The observation of double and multiple stars has always received little attention. Even in the old days of good astronomical literature, this topic was often bypassed, and you are unlikely to find much information on it. The reason for this may lie in the low scientific significance of such observations. After all, it is no secret that the accuracy of amateur measurements of the parameters of binary stars is, as a rule, much lower than that of professional astronomers who have the opportunity to work with large instruments.

However, almost all amateur astronomers are bound to observe binary stars for at least a short period of time. The goals that they pursue in this case can be completely different: from checking the quality of optics or purely sporting interest to conducting truly scientifically significant measurements.

It is also important to note that, among other things, observations of double stars are also an excellent eye training for an astronomer. Looking at close pairs, the observer develops the ability to notice the most insignificant, small details of the image, thus maintaining himself in good shape, which in the future will necessarily affect the observations of other celestial objects. A good example is when one of my colleagues, after spending a few days off, tried to resolve a couple of stars with a separation of 1", using a 110mm reflector, and, in the end, succeeded. In turn, after a long break, I in observations, I had to give in to this pair with a much larger instrument.

Telescope and observer

The essence of observing a binary star is extremely simple and consists in dividing a stellar pair into separate components and determining their relative position and distance between them. However, in practice, everything turns out to be far from being so simple and unambiguous. During observations, various kinds of third-party factors begin to appear that do not allow you to achieve the result you need without some tricks. You may already be aware of the existence of such a thing as the Davis limit. This value determines the ability of some optical system to separate two closely spaced point sources of light, in other words, determines the resolution p of your telescope. The value of this parameter in arcseconds can be calculated using the following simple formula:

ρ = 120"/D

where D is the diameter of the telescope objective in millimeters.

In addition to the diameter of the lens, the resolution of the telescope also depends on the type of optical system, on the quality of the optics, and, of course, on the state of the atmosphere and the skills of the observer.

What do you need to have in order to start observing? The most important thing, of course, is the telescope. And the larger the diameter of its lens, the better. In addition, you will need an eyepiece (or Barlow lens) that gives a high magnification. Unfortunately, some amateurs do not always correctly use Davis' law, believing that it alone determines the possibility of resolving a close double pair. A few years ago, I met with a novice amateur who complained that for several seasons he could not separate a couple of stars located at a distance of 2 "from each other in his 65 mm telescope. It turned out that he was trying to do this, using only 25x magnification, arguing that at such a magnification the telescope has better visibility. Of course, he was right that a small increase significantly reduces the harmful effects of air currents in the atmosphere. However, he did not take into account that at such a low magnification the eye is simply not able to distinguish between two closely spaced light sources!

In addition to the telescope, you may also need measuring instruments. However, if you are not going to measure the positions of the components relative to each other, then you can do without them. For example, you may well be satisfied with the fact that you managed to separate closely spaced stars with your instrument and make sure that the stability of the atmosphere today is suitable or your telescope gives good performance, and you have not lost your former skills and dexterity.

For more serious problems, it is necessary to use a micrometer to measure the distances between stars and an hour scale to determine positional angles. Sometimes these two devices can be found combined in one eyepiece, in the focus of which a glass plate with scales printed on it is installed, which allow one to carry out the corresponding measurements. Similar eyepieces are produced by various foreign companies (in particular, Meade, Celestron, etc.), some time ago they were also manufactured at the Novosibirsk enterprise "Tochpribor".

Taking measurements

As we have already said, the measurement of the characteristics of a binary star is reduced to determining the relative position of its constituent components and the angular distance between them.

position angle. In astronomy, this value is used to describe the direction of one object relative to another for confident positioning on the celestial sphere. In the case of binary stars, the term position angle includes the definition of the position of the fainter component relative to the brighter one, which is taken as a reference point. Position angles are measured from north (0°) and further east (90°), south (180°) and west (270°). Thus, two stars with the same right ascension have a position angle of 0° or 180°. If they have the same declination, the angle will be either 90° or 270°.

