If you flush gasses with the appropriate temperature ,pressure with these systems on artificial will become real atoms because of free level cohesion at atomic scale

Jie Shan and Kin Fai Mak need to look deeper, these emergent properties are just a hint at an underlying structure. ;D

My question is, if they can simulate a series of oxygen atoms, can they actually produce oxygen from these structures?

Semiconductors are not alternative 2D materials, but they can be 2D materials.

@@nrgj.t669 NEVER ! the gluons are the same

A lot of budget

True, this Channel is gold

It appears to suffer from an “old media” style that is going out of fashion. Loads and loads of b and c roll shots that don’t allow the viewer to get a good visualisation of what’s being spoken about for 80% of the video. Unfortunate because they do a decent job of reporting.

Wtf that’s at least one SSS too less. I feel confident this video is something to be proud of.

@@JMHynzie well u should consider if the inability to "get a good visualisation of what's being spoken about" is coming from you. I personally found the visualisation sufficient

It is exciting, nothing silly about recognizing that!

Moiré patterns have been used in art forever, but in my physics lectures, I show moiré patterns as a visual version of beat oscillation, and also as examples of a simple kind of interference pattern. (Think: holograms.) They are an excellent example of how there are larger patterns of patterns, and larger patterns still. This application is exciting, but also a natural next step in this direction of innovation. If we extended the hologram analogy, building a "holographic" graphene (or other material) pattern for a customized purpose would be exciting. (Think: super computer on a postage stamp.) These ideas aren't new, but bringing them into reality IS new, and very, very exciting.

@@ezfzx Yes! I saw another video here on KZfaq a couple of hours ago, where this pattern was shown in a gradual simulation, showing all different patterns as it was turning. My first thought was; this looks like an oscillation/cymatics pattern! I also love the idea of showing things in a holographic way. Maybe a stupid question, but what if you layered three sheets of the pattern, would they show structures in 3D?

@@lis7742 It just gets more complicated, like adding more electron harmonics, and without precision control, there comes a chance that some of the sought after patterns would suffer from some slight destructive interference. Maybe an A.I. could manage it.

@@ezfzx I'm thinking the same, I can't wait to see how much an AI will immensely augment advancements in science (and many other areas). It's giving me hope for the future.

Sounds hella scary when you say it like that

yes but the strenght of the chemical bonding of one of those artificial atoms its significantly weaker than that of an natural atom Those energy levels are DIFFERENT than the natural ones

Pretty much making their own sandbox.. hmmm

@@kukulroukul4698 Also the frequency of electron orbit are slower to they can applied by voltage.

@@kukulroukul4698 To be a top down and truly great physicist, you need to be a top down and truly great mathematician. Here's the CLEAR proof ON BALANCE. ULTIMATE, CLEAR, BALANCED, INTEGRATED, IRREFUTABLE, AND MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity: Consider what is TIME. E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma, AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY (AND NECESSARILY) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE; AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Great. Consider WHAT IS THE EYE ON BALANCE !!! Great. c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE. GREAT. Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE. Consider what is THE SUN ON BALANCE. GREAT. Indeed, notice what is the orange AND setting Sun ON BALANCE !! ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY (AND NECESSARILY) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Consider WHAT IS THE EYE ON BALANCE !!!! GREAT ❤️❤️❤️❤️. Finally, what is lava IS orange; AND it is even blood red. Excellent. By Frank DiMeglio Consider what is the man (AND THE EYE ON BALANCE) who IS standing on what is THE EARTH/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY (AND NECESSARILY) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Indeed, in identifying or considering what is THE EYE/EARTH balance, what is THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. Great. NOTICE: Gravity cannot be shielded (or blocked) ON BALANCE. Magnificent !! Water flows downhill. Great. By Frank

Bad bot

@@WsciekleMleko I might be bad or stupid, but not a bot 👌🏻

@@WsciekleMleko 🤡

@@juastw2285 I choose dialog option 2.

