Playing at a theater near you . . . the first ever electron captured on film.
Previously, scientists had only been able to see electrons indirectly, resulting in murky images. Now, using very short flashes of light and a powerful laser to extract electrons from atoms, researchers at Lund University in Sweden have figured out a way to get clear footage of a single electron careening away from an atom.
(Take a look at the footage here. What you see is basically a single oscillation of light and the “energy distribution of the electron.” The image is slowed down, of course.)
The technical challenge lay in the fact that electrons are very, very small and move very, very fast. We simply didn’t have light pulses fast enough to “freeze” and electron on film. But now technology has advanced to the point that it’s possible to take pictures using “attosecond” pulses. What’s an attosecond? Here’s how one of the researchers, Johan Mauritsson, explains it: “An attosecond is related to a second as a second is related to the age of the universe.” Cool. Or, in mathematical terms, each pulse was 10 -18 seconds long (about 300 attoseconds).
This achievement is important because it will allow scientists to gather more precise data about what electrons are, how they behave, and what happens when they collide with other particles.
Source: Tech News Watch
Particle physicists (and atomic physicists) have known “what electrons are, how they behave and what happens when they collide with other particles” for over 50 years. I don’t understand what you mean when you say that physicists could only detect electrons “indirectly” before because there is no other way to see them since they aren’t light (photons). The experiment you cite is an indirect measurement.
But we’ve had pictures of electrons for ages (look up cloud/bubble chambers). I just think you’re blowing up the importance of this experiment and misrepresenting it. There paper is interesting, but I don’t see any particle physicists (electrons are particles) caring.