Plasma–surface science for future fusion reactorsGrowing tall poppies among our girls

Volume 49, Number 5, Sept–Oct 2012

Integrate Agilent’s proven analog-to-digital technology into your design.

Explore the range of high-speed digitizers500 MSa/s to 8 GSa/s on one or more channelsResolution of 8, 10, 12 or 14 bitsBandwidths of up to 3 GHzFlexible acquisition memoryFast throughput with on-board real-time processing

Seamlessly design-in Agilent’s high-speed technology to fulfill your product requirements, while maintaining your in-house technical know-how and intellectual property. Reuse and upgradability of both hardware and software reduces your risk, protects your investment and gets your products to market faster.Be First — with Agilent

© 2011 Agilent Technologies, Inc.

Select and compare the digitizer that best fits your need.www.agilent.com/find/embedded-digitizersDiscover the Alternatives … ... Agilent Modular Products… ... A

132 EditorialChange and opportunity

133 President’s ColumnAIP links to otherorganisations

135 News & CommentMurchison Widefield Arrayto pioneer SKAAidan Byrne to headAustralian Research CouncilPASA goes to CambridgeInternational award toWLAN technologyLawrence Bragg honouredby Australia Post

138 Letters to EditorGeraint Lewis and colleagues debate the cosmologicalmodel put forward by Fulvio Melia

140 Eureka PrizeUNSW–Swinburne team honoured for its research onvariations in the fine-structure constant

141 Growing tall poppiesEroia Barone-Nugent, Harry Quiney and Keith Nugent havedeveloped a new program for increasing the number of girlsstudying physics at secondary school

148 Plasma–surface scienceCormac Corr describes the new MAGPIE facility at the ANUfor studying plasma–surface interactions in future fusionreactors

154 ObituariesSandy Mathieson (1920–2011) by Andrew Stevenson,Stephen Wilkins and Jacqui GulbisTrudi Thompson (1924–2012) by Lance Taylor

156 Book ReviewDavid Wiltshire on ‘Cracking the Einstein Code: Relativity andthe Birth of Black Hole Physics’ by Fulvio Melia

157 Product NewsA review of new products from Lastek, Warsash Scientific,Coherent Scientific and Agilent Technologies

CONTENTS

Plasma–surface science for future fusion reactorsGrowing tall poppies among our girls

Volume 49, Number 5, Sept–Oct 2012

CoverCutaway of the ITER fusion reactor underconstruction in France – see p. 149

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 131SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

Australian Institute of PhysicsPromoting the role of physics in research, education, industry and the community

AIP website: www.aip.org.au

AIP ExecutivePresident Dr Marc Duldig

Marc.Duldig@utas.edu.auVice President Dr Robert Robinson Robert.Robinson@ansto.gov.auSecretary Dr Andrew Greentree andrewg@unimelb.edu.auTreasurer Dr Judith Pollard

judith.pollard@adelaide.edu.auRegistrar Dr John Humble

john.humble@utas.edu.auImmediate Past President A/Prof Brian James

b.james@physics.usyd.edu.auSpecial Projects OfficersProf Warwick Couch

wcouch@swin.edu.auDr Olivia Samardzic

olivia.samardzic@dsto.defence.gov.au

AIP ACT BranchChair Dr Anna Wilson

anna.wilson@anu.edu.auSecretary Joe Hope

joseph.hope@anu.edu.au

AIP NSW BranchChair Dr Scott Martin Scott.Martin@csiro.auSecretary Dr Frederick Osman

fred_osman@exemail.com.au

AIP QLD BranchChair Dr Joel Corney

corney@physics.uq.edu.auSecretary Dr Till Weinhold weinhold@physics.uq.edu.au

AIP SA BranchChair Dr Scott Foster

scott.foster@dsto.defence.gov.auSecretary Dr Laurence Campbell laurence.campbell@flinders.edu.au

AIP TAS BranchChair Dr Elizabeth Chelkowska

Elizabeth.Chelkowska@environment.tas.gov.auSecretary Dr Stephen Newbury Stephen.Newbery@dhhs.tas.gov.au

AIP VIC BranchChair Dr Andrew Stevenson Andrew.Stevenson@csiro.auSecretary Dr Mark Boland Mark.Boland@synchrotron.org.au

AIP WA BranchChair A/Prof Marjan Zadnik m.zadnik@curtin.edu.auSecretary Dr Andrea Biondo andreaatuni@gmail.com

PrintingPinnacle Print Group288 Dundas Street, Thornbury VIC 3071www.pinnacleprintgroup.com.au

Change andopportunityAs chair of the editorial board of Australian Physics I would like to expressappreciation of the achievements of departing editor Peter Robertson andassistant editor Akin Budi, who duringtheir terms improved production stan-dards and regained a reliable schedulewhile maintaining varied, interesting and informative content.

As I see it, the role of Australian Physics is to inform members inparticular, but more generally the broad physics community, aboutPhysics activity in Australia and matters relevant to that community.Articles should to an extent be tutorial in nature: those who know littlein detail about the topic should gain a better appreciation of the topic.

While articles of interest will cover a wide range of subjects, thereare two kinds of articles that I would like to see more of. One is anaccount of career progression about a decade after the author hascompleted formal study (undergraduate or postgraduate degree). Sucharticles would serve as examples for current students, and can beparticularly informative when the career is not obviously physics, butone where a training in physics has presumably been of some advantage.I would welcome contact from members with ideas for such articles.

The other kind is by physics graduates working as physicists inindustry. We would all benefit from more exposure to the concerns ofsuch physicists, in a country where employment of physicists is pre-dominantly in teaching, academia and government laboratories.

In the current issue we have two very different articles. Dr Barone-Nugent and co-authors describe an innovative program, Growing TallPoppies, for increasing the number of females studying physics at highschool by establishing a collaboration between an ARC Centre of Ex-cellence and a high school. They present the results of a longitudinalstudy to show that significant results are being achieved. In the secondarticle, Dr Corr discusses the requirements for materials to withstandthe extreme environment of future fusion reactors where surfaces willbe subject to large energetic particle fluxes. He describes MAGPIE, anew experimental facility at the ANU that will be used to simulate theplasma–wall interactions in a fusion reactor in order to compare thebehaviour of different, including novel, materials.

Finally, I seek expressions of interest in the position of Editor. It isan interesting time for members’ journals like Australian Physics. Likemany similar organisations the AIP has a regular monthly emailnewsletter to provide timely information such as announcements andbranch activities. With this time-critical task removed from AustralianPhysics, the time is ripe for reinvention, which will no doubt includeexploiting the internet.Brian James

132

EDITORIAL

49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS

A Publication of the Australian Institute of Physics

EDITORPeter Robertson prob@unimelb.edu.au

ASSISTANT EDITORDr Akin Budiabudi@unimelb.edu.au

BOOK REVIEWS EDITORDr John Macfarlanejcmacfarlane@netspace.net.au

SAMPLINGS EDITORDr Don Pricedon.price@csiro.au

EDITORIAL BOARDA/Prof Brian James (Chair)

brian.james@sydney.edu.auDr M. A. BoxDr J. HoldsworthA/Prof R. J. SteningProf H. A. BachorProf H. Rubinsztein-DunlopProf S. Tingay

ASSOCIATE EDITORSDr John Humble John.Humble@utas.edu.auDr Laurence Campbell laurence.campbell@flinders.edu.auDr Frederick Osman fred_osman@exemail.com.auDr Wen Xin Tang wenxin.tang@monash.edu

SUBMISSION GUIDELINESArticles for submission to Australian Physics should be sent by email to theEditor: prob@unimelb.edu.au. The text should be sent as a Word file andauthors are advised to consult a recent issue as a guide to style. Imagesshould not be embedded in the document, but should be sent as highresolution attachments in JPG or PNG format. Authors should also send ashort bio and a recent photo. The Editor reserves the right to edit articlesbased on space requirements and editorial content. Contributions should besent to the Editor.

ADVERTISINGEnquiries should be sent to the Editor.

Published six times a year.© 2012 Australian Institute of Physics Inc. Unless otherwise stated, all writtencontent in Australian Physics magazine is subject to copyright of the AIP andmust not be reproduced wholly or in part without written permission.

The statements made and the opinions expressed in Australian Physics donot necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Institute of Physics or itsCouncil or Committees.

Print Post approved PP 224960 / 00008 ISSN 1837-5375

PRODUCTIONControl Publications Pty LtdBox 2155 Wattletree Rd PO, VIC 3145.science@control.com.au

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 133

Firstly I would like to welcome theAustralian Society of Rheology (ASR)as a Cognate Society to the AIP.Members of ASR may join the AIPat whatever membership level theyqualify for with a 10% discount andmay attend AIP conferences andworkshops at AIP member rates. Inreturn the ASR is offering AIP mem-bers a 20% discount on membershipand a 10% discount on registrationfees on all the conferences they or-ganise. The cognate society structurethat the AIP established many yearsago offers members similar benefitswith our other cognate societies andis a way of enhancing cooperationand collaboration between allied dis-ciplines.

Our other cognate societies are:Astronomical Society of Australia;Australasian College of Physicistsand Engineers in Medicine; Aus-tralasian Radiation Protection Soci-ety; Australian Acoustical Society;Australian Optical Society; AustralianSociety for General Relativity andGravitation; and Royal AustralianChemical Institute. If members knowof other societies that the AIP shouldbe establishing similar links to thenplease send me contact details.

Internationally the AIP has recip-rocal membership arrangements withthe following national physics soci-eties: the American Institute ofPhysics, the Canadian Associationof Physics, the European PhysicalSociety, the Institute of Physics (Sin-gapore), the Institute of Physics (UK),the Physical Society of Japan, theNew Zealand Institute of Physicsand the South African Institute ofPhysics. Members should rememberthat they can take advantage of thesearrangements when they are over-seas.

The AIP is also a founding memberof the Association of Asia Pacific Phys-ical Societies (AAPPS) and holds aposition on its Council. The AAPPSaims to bring together physicists fromacross the region and to interact as alinking body to similar European andNorth American bodies, namely theEuropean Physical Society (EPS) andthe American Physical Society. To thisend AAPPS runs a triennial physicsconference (the Asia Pacific PhysicsConference) with the most recentone, APPC 11, held in November2010 in Shanghai and APPC 12planned for July next year in Chiba,Japan (see www.jps.or.jp/APPC12/ ifyou are interested in attending).

The AAPPS is also working hardto develop relations with Europethrough the EPS. It has been recog-nised that physics in the Asia Pacificregion has reasonable linkages withNorth America but far less well de-veloped linkages to Europe. TwoAsia–Europe Physics Summits havealready been held, in Tsukuba, Japanin March 2010 and in Warsaw, Polandin October 2011. At these meetingshighlights in physics of each regionwere presented and the prospects forcollaboration discussed. The nextsuch summit will be held in associa-tion with APPC 12. The AAPPSalso produces a regular magazine,the AAPPS Bulletin. Three issueshave appeared this year highlightinginteresting experiments and researchdevelopments across the region andeach issue also presents articles on afew research institutions from a mem-ber country. The latest issue includedshort articles on the ANU and Mel-bourne University physics depart-ments. The AAPPS also works onother issues including physics in de-veloping countries and improving

the status of women in physics. Ourformer President, Cathy Foley, hasbeen involved in some of these ac-tivities. AIP members should visitthe AAPPS web site www.aapps.orgto find out more about this regionalorganisation and its activities.

Some members may be aware thatin the last few months of 1962 theAIP was formed. It grew from theAustralian Branch of the Instituteof Physics, UK. The specific date isuncertain as there were several stagesto the changeover, any one of whichmight lay claim to the starting dateof the AIP. But the last few monthsof this year clearly mark our 50th

birthday. Some activities and initia-tives are being planned for 2013 as asemi-centenary celebratory year. Theyear and some of the events will belaunched at the Congress. I hopethat all members will take some timeto think about the legacy that theAIP has given to Australian physicsin its first 50 years and how it andthey might contribute to the next50 years. Please take part in the cele-brations and help us all recogniseour special field of science and ourwonderful organisation that supportsit.Marc Duldig

PRESIDENT’S COLUMN

AIP links to other organisations

SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

!!

"#$!%&'((!)*+,-./0+!!1$2$3&'4/5(!65$78059&$9!:$'&.!-;!!

<7&'*!1&*.4'22-(&',#*!!