Couldn't have put it better

Funny enough, this is actually my field of research. I'm a PhD student in condensed matter experiment. The great part about these 2D materials is that we really don't know what their full capabilities are. We haven't yet realized all practical materials in 2D with proper study, so nobody knows what's still out there. Commercial uses range from solar panels that are factors more efficient than current panels, to faster computers, larger quantum computers, and many more. Realistically, this is one of the most fruitful fields of physics that still has a lot to be picked.

@@theflufffactor6060 Can the virtual atoms move around in their 2D matrix? Can they be combined into molecules?

@@GregConquest i think that as long as the moire pattern doesn't move, the Artificials Atoms (AA) won't move, AA are localized here. but creating an AA with an STM tip over a 2D materials (graphene), and moving the STM tip should give you mobile AA. if 2 AA are close enough, their state shall interact giving you Artificial Molecule. in the futur if we can control lot's of AA, we can simulate complex molecules and study their behaviour without doing very taxing computation, that's what we call quantu simulation i think (not sure)

@@GregConquest There is something called a semiconductor nanocrystal which people call an artificial atom, which can be assembled into artificial molecules. At least in my subsubfield, we don't care too much about moving them around in space. We focus on the electromagnetic properties of these low dimensional systems, not necessarily where they are. In theory, you can control where these virtual atoms "are" by carefully configuring the real material stacks. In practice, these material systems are hard to make in the first place. Typically, if your project is on material AB, you would be over the moon if you can synthesize it and measure it. We are very much in the baby stages of this field. The Nobel Prize for the study of graphene was in 2010, just to put things in perspective.

Wait wait, I’m more thinking about combining those atoms in molecules and creating realistic matter? As in a form of very crude replicators from Star Trek is that possible? Would be awesome to be able to create actual matter from virtual Atoms! Imagine the possibilities if this becomes a reality!

You can tell by how big they are smiling.

NOPE, its genuinely a bunch of nonsense, that's why they are smiling. No one has even seen a single Atom with any clarity, everything we think we know about atoms is pure speculation, No one has ever detected an Electron, a Proton or a Neutron, they are ASSSUMED to exist because or MODEL of the Atom says they ought to exist. Well, some don't agree with the current Model. Science is not about consensus. So, they haven't created an atom from Electrons at all, they have not ever actually studied an electron, because they cant capture one or even if they did, nothing they could do could examine such an object. Creating a sheet of graphene or similar only a couple of atoms thick, it would necessarily be practically invisible to an optical system. Remember an electron scanning microscope can only see a fuzzy blob that they think is an individual atom, so a material made from only two stacked is going to be too flimsy to hold together. Look at gold foil, it gets so thin that it cant be handled mechanically. it wafts away on the air currents if if gets too thin. And even then it no where near a few atoms thick. So they are claiming to be able to make any element by just adding electrons one by one... but Hydrogen has one electron and one Proton, but he said he added a single electron to make Helium, but Helium needs 2 Protons, so where did they second Proton come from? There is no way to just "add" a single electron by "dialling up the voltage". This is just like the quantum fake science they all rave about. All BS.

@@everythingisalllies2141 Let's assume everything you say is true. The device you are using to type all of this is based on storing billions of on/off states in matter using electrons. So even if we have never seen an atom or electron that doesn't really matter in any practical sense. We can build things in the real world with our models and they work in a consistent manner.

@@lucidvizion No, you ASSUME that the IC in my computer is working by storing little chinks of matter you called Electrons, because that is part of your imaginery MODEL of how electricity works. But SOMETHING is happening, but to claim its electrons is just your assumption. Truth is there is no way for you to prove that these electrons actually exist, you have never isolated one and presented it for inspection.

Artificial atoms based on Josephson junctions have been around for more than a decade now lol

could you plz link it in here?

You just pointed out a real world application. High temp superconducting.

