Imagine ditching the bathroom scales and instead weighing yourself with a watch. That鈥檚 now possible, in principle at least, following the creation of the first clock with a tick that depends on the mass of a single atom. The physicists behind it say it鈥檚 the most fundamental clock ever invented, and that it could help to re-define the mass of the kilogram.
Existing atomic clocks, the most accurate clocks that exist, measure how often a caesium atom鈥檚 electrons jump between two different energy levels 鈥� roughly 9 billion of these transitions equal 1 second.
But that鈥檚 not the only way to count time using an atom. Quantum mechanics says that all matter exists as both a wave and a particle. As a wave has a frequency, this means each particle also has a frequency, known as its Compton frequency, which depends on its mass.
Advertisement
In principle, it should be possible to build a 鈥淐ompton clock鈥� with a tick defined by the Compton frequency of a particular atom. The problem is that the Compton frequency of an atom is 100 billion times faster than the frequency of visible light waves. 鈥淭his frequency is so high that it is very far beyond any way of counting,鈥� says at the University of California, Berkeley.
Twin paradox
To solve this problem, his team turned to a strange quirk of Einstein鈥檚 theory of relativity, known as the twin paradox. It says that a twin who flies off in a fast-moving spacecraft and returns will have aged less than the one who stayed on Earth, as time passes slower for moving objects.
M眉ller replicated this at the atomic scale by sending the matter wave of a caesium atom through a device called an atom interferometer. This split the wave into two, with one half remaining stationary and the other continuing to move, before recombining the two halves. The moving wave becomes slightly out of phase 鈥� a result of the twin paradox.
Instead of measuring the Compton frequency directly, the researchers used a laser to measure this difference in frequency, which amounts to around 100,000 hertz. Because this also depends on the mass of the atom, it can act as the tick of a clock. This clock is more fundamental than any before because it depends on the behaviour of a single particle.
The clock loses about 1 second every eight years, comparable to the earliest atomic clocks. 鈥淎s a clock it鈥檚 not very good,鈥� says M眉ller. By contrast, the best atomic clock today would only have lost 4 seconds had it started ticking at the big bang.
But the Compton clock has a quality that atomic clocks lack: as its frequency depends on the mass of an atom, it could be used as a gold standard weighing device.
Kilogram, redefined
The scientific standard for mass is currently defined by a kilogram of metal stored at the in Paris, but metrologists are keen to change this because its mass is drifting due to microscopic contaminants.
Two competing methods are vying to replace the lump of metal. The first is to count out the exact number of silicon atoms in a ball that weighs a near-perfect kilogram, known as an Avogadro sphere. The second is to use a device known as a watt balance, which relates mass to a current and voltage using the fundamental Planck constant.
The Compton clock offers a third alternative. The mass of the clock鈥檚 caesium atom can be calculated from its Compton frequency, the Planck constant and the speed of light, with an accuracy of four parts in a billion.
As the relative masses of all atoms are known, this technique could be used to come up with very precise measurements for the masses of other atoms. It鈥檚 then possible to calculate how many atoms should be in a kilogram of a given element. This chain of calculations reduces the accuracy to 30 parts per billion, but that is still comparable to the accuracy of the watt balance method, says M眉ller.
鈥淭heir technique is extremely powerful,鈥� says of the UK National Physical Laboratory. He points out that it offers a method to accurately measure the mass of a single atom. That is not possible with the watt balance, which can only measure macroscopic objects.
Using the Compton clock for macroscopic masses may be more difficult however, as cheap, accurate methods for scaling up from atomic masses are not readily available, says Richard Steiner of the US in Gaithersburg, Maryland.
Journal reference: Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.1230767