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

$!'$3#<#,-0&#$&"82$ 8+='-&04&$0448*#-20-5A$ &"#$!"#$$%&'()'((*#+%,-./01*2.$?8<<$,#$"#<7$0&$&"#$I<7#-$Q0<<A$J48*#-28&5$ '($ K7#<087#$ '4$ !"6-2705A$ M&"$ '($R#3#+,#-$ ./%.H$ !"#$ N5+='286+$ ?8<<$ #S=<'-#$&"#$"82&'-830<A$ 2'380<$ 047$ ,-'07#-$ 238#4&8(83$ 8+=03&2$ '($&"#$@-0992T$?'-1H$!"#$N5+='286+$?8<<$"0*#$0$2&-'49$<84#;6=$'($40&8'40<$047$84&#-40&8'40<$2=#01#-2H$D-8'-$&'$ &"#$ @-099$ N5+='286+A$ 0$ 3'+,84#7$ +##&849$ '($&"#$ K2804$ P-52&0<<'9-0="83$ K22'380&8'4$ UK2PKV$ 047$

&"#$N'38#&5$'($P-52&0<<'9-0="#-2$ 84$K62&-0<80$047$)#?$W#0<047$?8<<$,#$"#<7$0&$ &"#$K7#<087#$P'4*#4&8'4$P#4&-#$(-'+$&"#$.47$&'$G&"$'($R#3#+,#-H$!"#$./%.$KXD$P'49-#22$84$N574#5$UF;%Y$R#3#+,#-V$78-#3&<5$('<<'?2$&"#$@-099$N5+='286+H$$$$Z'-$(6-&"#-$84('-+0&8'4[$"&&=[\\20=+#0H024H06\3'4*#4&8'42\3-52&0<./%.\,-099H"&+<$$$U/LV$L.]^$M/^L$Z0S[$U/LV$L.]^$M///$3-52&0<./%._20=+#0H024H06$$`'"4$P0-*#-$UP"08-=#-2'4V$$

Murchison Widefield Array to pioneer SKA The recent announcement that Australia and New Zealandwill co-host the Square Kilometre Array with southernAfrica has set the scene for Australian astronomy for thenext two decades. There are two radio telescopes underconstruction which will be test-bed precursors to the SKAand both are hosted at the Murchison Radio Observatory,about 350 km north–east of Geraldton in WA. One is theAustralian SKA Pathfinder (ASKAP) telescope and theother is the low-frequency Murchison Widefield Array.

The MWA is an international collaboration among in-stitutions from the US, Australia, New Zealand and India,with the International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research(ICRAR) at Curtin University the lead institution. ProfessorRachel Webster, head of the Astrophysics Group at Mel-bourne’s School of Physics, has been a driving force behindthe planning of the MWA. “Australia is the perfect locationfor radio telescopes as there are many remote and quietareas of the desert – important criteria for building suchsensitive technology”, she said.

Professor Stuart Wyithe (U. Melbourne) is also a memberof the team planning to detect signals from the earliestgalaxies using the low frequency array. “We know whathappened at the beginning of the Universe but we havenever been able to observe it. This has been beyond thereach of the Hubble and other telescopes. Radio telescopesmay provide us with those answers of our earliest begin-nings.”

Wyithe and his team have provided theoretical modelsand predictions of what type of signals the array will needto search for. “We have predicted what the radio signalsshould look like and hence the telescope has been specifically

designed to make those detections,” Wyithe said. “Theradio waves will tell us when the first galaxies appeared,how big they were and how many stars there were. Weknow this about nearby galaxies, but we don’t know whenthe first galaxies appeared.”

The team has been involved in developing real-timesoftware aimed at capturing the data so that it can be sentelsewhere for analysis. Webster says that their research isnot just astronomy but will have other applications. “Weare learning how to transport large amounts of data andanalyse them for key information. This will have definiteapplications in other fields such as medicine.”

The Murchison Widefield Array is expected be fullyoperational by mid-2013. “We really need to test the tech-nology, but as soon as this stage is finalised we will bemaking measurements as fast as we can. Whatever we findis going to be very exciting”, Webster said.[An earlier version of this item by Rebecca Scott appeared in theJuly issue of Melbourne University’s Voice, a supplement of The Agenewspaper]

Byrne to head Australian Research Council

Professor Aidan Byrne, dean of the ANU College ofPhysical and Mathematical Sciences, has been appointedchief executive officer of the Australian Research Council.Byrne took up the position in July, replacing ProfessorMargaret Sheil who completed a five-year term. Sheil isnow provost at the University of Melbourne.

ANU vice-chancellor Professor Ian Young congratulatedByrne on his new position and thanked him for hisdedicated work. “Aidan has been part of the fabric ofphysics, and science more broadly at ANU, for more than

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 135

NEWS & COMMENT

SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

One of the ‘tiles’ in the Murchison Widefield Array under construction in Western Australia. The array will consist of 128 tilesspread over a large area. [credit: ICRAR]

two decades. He started his PhD here in 1981, and returnedas a research fellow in 1989. He was also head of the De-partment of Physics from 2003 to 2007. He has been aleader who has displayed great passion for teaching as wellas research.”

The ARC manages Australia’s annual investment of$879 million in research, as well as the Excellence inResearch for Australia (ERA) research evaluation exercise.

According to ANU Professor Jim Williams, “In hisnuclear physics research, Aidan has been a vital contributorto our world-class research team in nuclear structure. Healso pioneered the novel application of nuclear physicstechniques in materials science, an area that has grown tobe a major research effort in the Research School of Physicsand Engineering. His outstanding leadership in bothresearch and education, as well as in university administration,will be sorely missed.”

Professor Andrew Roberts has been appointed as Byrne’sreplacement as dean of the ANU College of Physical andMathematical Sciences. Roberts joined the ANU in 2010and previously was at the University of Southhamptonand associate director of the UK National OceanographyCentre.

PASA goes to Cambridge

Cambridge University Press has announced that it will be-come the new home of Publications of the AstronomicalSociety of Australia (PASA). The journal publishes newand significant research in astronomy and astrophysics andcovers a wide range of topics, including multi-wavelengthobservations, theoretical modelling, computational astronomyand visualisation. PASA also maintains its heritage of pub-lishing results on southern hemisphere astronomy and onastronomy with Australian facilities.

PASA has been published by CSIRO Publishing since1994. In 1997 it was one of the first Australian journals to

go online and, in 2002, the hard copy ceased and it becameelectronic-only. Its impact factor has been steadily increasingand at one stage it had the highest impact factor of any sci-entific research journal published from Australia. Therecent announcement that Australia will co-host the SquareKilometre Array is expected to give PASA a further boost.

According to Professor Bryan Gaensler, chair of thePASA Editorial Board, “Australia is a world-leader in as-tronomy, and in Cambridge University Press we have founda partner with a comparable reputation in scientific publi-cation. Cambridge has a long and distinguished history inastronomical publishing, but PASA now adds an importantnew dimension to Cambridge’s capability in this area. TheAstronomical Society of Australia is excited to be partneringwith Cambridge, and looks forward to developing newways of sharing ideas and of promoting the latest astrophysicalresearch from around the world.”

Cambridge University Press publishes over 300 peer-reviewed academic journals. The five-year contract withthe Astronomical Society of Australia begins in January2013.

International award to WLAN technology

The CSIRO team that invented a faster system for wirelesslocal area networking – which later became the foundationof Wi–Fi in its most popular form today – has won a Eu-

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 136 49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

The final print copy of PASA in 2001.

Professor Adrian Byrne [courtesy: ANU]

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 137SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

ropean Inventor Award for 2012. Lead by Dr John O’Sullivan, the team from CSIRO Space Sciences andAstronomy was named the winners of the ‘Non-Europeancountries’ category of the annual awards for the patentedWLAN technology at an awards ceremony in Copenhagenin June.

The technology, which has given the freedom to workwirelessly from home or the office, is now estimated tobe in more than three billion devices worldwide and isexpected to be in more than five billion devices by thetime the CSIRO patent expires at the end of 2013.

“We’re thrilled for the team to receive this internationalrecognition for an invention that has had such a significantglobal impact”, said Nigel Poole from CSIRO InformationSciences. “It’s a technology that has changed how wework and how we live. The rapid expansion of indoorwireless communications is in part possible because ofthe WLAN technology invented at CSIRO.”

Launched in 2006, the European Inventor Award ispresented annually by the European Patent Office, inco-operation with the European Commission and thecountry which holds the EU Council Presidency at thetime of the award ceremony, which this year is Denmark.This is the first time an Australian team has won theaward.

The EIA is presented in five categories: Industry, Re-search, SMEs, Non-European countries and LifetimeAchievement. Fifteen finalists were selected across allcategories from almost 200 inventors and teams whowere originally nominated by an international jury.

O’Sullivan has been recognised previously for theWLAN with the Prime Minister’s Prize for Science in2009.

The WLAN project team: John Deane (left), Terry Percival,Graham Daniels, Diet Ostry and John O’Sullivan [courtesy:CSIRO Information Sciences].

[© Australian Postal Corporation]

Bragg honoured by Australia PostIn the centenary year of the announcement of Braggs’ law,Australia Post has issued a stamp in honour of LawrenceBragg (1890–1971), who was Australia’s first Nobel Laureateand is still the youngest laureate in any field. He shared theNobel Prize for Physics with his father William in 1915for their ‘services in the analysis of crystal structure bymeans of X-rays’ [see AP 49, 75–9 (2012)]. The stampfeatures a portrait of Bragg by Sir William Dargie.

The Bragg stamp is one of a series of five, with the otherfour also featuring portraits of early Australian Laureates:Howard Florey (1898–1968) who was awarded the prizefor physiology or medicine in 1945 ‘for the discovery ofpenicillin and its curative effect in various infectiousdiseases’; Frank Macfarlane Burnet (1899–1985) for phys-iology or medicine in 1960 ‘for discovery of acquired im-munological tolerance’; John Carew Eccles (1903–97) forphysiology or medicine in 1963 ‘for discoveries concerningthe ionic mechanisms involved in excitation and inhibitionin the peripheral and central portions of the nerve cellmembrane’; and Patrick White (1912–90) for literaturein 1973 ‘for an epic and psychological narrative art whichhas introduced a new continent into literature’.

The five stamp series was issued in late August.

Dear Editor,

Professor Melia, if he is to overturn so much of moderncosmology [see AP 49, 83–8 (2012)] has a lot of explainingto do. Like all cosmological models, his a(t) ∝ t modelhas to run the gauntlet of cosmological observations.We contend that a simple analysis of the key observationsshow that his model is an extremely poor representationof our Universe. We have detailed other deficiencies inhis model within the literature, and we are left to concludethat the Universe is not as simple as Melia hopes.

Melia uses the Friedmann equation, which relates theevolution of the scale factor a(t) to the density of theUniverse ρ. Melia’s a(t) ∝ t, k = 0 model requires thatthe energy density of the Universe scales with theexpansion as ρ∝ a–2, which implies an equation of stateof w = p/ρ= –⅓. As the article notes, neither matter norradiation fit the bill. We must postulate another form ofenergy – component X, say – whose pressure pX dependsnot only on its density ρX but on the density of matterand radiation as

pX = –⅓(ρm + 2ρr + ρX).

Given this dependence on ρm and ρr, component Xmust interact strongly with baryonic matter and radiation.Needless to say, no known form of energy has theseproperties.

Alternatively, Melia could maintain that the matterand radiation do not affect the expansion of the Universein the way that the Friedmann equation indicates. Thisimplies that the coupling between matter/radiation andspacetime is otherwise than is postulated in GeneralRelativity. Given that the Friedmann equation also resultsfrom a Newtonian treatment of cosmology, this wouldinvolve a major overhaul of our understanding of gravi-tation. No details of this revolution have been forth-coming.

Big Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN) presents a majordifficulty for the model. In the ΛCDM model, nucle-osynthesis occurs when the Universe is ~1 minute old,when T ~ 109 K and ρbaryon ~ 0.1 kg/m3. In Melia’smodel, the Universe takes 14 years to cool off to 109 K,much longer than the lifetime of the neutron. It is thusdoubtful that Melia’s model will reproduce the successfulpredictions of BBN in ΛCDM.

The Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) alsoposes problems. Melia quotes Spergel’s WMAP obser-vations that indicate that the Universe is flat. However,this result assumes that a(t) is as calculated in ΛCDM.

