If you recall, I was rather "harsh" on Jonny Wilkinson, the soccer player in the English League for bastardizing quantum mechanics. I certainly don't want to gloat on his misfortune, but it seems that his positive thinking isn't working. It appears that he had another injury yesterday during a game.
Maybe quantum mechanics is wrong?
(Don't answer that. I was be facetious)
Zz.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
60 Minutes Coverage of the LHC
Did you miss last week's 60 Minutes coverage of the LHC? CNET seems to have the video of that segment if you want to see it.
Zz.
Zz.
U.S. Science Faces a Flat 2009
In a move that isn't a surprise to anyone, the US Congress authorized a continuing resolution of the US budget until at least March 2009. This means that science funding in the US will be saddled with the disastrous FY2008 budget.
With the US economy in a meltdown, the future doesn't look too rosy either. The next US President will have a huge constraint on any spending due to the proposed bail-out of the financial sector. McCain has already indicated that most domestic spending will be frozen if he were to become president.
In other words, science funding in the US will be facing some very tough times. Considering that science and technology, which is only 10% of the work force and yet is responsible for more than 50% of the US economy, is being almost neglected, this can easily be the turning point to the dominance of the US as an economic superpower. Maybe decades from now, historian will see that this is where a major civilization started its decline, just like other major civilizations of the world in history.
Too bad the people who were responsible for it will not be alive to see the consequences of their actions.
Zz.
With the US economy in a meltdown, the future doesn't look too rosy either. The next US President will have a huge constraint on any spending due to the proposed bail-out of the financial sector. McCain has already indicated that most domestic spending will be frozen if he were to become president.
In other words, science funding in the US will be facing some very tough times. Considering that science and technology, which is only 10% of the work force and yet is responsible for more than 50% of the US economy, is being almost neglected, this can easily be the turning point to the dominance of the US as an economic superpower. Maybe decades from now, historian will see that this is where a major civilization started its decline, just like other major civilizations of the world in history.
Too bad the people who were responsible for it will not be alive to see the consequences of their actions.
Zz.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Dark Secret of Hendrik Schon
I was awake rather early this morning and couldn't go back to sleep. The TV was on (normal for me) and I started surfing the channel. At that hour, you mostly get crap and other informercials. However, as I got to the Science Channel, it has just started showing a program with a title that certainly caught my eye. It was called "The Dark Secret of Hendrik Schon".
To those of you who have no clue on who Hendrik Schon is, do a google search. I, on the other hand, am quite familiar with his work and the debacle that occurred. I was at Brookhaven when the proverbial crap hit the ceiling fan, and since there were either many former Bell Labs scientists that were there who still had contacts, or people who just came from Bell labs, I got to hear a lot of news about the investigation. So this is something that I've sort of followed closely over the years.
Anyway, of course, I had to view the TV program (which means that it would certainly prevented me from falling asleep the rest of the morning before I had to wake up). In any case, I found the show to be rather odd. It started with all this weird focus on nanotechnology and "nanobots", including some "disaster" scenario on runaway nanobots taking over our world. Yowzah! What did this had to do with Hendrik Schon and his "dark secrets"?
I think it was 5 or 10 mins into the show that Schon was mentioned and what he has done at that time (2001) and what he was trying to accomplish. He certainly had a series of impressive credentials by the time he was offered a job at Bell labs. No one doubted that. The show then mentioned something about Moore's Law, and how Moore's law might be halted due to the physical limitation to how small one can make a silicon chip. This is where Schon came in when he did his work on organic field-effect transistors. The show went on to give an explanation on why this is such an important and possibly revolutionary finding.
But then, it keeps going back to this nanotechnology and nanobots thing in between describing Schon's work. Only close to the end did it start to mention the scandal and how Schon was "caught" at either duplicating data or fabricating data for some of his work. And then back to nanobots....
It was a very strange program, and I think, too heavy on a very transparent attempt at sensationalism. I would have been more captivated if they had focused more on the scandal, the time line of when things happened, an interview of all the principal players who were the first to voice doubt in what Schon was producing, an interview with some of the panel doing the investigation, etc.. Those would have given a lot more insight into what was going on, and the atmosphere at Bell labs at that time. Instead, all I got was some superficial coverage of what was a very important event in physics. And then, more of those nanobots that could destroy all life forms.