Before measuring the position angle, it is necessary to correctly orient the measuring scale of the eyepiece-micrometer. By placing the star in the center of the field of view and turning off the clock mechanism (the polar axis of the mount must be set to the celestial pole), we will make the star move in the field of view of the telescope from east to west. The point at which the star will go out of the field of view is the point of direction to the west. If now, by rotating the eyepiece around its axis, we align the star with the value of 270 ° on the hour scale of the micrometer, then we can assume that we have completed the required installation. You can evaluate the accuracy of the work done by moving the telescope so that the star just begins to appear from behind the line of sight. This point of appearance should coincide with the 90° mark on the hour scale, after which the star, in the course of its daily movement, should again pass the center point and go out of the field of view at the 270° mark. If this does not happen, then the micrometer orientation procedure should be repeated.

If we now point the telescope at the stellar pair of interest to you and place the main star in the center of the field of view, then mentally drawing a line between it and the second component, we will obtain the required value of the position angle by removing its value from the hour scale of the micrometer.

Separation of components. In truth, the hardest part of the job is already done. We just have to measure the distance between the stars on the linear scale of a micrometer and then translate the result from a linear measure into an angular one.

Obviously, in order to carry out such a translation, we need to calibrate the micrometer scale. This is done as follows: point the telescope at a star with well-known coordinates. Stop the telescope's clockwork and note the time it takes for the star to travel from one end of the scale to the next. Repeat this procedure several times. The obtained measurement results are averaged, and the angular distance corresponding to the position of the two extreme marks on the eyepiece scale is calculated by the formula:

A \u003d 15 x t x cos δ

where f is the time of passage of the star, δ is the declination of the star. Then dividing the value of A by the number of divisions of the scale, we get the price of division of a micrometer in angular measure. Knowing this value, you can easily calculate the angular distance between the components of a double star (by multiplying the number of divisions of the scale that fit between the stars by the division value).

Observation of close couples

Based on my experience, the separation of stars with a distance close to the Davis limit becomes almost impossible, and the stronger this becomes, the greater the difference in magnitude between the components of the pair. Ideally, Davis' rule works if the stars are of the same brightness.

Looking through a telescope at a relatively bright star at high magnification, you can see that the star looks not just like a luminous point, but like a small disk (Erie disk) surrounded by several bright rings (so-called diffraction rings). It is clear that the number and brightness of such rings directly affects the ease with which you can separate a close couple. In the case of a significant difference in the brightness of the components, it may turn out that the weak star simply "dissolves" in the diffraction pattern of the main star. No wonder such well-known bright stars as Sirius and Rigel, which have faint satellites, are very difficult to separate in small telescopes.

In the case of a large difference in the color of the components, the task of separating the double, on the contrary, is somewhat simplified. The presence of color anomalies in the diffraction pattern becomes more noticeable, and the observer's eye notices the presence of a weak companion much faster.

It is believed that the maximum useful magnification given by a telescope is approximately equal to twice the diameter of the objective in mm, and using a higher magnification does not lead to anything. This is not the case for binary stars. If the atmosphere is calm on the night of observation, then using a 2x or even 4x maximum magnification may help to see some "disturbances" in the diffraction pattern, which will indicate to you the presence of the source of these "interferences". Of course, this can only be done with a telescope with good optics.

To determine the magnification at which to start separating a close pair, you can use the following simple formula:

X=240"/S"

where S is the angular distance between the components of the binary in arcseconds.

To separate close stars, we can also advise you to use a simple device that is put on the telescope tube and turns the round shape of the aperture into, say, a regular hexagon. Such diaphragming somewhat changes the distribution of light energy in the image of the star: the central Airy disk becomes somewhat smaller in size, and instead of the usual diffraction rings, several bright spike-like bursts are observed. If you rotate such a nozzle, you can ensure that the second star is between two neighboring bursts and thus "allows" to detect its presence.

The problem of excess weight makes itself felt not only in the summer on the beach. Looking into the mirror every day, one has to sadly observe a double chin, jowls and blurry contours. Fortunately, all this can be masked if you master makeup for a full face with all its nuances.

Peculiarities

For full girls, makeup artists offer a make-up, the main task of which is to stretch the face, make it visually thinner. To solve it, techniques such as contouring (to make the outlines become clearer) and vertical shading are used.