In particular, one must calculate the angular diameterdistance DA to the surface of last scattering zlast ≈ 1089.In Melia’s model, DA(zlast) is about 2.25 times largerthan in the ΛCDM model. To fit the angular anisotropiesof the CMB, either component X must by some miracleincrease the sound horizon by almost exactly the samefactor, or else one must suitably fine-tune the primordialspectrum of inhomogeneities. Given that Melia’s modelseeks to replace inflation as the mechanism for generatingsuch inhomogeneities, this represents another gapinghole in the model.

Further, the model must account for observations ofdistant supernovae, which constrain the relationship be-tween the luminosity distance and redshift. Bilicki andSeikel (2012, preprint: arxiv.org/abs/1206.5130) haveshown that Melia’s model fails this test: the data constrainthe deceleration parameter of the Universe today to beq0 = –0.34±0.05, ruling out q0

Melia = 0 to more than 6-sigma. The redshift dependence of q, and the Hubbleparameter, are further hurdles at which Melia’s modelfalls.

Against such evidence, what does Melia’s model havein its favour? Melia states that Weyl’s principle requiresthat all proper distances have the form R = a(t)r (wherer is the unchanging co-moving distance), including thegravitational radius Rh = c/H. Weyl’s principle statesnothing of the sort. It applies to the worldlines of particlesmoving with the expansion of the Universe (ie. in theHubble flow). The principle does not apply to all properdistances, and in particular does not apply to Rh.

The only piece of evidence in favour of the Meliamodel is the fact that in the ΛCDM model, we happento live in the short time window in which t0 ≈ 1/H0,where t0 is the age of the Universe, while for Melia’smodel this relation is exactly true at all times. Such argu-ments have dubious pedigree: Dirac tried to argue thatthe coincidence between the age of the Universe inatomic units and the strength of electromagnetismrelative to gravity implies that the gravitational ‘constant’G(t) changes linearly with time. Dicke, however, pointedout that the coincidence could more easily be explainedby noting that observers in our Universe are made fromthe products of stellar fusion, and thus could expect toobserve a Universe that is roughly the same age as mainsequence stars.

We should keep in mind that this is just a coincidence– there is no conflict between theory and data. This~1% level coincidence is interesting but hardly cries outfor the conclusion that, despite all evidence to the

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 138

LETTERS

49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

contrary, the energy content of the Universe has conspiredto have no effect whatsoever on its expansion rate forthe last 13.7 billion years.

We conclude that the a(t) ∝ t model has almostnothing going for it, and a considerable body of cosmo-logical observations convincingly against it.

Sincerely,

Dr Luke Barnes, Dr Krzysztof Bolejko and Professor Geraint LewisThe Gravitational Astrophysics Group,Sydney Institute for Astronomy, School of Physics,The University of Sydney29 June 2012

Dear Editor,

The claims by Professor Lewis and his colleagues reveal astrong reluctance to view the latest observations objectively.They correctly state that any cosmological model mustrun the gauntlet of cosmological observations. So let ussee how the current model they are defending (knownas Lambda Cold Dark Matter, or ΛCDM) compareswith the Rh = ct Universe. (All of these points are basedon papers already published or posted to the electronicpreprint server arXiv.)(1) ΛCDM requires a brief period of inflation following

the Big Bang in order to explain how opposite sidesof the sky can be in equilibrium. In the Rh = ctUniverse, all parts of the visible Universe have beenin equilibrium from the beginning. But the problemswith inflation appear to be insurmountable becausenone of the hundreds of individuals who have spentmuch of their career working on it have figured outhow to make it work. This observational issue thereforefalls strongly in favour of Rh = ct.

(2) The fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background(CMB) show no correlation at angles greater than60°, in line with the predictions of Rh = ct. In contrast,ΛCDM predicts correlations at all angles. Otherssuch as Copi et al. (2009) have proven that the prob-ability of ΛCDM being the correct model to explainthese fluctuations is less than 0.03%. No one who se-riously understands scientific principles would claimthat a theory with such an infinitesimally low prob-ability is tenable. Yet this is the observational evidenceProfessor Lewis and his colleagues use to defendΛCDM.

(3) The observed alignment of the quadrupole andoctople moments of the CMB fluctuations is a sta-tistical anomaly for ΛCDM, but not in the contextof Rh = ct.

(4) The distribution of matter in the Universe is observedto be scale-free, exactly how Rh = ct predicts it to be.Yet ΛCDM predicts different distributions on differentspatial scales, prompting Watson et al. (2011) to cat-egorise this situation as yet another cosmic coincidencefor ΛCDM.

(5) In ΛCDM there is no explanation for why matterconstitutes 27% of the overall energy density. But Rh = ct explains exactly that when one naively forcesthe matter–energy density to be comprised of thethree specific components, matter, radiation, and acosmological constant (more on this below), the Rh = ct condition exactly forces the matter contribu-tions to be 27%.

(6) In ΛCDM, we are so special that we live at exactlythe perfect – and unique – moment in history whenthe early deceleration was exactly matched by thelater acceleration, in such a magical way that we nowsee an overall expansion equal to what it would havebeen if the Rh = ct condition had been maintainedall along. Let me stress that this condition couldnever have been maintained over the Universe’s pre-vious 13.7 billion-year history and, more importantly,never in its entire, infinite future history either.Again, this is the kind of straw Lewis et al. mustgrasp in order to make their claims.

(7) Lewis et al. are critical of the fact that Rh = ct cannotyet explain what dark energy is. That is true, as thisis not yet a complete theory. So what does ΛCDMdo? It adopts the view that dark energy is a cosmo-logical constant with a value 10120 smaller than thatpredicted by Quantum Mechanics. This is not atypo. Somehow, supporters of ΛCDM have convincedthemselves that this is acceptable.

(8) We are now discovering 109 solar-mass quasars atredshifts beyond 7. In ΛCDM, the Universe wasonly 400 million years old. Only magic could haveformed such gargantuan objects so quickly after theBig Bang. Yet in Rh = ct that redshift corresponds toan age of 1.7 billion years, and the first 10-solar-mass black holes formed from supernovae at the endof the dark ages could have easily grown to a billionsolar masses as a result of Eddington-limited accretion.

(9) The details concerning Big Bang nucleosynthesis(BBN) are too extensive to list here (but see e.g. the

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 139SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

recent paper by Benoit-Levy and Chardin 2012).Clearly, the nuclear network in the Rh = ct Universeproceeds differently from that in ΛCDM, yet theyield of helium is virtually the same. This is becauseBBN with a constant expansion results from the on-going creation of neutrons over many years. ButLewis et al. fail to highlight the so-called ‘lithiumanomaly’ in ΛCDM – the fact that ΛCDM predictsa 7Li yield differing by factors of 3 or 4 from that ac-tually observed. Yet this anomaly virtually disappearsin the context of a constant expansion scenario. Con-trary to what Lewis et al. claim, BBN in ΛCDMtherefore does not work as well as it does in Rh = ct.

In fitting models to the supernovae observations, thedata cannot be determined independently of the assumedcosmology. One must optimise the four parameters thatyield the SN distance moduli along with those of themodel itself. As such, different models can fit the datawith equal statistical significance. The profiles predictedby ΛCDM and Rh = ct are virtually indistinguishable allthe way out to a redshift of 6 or more. The Type Ia SN

data do not by themselves support one model over theother.

Finally, Lewis et al. have not understood what Weyl’spostulate is telling us. The radius R either is, or is not, aproper distance. If it is a proper distance, then it must beexpressible in the form a(t)r, where a(t) is a universalfunction of time and r is an unchanging co-movingdistance. But they claim that r itself can change in time.Well, then R is not a proper distance. In other words,you cannot have your cake and eat it too! Lewis et al.want to believe that Rh must be defined as a properdistance in the Hubble law, but then they also want toclaim that r is not constant. They cannot have it bothways.

Sincerely,

Professor Fulvio MeliaThe University of Arizona, Tucson2 July 2012

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 140 49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

Eureka Prize to UNSW–Swinburne team

The Eureka Prize for Scientific Research for 2012 hasbeen awarded to a team of astrophysicists consisting ofDr Julian Berengut, Professor Victor Flambaum, DrJulian King, Professor John Webb (UNSW) and A/Pro-fessor Michael Murphy (Swinburne). Their researchprovides compelling evidence that the fine structureconstant, and thus electromagnetism, varies in strengthacross the Universe – see the cover story by Murphy inAP 49, 43–48 (2012). The annual prize worth $10,000,announced in Sydney on 28 August, is one of severalawarded by the Australian Museum.

The pioneering research challenges the conventionalview that the Universe is homogeneous in any directionwithout variation – at least in relation to the fundamentallaws of nature. “Beneath the mind-boggling complexityof the cosmos there has always been a solid confidencethat the laws of nature are always and everywhere thesame. Thanks to the work of this team that cherishednotion might have to be discarded,” says Frank Howarth,Director of the Australian Museum.

A breakthrough by Flambaum and Webb more thana decade ago allowed them to improve the precision ofmeasuring physical laws elsewhere in the Universe by a

factor of 10. Recently, the team has used large opticaltelescopes in Hawaii and Chile to observe the lightfrom extremely distant quasars as it passes through in-tervening gas clouds. Their extraordinary discovery isthat the spectra of elements in the clouds differ slightly,but significantly, from the same spectra measured inthe laboratory, indicating small variations in the strengthof the electromagnetic force.

A finalist in the Eureka Prize for Science or Mathe-matics Teaching was Dr Eroia Barone-Nugent – seethe article next page.

Four of the team: Julian Berengut (left), John Webb,Michael Murphy and Victor Flambaum [credit: DanielO’Doherty & Australian Museum Eureka Prizes].

IntroductionIt is well-documented that the fraction of studentsenrolled in physics and the absolute number of studentsenrolled in physics have both been steadily declining forseveral decades [1–3]. Biology, chemistry and physicshave shown decline since 1991 and, of these, the declinein the study of physics is the most significant. The overalldeclines are even more severe for enrolments of girls inthese subjects and again the drop is most dramatic forphysics [4–8].

The reasons for these reductions in numbers are notclear, are no doubt complex and are mirrored acrossmany developed nations [9]. One may reasonably speculate

that the reasons include a perceived lack of relevance,lack of career opportunity, scepticism about the value ofscience and, in Australia at least, the removal of scienceas a prerequisite for entry to many university courses.Many of these perceptions have been underlined byrecent reports. For example, a Universities Australiareport released in 2012 [3] indicates that many studentsregard science as uninspiring and that they struggle tocontextualise their learning into their broader life expe-riences. The report reveals that enrolments in scienceswith an obvious human or social dimension (such aspsychology) have increased, while sciences such as physicshave decreased. The report also suggests that girls have

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 141SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

Increasing numbers of girls studyingphysics through partnerships

Eroia D. Barone-Nugent, Harry M. Quiney and Keith A. Nugent

The ARC Centre of Excellence for Coherent X-ray Science headquartered in the Schoolof Physics at the University of Melbourne, in collaboration with Santa Maria College,Northcote, a Catholic girls school in suburban Melbourne, has developed apartnership aimed at empowering girls to continue with their study of physics to Year12. The program is called Growing Tall Poppies in Science: An authentic science experiencefor secondary students. The program has succeeded in doubling the number of girlsstudying physics at Santa Maria College. A longitudinal study identified the program’simpact on students’ subject selection, particularly physics in years 11 and 12. Theresults show a statistically significant increase in both students choosing year 11physics and the retention of those students into year 12 physics.

Growing Tall Poppies

particularly moved away from the study of physics. As part of the outreach activities of the ARC Centre

of Excellence for Coherent X-ray Science (CXS) [10]and the partnership activities of Santa Maria College,Northcote (SMC) we have, since 2008, developed an in-teractive and integrated program that engages secondarystudents with current research questions that allows themto contextualise the physical sciences. Our program iscalled Growing Tall Poppies: An authentic science experiencefor secondary students (GTP, for short) and it engagesstudents with research projects that are cross-disciplinaryin nature and highlights how the physical and biologicalsciences work together to resolve complex questions [11].

A recent review of science education by the AustralianAcademy of Science (AAS) [2] indicates the need for agreater emphasis on a pedagogical model of student en-gagement that promotes relevance and meaning to students,rather than on the transmission model. This has beensupported by the AAS ‘Science by Doing’ program [2].The AAS also reported the importance of demonstratingand emphasising cross-disciplinary links in order to keepstudents in science. Our program has independently de-veloped and implemented teaching and learning strategiesthat are entirely consistent with these reports and ourresults confirm the value of such an approach.