Maybe they're hoping that the threat of possible annihilation could give the show as much free publicity as that being given to the LHC. Not gonna happen!
Zz.
To those of you who have no clue on who Hendrik Schon is, do a google search. I, on the other hand, am quite familiar with his work and the debacle that occurred. I was at Brookhaven when the proverbial crap hit the ceiling fan, and since there were either many former Bell Labs scientists that were there who still had contacts, or people who just came from Bell labs, I got to hear a lot of news about the investigation. So this is something that I've sort of followed closely over the years.
Anyway, of course, I had to view the TV program (which means that it would certainly prevented me from falling asleep the rest of the morning before I had to wake up). In any case, I found the show to be rather odd. It started with all this weird focus on nanotechnology and "nanobots", including some "disaster" scenario on runaway nanobots taking over our world. Yowzah! What did this had to do with Hendrik Schon and his "dark secrets"?
I think it was 5 or 10 mins into the show that Schon was mentioned and what he has done at that time (2001) and what he was trying to accomplish. He certainly had a series of impressive credentials by the time he was offered a job at Bell labs. No one doubted that. The show then mentioned something about Moore's Law, and how Moore's law might be halted due to the physical limitation to how small one can make a silicon chip. This is where Schon came in when he did his work on organic field-effect transistors. The show went on to give an explanation on why this is such an important and possibly revolutionary finding.
But then, it keeps going back to this nanotechnology and nanobots thing in between describing Schon's work. Only close to the end did it start to mention the scandal and how Schon was "caught" at either duplicating data or fabricating data for some of his work. And then back to nanobots....
It was a very strange program, and I think, too heavy on a very transparent attempt at sensationalism. I would have been more captivated if they had focused more on the scandal, the time line of when things happened, an interview of all the principal players who were the first to voice doubt in what Schon was producing, an interview with some of the panel doing the investigation, etc.. Those would have given a lot more insight into what was going on, and the atmosphere at Bell labs at that time. Instead, all I got was some superficial coverage of what was a very important event in physics. And then, more of those nanobots that could destroy all life forms.
Maybe they're hoping that the threat of possible annihilation could give the show as much free publicity as that being given to the LHC. Not gonna happen!
Zz.
European Strategy for Astroparticle Physics
The Roadmap Committee for European astroparticle physics has released the strategy for future projects in this field of study. They listed the "magnificent 7" projects to try and answer some of the biggest questions in astronomy, astrophysics, and particle physics.
Zz.
* CTA, a large array of Cherenkov Telescopes for detection of cosmic high-energy gamma rays
* KM3NeT, a cubic kilometre-scale neutrino telescope in the Mediterranean Sea
* Ton-scale detectors for dark matter searches
* A ton-scale detector for the determination of the fundamental nature and mass of neutrinos
* A Megaton-scale detector for proton decay's search, neutrino astrophysics & investigation of neutrino properties
* A large array for the detection of charged cosmic rays
* A third-generation underground gravitational antenna
Zz.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Could The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer Get To The ISS After All?
The one single instrument that would turn the International Space Station (ISS) from a colossal scientific waste-of-money into something halfway useful might take off after all. The alpha magnetic spectrometer that was abruptly dumped by NASA to be flown to the ISS after it is ready and waiting has been given a lifeline by a US Congress authorization bill.
One can only hope that the next US president sees what the rest of us see, that the AMS is the only thing up there that makes the ISS worthwhile.
Zz.
The measure authorizes $20.2 billion for next year’s NASA budget. That’s about $2.6 billion more than what President Bush had proposed for the agency and includes $1 billion specifically for work to accelerate development of the Constellation program, which will eventually replace the current shuttles. The measure also adds an extra flight to the shuttle’s current schedule to deliver a physics project, the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer, to the International Space Station.
One can only hope that the next US president sees what the rest of us see, that the AMS is the only thing up there that makes the ISS worthwhile.
Zz.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
LHC Setback Is Not Surprising
In fact, I would say that the recent setback of the LHC is expected! You can't design and operate a machine that complicated, that big, and that technologically advanced and not have some form of failure. Many physicists in the know thought that the first series of start-up that they had to get the beam in the ring was unusually smooth! They expected more problems with that than what was seen.
