilogram metres a second, pointing across both the field and the dipole. Nothing in the picture is moving as a whole. The electromagnetic field round the loop carries exactly that momentum the other way.

Electromagnetism

The momentum of something that is not moving

A current loop sitting still in an electric field has momentum in the space around it. Nothing is moving, so something must be carrying an equal and opposite amount — and it is the loop, whose carriers on the high-potential side are more energetic than those on the low.

$A cone of 14.3°, from two indices and nothing else. On the left, the acceptance cone of a step-index fibre with a core index of 1.4677 and a cladding of 1.4624. A ray entering steeper than the cone reaches the wall inside the critical angle and is refracted out at the first bounce; one inside it is trapped. The sine of the half-angle is √(n₁² − n₂²) = 0.125, which is 7.2° in air. On the right, that number against the fractional index difference between core and cladding. Nothing about the core's diameter appears: a fibre a hundred times thicker accepts exactly the same cone, and takes a hundred times the area's worth of light through it.$ Optics

The cone a fibre will accept

A fibre takes light from a cone whose half-angle depends on two refractive indices and nothing else — not on how thick it is, not on how long, not on what is shining into it. That single number, squared and multiplied by the core's area, is all the light it will ever carry.

Why only a sideways scattered wave takes anything away. The transmitted amplitude behind a thin scatterer, drawn as a phasor: the incident wave of unit length along the axis, plus a forward-scattered wave of length 0.12 at 0°, 60°, 90°, 150°. What a detector reads is the square of the total length. A scattered wave along the incident one lengthens or shortens the sum in proportion to itself; one at right angles changes the length only in second order, because a small perpendicular addition to a long vector barely alters its length. So a scatterer that removes energy from the beam at first order must scatter forward with a component perpendicular to the incident wave, and the size of that component is the whole extinction — which is the optical theorem.

Optics

Everything a scatterer removes, from one direction

How much light a particle takes out of a beam — by scattering it anywhere at all, and by absorbing it — is fixed entirely by what it does in the forward direction, where its scattered wave cannot be told apart from the incident one. The mechanism is interference, and it also gives the refractive index.

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.

Effusion rate against molecular mass. The rate at which a gas escapes through a small hole, against its molar mass, normalised to hydrogen. The rate is a quarter of the number density times the mean speed times the area, and the mean speed goes as the inverse square root of the mass — so the rate does too, which is Graham's law of 1848. Hydrogen escapes four times faster than oxygen and 13.3 times faster than uranium hexafluoride. The practical consequence is isotope separation, and its difficulty is on this chart. The two uranium hexafluorides differ by 3 out of 352 in mass, so a single stage enriches by a factor of only 1.00429 — four parts in a thousand. Reaching 90 per cent from natural uranium's 0.72 per cent therefore takes about 1665 ideal stages, and a real cascade needs more because each stage is imperfect. That number is why gaseous-diffusion plants were among the largest industrial structures ever built, and why centrifuges — which separate by mass directly rather than by the square root of it — replaced them.

Thermodynamics

The gradient that drives the other thing

A concentration gradient drives a flow of matter and a temperature gradient drives a flow of heat. Each also drives the other, by coefficients that are equal — a relation nobody could have guessed and which follows from the fact that the underlying motion runs the same forwards and backwards in time.

A bundle that swings and never spreads. A Gaussian of the ground state's own width, released at rest from x = 3 in a harmonic well and propagated on a grid by split-step Fourier, drawn at 0 of a period, 0.25 of a period, 0.5 of a period. The packet slides from side to side and its shape does not change: over 2.2 full periods the width moves by 6.6e-5 per cent, and its centre tracks x₀cos t to 8.6e-6. Every other initial width breathes. This one is the displaced ground state, and it is the closest a quantum state comes to being a classical oscillator — a definite thing at a definite place, moving on the classical trajectory, staying the size it was.

Quantum

The state that swings like a pendulum

Most quantum states of an oscillator look nothing like a swinging weight. One family does: it follows the classical trajectory exactly, never spreads, and sits at the uncertainty minimum for ever — and it is the state a laser and a driven circuit actually produce.

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.

All themes