We undertook a longitudinal study to identify theprogram’s impact on students’ subject selection, particularlyphysics in years 11 and 12. The results show a statisticallysignificant increase in both students choosing year 11physics and retention into year 12 physics.

A partnership between CXS and SMCThe GTP program is particularly directed towards girlsin the physical sciences with the overarching aim ofdemonstrating that physics is relevant to their owninterests. The program is a context-based curriculum pro-viding an authentic science environment for studentsaged 15–17 years. The program promotes enduring science

learning by focusing on how the scientific process buildsknowledge that improves the quality of life and how itcan address complex problems that are relevant to society,community and individuals. The essential tenet is that ifgirls can see the relevance of physics to society via, for ex-ample, developments in the biological sciences and med-icine, and if they can meet working physicists who are ex-cited by what they do, then they will see why it is worthcontinuing with its study to year 12 and possibly beyond.The guiding principles of GTP are outlined in Box 1.

Students crave excitement in their learning environmentand they often make career choices based on a perceptionthat their contribution will be valued. Secondary schoolstudents deserve the opportunity to see how science isconstructed, and how the advances being made rightnow can effect change, can cure disease, can understandclimate change and improve ‘the lot’ of humanity [7,11–13]. The key to the GTP program, then, is to linkscience educators, students and scientists via currentresearch projects in which students are able to participateand contribute. At the same time, the outcomes of theprogram are aligned to key curriculum areas allowing theresearch work to support and invigorate the classroomexperience. The projects are chosen to be engaging, andto provide students with the autonomy to follow theirown lines of inquiry; curiosity and problem solving arecentral parts of the experience. The students work withyoung scientists who take on a collegial mentoring rolerather than a classical (didactic) teacher role. The scientistshelp the students to formulate their own questions, followtheir own ideas, to construct investigations and collectfirst-hand data [14]. This collegial environment includesexposure to cutting edge technology and allows thestudents to explore the sciences in the context of potentialcareer choices. The students are expected to articulate, intheir reflective assessment, attractive career directionsthey may have identified.

A critical factor allowing students to benefit from this

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 142 49(4) | JULY–AUGUST 2012

Box 1. Attributes of GTP(1) GTP takes students out of the classroom and immerses them in world leading science laboratories with world-class scientists and

cutting edge technology (2) GTP provides context-based projects to relate science content to a broader contextual meaning(3) GTP allows an inside look at science(4) GTP expects students to gather results that contribute to scientific knowledge (5) GTP expects students to present their work to the scientific community and publish their work online, and to reflect on the meaning

and importance of science(6) GTP develops student expertise and knowledge that is shared with their school community and friends and family (7) GTP participants are encouraged to develop a mutually supportive community

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 143SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

partnership is that CXS is an interdisciplinary centreworking at the intersection of physics, biology and chem-istry. The fundamental science research goals of CXSaddress questions that are directly relevant to society,such as alternatives to existing antibiotics and new curesfor malaria. Of course CXS is not alone in having an in-terdisciplinary research program. The School of EarthSciences at the University of Melbourne has also participatedin GTP via a project that investigates questions regardingglobal warming in an interdisciplinary manner. As partof their GTP experience, students searched througharchived historical documents for reports on weatherdata to analyse if there has been a discernible change ofAustralian climate since colonisation; this project linkedphysics, earth sciences and Australian history. (For a dis-cussion and some idea on such approaches to learningsee [15, 16].)

A sample projectThe GTP program has run projects over a broad range oftopic areas [10, 11, 14] and we invite interested readersto visit our website for details of many of them [seewww.coecxs.org/growingtallpoppies]. In this section, wedescribe in detail a project highlighting how an abstracttheoretical aspect of physics can be articulated to Year 10students.

A central scientific aim of CXS is to develop newforms of X-ray structural analysis applicable to singlebio-molecules using data obtained by scattering extremelyhigh-intensity coherent X-ray laser pulses from singlebio-molecules. Increasingly the bio-molecules of interest,such as membrane proteins, do not form crystals. Thisnew approach to structure determination does not requirecrystallisation of bio-molecules. We need to put aside,therefore, the well-established methods of crystallographythat have been developed in the 100 years since Australia’sfirst physics Nobel laureates published the Bragg equa-tion.

There is a fundamental difference between deducingthe molecular structure from a periodic (crystalline)diffraction pattern, and the use of the continuous diffractionpattern that would be produced by a single molecule (anon-crystalline structure). Fortunately, while the singlemolecule experiment is very much harder than an exper-iment with a crystal, the data analysis, while still challenging,is rather easier.

The key to solving the structure that will produce acontinuous diffraction pattern is to recognise that thestructure that produces it is subject to a considerable

number of constraints. For example, we know that themolecule has finite extent, we probably know a lot aboutits atomic constituents by independent methods ofchemical analysis, and we know that its electron densityis numerically positive and real. It is now well-establishedthat iterative processes that systematically guess thatanswer and impose constraints such as these can get youto the solution reliably and, with modern computer re-sources, rapidly.

Interestingly, the method of recovering the phase for acontinuous diffraction shares some deep connections tothe solution of a Sudoku puzzle and to other problems in

Box 2. X-Ray SudokuEfficient computational algorithms exist for thedetermination of structures from experimental X-raydiffraction data. While the concepts of optical phase, theFourier transformation of complex amplitudes and iterativecomputational algorithms are unlikely to be familiar tosecondary-level students. Elser has pointed out (seeseedmagazine.com/content/article/microscopy_and_the_art_of_sudoku/) that the general strategy involved in thephase retrieval of X-ray diffraction data is common to a widerange of problems, including the solution of themathematical puzzle Sudoku. Large numbers of people maybe daily observed performing “constrained searches oniterated maps” as they commute home on the train. InSudoku, one requires that the integers 1 to 9 appear exactlyonce in each row, each column and each 3×3 sub-block of a9×9 grid, subject to the fixed ‘clues’ that distinguish onepuzzle from another. The solution of problems in coherentphase recovery and Sudoku puzzles may be cast within acommon framework.

Elser described a general computational search algorithmfor Sudoku in which two constraints on arrangements of theintegers are applied in turn until a solution is obtained. Thisalgorithm is able to solve Sudoku puzzles in between 10 and100 steps. We have devised a simplified version of thisalgorithm, also involving the satisfaction of two constraints.The rules are simple and have been used to formulate a boardgame that we ask the students to make and then play.

“Our program … engagesstudents with researchprojects that are cross-disciplinary in nature andhighlights how the physicaland biological scienceswork together to resolvecomplex questions.”

code breaking. The details of the connection to diffractionare outlined in Box 2, but of course these require a levelof knowledge that is well beyond even the most optimisticexpectations of a Year 10 student. These students are,however, familiar with Sudoku puzzles and are usuallyable to solve them guided mostly by intuition; theapproach adopted in the GTP project may most simplybe regarded as a formal articulation of that intuitivesolution process. One of us (HMQ) has developed aniterative scheme that enables all but the most fiendish ofSudokus to be solved via a new form of board game. Thisemploys an iterative approach that works by repeatedlyimposing the constraint on a Sudoku – that each rowand column contains all digits from 1 to 9. Thus theGTP program involves ‘playing’ diffraction, explaininghow it relates to biology and drug-design, how CXS istrying to take the field to a new level using the latest sci-entific facilities and then relating it to the familiar. As abonus they take home a new board game that’s a lot offun for everyone (Fig. 1). The students understand theanalogy between Sudoku and X-ray imaging and explainit in their presentations at the conclusion of the program.

The Sudoku project is perhaps the most ambitious inthe GTP program, but there are numerous other interestingand exciting projects in which students work in biology

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 144 49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

Box 3. Reflections of StudentParticipants in the Growing TallPoppies Program“Before the Growing Tall Poppies program, I thought thatPhysics, Biology and Chemistry were separate from eachother.”

“The Growing Tall Poppies program revealed the importanceof science in today’s society and has inspired me to continueto study science.”

“My experience helped me see the importance of science andrelevant applications of the things you study at school. Youcan also see the links with the different areas of study.”

“Not only do you realise science is awesome but also that thedifferent branches of science such as biology, physics andchemistry are all joined together. I really feel I can do this typeof study as a career.”

“Before the program my definition of a scientist was a manin white lab coat and now I see that scientists are all sorts ofpeople with a wide range of interests and really creativeminds.”

“The program has helped me see science-in-action and whatscientists really do. It has helped me stay interested in thescience we learn at school.”

“The best part was learning how the three sciences (physics,chemistry and biology) complement each other.”

Fig. 1. The board of the GTP Sudoku game. White tiles arethe fixed clues. The constraint to be applied iteratively isthat each row and each column must contain all digits from1 to 9. Keeping the movable squares of a particular colourin the 3×3 regions ensures that the second Sudokuconstraint is obeyed automatically. Fig. 2. GTP conference delegates in 2010 explore the display

put on by the School of Physics at the University ofMelbourne for the event.

labs attempting crystal formation, perform experimentsat the Australian Synchrotron or in femtosecond laserlabs, or perform 3-D X-ray tomography using laboratorysources [14].

The reception by the students and by the scientiststhey work with has been fantastic and some sample com-ments are outlined in Box 3. The community of GTPalumnae continues to communicate though a website.In 2010, a student conference was organised at whichProfessor Margaret Murnane, a leading laser physicistfrom Colorado, agreed to speak on her experiences as ayoung female scientist (see Figs 2 and 3). The next con-ference in the series will be held in 2012.

Does it work? It is universally accepted that outreach activities and thepromotion of science are worthy activities but the successof such initiatives is often merely anecdotal. With GTPwe have adopted the principle that we would apply thesame standards to our outreach as we do to our science.This necessitates the formulation of well-articulated goalsand the measurement of outcomes.

The goal of GTP is quite simply to increase the numberof girls studying physics to year 12 and, in particular, toensure that once the student embarks on their final year

of physics study, they persevere to the end of theirsecondary schooling. Year 12 enrolments in physics atSanta Maria College are now approximately twice thehighest pre-GTP enrolment over the last decade. Asecond feature of GTP is the confidence that it providesthe students to persist with the study of physics. By thismeasure, GTP has been a fantastic success, as shown inFig. 4 where we plot the retention rate of students fromUnit 2 physics (second semester in Year 11) to Unit 3physics (first semester in Year 12). This plot also showsthe state-wide figures for girls obtained from the VictorianCurriculum and Assessment Authority website(www.vcaa.vic.edu.au). It can be seen that the retentionrate at SMC has increased very significantly from a ratebelow the state average to one that is well above after theintroduction of the GTP program in 2008. The historicalretention rate of around 40% has increased to over 90%,indicating both higher participation and higher retention.The enrolments, though small, have increased from a2002–08 average of six students in Unit 3 (year 12)physics to a 2009–12 average of 9.25 students. This year13 students are enrolled, the highest number ever atSMC.

The small numbers dictate that we must ensure thatthe numbers are statistically significant. Analysis via

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 145SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

Fig. 3. Professor Margaret Murnane from the University ofColorado describes the science she pursues to the 2010 GTPstudent conference.

Fig. 4. Retention rate from Unit 2 (Year 11) to Unit 3 (Year 12)physics. The diamonds show overall numbers for girls inVictoria. The squares show the corresponding rate for SantaMaria College. The increase in retention rate for SMC afterthe commencement of GTP in 2008 is apparent andstatistically significant (p < 0.001).

“The goal of GTP is quitesimply to increase thenumber of girls studyingphysics to year 12 …”

Fisher’s test for association has shown that the probabilitythat the impact seen in Fig. 4 is due to chance is negligiblysmall (p < 0.001); the impact of GTP is a real effect andthe impact does live on with the students. We believethat our data allow us to conclusively claim that our ap-proach does change student outcomes.

Conclusions and futureGrowing Tall Poppies is an active research project inoutreach that is having positive effects in changing per-ceptions and subject choices of students. The studentsbenefit from the intensive mentorship they receive duringthe week of participation in an environment that is newand exciting. The hosting research group integrates thegroup of students with little disruption and the young

scientists who mentor them develop skills in communi-cating their research goals in an understandable way.Several PhD students have expressed an interest in ateaching career after their GTP experience, because theyhave enjoyed the process of facilitating students’ learning;it can be life changing from both sides!

