electron « WordPress.com Tag Feed

The Atomic Comic Club

davidvblack — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 19:41:42 +0000

This is a somewhat random post on a few things I’ve been working on the past two weeks. Now that the NSF grant is submitted, I can return to editing episodes in preparation for finally setting up an iTunes site. I’ve been working on transcribing Dr. Eric Scerri’s interview so that I can edit it and send him a “good parts” version along with the complete interview. (By the way, I saw Theo Gray’s new book on the elements in Barnes & Noble the other day, and its beautifully photographed and engagingly written. Check it out!) In between, I’m creating some drawings of Greek philosophers for the segments on Greek matter theories. I’ve completed the line art versions of Heraclitus, Parmenides, Zeno, and Plato. They were drawn with pencil, then inked in and scanned, then cleaned up in Adobe Photoshop. I still have to add color. Here are samples:

Heraclitus

Heraclitus was the philosopher who said that you can’t step in the same river twice, because both the river and you have changed. Parmenides and Zeno were of the Eleatic school that argued logically that change and motion were impossible. Zeno’s famous Achilles and the Tortoise paradox is still a difficult test for students of logic. And of course we all know about Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. Each of them affected subsequent matter theories, including Aristotle and Democritus, and therefore influenced modern atomic theory as well.

Zeno of Elea

Plato of Athens

I’ve also gone through all my electronic files scattered over several hard drives just to take inventory and see what’s already done so that I don’t re-create files and duplicate effort. One piece of work I came across was a script for part of an episode of a mini-series that I proposed to the Sloan Foundation and to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting back in 2007-08. Sloan responded negatively without even taking the time to read the proposal. CPB at least looked it over, said the idea had merit, but declined due to having plenty of material related to the elements already in the pipeline. It was at that point that I reinvented this project as a series of podcast episodes; I wouldn’t have to worry about the limited airtimes and economics of scarcity of broadcast channels, but could put the finished material where anyone could access it for free. If you want to learn more about these issues, there are two great books I heartily recommend: First, read Thomas Friedman’s The World is Flat, which talks about the flattening of the global economy and many of the issues that have become so huge lately. Then, after you’ve gotten the general background, read Chris Anderson’s The Long Tail, which discusses the new economics of abundance that the Internet provides. Both books figure heavily in my grant application. I’ve even created animations and graphics to show how their ideas apply to science education.

Boson the Clown, the Quantum Quipster

The script I came across was meant to be part of an hour-long segment on the history of atomic theory and was a section on subatomic particles and their interactions, one of the most difficult subjects to teach. Several years ago, while teaching chemistry at Provo Canyon School, we came to the unit on atomic theory and I took my students through the Standard Model of Particles and Interactions, one of the great iconic models of science that ranks up there with the Periodic Table of the Elements. The terminology of that model is rather hard and strange (literally – most people have never heard of strange quarks, but there they are) and so when we finished the unit and it came time for the test, I decided as an extra credit question to have the students come up with some type of pun or joke based on subatomic physics. They wound up spending more time on that question than the rest of the test combined, and the results were pretty good. Here’s an example: “A pion took a trip down under and walked in front of a kangaroo. Do you know what happened? He got lepton!” or an equally bad groaner: “A neutron walks into a bar and asks the bartender, ‘How much for a drink?’ The bartender says, ‘For you, there’s no charge!’ “

Boson the Clown storyboard frame

Yes, I know, they’re bad. But it brought me to an interesting idea that wouldn’t go away. I envisioned a subatomic particle telling these jokes as a stand-up routine, and suddenly the whole thing popped into my head fully formed. The particle’s name is Boson the Clown, and he’s telling these jokes to an audience of electrons in an atom and as he does so, he throws photon balls at them which makes them vibrate and get excited until they jump up to higher balconies of the comedy club – they quantum leap – and that this would make a good illustration (if with a somewhat warped sense of humor) of how bosons work to aid energy interactions between particles. The name of the club is the Atomic Comic Club, and I’ve written an entire script of the scene which I hope to animate in 3D at some point. I’ve done some sample models over the years just to try to visualize what he’d look like, riding a unicycle on a wavy path in a Feynman diagram tossing photon balls at electrons. I’m including the script of the scene here, just in case you’d like to read it and make comments or tell me I’ve finally flipped.

