ÌÇÐÄTV

Levitating nanoparticles with a laser field and optically cooling them into the quantum regime offers an attractive route towards fundamental tests of quantum mechanics. As demonstrated recently, the interaction between the nanoparticle and the light field can be increased by using rod-shaped objects instead of spheres [1]. In this talk I will present the theory of nanorotors interacting with laser fields and ambient environments [2] and argue that cooling the rotation of aspherical nanoparticles into the deep quantum regime opens the door for the observation of macroscopic orientational quantum revivals [3], a complete recurrence of the initial orientation after integer multiples of the revival time.

[1] Kuhn, Stickler, Kosloff, Patolsky, Hornberger, Arndt, and Millen, Nat. Commun. 8, 1670 (2017).
[2] Stickler, Schrinski, and Hornberger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 040401 (2018).
[3] Stickler, Papendell, Kuhn, Schrinski, Millen, Arndt, and Hornberger, New J. Phys. 20, 122001 (2018)

STFC Spark Award holders undertake high quality programmes of novel public engagement that inspire and involve target audiences with stories of STFC science and technology.

1.1.1 Engagement Programmes

Proposed engagement programmes must clearly focus around the remit of the STFC science programme (astronomy, solar and planetary science, particle physics, particle astrophysics, cosmology, nuclear physics and accelerator science) or clearly and demonstrably align to the science and technology work of STFC’s national and international laboratories and facilities.

Spark Awards will not be awarded unless there is a strong and demonstrable link between the proposed activities and STFC science and technology.

1.1.2 General Points

Applicants should use their Case for Support to clearly explain how their Spark Award furthers the aims of the .

Applications that highlight the social, ethical, and economic benefits of research are welcomed.

Applicants are encouraged to propose novel or innovative approaches towards engagement as part of their Spark Award, as long as these are demonstrably well-planned.

STFC focuses heavily on evaluation and applicants must provide a clear evaluation plan showing details of how the outputs, outcomes and impacts of the Spark Award will be captured and evaluated. As outlined in section 1.7.2 we require applicants to report on the outcomes of their Spark Award in line with the , which describes our approach towards effective engagement. We suggest that applicants should familiarise themselves with the STFC Public Engagement Evaluation Framework and consider how the Framework could be used to evaluate their engagement programme.

We encourage applications that propose engagement with audiences considered to have low ‘science capital’. Applicants may choose which audiences to engage with, and the methods of engagement. These must be outlined in the Case for Support.

1.1.3 Spark Awards and STFC’s Wonder initiative

The Wonder initiative is about giving under-served communities an equal voice by listening, understanding, and responding to what people want to know about science and technology. Wonder marks a long-term commitment by STFC public engagement to move our focus towards audience-driven public engagement with under-served communities in the most socioeconomically-deprived areas of the UK. Financial support via Spark Awards will become a key part of the Wonder initiative.

The target audience for Wonder is defined according to Indices of Multiple Deprivation. Specifically, STFC are interested in supporting audience-driven engagement that works with audiences, particularly those 8-14 years old and their families and carers, from the 40% most socioeconomically-deprived areas of the UK.

STFC define the 40% most socioeconomically-deprived areas of the UK as those areas listed in the bottom two quintiles of the Indices of Multiple Deprivation for the respective part of the UK.

Applicants are explicitly invited to submit Spark Awards that work with the Wonder target audience. Details of how to highlight this in a Case for Support are provided in section 2.2.1, and attendant modifications to our peer review process are outlined in section 2.4.1.