As many research groups are involved in CXS, it ispossible to deliver this immersion program to a largenumber of students. We see no fundamental obstacle toscaling the program up to a significantly larger scale ifaccess to more laboratories were possible, for examplevia a university- or laboratory-wide program. In our case,about three hundred students have been involved in thefour years of its operation, helping to encourage anddevelop scientifically-inclined students to continue with

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 146 49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

Fig. 5. Eroia Barone-Nugent with student Yvonne Liu.

the study of science and especially physics. There is nosign of any diminution of the importance of physics toscientific advancement and through this program we arecontributing to the future generations’ tall poppies. Weare obliged to do all we can to ensure the continuedstudy of physics.

AcknowledgementsThe GTP program is supported by Santa Maria College,Northcote, CXS, the Catholic Education Office Mel-bourne, a University of Melbourne Knowledge TransferGrant and as the 2009 winner of the National AustraliaBank Schools First State Award for Victoria. We also ac-knowledge the wonderful contributions of the manymentors who have willingly contributed their time, aswell as the resources of CSIRO, the Australian Synchrotronand a number of university departments from the Uni-versity of Melbourne, La Trobe University and SwinburneUniversity. The ARC Centre of Excellence for CoherentX-ray Science is supported by the participating institutionsand by the Australian Research Council.

References [1] J. Ainley et al., ‘Participation in Science, Mathematics

and Technology in Australian Education’, ACER ResearchMonograph No. 63 (2008).

[2] D. Goodrum et al., ‘The Status and Quality of Year 11and 12 Science in Australian Schools’ (2011), Office ofthe Chief Scientist [see www.science.org.au/publications/documents/Year11and12Report.pdf ].

[3] Universities Australia: ‘STEM and non-STEM First YearStudents’ (2012) [see www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/re-sources/680/1319].

[4] A. Kelly, ‘The development of girls and boys attitudes toscience – a longitudinal study’, European J. Sci. Educat.8, 399 (1986).

[5] A. Kelly et al., ‘Girls into science and technology. Finalreport’ (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED

250 203), Manchester: GIST, Department of Sociology(1984).

[6] B. Smail, ‘Encouraging girls to give physics a secondchance’, in ‘Science for Girls?’, A. Kelly (ed.), pp. 13–18(Open University Press, Milton Keynes, 1985).

[7] E. K. Stage et al., ‘Increasing the participation and achieve-ment of girls and women in mathematics, sciences andengineering’, in ‘Handbook for achieving Sex Equitythrough Education’, S. Klein (ed.) (The Johns HopkinsUniversity Press, Baltimore).

[8] C. Williams et al., ‘Why aren’t secondary studentsinterested in physics?’, Phys. Educat. 38, 324 (2003).

[9] T. Lyons, ‘The puzzle of falling enrolments in physicsand chemistry courses: Putting some pieces together’,Res. Sci. Educat. (2005), DOI: 10.1007/s11165-005-9008-z.

[10] K. A. Nugent and A. G. Peele, ‘The ARC Centre of Ex-cellence for Coherent X-ray Science’, Aust. Phys. 47, 10(2010).

[11] E. Barone-Nugent, ‘Growing Tall Poppies in science: Anauthentic science experience for secondary school students’,Labtalk: Secondary Science J. Science Teachers’ Associationof Victoria 54, 29 (2010).

[12] A. M. W. Bulte et al., ‘A research approach to designingchemistry education using authentic practices as contexts’,Int. J. Sci. Educat. 28, 1063 (2006).

[13] C. Hart et al., ‘What does it mean to teach physics ‘incontext’? A second case study’, Aust. Sci. Teachers J. 48, 6(2002).

[14] T. Kirkinis and E. Barone-Nugent, ‘Jurassic Park in minia-ture: Why imaging fossils can be cool’, Labtalk 54, 29(2010).

[15] ‘Providing hands-on, minds-on, and authentic learningexperiences in science’ [see www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/science/sc500.htm].

[16] Pedagogical models on how to teach in novel engagingways can be found at: serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/pedagogies.html.

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 147SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

AUTHOR BIOSEroia Barone-Nugent is a science teacher and Head of Partnerships Development at Santa Maria College, Northcote. She has a PhDin palaeontology from the University of Melbourne, a MEd in mathematics and science education from La Trobe University and anhonours degree in biochemistry from the University of Adelaide. She has been the driving force behind the Growing Tall Poppiesprogram which won the inaugural State Award from the Schools First in 2009. Eroia was a finalist in the 2012 Eureka Prizes inrecognition of the GTP program. Keith Nugent is a Federation Fellow and Laureate Professor in Physics at the University of Melbourne.He is also Director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coherent X-ray Science (CXS) and of the Australian Synchrotron. Harry Quineyis Assistant Director of CXS and Head of the CXS Theory and Modelling Program. He specialises in understanding quantum molecularscience and decoding diffraction patterns. He doesn’t particularly enjoy Sudoku. Eroia does.

In 2003, Professor Richard Smalley, a Nobel Prize winnerin chemistry, posed the question: “What will be the topproblems facing the world in the not too distant future –50 years?”. The top ten challenges in ranked order weredetermined to be: (1) energy, (2) water, (3) food, (4) en-vironment, (5) poverty, (6) terrorism & war, (7) disease,(8) education, (9) democracy, and (10) population. Thereason that energy and water are number (1) and (2) re-spectively is that an abundant amount of clean energyand water would make the other challenges easier tosolve. With an abundant amount of clean energy, cleanwater can be provided – for this reason energy is rankednumber one.

The reality is that fossil fuels are becoming depletedand we are in great need of large-scale new energy sources.This realisation was not lost on the great French sciencefiction writer, Jules Verne. In his 1874 book, The MysteriousIsland (chapter 33), Jules Verne writes of a group of fiveAmericans on an unchartered island in the South Pacific,who often talked of their country and the industrial

movement, and the question is raised as to what willhappen when the American and Australian mines runout of coal in about 250 or 300 years. Cyrus Harding,an engineer, replies: “I believe that water will one day beemployed as fuel, that hydrogen and oxygen which constituteit, used singly or together, will furnish an inexhaustiblesource of heat and light, of an intensity of which coal is not capable.” Indeed, one such energy source that canuse hydrogen isotopes from water as its fuel is nuclearfusion.

Nuclear fusionIt is possible to create a large amount of energy from thenucleus in two ways: (i) by splitting the nuclei intosmaller nuclei (fission) or (ii) by joining small nucleiinto larger ones (fusion). Fission is a well-developedtechnology while fusion still has much to prove as anenergy source. Nuclear fusion is one of few options forlarge-scale environmentally friendly power generation.The fusion of light nuclei yields heavier nuclei and

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 148 49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

Atthe EdgePlasma–Surface Science for Future Fusion ReactorsCormac Corr

Concerns over energy security and climate change are driving the development ofnovel sustainable energy sources. Fusion, the process that powers the Sun, has greatpotential to provide clean industrial-scale baseload electrical power, with negligibleCO2 emissions and produce little long-term waste. Results from the 500 MWinternational magnetic confinement experiment ITER will determine the future offusion energy as a viable alternative source of clean energy. The science andtechnology of materials under extreme heat loads, and in particular plasma–surfaceinteractions, are critical to the success of plasma fusion sources such as ITER [1] andthe ultimate viability of generating fusion power under steady state conditions.

converts mass to kinetic energy. Due to the Coulombrepulsion of the nuclei, fusion reactions occur only attemperatures that are six orders of magnitude higherthan regular chemical reactions. The lowest thresholdreaction is between deuterium and tritium:

2D+ + 3T+ → n + 4He++ + 17.6 MeV,which is the reaction of choice for ITER (meaning ‘theway’ in Latin), the 500 MW international magnetic con-finement experiment being built in the south of France,to demonstrate the feasibility of controlled magneticfusion as an energy source for the future. ITER bringstogether a significant international consortium, withconfirmed project capitalisation of more than €16b andrepresents an unprecedented leap in fusion power, energydensity, pulse length, and tritium fuel throughput forfusion experiments.

While the decision to construct the experimental testreactor ITER is a significant step forward, severalimportant challenges remain. Controlling the plasma–wall interaction region, which couples high edge tem-peratures (106 K) to low temperature (103 K) wall com-ponents, is critical for ITER’s successful operation. In-vestigations of the fundamental science at the plasma–material interface are in the early stages. Emphasis hasbeen on operational aspects, such as the flux and type ofimpurities, and empirical studies rather than the physicsdetails such as the space charge effects (sheath), particletransport and details of chemical erosion andphysical sputtering mechanisms.

Plasma: The fusion fuelPlasma, the fourth state of matter, is anionised gas that consists of a ‘soup’ of pos-itively and negatively charged particlesalong with neutral particles. It plays acritical role in modern technologies suchas micro-electronics, display technologies,mobile phones, solar-cells, nano-chip fab-rication, aerospace applications, high-effi-ciency lighting, biomedicine, and evencancer treatment. Such technologies ex-ploit the complex plasma–surface inter-actions in which the low-temperatureplasma (<100,000 K or 10 eV) isused to modify surface propertiesof materials. An example of thisis shown in Fig. 1 where a chlorineplasma is used to modify a siliconsurface. In such a process, a syn-

ergistic effect between chlorine radicals and chlorineions is used to remove silicon atoms from the surface.Processes such as this have been driving technologicalinnovation for many decades. Modern society would besignificantly less advanced in the absence of plasma tech-nologies.

Plasma is also the fuel of magnetically confined fusionenergy. A key challenge for fusion power is controllingtransport between the hot fusion core and the low tem-perature wall [2–6]. While plasma–surface interactionshave been widely studied for low-temperature applications,very little is known about interactions at the edge of hotmagnetised fusion plasma. With the establishment ofthe superconducting ITER plasma fusion project we areat the threshold of realising burning fusion plasma, in

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 149SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

Fig. 1. Plasma–material modification using a chlorineplasma.

Fig. 2. The burning fusion plasma ITER [courtesy: ANU ScienceWise magazine].

which the plasma is dominantly self-heated by fusion re-actions. Harnessing the burning plasma (Fig. 2) toproduce a sustainable clean energy source requires un-derstanding and controlling the complex interactionsbetween the plasma edge and the wall.

Materials in extreme environments: A real challengeThe importance of plasma–surface interaction is recognisedin the international fusion program, particularly in theEuropean Union, which will host the ITER burningplasma experiment. However, it is important to realisethat plasma–surface interaction science and technologymust advance far past solving the issues for ITER torealise fusion power. Perhaps the most daunting researchchallenge facing fusion is dealing with plasma–surfaceinteractions in the subsequent jump to a steady-statefusion reactor (DEMO, ie. DEMOnstration powerrplant), with high neutron and energy flux to all surfaces.The demands on materials for a fully steady-state fusiondevice will be extreme. Some materials might erode ordegrade quickly, requiring frequent replacement; othersmight eject excessive material into the plasma, contami-nating it leading to cooling of the burning plasma. Theinteraction between a plasma and the surface is complexand is demonstrated in Fig. 3. Without greatly improvedmaterial components critical to minimising plasma im-purities, fusion power will be unviable.

Current materials for ITERWall materials are of critical importance because theymight be released in some form into the core plasma,

where they would be ionisedand thus cool the plasma [5].Heat and particles are trans-ported through the edge plas-ma to the surrounding cham-ber walls or special high-heat-flux surfaces via various colli-sional, intermittent and tur-bulent processes. The powerlevel absorbed by the materialsurfaces for ITER is close tothe limit materials can standwithout rapid erosion. Al-though the plasma is relatively‘cooler’ at the edge of the fu-sion reactor, the plasma facingcomponents still receive high

particle (1024 ions m-2 s-1) and heat fluxes (10 MW m-2). Materials for ITER have been chosen from ‘traditional’

materials for which we have accumulated a knowledgebase through trial and error over the last few decades.Different plasma-facing materials have been selected fordifferent components in ITER. Plasma–surface interactionissues, such as materials erosion, plasma contaminationand tritium retention, drove the material selection. Theinitial materials for plasma-facing components are: beryl-lium for the first wall [due to its low Z and its ability toremove oxygen (gettering)]; graphite carbon-fibre-com-posites for the divertor target [as carbon is a good radiatorand it has excellent thermal and mechanical properties];and tungsten for other areas of the divertor exhaustregion [due to low erosion and long lifetime]. However,each of these materials has significant shortcomings andthe mixture of three plasma-facing materials could becomea critical issue after sustained operation. While berylliumis highly toxic, carbon has a significant drawback due tothe complex erosion/deposition phenomena occurringthrough plasma–surface interaction, and tungsten hashigh Z so can contribute to larger radiative coolingthrough ionisation.