Tone and relief

1. Without a tonal foundation that models the contours and visually stretches them, makeup is impossible.
2. The oval is highlighted with a light foundation (primer), everything else is darker (do not forget about the neck and décolleté area).
3. Concealers should be matte and dense in texture.
4. It is very important to highlight the eyes, so be sure to mask the dark circles under them with a concealer.
5. Powder - compact, not shiny.
6. Apply blush with a soft brush, moving from top to bottom. Ideal shades - beige, bronze.

Eyes and eyebrows

1. Opt for lengthening mascara.
2. Limit pearlescent shadows.
3. Carefully shade all transitions of shades.
4. Lighten the inner corners, darken the outer corners.
5. All lines should go up.
6. The ends are better shaded.
7. Eyebrows should not be too thin and too wide. The bend is moderate.

Lips

1. No need to add extra volume to the lips.
2. Lip contouring is also excluded.
3. Young girls can use unobtrusive shine.
4. After 35, it is better to give preference to matte lipstick - coral or pink.

If you have a full face, do not be upset. Usually girls with such a deficiency have very beautiful eyes, smooth, clean skin and no wrinkles. Try to highlight your advantages and mask the swollen features to the maximum with a skillful make-up.

Under eye color

In such a make-up, it is imperative to take into account the color of the eyes, since it is recommended to focus on them.

For the green-eyed

1. To highlight green eyes on a full face, you will need shades of shades such as turquoise, green, yellow, blue.
2. Unlike makeup for blue-eyed beauties, here you will need a multi-layer technique. So don't be afraid to apply shadows in several layers.
3. The main thing - do not forget to carefully shade everything. A full face does not tolerate contrasts.
4. Choose the color of the eyeliner under the shadows: it should be a little more saturated.
5. Raise the arrows up so that the horizontal lines do not make the face even fuller.
6. For daytime make-up, use blue or green mascara. For a festive, evening - black or brown.
7. To make lips more embossed, take a lipstick or gloss with a shimmer. The recommended shade is bright cherry or coral.

For blue-eyed

1. Recommended palette of shadows: silver, pink, gold, pearl, purple, lilac, sea wave, turquoise. If fulfilled, you can take black and brown.
2. For blue eyes, you need to use the lightest techniques. Multilayer is excluded. So the shadows can lay down in 1-2 layers, but no more.
3. It's the same with mascara. Do not overdo it with it: 1 application will be enough. Recommended colors are gray, brown (for the daytime version), black (for the evening).
4. Lipstick and lip gloss can be in a pink tone, but taking into account age. After 35 it is better to use cream or burgundy. The main thing - without moisture and volume.
5. Makeup artists suggest using the same color schemes for gray-eyed girls.

For brown-eyed

1. Makeup for a full face with brown eyes begins with the right selection. Choose beige or apricot shades - they visually lengthen the features.
2. To define your cheekbones, apply lilac-pink blush on them. Terracotta put away - they will make them flat.
3. The eyeshadow palette should open your eyes. The colors in your palette are blue, purple, bronze, gold, chestnut, beige, honey, pink.
4. The liner can be blue, golden, purple, chestnut, black - the same color as the shadows. It is better to twist the arrows up.
5. For eyelashes, you will need lengthening mascara in black, blue, brown or purple.
6. The shape of the eyebrows must be correct. Avoid straight horizontal lines and overly pronounced flirtatious curves.
7. Lipstick and lip gloss can be of the following colors: ripe cherry, warm nude, pink neon, coral.

The choice of makeup color scheme may also depend on the color of the hair. But it is the eyes that play a decisive role in this matter.

Step-by-step instruction

Different styles of make-up for obese women allow them to feel attractive and beautiful both in everyday life and on holidays. Basic ( and ) must be mastered.

Day

1. To lengthen a full face, use a silicone-free liquid foundation. Pay special attention to masking the wings of the nose and the sides of the cheeks.
2. To even out the tone, it is better to take matte powder.
3. To make the contours of the face more clear and embossed, they need to be darkened, and the center (nose, forehead, chin) should be brightened as much as possible. To do this, the corrector can be worked directly on top of the powder.
4. Sand blush can be applied to the cheekbones.
5. The upper eyelids are stained in 1 layer with mother-of-pearl. Better than silver.
6. Very thin arrows on the upper eyelids are drawn with anthracite and are bent upwards.
7. We do not work with the lower part of the eyes during daytime makeup.
8. We open the look with gray lengthening mascara in 1 layer.
9. For lips, take a glossy gloss of a natural shade.