My buddy Ben has started a blog (welcome to the blogsphere, Ben!) and he has this rather amusing anecdote on the problems faced at the Tevatron both when it first went online and at the start of Run II. I think this will put things in perspective as to why problems being faced at the LHC is, really, not unexpected. The only thing we don't want is a show-stopping failure, and this isn't it.
Zz.
My buddy Ben has started a blog (welcome to the blogsphere, Ben!) and he has this rather amusing anecdote on the problems faced at the Tevatron both when it first went online and at the start of Run II. I think this will put things in perspective as to why problems being faced at the LHC is, really, not unexpected. The only thing we don't want is a show-stopping failure, and this isn't it.
Zz.
Bison Roam Prairie of Fermila
While Argonne has its white deer on site, Fermilab has bison roaming its grounds. This news article has a bit of a story of the bison there and their ultimate fate.
I remember quite a while back that I bought a thermal coffee mug when I visited Fermilab back then, and they were using a bison on the mug as their "mascot". Don't know if they're still using that, but it was cute.
Zz.
In the Chicago suburbs, these shaggy symbols of Big Sky Country might seem out of place, but they've been at Fermilab since 1969 because of Robert Wilson, the laboratory's first director, who wanted a lasting reminder of Illinois' prairie heritage.
Two years after Wilson brought a bull and four cows, what was then the Illinois Department of Conservation donated 21 more buffalo. By the 1990s, the herd had grown to 160 head, Plese said. Today, there are just 28, many of which are descendants of the first bison at Fermilab.
The animals at Fermilab are plains bison, different from woods bison from Canada, which often have smaller heads and humps. They are contained by an electric fence and an outer fence high enough to thwart their 6-foot vertical leap.
I remember quite a while back that I bought a thermal coffee mug when I visited Fermilab back then, and they were using a bison on the mug as their "mascot". Don't know if they're still using that, but it was cute.
Zz.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Science Chicago Science Saturdays
If you are in the Chicagoland area on Oct. 18 and looking for something unusual to do, here's something you might want to consider.
Check out the rest of Science Chicago website for other fun stuff.
Zz.
Check out the rest of Science Chicago website for other fun stuff.
Zz.
Obama Outlines Science Spending Boost
Barak Obama has issued his 11-page plan for science (link may be open for free only for a limited time). John McCain has yet to respond, which is consistent with what has gone on so far during the campaign. Note also that John McCain had declined to answer the questions submitted by Nature, whereas Barak Obama campaign made an effort respond to each one of them.
But what was more interesting, for whatever it is worth, is this piece of information:
Zz.
But what was more interesting, for whatever it is worth, is this piece of information:
At the same time, 61 US Nobel science laureates endorsed Obama — the largest number ever to make their voices heard during a presidential campaign. In 2004, 48 science Nobelists threw their weight behind John Kerry, then the Democratic presidential contender.
The Obama supporters range from James Watson, a 1962 Nobel prize winner in physiology or medicine, to two of last year's winners in physiology or medicine, Mario Capecchi and Oliver Smithies. In an "open letter to the American people," they write: "The country urgently needs a visionary leader who can ensure the future of our traditional strengths in science and technology and who can harness those strengths to address many of our greatest problems: energy, disease, climate change, security, and economic competitiveness. We are convinced that Senator Barack Obama is such a leader."
Zz.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
LHC Project Simulator
OK, I had way too much fun playing with this thing.
Even though the LHC is going to be down till after the scheduled winter shutdown, doesn't mean we all can't pretend that it is running and already producing collisions. In fact, WE can actually simulate a run and start hunting for those elusive particles after all!
This is a LHC project simulator. It tries to simulate the possible outcome of a collision based on the beam/magnet parameters that one start with. It's a lot of fun in a cartoonish sort of way. If only the actual thing is this easy. :)
Zz.
Even though the LHC is going to be down till after the scheduled winter shutdown, doesn't mean we all can't pretend that it is running and already producing collisions. In fact, WE can actually simulate a run and start hunting for those elusive particles after all!
This is a LHC project simulator. It tries to simulate the possible outcome of a collision based on the beam/magnet parameters that one start with. It's a lot of fun in a cartoonish sort of way. If only the actual thing is this easy. :)
Zz.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Why Can't Science Journalists Just Tell It Like It Is?