The high particle fluxes lead to physical sputtering ofcarbon due to ion bombardment and chemical sputteringof carbon by atomic hydrogen. This leads to depositionof carbon or co-deposition of carbon and hydrogen atvarious locations in the reactor. Significant trapping ofsuch deposits and tritium is unacceptable for safetyreasons in the case of ITER. Trapping can also occur byimplantation and diffusion. Implantation occurs overthe first few nanometres of the wall and rapidly saturates.

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 150 49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

Fig. 3. Plasma–material interactions[reproduced from www.psisc.org].

In comparison, deposition creates a ‘new’ wall materialwith hydrogenated deposits. To control transport at theplasma boundary, it is important to have a clear under-standing of the elementary mechanisms intervening inthe plasma–wall region, from erosion to the creation ofnegative ions.

International progress in plasma–surfaceinteraction researchUnderstanding and controlling plasma–surface interactionhas always been very important for the optimisation offusion plasma performance in present day devices. Inthe past, most plasma–surface interaction research hasconcentrated on plasma performance and optimal con-finement, aiming at maximum flexibility with respect todifferent plasma scenarios. Plasma–surface interactionissues were approached with performance in mind,typically in the large tokamaks, rather than surfacescience. However, plasma–surface interaction studies inthese devices have usually been limited to spectroscopyand embedded Langmuir probes providing details aboutfluxes to first walls, as well as information on erosionyields.

Recently there has been a concerted effortto tackle the plasma science and materialsscience issues in an integrated manner. Thishas led to the development of several newlinear devices, which have a major advantagewith respect to tokamaks. In these devicesthe plasma production is separated fromthe region where the plasma–surface inter-action is studied. This allows tailoring ofthe plasma source region without unwantedfeedback from the surface region. Also, di-agnostics on linear machines are not so re-stricted by access, and research can focuson non-invasive techniques that could di-rectly translate to the more restrictive toroidaldevice environment.

ANU fusion material programTo answer fundamental questions aboutthe science of plasma–surface interactionsat the complex fusion boundary a new pur-pose-built linear plasma device, the prototypeMAGnetised Plasma Interaction Experiment(MAGPIE) [7] has been constructed in

the Plasma Research Laboratory of the Australian NationalUniversity (ANU) to develop novel diagnostics and testmaterials under aggressive plasma conditions. The deviceis part of the Super Science upgrade to the AustralianPlasma Fusion Research Facility, which includes the H-1 Heliac. Facility director Boyd Blackwell based theconceptual design on work by collaborators at the OakRidge National Laboratories.

The linear plasma device employs a unique combinationof a high-power laboratory radio-frequency plasma, atarget chamber and a set of advanced diagnostics forplasma and material analysis to correlate the plasma pa-rameters with surface processes. MAGPIE provides acontrolled environment, creating key experimental con-figurations and plasma conditions to investigate thecoupled issues of plasma performance, erosion, redepositionand impurity control.

In this system a helicon plasma discharge will providean opportunity to reach very high densities in a linear elec-trodeless discharge (Fig. 4). The high-density (~1019 m-3)plasma production region is separated from the regionwhere plasma–surface interactions are studied. Thisallows adequate tailoring of the core plasma propertieswithout unwanted impurities from the target chamber.The plasma production region is connected to the surface

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 151SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

Fig. 4. Schematic of the MAGPIE device and a photo of theplasma interacting with a target.

region by a long transport section, which allows theplasma to be diagnosed at multiple points. It is possibleto vary the different parameters over a broad range, ie.up to values relevant for tokamak conditions (pressurefrom a few Pa to hundreds of Pa, power up to severalkW, ion flux up to 1020 m-2 s-1, ion energy between a feweV to several hundred eV). As can be seen in Fig. 4, amagnetically focussed plasma is created in the targetregion of MAGPIE.

The research program investigates the physics of theplasma boundary region and plasma–surface interactionsfor fusion using advanced diagnostic techniques includinglaser induced fluorescence, coherence imaging and elec-trostatic probes. A large variety of processes are involvedin the plasma–wall region, which are determined by theproperties of the wall material, plasma parameters (e.g.density, temperature), heat and particle transport withina given magnetic field topology and the properties ofthe various plasma species (hydrogen and impurities).As displayed in Fig. 3, the phenomena associated withplasma–surface interactions involve an interdisciplinarymix of plasma physics, ion–solid collision physics, surfacephysics, materials science, and material engineering.

The formation of a formal collaborative project betweenthe ANU and the Australian Nuclear Science and Tech-nology Organisation (ANSTO) is enabling the two in-stitutions to collaborate across research fields that underpinfuture energy sources. This collaboration brings togetherkey capabilities – innovations in the design, manufactureand characterisation of advanced materials, and the basicscience of the interaction of plasma with such materials.In collaboration with Daniel Riley (leader of the ExtremeMaterials for Fusion project at ANSTO), initial resultsare shown in Fig. 5 where a helium plasma has irradiatedsamples of pure tungsten (above) and tungsten-alloy (be-low). Samples were exposed to a total dose of 1019 ionscm-2 at a flux rate of 1017 ions cm-2 s-1, with ion energiesup to 250 eV. It can be clearly seen that the pure tungstensample has only been affected slightly by the plasmawhile that of the tungsten-alloy displays blistering onthe surface possibly due to the accumulation of heliumunder the surface. Similar observations were made inlarge toroidal devices. Interestingly, no such observationswere made when the material was bombarded with hy-drogen and argon plasma.

It is important to decouple the synergistic effect ofplasma and ion bombardment at the plasma–wall interface,which leads to functionalisation of the surface and en-hanced chemical sputtering and fuel retention. Comparison

with beam–surface experiments would give understandingof the full extent of the plasma-induced synergy ofparticles, energies, and angles.

The collection of plasma diagnostics mentioned abovecan measure a broad range of plasma parameters includingplasma species (atomic, molecular and ionic), impurities(C, W), velocity and flows, negative ions, ion velocitydistribution functions, electric fields, electron densityand gas temperature. Initially our aim is to benchmarkwell-known reactor materials such as carbon, siliconcarbide and tungsten before progressing to more advancedmaterials. These materials are being developed at ANSTOand provided to the ANU under the on-going collaborationsupported by a memorandum of understanding. Indeed,MAGPIE is not just limited to fusion material researchand can be applied to other research themes such asmaterial processing for advanced technologies or developingbetter radiation resistant materials for aerospace appli-cations. Users outside of the ANU are welcome to availof the MAGPIE device.

Finally, the advent of tera-scale computing combined

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 152 49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

Fig. 5. Sample of irradiated pure tungsten (above) and asample of irradiated tungsten-alloy (below).

with recent advances in atomistic modelling has deliveredan essential new tool for identifying and understandingthe key processes. For example, new simulations havedemonstrated that functionalisation of surfaces by plasmaneutral fluxes in the presence of fast ion bombardmentproduces much higher interaction rates than either fluxalone. Our collaborator in the US, Predrag Krstic [8],has shown that the plasma environment can eitherenhance or suppress sputtering, and has predicted [9]pronounced differences in the behaviour of hydrogenisotopes (H, D) in the low-energy components of reactoredge plasma fluxes. In combining our novel plasma–surface interaction experiments under controlled conditionswith tera-scale simulations, we aim to validate predictivenumerical models across multiple length scales. This willlead to predictive plasma–surface science capabilities forfuture fusion reactors.

ConclusionsThe wall of a magnetically confined fusion reactor rep-resents one of the most extreme materials environmentsof any power production method; actively cooled com-ponents must be capable of withstanding energeticparticle erosion, chemical sputtering and elevated operatingtemperatures in excess of 1000 K. To date, traditional

solutions have centred on refractory metals due toimplicitly high melting temperatures, moderate resistanceto radiation damage and availability. However, programssuch as ITER and eventually the steady-state fusionreactor DEMO will operate at significantly higher powerlevels. We need to bridge the gap between research onatom and ion interactions with perfect surfaces, and re-search conducted on large fusion facilities, involvingcomplex plasma–wall interaction phenomena.

For more information contact cormac.corr@anu.edu.auand visit prl.anu.edu.au.

References[1] ‘Priorities, gaps and opportunities: Towards a long-range

strategic plan for magnetic fusion energy’, FESAC Report,DOE/SC-0102 (2007).

[2] ITER: www.iter.org.[3] U. Samm, ‘Plasma–wall interaction’, Trans. Fusion Sci.

Technol. 49, 234–9 (2006).[4] U. Samm, ‘Plasma–wall interaction in magnetically confined

fusion plasmas’, Trans. Fusion Sci. Technol. 57, 234–9(2010).

[5] A. W. Kleyn, N. J. Lopes Cardozo and U. Samm, ‘Plasma–surface interaction in the context of ITER’, Phys. Chem.Chem. Phys. 8, 1761–74 (2006).

[6] G. F. Counsell, ‘The plasma–wall interaction region: Akey low temperature plasma for controlled fusion’ PlasmaSources Sci. Technol. 11, A80–A85 (2002).

[7] B. D. Blackwell, J. F. Caneses, C. M. Samuell, J. Wach, J.Howard and C. S. Corr, ‘Design and characterisation ofthe Magnetised Plasma Interaction Experiment (MAGPIE):A new source for plasma–material interaction studies’,Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. (submitted 2012).

[8] P. S. Krstic and C. O. Reinhold, ‘Atomic processes inplasmas’, AIP Conf. Proc. 1161, 75–84 (2009); P. S. Krsticet al., ‘Burning plasma–wall interactions’, J. Appl. Phys.104, 103308 (2008).

[9] C. O. Reinhold and P. S. Krstic, ‘Isotopic effects in theenergy spectrum of molecules sputtered from carbon’, J.Nucl. Materials 415, S121 (2011).

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 153SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

AUTHOR BIOCormac Corr is an ARC Future Fellow in the Plasma Research Laboratory of the Australian National University. He received a PhD fromQueens University, Belfast, and spent three years working at Ecole Polytechnique, Paris. He commenced work at the ANU in 2006. Hecurrently teaches second-year Electricity and Magnetism and third-year Plasma Physics. Cormac has undertaken a wide variety oflaboratory plasma research with particular emphasis on combined experimental and modelling studies. Research activities includeradio-frequency plasmas, plasma–surface interactions, negative ion plasmas, plasma processing, plasma stability, plasma modellingand plasma diagnostics.

Fig. 6. Some members of the ANU research team (from left):PhD students Cameron Samuell and Juan Caneses, technicalofficer John Wach, and project leader Cormac Corr.

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 154

OBITUARY

49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

Alexander (‘Sandy’) McLeod Mathieson was the fatherof Australian X-ray crystallography. In the years immediatelyfollowing WWII, he pioneered the field in Australia andhe continued to make major contributions over a 64-yeartime span. He was widely recognised for his seminalwork in crystallographic methods, molecular structuredetermination and related instrument development. WhileSandy’s background was primarily in Chemistry, his in-clinations in seeking to understand the physical nature ofthe interaction between X-rays and crystals and hisabiding interest in the development of new instrumentsoften led him more towards Physics than Chemistry.

Born in Aberdeen, Scotland, on 17 July 1920, Sandycontracted poliomyelitis at the age of two. He recoveredsufficiently to walk with the aid of sticks and thrived atschool. His tertiary education continued at the Universitiesof Aberdeen (BSc Hons 1942) and Glasgow (PhD 1948).His PhD research was carried out in structural crystal-lography under Prof. J. M. Robertson. In 1947 Sandy ac-cepted a position in CSIR (to become CSIRO in 1949)and came to Australia to work in the Chemical Physicssection within the Division of Industrial Chemistry.Sandy rapidly established an X-ray single-crystal diffractionlaboratory that became a mecca for local budding crystal-lographers.

Sandy was an early exponent of crystal-structure de-termination by direct methods. His work provided valuableexamples demonstrating that, with suitable crystallinederivatives, such organic structures could be determinedab initio. Sandy also used the ‘heavy-atom’ method toconsiderable advantage and made important contributionsto the determination of absolute structures. Sandy madesignificant contributions to the development of instrumentaltechniques including the design of a linear diffractometer,liquid N2 cooling stages and a high-power generator. Healso studied the separation of sample and instrumentaleffects in the intensity distribution of Bragg reflections,

and the elimination of extinction from structure-factormeasurements.