Evening

1. A pink concealer allows you to stretch the contour of the face.
2. To make the make-up flawless, pay special attention to masking the neckline.
3. Coral bright blush will stretch the cheekbones.
4. Shadows lie on the upper eyelid in layers: black, anthracite, emerald. The main thing is to shade everything well so as not to create contrasts.
5. The lower eyelids are shaded with a shade of wet asphalt.
6. Black arrows should repeat the shape of the eye and connect at the top, leading the lines to the temples.
7. The outer corners can be highlighted with a white liner or shadows.
8. Mascara in 2 layers - black lengthening.
9. It is better not to use sequins and shimmer.
10. Matte lipstick in coral color and transparent gloss complete the evening make-up.

If they caused internal complexes, you have only two ways to solve the problem. The first is to lose weight. But it is long and requires considerable strength and patience. The second is to learn the right makeup for a full face, which will make it visually thinner. Do not neglect the advice of makeup artists in such a situation - they will make you look much better.

In astronomy, double stars are such pairs of stars that stand out noticeably in the sky among the surrounding background stars by the proximity of their apparent positions. As estimates of the proximity of visible positions, the following boundaries of angular distances r between the pair components are taken, depending on the apparent magnitude m.

Types of double stars

Binary stars are subdivided, depending on the method of their observation, into visual binaries, photometric binaries, spectroscopic binaries, and speckle interferometric binaries.

Visual double stars. Visual binary stars are fairly wide pairs, already well distinguishable in observations with a moderately sized telescope. Observations of visual double stars are made either visually with telescopes equipped with a micrometer or photographically with astrograph telescopes. Can stars be typical representatives of visual double stars? Virgo (r=1? -6? , rotation period P=140 years) or the star 61 Cygnus close to the Sun (r=10? -35? , P P=350 years), well known to astronomy lovers. To date, about 100,000 visual double stars are known.

Photometric binary stars. Photometric binary stars are very close pairs, circulating with a period of several hours to several days in orbits whose radius is comparable to the size of the stars themselves. The planes of the orbits of these stars and the observer's line of sight practically coincide. These stars are detected by eclipse phenomena, when one of the components passes in front of or behind the other relative to the observer. To date, more than 500 photometric binary stars are known.

Spectral binary stars. Spectral binaries, like photometric binaries, are very close pairs circulating in a plane forming a small angle with the direction of the observer's line of sight. . Spectral binary stars, as a rule, cannot be separated into components even when using telescopes with the largest diameters; however, the belonging of the system to this type of binary stars is easily detected in spectroscopic observations of radial velocities. Can a star be a typical representative of spectroscopic binary stars? Ursa Major, in which the spectra of both components are observed, the oscillation period is 10 days, the amplitude is about 50 km/s.

Speckle interferometric binary stars. Speckle interferometric binaries were discovered relatively recently, in the 1970s, as a result of the use of modern large telescopes to obtain speckle images of some bright stars. The pioneers of speckle interferometric observations of binary stars are E. McAllister in the USA and Yu.Yu. Balega in Russia. To date, several hundred binary stars have been measured by speckle interferometry with a resolution of r ?.1.

Double star research

For a long time it was thought that planetary systems could only form around single stars like the Sun. But in a new theoretical paper, Dr. Alan Boss of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Terrestrial Magnetism (DTM) has shown that a host of other stars, from pulsars to white dwarfs, could have planets. Including in binary and even triple star systems, which make up two thirds of all star systems in our Galaxy. Typically, binary stars are located at a distance of 30 AU. from each other - this is approximately equal to the distance from the Sun to the planet Neptune. In previous theoretical work, Dr. Boss suggested that gravitational forces between companion stars would prevent the formation of planets around each of them, according to the Carnegie Institution. However planet hunters have recently discovered gas giant planets like Jupiter around binary star systems, which led to a revision of the theory of planet formation in star systems.