While I may not entirely agree with this article, it is nevertheless a very entertaining read. The article in Slate.com chastised many journalists covering the LHC for overextending the "color commentary" about the LHC. The author cited several prominent newspapers that were guilty of using prose that really did not convey the content, but rather paid more attention to style in trying to grab an audience.
The author also said this at the end:
While in general, I tend to agree with all this, I'm of two minds with regards to this as well. I think communicating, as accurately as possible, the idea is the most important thing we can do. To do this, we must be able to convey the idea in a manner that is understandable to the audience we are talking to. So this is the substance.
However, the public often are more "seduced" by the style. For a scientist, he/she must start to realize this because there have been way too many instances where science was defeated by style without any substance. So we DO have to try harder to make people care, and the politicians to care, because if not, we end up in this situation where the importance of science has taken the back seat, and so has the funding.
One thing that this article did do is to prove my point that science cannot be done in the popular media.
Zz.
The color provided by this sort of extravagant prose comes at a cost. It may make for a richer read, but to decorate the science with ornate wordplay has a way of obscuring the very ideas those words are supposed to highlight. Such language gives science a flavor of the mystic and inaccessible, which is exactly the opposite of what it is: messy, full of false starts and wrong ideas, but ultimately committed to making the universe more coherent.
The author also said this at the end:
On the whole, the best writing about physics for a general audience seems to come from physicists, not journalists. This isn't due to the fact that physicists understand the subject matter better—if anything, people who spend all day in the lab are often the worst at explaining the big picture. Rather, they're better at writing about physics because they don't try so hard to make you care. They don't believe their readers must be seduced with colorful wordplay or end-of-the-world melodramas. Journalists writing popular treatments of subatomic physics could take a lesson from the scientists: Tell it straight and have a little faith that the subject matter itself—a major advance in our understanding of the cosmos—can generate its own wonder and excitement.
While in general, I tend to agree with all this, I'm of two minds with regards to this as well. I think communicating, as accurately as possible, the idea is the most important thing we can do. To do this, we must be able to convey the idea in a manner that is understandable to the audience we are talking to. So this is the substance.
However, the public often are more "seduced" by the style. For a scientist, he/she must start to realize this because there have been way too many instances where science was defeated by style without any substance. So we DO have to try harder to make people care, and the politicians to care, because if not, we end up in this situation where the importance of science has taken the back seat, and so has the funding.
One thing that this article did do is to prove my point that science cannot be done in the popular media.
Zz.
Physics At ETH
It is one of the most prestigious university in the world, and Physics is a prominent subject area, unlike at most universities where it is often one of the smallest. This article provides a brief introduction to this outstanding institution that has the ability to attract international students and faculty members.
The best institutions in the world usually tend to have the ability to attract the best people, no matter where they are from.
Zz.
“The brain-import role is true for research as well”, van der Veen continues. “ETH is one of the few European universities that is able to ‘buy’ well known American scientists.” Though van der Veen still speaks highly of his time as researcher at the University of Amsterdam, he didn’t hesitate to accept the job offer from ETH eight years ago. “The infrastructure and big research facilities at ETH are excellent. And there is a lot of money available for research! There is so much potential over here. Look at the amazing amount of 21 spin-off companies at ETH, which were registered last year. Very inspiring.”
The best institutions in the world usually tend to have the ability to attract the best people, no matter where they are from.
Zz.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Why We Should Teach The Bohr Model And How To Teach It Effectively
I've printed out this paper for weeks now, but due to many distractions (including vacations), I haven't yet read through the whole thing. It also doesn't help that it is 9 pages long. So I thought that since I can't do a thorough review of it, maybe some of you can. I'll put in my comments once I've had digested the whole paper (not literally, of course).
The paper by McKagan et al. (Phys. Rev. Sp. Topics - Phys. Ed. Res., v.4, p.10103 (2008)) argues on why the Bohr model should be taught in intro modern physics courses, but it must be done "effectively". It is no secret that I am not a fan of this, because in my experience, the Bohr model given to students, especially those who are NOT physics majors, or do not intend to take higher level courses, are left holding on to a rather faulty view of what an atom is, at least from the way physics describes it via the Schrodinger formalism. So one is left with students having a mental picture of the planetary model. I have no issues with it being presented as a "historical" item, and then making sure the students understand why such picture is no longer used. However, teaching it formally?