Sandy was appointed a Member (1960–72) (Chairfrom 1963) of the IUCr Commission on CrystallographicApparatus and also a Member of the Commission onStructure Reports (1961–72). He served on the IUCrExecutive (1969–75), and was elected a Fellow of theAustralian Academy of Science in 1967, and a memberof the Academy Council (1975–78).

From 1965 to 1985, Sandy was a CSIRO ChiefResearch Scientist and leader of the X-ray DiffractionSection (Acting Chief of Division 1978–80). His awardsinclude the David Syme Medal (University of Melbourne1954), the Smith Medal (Royal Australian Chemical In-stitute 1963), a DSc (University of Melbourne 1956), anHon DSc (University of St Andrews 1989), and a Cen-tenary Medal (2003).

On his retirement from CSIRO in 1985, Sandy wasappointed Hon Prof of Chemistry at La Trobe University,where he continued to make valuable contributions foralmost 20 years. He also continued his close CSIRO as-sociation, usually visiting one day each week.

In honour of his seminal contributions to X-ray crys-tallography in Australia and his profound influence inshaping the field, the Society of Crystallographers inAustralia and New Zealand decided to name its biennialaward for outstanding scientific achievement by a youngscientist (Australia or New Zealand) ‘The Sandy MathiesonMedal’. The first award will be made in Adelaide in De-cember 2012.

Sandy died peacefully in Melbourne on 30 August2011 and is survived by his wife Lois (née Hulme) of 58years, daughters Fiona and Sheena and their families. Andrew Stevenson and Stephen Wilkins are at CSIRO MaterialsScience & Engineering and Jacqui Gulbis is at the Walter & Eliza HallInstitute. This obituary has been adapted from a longer versionpublished in J. Appl. Cryst. 45, 371–2 (2012).

Sandy Mathieson, FAA (1920 – 2011)Andrew Stevenson, Stephen Wilkins and Jacqui Gulbis

Dr Gurtrud (Trudi) Helene Thompson was born inBerlin on 16 February 1924 to Ernst and Leonore Gold-schmidt. Trudi and her brother Rudolf were educated inthe Goldschmidt Schule, a school founded by her motherin 1935 to cater for Jewish students and teachers whohad been expelled en masse from the state schools ofNazi Germany. In 1939 at the age of 15, Trudi fled toEngland with her brother, being joined later by herparents. With the help of a loving, staunch AnglicanBritish family, Trudi prospered in England, graduatingfrom Lydney Grammar School with top A level results.Then, with complete disregard for female stereotypes ofthe era, she headed to Birmingham University to followher passion for Physics.

At the age of 24 and armed with a PhD in crystallog-raphy, Trudi left for Canada to work at the Chalk RiverNuclear Research Station in northern Ontario, whereshe met Canadian Bill Thompson, who she married in1953 in England. Two children, Kathleen (Suky) andGraham were the result of that union. Trudi chose toleave her professional career for full-time motherhood,determined to spend more time with her children. Afterthe sad breakdown of her marriage, Trudi studied AppliedScience, Medical Technology at Grossmont College inCalifornia. In 1975 she moved to faraway WesternAustralia where she took up a position as a medicalphysicist at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital.

Trudi relished having her own career again and thewonderful friends she made through it. On a trip toEngland Trudi learnt of the innovative Magnetic ResonanceImaging technology. As a direct result of Trudi’s determinedlobbying, in 1988 Western Australia’s first MRI machinewas installed in Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital.

As an active member of the Australian Institute ofPhysics, in 1978 Trudi won first prize for an essay shewrote for The Australian Physicist entitled ‘The NuclearDebate’. From 1986–87 Trudi served as editor of the

same journal (the forerunner of Australian Physics). Shevery much enjoyed this time and derived great satisfactionin developing a new revitalised look for the publication.In 2004 she was made an Honorary Fellow of the AIP.She wrote numerous articles for scientific publicationson a wide range of topics, from chemical crystallographyto polarised gamma rays and implanted cardiac pacemakers.Her honorary appointments also included Treasurer ofthe WA Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine1985–88, and member of The Radiological Council,WA 1986–88.

For five years after she retired in 1988 Trudi travelledthe world. She had many adventures especially in theUSSR as it was, including having lunch in the Kremlin.Of her visit to the Hermitage Museum in Leningrad shesaid “only idiots go in the front door”. If there was a wayaround officialdom she invariably found it. She gavespeaking engagements on her adventures and publisheda travel guide How to Travel Cheaply.

Trudi’s inquiring mind and her strength of characterwere forged in the hell pit of Nazi Germany. She was amiracle of her time: a woman, a scientist, a humanist,and a champion of the underdog. Being passionate in allshe did, she was a lifetime advocate of ‘a fair go’ andgained the love and admiration of a worldwide networkof friends. In December last year, her final engagementwas enlivening the WA Branch post AGM dinner withher wit and wicked sense of humour. She died on 19March 2012. Trudi was a unique character and will begreatly missed. Lance Taylor is Head of the Science Department, Willetton SeniorHigh School, Perth.

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 155

OBITUARY

SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

Trudi Thompson (1924 – 2012)Lance Taylor

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 156

BOOK REVIEW

49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

Cracking the EinsteinCode: Relativity andthe Birth of Black HolePhysicsBy Fulvio Melio, afterword by Roy KerrUniversity of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2009,150 pp. (hardback)ISBN 978-0-22-651951-7

Reviewed by David Wiltshire, University ofCanterbury, Christchurch

Next year will mark the 50th anniversary of the discoveryby New Zealand mathematician Roy Kerr of the exactsolution of Einstein’s field equations of general relativity(GR) that describes some of the most enigmatic and as-trophysically important objects in the Universe: rotatingblack holes. Although black holes have become part ofpopular culture, the story of their discovery is littleknown. Fulvio Melia’s book ‘Cracking the Einstein Code’is unique in combining the science with a historicalaccount of the events leading up to Kerr’s discovery andthe ‘golden age of GR’ that ensued in the followingdecade.

Book reviewers are usually independent of theirsubjects. On this occasion though I have to declare aninterest; as a former student and colleague of Roy Kerr Iorganised a conference in 2004 at Canterbury on theoccasion of his 70th birthday. Although spinning blackholes were becoming of increasing interest to astronomers,Kerr himself was largely unknown to many of his peers.At least one of the invited speakers declared his surpriseto learn that Kerr was still alive! Melia’s book is one ofthe lasting consequences of the 2004 ‘Kerrfest’, and tellsa remarkable story of scientific discovery that wouldotherwise remain untold.

The book is a slim volume but it is fast-paced, accessiblywritten and full of colourful anecdotes which make itdifficult to put down. Courtesy of a delayed flight, Iread it at Christchurch airport in a single sitting. Meliabegins by giving a lucid account of the development ofthe key concepts in Einstein’s theory of gravitation, de-scribing the early historical development of GR and keycontributions of Hilbert and Noether. Another chapteris devoted to observational tests of GR, starting withArthur Eddington’s 1919 expedition to observe thebending of light during a total solar eclipse, movingthrough the observation of gravitational redshift byPound and Rebka in 1960, to the precision tests providedby the 1974 discovery of the Hulse–Taylor binary pulsar,and present efforts in gravitational wave detection.

It is the rest of the book, which combines a biographyof Roy Kerr with a history of GR in the 1960s and1970s, that makes it completely unique. After rapid earlydevelopment, progress in GR was slow and interest in itwas dwarfed by developments in quantum mechanicsand particle physics. The mathematical complexity ofGR was simply too daunting. However, by the late 1950sresearchers began to take up the challenges posed byGR, and a conference in Warsaw in 1962 brought a sig-nificant number of scientists together to discuss theissues for the first time.

One key problem was to find a solution of Einstein’sequations that describe the exterior of a rotating body.In 1916 Karl Schwarzschild had produced the solutionthat describes a non-rotating star or black hole. But theblack hole properties, which were only really understooddecades later, were thought to possibly be a mathematicalartefact, since real physical stars were all known to ro-tate.

Within a year of attending the Warsaw conferenceRoy Kerr solved the problem that had defeated othersfor decades, showing that black holes were a physical in-evitability. Furthermore, once the solution was knownits properties, which include many bizarre physical effectsonly possible in the strong field regime, were quickly un-covered. In the past few decades we have come to under-stand that spinning supermassive black holes are theengines that power quasars and other active galacticnuclei, and that black holes are central to many processesin the evolution of galaxies. The angular momentum ofsupermassive black holes has been measured directly andin many cases they are rotating close to the maximumrate allowed by the Kerr solution.

It was the historical account and anecdotes from theintense decade of GR following Kerr’s discovery that forme was the most fascinating part of Melia’s book. As aprofessional general relativist who trained in the 1980s,I of course know many of the characters as friends andcolleagues. But not being around in the 1960s, I stilllearned a great deal from the book.

This story is written in such a lively, personal and en-gaging fashion that I am sure it will also captivate anyonewith an interest in the human face of the progress ofscience.

LASTEK

Toptica FemtoFiberPro NIR System:Near-infraredFemtosecond FiberLaser• Ultrafast pulses (<100 fs) • High output power (>140 mW at

780 nm) • Simple switching between fundamental 1560 nm and SHG

780 nm output.The FemtoFiber pro NIR from Toptica is a saturable absorbing

mirror (SAM) mode-locked oscillator and fiber amplifier system,capable of outputting >350 mW at the fundamental wavelengthof 1560 nm and also >140 mW at the second-harmonic of 780nm. The standard repetition rate of the system is 80 MHz,although a 40 MHz repetition rate can be provided upon re-quest.

The system uses all polarisation maintaining components andis >95% polarised (horizontal). Users can simply swap betweenthe fundamental and SHG output wavelengths without realignmentby a switch activated mirror that redirects the fundamental beaminto the SHG resonator.

Furthermore, an in-built motorised prism compressor allowsusers to optimise the pulse characteristics to their needs at both1560 and 780 nm. The system also allows for the integration ofmultiple amplifiers via oscillator outputs, which then seed theamplifiers to produce multiple beams with the same specificationsas the master system. Laser control is available via PC interfacewith USB, Ethernet and RS232. Users can also control the laservia a web interface, as opposed to the GUI provided.

Hybrid PhotomultiplierDetector Assemblyfrom PicoquantThe PMA Hybrid is a compact singlephoton sensitive detector based on afast GaAs Hybrid PhotomultiplierTube with peltier cooler to reduce thedark count rate. The PMA Hybrid features a very high photon de-tection efficiency up to 45% at 500 nm and is sensitive inthe wavelength range between 300 and 700 nm. Featuring timingresolution  down to 120 ps (FWHM) and virtually free ofafterpulses, the PMA hybrid is especially suited to fluorescencecorrelation spectroscopy.

Featuring:• Detection efficiency up to 45% at 500 nm• Instrument response <120 ps (FWHM)• Negligible afterpulsing• Internal HV power supply and pre-amplifier• Active temperature stabilisation• Shutter overload protection• Active sensor area: 3 mm.

QE65 Pro Scientific-grade Spectrometerfrom Ocean Optics

The QE65 Pro offers high sensitivity and low stray light performancethat make it ideal for a wide range of low light level applicationssuch as fluorescence, DNA sequencing and Raman analysis.

The enhanced QE65 Pro has an athermal design that promotesexcellent spectrometer wavelength stability, triggering functionsfor providing accurate timing and synchronisation between thespectrometer and other devices and a replaceable slit design foradded convenience. An extensive range of gratings offers flexibilityin optimising applications.

The QE65 Pro features:• Back-thinned detector. At the heart of the QE65 Pro is a

Hamamatsu FFT-CCD  detector distinguished by its highquantum efficiency (90% maximum) and low etalon charac-teristics. Unlike linear CCDs, the 2D area detector in theQE65 Pro allows  binning (or summing) a vertical row ofpixels, which offers significant improvement in the signal-to-noise ratio (>1000:1) and signal processing speed of the de-tector

• TE-cooled (down to -15°C) detector offers low noise andlow dark signal, which enables low-light-level detection andlong integration times – from 8 ms to 15 min, with virtuallyno spectral distortion

• Availability of new gratings, selected for their optimal wavelengthrange and stray light performance characteristics

• New optical bench components that more efficiently manipulatelight for greater throughput and higher sensitivity

• SMA 905 connector assembly with replaceable slit design foradded convenience and excellent repeatability

• Changes to the optical bench and its components that promoteexcellent spectrometer wavelength thermal stability.