06/01/2005 At the conference of the American Astronomical Society, astronomer Tod Strohmeyer from the Space Flight Center. Goddard Space Agency NASA presented a report on the binary star RX J0806.3 + 1527 (or J0806 for short). The behavior of this pair of stars, which belong to the class of white dwarfs, clearly indicates that J0806 is one of the most powerful sources of gravitational waves in our Milky Way galaxy. The mentioned stars revolve around a common center of gravity, and the distance between them is only 80 thousand km (this is five times less than the distance from the Earth to the Moon). This is the smallest orbit among the known double stars. Each of these white dwarfs is about half the mass of the Sun, but similar in size to the Earth. The speed of movement of each star around the common center of gravity is more than 1.5 million km/h. Moreover, observations have shown that the brightness of the binary star J0806 in the optical and X-ray wavelength ranges varies with a period of 321.5 seconds. Most likely, this is the period of orbital rotation of the stars included in the binary system, although it cannot be ruled out that the mentioned periodicity is a consequence of the rotation around its own axis of one of the white dwarfs. It should also be noted that every year the period of change in the brightness of J0806 decreases by 1.2 ms.

Characteristic signs of double stars

Centauri consists of two stars - a Centauri A and a Centauri B. and Centauri A has parameters almost similar to those of the Sun: Spectral type G, temperature about 6000 K and the same mass and density. a Centauri B has a mass of 15% less, spectral class K5, temperature 4000 K, diameter 3/4 solar, eccentricity (the degree of elongation of the ellipse, equal to the ratio of the distance from the focus to the center to the length of the major semiaxis, i.e. the eccentricity of the circle is 0 – 0.51). The orbital period is 78.8 years, the semi-major axis is 23.3 AU. That is, the plane of the orbit is inclined to the line of sight at an angle of 11, the center of gravity of the system is approaching us at a speed of 22 km / s, the transverse speed is 23 km / s, i.e. the total speed is directed towards us at an angle of 45o and is 31 km/s. Sirius, like a Centauri, also consists of two stars - A and B, however, unlike it, both stars have a spectral type A (A-A0, B-A7) and, therefore, a significantly higher temperature (A-10000 K, B-8000K). The mass of Sirius A is 2.5 M of the sun, of Sirius B is 0.96 M of the sun. Consequently, the surfaces of the same area radiate the same amount of energy from these stars, but in terms of luminosity, the satellite is 10,000 times weaker than Sirius. This means that its radius is 100 times less, i.e. it is almost the same as the Earth. Meanwhile, its mass is almost the same as that of the Sun. Consequently, the white dwarf has a huge density - about 10 59 0 kg / m 53 0.

> Double stars

– observation features: what is it with photos and videos, detection, classification, multiples and variables, how and where to look in Ursa Major.

Stars in the sky often form clusters, which can be dense or, on the contrary, scattered. But sometimes between the stars there are stronger bonds. And then it is customary to talk about binary systems or double stars. They are also called multiples. In such systems, the stars directly influence each other and always evolve together. Examples of such stars (even with the presence of variables) can be found literally in the most famous constellations, for example, Ursa Major.

Discovery of double stars

The discovery of binary stars was one of the first achievements made with astronomical binoculars. The first system of this type was the Mizar pair in the constellation Ursa Major, which was discovered by the Italian astronomer Ricciolli. Since there are an incredible number of stars in the universe, scientists decided that Mizar could not be the only binary system. And their assumption turned out to be fully justified by future observations.

In 1804, William Herschel, the famous astronomer who had made scientific observations for 24 years, published a catalog detailing 700 double stars. But even then there was no information about whether there is a physical connection between the stars in such a system.

A small component "sucks" gas from a large star

Some scientists have taken the view that binary stars depend on a common stellar association. Their argument was the inhomogeneous brilliance of the components of the pair. Therefore, it seemed that they were separated by a significant distance. To confirm or refute this hypothesis, it was necessary to measure the parallactic displacement of stars. Herschel undertook this mission and to his surprise found out the following: the trajectory of each star has a complex ellipsoidal shape, and not the form of symmetrical oscillations with a period of six months. The video shows the evolution of binary stars.

This video shows the evolution of a close binary pair of stars:

You can change subtitles by clicking on the "cc" button.

According to the physical laws of celestial mechanics, two bodies bound by gravity move in an elliptical orbit. The results of Herschel's research became proof of the assumption that in binary systems there is a connection between the gravitational force.