So that's why I was interested in reading this paper. What useful ideas in understanding the atom and QM in general can be gathered out of making an effort to teach the Bohr model, and teach it effectively? Obviously, it can't be done the way it has been, especially with disinterested teachers that won't put any effort to do it the way the authors are suggesting.
I really should make an effort to read it.
BTW, the paper should be available for free from the APS journal page, or you can get the ArXiv version here.
Zz.
The paper by McKagan et al. (Phys. Rev. Sp. Topics - Phys. Ed. Res., v.4, p.10103 (2008)) argues on why the Bohr model should be taught in intro modern physics courses, but it must be done "effectively". It is no secret that I am not a fan of this, because in my experience, the Bohr model given to students, especially those who are NOT physics majors, or do not intend to take higher level courses, are left holding on to a rather faulty view of what an atom is, at least from the way physics describes it via the Schrodinger formalism. So one is left with students having a mental picture of the planetary model. I have no issues with it being presented as a "historical" item, and then making sure the students understand why such picture is no longer used. However, teaching it formally?
So that's why I was interested in reading this paper. What useful ideas in understanding the atom and QM in general can be gathered out of making an effort to teach the Bohr model, and teach it effectively? Obviously, it can't be done the way it has been, especially with disinterested teachers that won't put any effort to do it the way the authors are suggesting.
I really should make an effort to read it.
BTW, the paper should be available for free from the APS journal page, or you can get the ArXiv version here.
Zz.
Monday, September 22, 2008
McCain Will Freeze Funding On Research And Education
Aides to the senator has revealed that the candidate for the US Presidency will propose a budget that will freeze all domestic spending, including funding for research and education.
Here's a question I have never gotten an answer to, and why none of these so-called "journalists" ever asked these candidates. How come, whenever there is a fiscal issue, that domestic spending, and science spending in particular, is always the FIRST one to take the brunt of any freeze or cutbacks? I mean, if McCain is THAT concerned about earmarks and waste spending, how about the $14 billion that went missing in Iraq? If the whole philosophy here is to cut back wasteful spending, I'd say one might find the largest amount to save on by making a careful audit of the money that's flowing like water in this area. So how come the puny amount spend on scientific research gets the squeeze?
It has always been my impression that McCain has never paid any particular importance to science and scientific research. Obama doesn't put science that high on his agenda either, but McCain seems to almost ignore it completely to being a non-existent issue.
Zz.
"The purpose of the freeze is to evaluate each and every program, looking at which ones are worthwhile and which are a waste of taxpayer dollars," Ike Brannon, an economist and senior policy adviser to McCain, told the Task Force on the Future of American Innovation at a private gathering in Washington, D.C. The task force, a coalition of scientific and professional societies, had heard a more upbeat message in July from aides for Democratic Senator Barack Obama (IL), who has proposed doubling over 10 years the budgets of a host of U.S. science agencies.
McCain has expressed similar views to those of Obama in other venues, including support for "full funding" of the 2007 America COMPETES Act, which authorizes a 7-year doubling of the budgets of the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (ScienceNOW, 3 August 2007). But Brannon said today that there's been no talk within the campaign of allowing any flexibility in the proposed freeze. It would be part of McCain's 2010 budget submission next spring to Congress for the fiscal year that begins in October 2009, should he defeat Obama in November.
"Senator McCain realizes that it's difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of basic research," Brannon told Science after the closed-door briefing. "But the freeze applies to the entire budget, most of which doesn't relate to science. He hopes to be able to find savings from earmarks, from unnecessary subsidies, and from other programs that could then be applied to research."
Here's a question I have never gotten an answer to, and why none of these so-called "journalists" ever asked these candidates. How come, whenever there is a fiscal issue, that domestic spending, and science spending in particular, is always the FIRST one to take the brunt of any freeze or cutbacks? I mean, if McCain is THAT concerned about earmarks and waste spending, how about the $14 billion that went missing in Iraq? If the whole philosophy here is to cut back wasteful spending, I'd say one might find the largest amount to save on by making a careful audit of the money that's flowing like water in this area. So how come the puny amount spend on scientific research gets the squeeze?