QE65 Pro is ideal for Raman!QE65 Pro is a great choice for fluorescence and low light level

applications and is particularly well suited for modular Ramanspectroscopy. For Raman, we offer a 900 mm-1 grating (#H36)that is blazed at 500 nm and has good response at the 532 and785 nm laser illumination wavelengths typical of Raman.

For more information please contact Lastek atsales@lastek.com.auLastek Pty Ltd10 Reid St, Thebarton, SA 5031Toll free: Australia 1800 882 215; NZ 0800 441 005Tel: +61 8 8443 8668; Fax: +61 8 8443 8427; Web: www.lastek.com.au

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 157

PRODUCT NEWS

SEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

WARSASH SCIENTIFIC

Sintering withAdjustable Pulse WidthCapabilityWarsash Scientific delivers evengreater flexibility for sintering con-ductive Cu and Ag metallic inks, curing thin-film substrates andfor solar and surface modifications with the Sinteron 2010 fromXenon Corporation. The new Sinteron 2010 now allows fordigitally programmable pulse widths, making it extremely flexibleand valuable to process development.

A number of attractive features are designed into this 19 inchrack-based stand-alone system. The pulse width is adjustable inincrements of 5 µs in the range 100 to 2000 µs. With totalcontrol of the pulse amplitude and pulse width, the opticalenergy delivered by the system can be precisely controlled. Asthe pulse profile is very linear at maximum amplitude, a relationshipof 1000 J/ms can be assumed. The Sinteron 2010 allows connectionfor either Spiral or Linear Lamp housings. These can provideoptical footprints of 19×305 mm or 127 mm diameter areas.

Sinteron 2010 is welcome news for those involved in photonicsintering of conductive inks for printed electronics in areas suchas displays, smart cards, RFID and solar applications. The non-contact, low thermal characteristics for this process make itsuitable for web-based printing techniques such as inkjet, flexog-raphy, gravure, and screen print.

In addition to offering sintering systems for the printed elec-tronics industry (making it possible to print, at room temperature,on substrates such as paper and PET), Warsash Scientific offershigh performance pulsed UV systems for decontamination, UVcuring and food enhancement.

Fast PiezoFocusingSystems forMicroscopyWarsash Scientific offersa more affordable series of fast piezo focusing devices with thenew PIFOC system packages from PI. These packages are designedto improve results in fast focussing and lens positioning, as wellas in deconvolution/3D imaging, and reduce costs at the sametime.

System packages consist of closed-loop, piezo-mechanicobjective positioners and custom-tuned, compact digital servocontroller/driver units. This combination provides higher per-formance at reduced costs. The integrated, frictionless and high-stiffness piezo flexure drive ensures fast response and short settlingtimes, as well as exceptional guiding accuracy. The settling timeof less than 10 ms increases throughput and allows for rapid Z-stack acquisition.

The digital controller provides several advantages comparedwith the conventional analogue controllers of the fast focussingsystems currently available. Higher linearity, improved settlingperformance, quick adaptation to changing motion requirementsand access to advanced automation are all benefits.

The included software facilitates system setup and allows swiftswitching between different sets of parameters. For the user thismeans extracting the maximum performance from the piezofocusing mechanism all the time, no matter what size objective isused or whether aggressive long-travel stepping or smoothnanometre size dithering motion is needed. Since jumpers andtrim pots no longer have to be accessed to make changes, systemintegration becomes much more straightforward.

Key features:• Complete and affordable system with fast digital controller

and software• Choice of travel ranges: 100, 250 or 400 µm• Ideal for fast autofocus applications• Sub-nm resolution• Choice of position feedback sensors: piezoresistive or capaci-

tive• Improved performance and easy system integration.

M-660: Low ProfileRotation StageOne of the lowest profile rotary ta-bles on the market, the M-660, avail-able from Warsash Scientific, is nowcomplemented by a higher perform-ing model providing more thaneight times the position resolution of the existing version.

The compact design with minimised mass and inertia provideshigh precision, bidirectional speed and position control, as wellas high speed motion contouring. The M-660 is based on thenew U-164 Piezo Motor and outperforms the stability, accelerationand settling speed of traditional servo motor direct drives andgear-driven mechanisms. The innovative motor drive can providesignificantly higher speeds, shorter positioning times and a veryhigh positioning accuracy when moving the measuring optics.

The stage can accelerate to velocities of 720 degrees/sec andresolves positions down to 4 µrad (8 arcsec). Its self-clampingceramic drive provides very high stability, with no energy con-sumption at rest and no heat generation. A directly coupledprecision optical encoder provides phase lag-free, backlash-freefeedback to the servo controller.

The newly designed piezo motor controller is available to takeadvantage of the specific motion characteristics of ultrasonicceramic motors. USB interfacing and a solid software and driverpackage for seamless integration are included.

For datasheets and more information on all three products,please contact Warsash Scientific at sales@warsash.com.auWarsash Scientific Pty LtdTel: +61 2 9319 0122; Fax: +61 2 9318 2192; Web: www.warsash.com.au

158 AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012

COHERENT SCIENTIFIC

Fibre Laserfor AtomCoolingQuantel has releasedthe EYLSA 780 fi-bre laser designedspecifically for ru-bidium atom cooling.

EYLSA is a single-frequency laser delivering 1 W at 780 nmwith linewidth less than 2.5 MHz (200 kHz option is alsoavailable). The wavelength is tunable over a 100 GHz rangecovering both the Rb-85 and Rb-87 D2 lines. A wavelengthlocking control loop is included and may be connected to a com-mercially available PID device.

The EYLSA laser comes in a compact package with 19-inchrackmount and touchscreen control.

Fully Automated,Ultrashort PulseTi:Sapphire LaserCoherent’s Vitara is the firstwidely tunable, ultrafast laserto deliver pulsewidths shorterthan 12 fs, while also offeringtrue hands-free and fully au-tomated operation. This includes automated wavelength tuningfrom 755 to 860 nm and push-button bandwidth adjustmentfrom 30 to 125 nm.

The Vitara family has recently been expanded with the additionof Vitara-S, a cost-effective model designed specifically for seedingCoherent’s range of Legend Elite ultrafast amplifiers. Vitara-Sdelivers bandwidth of over 70 nm at a fixed wavelength of 800nm.

The Vitara-T and Vitara-T-HP are available for applicationsrequiring higher power.

Verdi G Series LasersNow Available with 18W OutputCoherent’s Verdi G series is a familyof optically pumped semiconductorlasers, where the traditional rod-based gain material is replaced witha semiconductor chip. The result isa compact, robust and economical product with noise specificationsidentical to the original Verdi V. The Verdi G series is ideal forTi:Sapphire pumping and other applications that do not requiresingle longitudinal mode output.

Verdi G series is now available with new high-power optionsof 12, 15 and 18 W. All Verdi G lasers come with a two-yearcomprehensive warranty and trade-ins are available for existingsolid-state lasers or ion lasers (dead or alive!).

Fianium IntroduceCompact, Low-costSupercontinuumLaserFianium has released its newly designed, WhiteLase micro™ su-percontinuum source at the recent Photonics West exhibit.WhiteLase micro is a quasi-CW laser producing total power ofmore than 200 mW over the wavelength range 450 to 2000 nm.The beam may be easily collimated and focused to a diffraction-limited spot for use in a variety of applications. The unit is simpleto operate and may be used with Fianium’s SuperChrome andAOTF filters for programmable wavelength selection.

For applications requiring higher power Fianium’s existingrange of supercontinuum lasers produces total power up to 8 Wand visible power greater than 1200 mW.

FluorescenceLifetimeEdinburgh Photonics has ap-pointed Coherent Scientificas its distributor for Australiaand New Zealand.

Edinburgh designs andmanufactures steady-state fluorescence spectrometers, dedicatedfluorescence lifetime spectrometers and laser flash photolysisspectrometers, covering the vacuum UV to the near infraredwith outstanding sensitivity. They have pioneered the techniqueof Time Correlated Single Photon Counting (TCSPC), permittinglifetime measurements down to 5 ps to be made quickly andeasily. Edinburgh’s spectrometers are highly modular, allowingsystems to be configured for a wide variety of applications or tobe upgraded as research priorities change.

Edinburgh’s products are used across a wide range of applicationsincluding photophysics, photochemistry, semiconductor physicsand biophysics.

For further information please contact Paul Wardill or Dale Ottenon sales@coherent.com.auCoherent Scientific116 Sir Donald Bradman Drive, Hilton, SA 5033Tel: +61 8 8150 5200; Fax: +61 8 8352 2020; Web: www.coherent.com.au

159AUSTRALIAN PHYSICSSEPT–OCT 2012 | 49(5)

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES

High Resolution Wide Bandwidth ArbitraryWaveform Generator

Agilent Technologies has added a high-resolution, wide-bandwidth,8- or 12-GSa/s modular instrument to its portfolio of arbitrarywaveform generators. The new M8190A arbitrary waveform gen-erator is able to deliver simultaneous high resolution and widebandwidth along with spurious-free dynamic range and very lowharmonic distortion.

This functionality allows radar, satellite and electronic warfaredevice designers to make reliable, repeatable measurements andcreate highly realistic signal scenarios to test their products.

The M8190A helps engineers:• build a strong foundation for highly reliable satellite commu-

nications• generate multilevel signals with programmable ISI and jitter

up to 3 Gb/s.The M8190A offers:

• 14 bits of resolution and up to 5 GHz of analog bandwidthper channel simultaneously

• the ability to build realistic scenarios with 2 GSa of waveformmemory

• reduced system size, weight and footprint with compactmodular AXIe AWG capability. The high performance of the M8190A arbitrary waveform

generator is made possible by a proprietary digital-to-analog con-verter (DAC) designed by the Agilent Measurement ResearchLab. Fabricated with an advanced silicon–germanium BiCMOSprocess, the DAC operates at 8 GSa/s with 14-bit resolution andat 12 GSa/s with 12-bit resolution. At 8 GSa/s, the AgilentDAC delivers up to 80c-dB SFDR.

More information is available at www.agilent.com.au/find/M8190.

Agilent PCIe High-Speed DigitiserAgilent U1084A is a dual-channel, 8-bit PCIe digitiserwith up to 4 GS/s samplingrates, 1.5 GHz bandwidth andincorporates a 15 ps triggertime interpolator for accuratetiming measurement.

The U1084A’s digitisertechnology combines fast ana-log-to-digital converters withon-board field programmablegate array technology allowing original equipment manufacturersto easily design-in high-speed signal acquisition and analysis.

More information is available at www.agilent.com.au/find/u1084a.

One Box EMI Receiverthat EnhancesCompliance Testing Agilent Technologies has announced the introduction of theN9038A MXE EMI receiver, which is designed for laboratoriesthat perform compliance testing of electrical and electronicproducts. The MXE enhances electromagnetic interference (EMI)measurement accuracy and repeatability with a displayed averagenoise level of -163 dBm at 1 GHz. This represents excellentinput sensitivity, an essential receiver attribute that reduces theeffects of electrical noise.

The MXE is fully compliant with CISPR 16-1-1 2010, theInternational Electrotechnical Commission recommendationthat covers measurement receivers used to test conducted andradiated electromagnetic compatibility of electrical and electronicdevices. With outstanding measurement accuracy of ±0.78 dB,the MXE exceeds CISPR 16-1-1 2010 requirements.

The built-in suite of diagnostic tools, including meters, signaland measurement lists, markers, span zoom, zone span and spec-trogram displays, makes it easy to monitor and investigate problemsignals. The MXE is also an X-Series signal analyser capable ofrunning a variety of measurement applications such as phasenoise. By enhancing the analysis of noncompliant emissions,these capabilities enable EMI test engineers and consultants toevaluate signal details and deliver new insights about the productsthey test.

More information is available at www.agilent.com.au/find/MXE.For further details, contact tm_ap@agilent.com.Agilent Technologies Australia Pty LtdTel: 1800 629 485Web: www.agilent.com.au/find/promotion

AUSTRALIAN PHYSICS 160 49(5) | SEPT–OCT 2012