Classification of double stars

Binary stars are usually grouped into the following types: spectroscopic binaries, photometric binaries, and visual binaries. This classification allows you to get an idea of ​​the stellar classification, but does not reflect the internal structure.

With a telescope, you can easily determine the duality of visual double stars. Today, there are data on 70,000 visual double stars. At the same time, only 1% of them definitely have their own orbit. One orbital period can last from several decades to several centuries. In turn, the alignment of the orbital path requires considerable effort, patience, the most accurate calculations and long-term observations in the conditions of the observatory.

Often, the scientific community has information only about some fragments of orbital movement, and they reconstruct the missing sections of the path using the deductive method. Do not forget that the plane of the orbit may be tilted relative to the line of sight. In this case, the apparent orbit is seriously different from the real one. Of course, with a high accuracy of calculations, one can also calculate the true orbit of binary systems. For this, Kepler's first and second laws apply.

Mizar and Alcor. Mizar is a double star. On the right is the Alcor satellite. There is only one light year between them.

Once the true orbit is determined, scientists can calculate the angular distance between the binary stars, their mass and their rotation period. Often, Kepler's third law is used for this, which also helps to find the sum of the masses of the components of a pair. But for this you need to know the distance between the Earth and the double star.

Double photometric stars

The dual nature of such stars can only be known from periodic fluctuations in their brightness. During their movement, stars of this type obscure each other in turn, which is why they are often called eclipsing binaries. The orbital planes of these stars are close to the direction of the line of sight. The smaller the eclipse area, the lower the brightness of the star. By studying the light curve, the researcher can calculate the angle of inclination of the orbital plane. When fixing two eclipses, the light curve will have two minima (decreases). The period when 3 successive minima are observed on the light curve is called the orbital period.

The period of double stars lasts from a couple of hours to several days, which makes it shorter in relation to the period of visual double stars (optical double stars).

Spectral binary stars

Through the method of spectroscopy, researchers fix the process of splitting of spectral lines, which occurs as a result of the Doppler effect. If one component is a faint star, then only periodic fluctuations in the positions of single lines can be observed in the sky. This method is used only when the components of the binary system are at a minimum distance and their identification with a telescope is complicated.

Binary stars that can be examined through the Doppler effect and a spectroscope are called spectroscopic binary. However, not every binary star has a spectral character. Both components of the system can approach and move away from each other in the radial direction.

According to the results of astronomical research, most of the binary stars are located in the Milky Way galaxy. The ratio of single and double stars as a percentage is extremely difficult to calculate. Using subtraction, you can subtract the number of known binary stars from the total stellar population. In this case, it becomes obvious that double stars are in the minority. However, this method cannot be called very accurate. Astronomers are familiar with the term "selection effect". To fix the duality of stars, one should determine their main characteristics. This will require special equipment. In some cases, fixing double stars is extremely difficult. So, visually binary stars are often not visualized at a considerable distance from the astronomer. Sometimes it is impossible to determine the angular distance between the stars in a pair. To fix spectral-binary or photometric stars, it is necessary to carefully measure the wavelengths in the spectral lines and collect the modulations of the light fluxes. In this case, the brightness of the stars should be strong enough.

All this dramatically reduces the number of stars suitable for study.

According to theoretical developments, the proportion of binary stars in the stellar population varies from 30% to 70%.

Nobody in the world understands quantum mechanics - this is the main thing you need to know about it. Yes, many physicists have learned to use its laws and even predict phenomena using quantum calculations. But it is still unclear why the presence of an observer determines the fate of the system and forces it to make a choice in favor of one state. "Theories and Practices" selected examples of experiments, the outcome of which is inevitably influenced by the observer, and tried to figure out what quantum mechanics is going to do with such interference of consciousness in material reality.

Shroedinger `s cat

Today there are many interpretations of quantum mechanics, the most popular of which remains the Copenhagen one. Its main provisions were formulated in the 1920s by Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg. And the central term of the Copenhagen interpretation was the wave function - a mathematical function that contains information about all possible states of a quantum system in which it simultaneously resides.