It has always been my impression that McCain has never paid any particular importance to science and scientific research. Obama doesn't put science that high on his agenda either, but McCain seems to almost ignore it completely to being a non-existent issue.
Zz.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Proton Therapy - Cost and Benefit
While this article started on the news of the proposed building of another proton therapy in the Chicagoland area, it later on dove into what it is, and the current question on whether patients do benefit from it better than conventional, less-costly treatment.
I think the last line kinda says it all. If it were of the same cost as conventional treatment, it would have been built everywhere. But as of yet, no study on the cost versus benefit has been conducted. There certainly is no question that proton therapy causes less damage to surrounding tissues/cells, but how this translates to a patient's overall well-being is still unknown.
Zz.
I think the last line kinda says it all. If it were of the same cost as conventional treatment, it would have been built everywhere. But as of yet, no study on the cost versus benefit has been conducted. There certainly is no question that proton therapy causes less damage to surrounding tissues/cells, but how this translates to a patient's overall well-being is still unknown.
Zz.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Continuing Bastardization of Quantum Mechanics
Maybe I should have turn this into a series. But who knew that the news media would report this much crap on QM?
So if you haven't been following this blog, I've had already several posts on how people and the media have bastardized QM. They took what they read (usually out of some pop-science source) and somehow able to extrapolate whatever pathetic little knowledge that they gained into something completely unverified, unscientific, and worse still, completely wrong. All because they thought they understood QM.
This is the latest example. I'm guessing that this is a rather famous soccer player in the UK (I don't know, I don't follow soccer much).
Sounds familiar, doesn't it? In fact, the book "The Secret" made use of the same bastardization.
So here's something most of these people seem to have ignored. I'm staring at a pencil right now......... Now I'm staring at it again ......... and again ........
How have I changed the pencil? How have I changed "reality"? None? Bingo! In the classical world, which is the world we live in and most familiar with, the quantum rules are not observed. A cat is either dead or alive, not a superposition of dead and alive. A pencil can only be at one place at a time, not simultaneously spread out over various locations, etc... etc. What does this tells us? That there is a distinct difference between the rules of the classical world and quantum world. Where do they meet? No one knows, and that is still a subject of constant research to know at what point the quantum and classical world merges. We don't even know if this is a smooth crossover or an abrupt transition.
The point in all of this is that extrapolating the rules that govern quantum system into classical world has no justification. We have no scientific research that you can change reality simply by thinking about it in the SAME way that an act of measurement affects the outcome of a quantum system. NONE. It is a bastardization of QM to do so.
Zz.
So if you haven't been following this blog, I've had already several posts on how people and the media have bastardized QM. They took what they read (usually out of some pop-science source) and somehow able to extrapolate whatever pathetic little knowledge that they gained into something completely unverified, unscientific, and worse still, completely wrong. All because they thought they understood QM.
This is the latest example. I'm guessing that this is a rather famous soccer player in the UK (I don't know, I don't follow soccer much).
His epiphany came after reading about a famous experiment in quantum physics known as Schrodinger's Cat.
"It was all about the idea that an observer can change the world just by looking at something; the idea that mind and reality are somehow interconnected," Wilkinson explained.
"It is difficult to put into words, but it hit me like a steam train."
He continued: "I came to understand that I had been living a life in which I barely featured. I had spent my time immersed in the fear of not achieving my goals and then spent my time beating myself up about the mistakes I made along the way. Quantum physics helped me to realise that I was creating this destructive reality and that all I needed to do to change it was to change the way I chose to perceive the world.
Sounds familiar, doesn't it? In fact, the book "The Secret" made use of the same bastardization.
So here's something most of these people seem to have ignored. I'm staring at a pencil right now......... Now I'm staring at it again ......... and again ........
How have I changed the pencil? How have I changed "reality"? None? Bingo! In the classical world, which is the world we live in and most familiar with, the quantum rules are not observed. A cat is either dead or alive, not a superposition of dead and alive. A pencil can only be at one place at a time, not simultaneously spread out over various locations, etc... etc. What does this tells us? That there is a distinct difference between the rules of the classical world and quantum world. Where do they meet? No one knows, and that is still a subject of constant research to know at what point the quantum and classical world merges. We don't even know if this is a smooth crossover or an abrupt transition.