Script_for_Boson_anim

Eventually perhaps the footage that we’ve taken for The Elements Unearthed can be re-edited into a mini-series for PBS as I originally planned (as well as a book, games, on-line materials, lesson plans, posters, etc.) but that will be after we’ve completed the first several phases of the project and have about 100 episodes posted. For now, I’ve got to get back to my editing so that you can finally see what I’ve been talking about all this time.

God’s Footprint--The Quasi-Physical Event Aspect Chapter Two

bwinwnbwi — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:48:16 +0000

God’s footprint, grounded as it is in the Logos of Existence, is shaped like a piece of pie, the edges of which meet where the observer’s edge of the pie and the opposite edge of the pie (the physical event edge) come together. The pie crust separates the observer from macro level physical events. In other words, without macro level physical events human intelligence would cease to exist (no piecrust, — no pie piece, no determinism, — no human intelligence). The comprehensibility of a micro level event is different from the comprehensibility of a macro level event because, in the same universe, the physical duality that constitutes micro level comprehensibility is different from the physical duality that constitutes macro level comprehensibility. Events on the macro level of the universe are more deterministic than events at the micro level of the universe because the entire universe is comprehensible by people who can comprehend—you, me, and the scientist. In quantum mechanics the loss of space time localization coupled with the realities of wave/particle phenomena have forced some physicists to abandon the concept of a deterministic universe. However, when viewed from the perspective of God’s footprint, one does not give up anything. Just like in the physics of relativity where yardstick lengths and rates of ticking clocks are tied to the observer’s frame of reference, so to, in God’s footprint, the comprehensibility of universe is tied to the frame of reference of different dualities— e.g., ~~b (wave/particle duality), ~bb (accommodation/assimilation of living creatures duality), and, b~b~bb (the physical event/human intelligence duality).

As I was saying in the beginning chapter of God’s Footprint, the physical event/quantum side of the pie piece is embedded in the aesthetic continuum, — or the feeling/sensing side of experience as opposed to the cerebral experience where we encounter the “ideal meanings” that get used in the interpretation of the phenomena that we ascribe to nature according to law. How this translates into the physical event/quantum side of the pie piece is contained in the ongoing story of what can loosely be called “the strange behavior of quantum phenomena.” In order to get a better idea of what is entailed in the quantum event, I’ll let another dialogue (written a while back) speak to this issue. In this half-imagined conversation, three strangers meet at a California state campground. In this conversation, Don, the skeptical university student, Jade, the newly graduated science teacher, and me, the vagabond bicycler, are discussing Fritz Capra’s book, Tao of Physics.

“What are you guys talking about anyway,” said Don, “Catch up to what? How can a scientist catch up to science?”
“Catch up to the universe,” I said. “Science–the scientist– has to catch up to what’s happening in the universe. There’s no going back to Kansas anymore. That’s what Capra was telling us in his book. We just don’t live in a world divided up into the squeaky clean categories of mass and energy anymore, not to mention cause and effect.”
“Don’t be ridiculous,” said Don. “It sounds like you guys, Capra included, have been smoking too much of that hookah weed stuff.”
“Not really,” Jade replied, “Capra is a well respected physicist who just happens to be on the cutting edge of new age thinking. He really knows what he’s talking about.”

Jade’s right,” I said, “The new physics has turned waves into particles and particles into waves. Hell, we don’t even know for sure if the world exists separate from the way we look at it. According to Capra, at the quantum level, the universe looks and behaves differently from the way we typically perceive it. At the level of the very small, we loose track of independently existing things. Physical phenomena appears, at that level, to show signs of being interconnected, which means that we are interconnected with everything else, which means that the sages of the East were right all along. Ultimately, we are all part of some mystical ‘Oneness,’ but we just don’t know it. In reality, we’re just one big happy family.”

“Quantum physics says all that,” replied Don, “I don’t mean to be a party pooper fellows, but didn’t anybody ever tell you that the splitting up of that “small stuff” is what resulted in the ‘now you see ‘em, now you don’t’ cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. I mean the family that bombs together doesn’t necessarily stay together, let alone live in bliss!”
“Well, yeah,” Jade replied, “I guess it doesn’t hurt to keep a perspective on things. I think what is being said here is that the world that gave us a better bomb, on a fundamental level, just doesn’t exist anymore. It exists locally, yeah, but even so, we still can’t go back to Kansas. Everything has changed.”
“Like what exactly,” replied Don.