According to the Copenhagen interpretation, only observation can accurately determine the state of the system, distinguish it from the rest (the wave function only helps to mathematically calculate the probability of detecting the system in a particular state). We can say that after observation, a quantum system becomes classical: it instantly ceases to coexist in many states at once in favor of one of them.

This approach has always had opponents (remember, for example, “God does not play dice” by Albert Einstein), but the accuracy of calculations and predictions took its toll. However, in recent years there have been fewer and fewer supporters of the Copenhagen interpretation, and not the least reason for this is the very mysterious instantaneous collapse of the wave function during measurement. Erwin Schrödinger's famous thought experiment with the poor cat was just designed to show the absurdity of this phenomenon.

So, we recall the content of the experiment. A live cat, an ampoule of poison and some mechanism that can set the poison into action at a random moment are placed in a black box. For example, one radioactive atom, the decay of which will break the ampoule. The exact time of the decay of the atom is unknown. Only the half-life is known: the time during which the decay will occur with a probability of 50%.

It turns out that for an external observer, the cat inside the box exists in two states at once: it is either alive, if everything goes well, or dead, if the decay has occurred and the ampoule has broken. Both of these states are described by the cat's wave function, which changes over time: the farther, the more likely it is that radioactive decay has already happened. But as soon as the box is opened, the wave function collapses and we immediately see the outcome of the flayer experiment.

It turns out that until the observer opens the box, the cat will forever balance on the border between life and death, and only the observer's action will determine his fate. This is the absurdity that Schrödinger pointed out.

Electron diffraction

According to a survey of leading physicists conducted by The New York Times, the experiment with electron diffraction, set in 1961 by Klaus Jenson, became one of the most beautiful in the history of science. What is its essence?

There is a source that emits a stream of electrons towards the screen-photographic plate. And there is an obstacle in the way of these electrons - a copper plate with two slits. What kind of picture on the screen can be expected if we represent electrons as just small charged balls? Two illuminated bands opposite the slits.

In reality, a much more complex pattern of alternating black and white stripes appears on the screen. The fact is that when passing through the slits, electrons begin to behave not like particles, but like waves (just like photons, particles of light, can simultaneously be waves). Then these waves interact in space, somewhere weakening, and somewhere strengthening each other, and as a result, a complex picture of alternating light and dark stripes appears on the screen.

In this case, the result of the experiment does not change, and if electrons are passed through the slit not in a continuous stream, but one by one, even one particle can simultaneously be a wave. Even one electron can pass through two slits at the same time (and this is another of the important provisions of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics - objects can simultaneously display both their "usual" material properties and exotic wave properties).

But what about the observer? Despite the fact that with him the already complicated story became even more complicated. When, in such experiments, physicists tried to fix with the help of instruments through which slit the electron actually passes, the picture on the screen changed dramatically and became “classical”: two illuminated areas opposite the slits and no alternating stripes.

The electrons did not seem to want to show their wave nature under the gaze of the observer. Adjusted to his instinctive desire to see a simple and understandable picture. Mystic? There is a much simpler explanation: no observation of the system can be carried out without physical impact on it. But we will return to this a little later.

Heated fullerene

Experiments on particle diffraction were carried out not only on electrons, but also on much larger objects. For example, fullerenes are large, closed molecules composed of tens of carbon atoms (for example, a fullerene of sixty carbon atoms is very similar in shape to a soccer ball: a hollow sphere sewn from five- and hexagons).

Recently a group at the University of Vienna, led by Professor Zeilinger, has tried to introduce an element of observation into such experiments. To do this, they irradiated moving fullerene molecules with a laser beam. After that, heated by an external influence, the molecules began to glow and thus inevitably revealed their place in space for the observer.

Along with this innovation, the behavior of molecules has also changed. Before the start of total surveillance, fullerenes quite successfully went around obstacles (showed wave properties) like electrons from the previous example passing through an opaque screen. But later, with the advent of the observer, the fullerenes calmed down and began to behave like completely law-abiding particles of matter.

Cooling dimension

One of the most famous laws of the quantum world is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle: it is impossible to simultaneously determine the position and speed of a quantum object. The more accurately we measure the momentum of a particle, the less accurately we can measure its position. But the operation of quantum laws, operating at the level of tiny particles, is usually imperceptible in our world of large macro objects.