The point in all of this is that extrapolating the rules that govern quantum system into classical world has no justification. We have no scientific research that you can change reality simply by thinking about it in the SAME way that an act of measurement affects the outcome of a quantum system. NONE. It is a bastardization of QM to do so.
Zz.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
JLAB Gets Money to Upgade CEBAF
Thomas Jefferson Laboratory has been given the go-ahead by the DoE to upgrade CEBAF to obtain up to 12 GeV electrons.
This is certainly good news, considering that maybe a couple of years ago, it appears that either CEBAF or RHIC was in jeopardy of being shut down due to lack of funding. Note that while CEBAF (and also RHIC) actually collides particles in their experiment, these are not considered as high energy particle colliders. In the sometime-puzzling world of physics and also how physics is funded in the Dept. of Energy, these are considered as nuclear physics experiments, and not high energy/particle physics experiments. RHIC and CEBAF are thus funded by a different division of the DoE, the nuclear physics division, not the high energy physics division.
So with the termination of SLAC as a high energy facility, and with the pending shut down of the Tevatron, the US will technically cease in having any high energy particle colliders within its shores for the first time since the field of experimental high energy physics was created.
Zz.
This is certainly good news, considering that maybe a couple of years ago, it appears that either CEBAF or RHIC was in jeopardy of being shut down due to lack of funding. Note that while CEBAF (and also RHIC) actually collides particles in their experiment, these are not considered as high energy particle colliders. In the sometime-puzzling world of physics and also how physics is funded in the Dept. of Energy, these are considered as nuclear physics experiments, and not high energy/particle physics experiments. RHIC and CEBAF are thus funded by a different division of the DoE, the nuclear physics division, not the high energy physics division.
So with the termination of SLAC as a high energy facility, and with the pending shut down of the Tevatron, the US will technically cease in having any high energy particle colliders within its shores for the first time since the field of experimental high energy physics was created.
Zz.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
High-Temperature Superconductivity in the Iron Pnictides
The iron-arsenic based superconductors are the hottest material right now (outside of graphene) in condensed matter physics. The rush to study this almost mirrors what happened earlier with the cuprates and the MgB2 compounds. Plenty of papers are coming out on this right now.
This is an excellent overview by Mike Norman on the state of knowledge that we have currently on this compound. More importantly, the similarity between the FeAs-based compounds and the cuprates superconductors make this system exceedingly important to solve the mystery of superconductivity in these high-Tc superconductors.
It would be interesting to see a couple of years from now how what we know now would have changed, and if any of these observations and understanding are still valid. Things in this field change very rapidly.
Zz.
This is an excellent overview by Mike Norman on the state of knowledge that we have currently on this compound. More importantly, the similarity between the FeAs-based compounds and the cuprates superconductors make this system exceedingly important to solve the mystery of superconductivity in these high-Tc superconductors.
It would be interesting to see a couple of years from now how what we know now would have changed, and if any of these observations and understanding are still valid. Things in this field change very rapidly.
Zz.
Energy Future = Think Efficiency
I'm very happy that the APS has launched a report to tackle the US energy issue. We have gotten so many of these things already, but not from the point of view of the science/technology. The APS's webpage claim that this is a different type of energy report.
Certainly very timely, and worth paying attention to. I mean, if those global warming opponents got so excited that an article in an APS Division actually presented an anti-global warming argument, then they also can't ignore when the APS itself produces and endorses something like this.
Edit: here's a news article on this APS report.
Zz.
Energy Future: Think Efficiency differs from other energy efficiency reports in its emphasis on scientific and technological options and analysis. Based on emerging technologies, this report targets which research and development gives America the best return for its dollars.
Want to know what works now, what can work soon, and what is feasible for the future? The Energy Future: Think Efficiency study panel of leading experts in energy policy with backgrounds in physics, engineering, economics, and policy, examines and answers these very questions.
Certainly very timely, and worth paying attention to. I mean, if those global warming opponents got so excited that an article in an APS Division actually presented an anti-global warming argument, then they also can't ignore when the APS itself produces and endorses something like this.
Edit: here's a news article on this APS report.
Zz.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)