It has been considered, but, until recently, just hypothetical, waiting for the technology to catch up ... like so much innovation. When physicists get frustrated waiting for the future to arrive, they sometimes go write "hard" science fiction, a largely untapped resource for scientific inspiration. :)

@@ezfzx Did I hear 'Mars Trilogy' or 'Ender's Game' ?

@@gregparrott Perhaps! Some of the best "hard science" fiction, isn't always great fiction, since the authors are so excited by the science. But the science fans who understand it will eat it up. Some of the best ideas we've had for little under-grad research projects were inspired by works no one (outside of the science community) had ever heard of.

@@gregparrott Ender's Game is just god-tier

Imagine the capacity of a self-modifying microchip, real programmable electronics, not fake one like in FPGAs. No one saw that potential, forget about superconductors. That would boost computers to another scale of power and give another spin to the wheel of Moore's law. (it is getting a bit slower , Moore's law is not dead and never will die, but the wheel can get slower and slower until a paradigm shift like this) That if made into a working product would be a trillion dollar industry. We could even call it metaelectronics, imagine the potential !

Yeah and does this artificial atom go away when no more voltage is applied.

@@errgo2713 I don't think they are stable without the specific pressure, temperature, and energy conditions, as the quasiparticles are formed from those. I think you can see it as an electron liquid, where depending on those conditions it exhibits different, more bizarre quantum states of matter that are emergent from the interaction of many particles.

Also as I understand it, atoms are kinda defined by their number of protons, 1 for H, 2 for He, 3 for Li, etc. So why does changing the metric associated with electrons change the atom, and not just change it to a type of ion instead? Also, as I understand it, an atom usually has the same amount of protons as neutrons, so are these created atoms special isotopes of the usual atoms?

this is what I wanted to ask

@@asdli6402 Because they aren't really atoms. It's a really common thing in condensed physics to do "simulations" of the real thing by using an absolutely different physical object, that on some level behaves similar to the thing you are studying. In this case, having read the article, it's not electrons that are orbiting "artificial atoms", it's "excitons" - a "particle" consisting of an electron+hole pair in different layers of the material. It is not really a particle in a physical sense, but it *behaves* like one, and if you are willing to accept it as a particle, it follows the regular Schrodinger's equation (except in 2D). This isn't the first time condensed physics has done this - there are also so called "phonons", for example, that are quantum particles of sound waves - basically a particle representation of deformation waves travelling through a material, and they also behave like regular quantum particles if you look at them right. What that Moiré lattice does is create potential wells for those "excitons", similar to how nucleus creates a potential well for an electron in the atom. This way, these excitons follow the Schrodinger's equation really similar to that of a real atom, so the effects you find with them can be applied to real atoms too. That's why they're called "virtual atoms" - they're not atoms in any real sense, there's no nucleus and there are excitons instead of electrons, but it's similar enough to be interesting. And yes, you can create lots of them - they're automatically "placed" at the nodes of the Moiré lattice, so as long as your sheet of material is big enough, you can get as many of them as you want.

What they have is a region in the 2D structure that behaves like an individual atom, but it's actually way bigger, so it's easier to measure. Atoms are defined by the number of protons, but their real behaviour and most characteristics are defined by how the electron cloud is distributed. That's why atoms in the same column of the periodic table have similar properties. When they change the voltage it changes how the simulated atom behaves.

@@tiagodasilva1124 appreciate the clear explanation!

@@ToriKo_ Yeah, I don't think there are actually any protons or neutrons in there. When they say "atom", it sounds like they've reproduced an electron cloud environment similar to what you'd find around an actual atom. Which is why it's "larger", because an actual atomic nucleus would pull those electrons in a LOT tighter.

According to Wikipedia. The amount of electrons in atom mirror the number of protons.

@@JasonB808 That is typically true. But these structures they are making are, near as I can tell, not complete atoms. They are clouds of electrons resonating the way they would if they were attached to an atom. It's very clever, but also a very VERY loose application of the phrase "artificial atom", which is no doubt causing the confusion.

agreed!