Therefore, the recent experiments of the group of Professor Schwab from the USA are all the more valuable, in which quantum effects were demonstrated not at the level of the same electrons or fullerene molecules (their characteristic diameter is about 1 nm), but on a slightly more tangible object - a tiny aluminum strip.

This strip was fixed on both sides so that its middle was in a suspended state and could vibrate under external influence. In addition, next to the strip was a device capable of recording its position with high accuracy.

As a result, the experimenters discovered two interesting effects. Firstly, any measurement of the position of the object, observation of the strip did not pass without a trace for it - after each measurement, the position of the strip changed. Roughly speaking, the experimenters determined the coordinates of the strip with great accuracy and thereby, according to the Heisenberg principle, changed its speed, and hence the subsequent position.

Secondly, which is already quite unexpected, some measurements also led to cooling of the strip. It turns out that the observer can only change the physical characteristics of objects by his presence. It sounds absolutely incredible, but to the credit of the physicists, let's say that they were not at a loss - now Professor Schwab's group is thinking how to apply the discovered effect to cooling electronic circuits.

Freezing particles

As you know, unstable radioactive particles decay in the world not only for the sake of experiments on cats, but also quite by themselves. Moreover, each particle is characterized by an average lifetime, which, it turns out, can increase under the gaze of an observer.

This quantum effect was first predicted back in the 1960s, and its brilliant experimental confirmation appeared in a paper published in 2006 by the group of Nobel laureate in physics Wolfgang Ketterle from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

In this work, we studied the decay of unstable excited rubidium atoms (decay into rubidium atoms in the ground state and photons). Immediately after the preparation of the system, the excitation of atoms began to be observed - they were illuminated by a laser beam. In this case, the observation was carried out in two modes: continuous (small light pulses are constantly fed into the system) and pulsed (the system is irradiated with more powerful pulses from time to time).

The results obtained are in excellent agreement with the theoretical predictions. External light effects really slow down the decay of particles, as if returning them to their original, far from decay state. In this case, the magnitude of the effect for the two studied regimes also coincides with the predictions. And the maximum life of unstable excited rubidium atoms was extended by 30 times.

Quantum mechanics and consciousness

Electrons and fullerenes cease to show their wave properties, aluminum plates cool down, and unstable particles freeze in their decay: under the omnipotent gaze of an observer, the world is changing. What is not evidence of the involvement of our mind in the work of the world around? So maybe Carl Jung and Wolfgang Pauli (Austrian physicist, Nobel laureate, one of the pioneers of quantum mechanics) were right when they said that the laws of physics and consciousness should be considered as complementary?

But so there is only one step left to the duty recognition: the whole world around is the essence of our mind. Creepy? (“Do you really think that the Moon exists only when you look at it?” Einstein commented on the principles of quantum mechanics). Then let's try again to turn to physicists. Moreover, in recent years, they are less and less pleased with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics with its mysterious collapse of a function wave, which is being replaced by another, quite mundane and reliable term - decoherence.

Here's the thing - in all the described experiments with observation, the experimenters inevitably influenced the system. It was illuminated with a laser, measuring instruments were installed. And this is a general, very important principle: you cannot observe a system, measure its properties without interacting with it. And where there is interaction, there is a change in properties. Especially when colossus of quantum objects interact with a tiny quantum system. So the eternal, Buddhist neutrality of the observer is impossible.

This is precisely what explains the term "decoherence" - an irreversible process from the point of view of violating the quantum properties of a system when it interacts with another, large system. During such an interaction, the quantum system loses its original features and becomes classical, "obeys" the large system. This explains the paradox with Schrödinger's cat: the cat is such a large system that it simply cannot be isolated from the world. The very setting of the thought experiment is not entirely correct.

In any case, compared to reality as an act of creation of consciousness, decoherence sounds much more calm. Maybe even too calm. After all, with this approach, the entire classical world becomes one big decoherence effect. And according to the authors of one of the most serious books in this field, statements like “there are no particles in the world” or “there is no time at a fundamental level” also logically follow from such approaches.

Creative observer or omnipotent decoherence? You have to choose between two evils. But remember - now scientists are becoming more and more convinced that the very notorious quantum effects underlie our thought processes. So where observation ends and reality begins - each of us has to choose.