“Like we can’t think of the universe as just a collection of objects anymore,” Jade responded. “Rather, it’s more like a complicated web of relations. Some physicists even go as far as to say that it is a complicated web of relations between the various parts of a unified whole. And that is what Dave meant when he said that Eastern mystics were there first. In fact, Capra is saying the same thing. According to him, even the language used by physicists and the language used by mystics is starting to sound the same. Nagarjuna, a second century Buddhist, preached that things were nothing in themselves; instead, they derived their being from a mutual dependence with other things. A particle physicist might use those very same words to describe the results of a cloud chamber experiment that records the trajectories of colliding particles. Under certain conditions, an elementary particle is no more than a set of relationships that reach outward to other things. The world, on that level, is no more than a complicated tissue of events that determines the texture of the whole.”

“Big deal,” snapped Don. “So what the hell is all that supposed to mean? Physicists still do physics don’t they? They still make weapons that kill don’t they, weapons that when sold produce mega bucks for the seller. Who cares where destruction comes from; it’s still destruction, right!”

“Wait a minute.” I interrupted. “We need to start over, I know what you’re getting at Don, and I totally agree. And I know Jade does too. That’s why I said that it takes time, lots of it, for the implications of new concepts to be fully digested. Maybe a hundred years for all I know, but digested they will be, and when it happens the world will be better off. That’s all I’m trying to say. What’s happening in physics today is a far cry from what happened in the past, and its telling us new and exciting things about the universe, and maybe even about ourselves! This new vision does not exclude, it includes, and therein lies the hope. When humanity is brought into the mix with everything else, a whole new ballgame arises. The center of balance shifts, and overtime, possibilities open, even if in the short run, the rules remain the same. If you ask me, humanity will be in for immense benefits if this new vision catches on. Think about it. What’s happening in science today is the rediscovery of our lost identity, and that can’t be all bad.”

“How many beers are left?” said Don.
“What?”
“If we’re gunna start over,” Don replied, “and if you’re gunna get metaphysical on me, I need to know just how patient I want to be. So how many beers patient will I be?”
“Well,” said Jade, after checking the twelve pack, and handing everyone another beer, “I’d say about two or three, depending of course on how patient you want to be!”
“That sounds about right,” Don said. “Educate me. I’m ready now.”
“Jade, you’re the science teacher. You start,” I said.
“You don’t need me,” Jade shot back, “you need Neil’s Bohr or Warner Heisenberg.”
“That sounds good,” I said. “Start with those guys. Think of it as practice. After all, in the classroom you won’t have such a patient audience. We won’t heckle. Go for it.”

“All right already, enough,” Jade said. “As best I can remember, it all started with Max Planck’s black body radiation experiments at the turn of the century. He discovered that radiation or light propagates in discrete packets. Those packets are called the quantum of action. The energy in a quantum of action varies, but its discreteness doesn’t. That discreteness is known as Planck’s constant. Particles in classical physics evolve in a continuous manner, and in three dimensions of space, but in atomic physics that just doesn’t seem to be the case. With the discovery of the quantum of action, there was a merging of the dynamic state of the elements under study with their localization. The particles’ independence dissolved, as it became impossible to simultaneously determine position and momentum, an impossibility for which the uncertainty relations of Heisenberg became the precise expression. After the uncertainty principle, Cartesian space and time co-ordinates ceased to be applicable, and physicists were forced into learning new rules for a new game. In fact, all the conjugate variables of analytical mechanics–energy, time, momentum, position, had to be dealt with as approximations; they had to be dealt with in terms of statistical analysis. Ultimately, with the loss of space and time localization, physicists were forced to abandon their concept of a deterministic physical universe.”

“Oh yeah, and what about Einstein,” Don said. “Did he abandon the concept of determinism? What happened to his space and time?”
“Well, not exactly,” Jade replied. “His space and time are still there, only it’s not just his space-time any longer, it’s everybody’s.”
“I’ve always wanted to know about relativity. Fill me in why don’t you.” Don said.

“I’d really like to except it’s all a little fuzzy for me, too,” replied Jade. “I really don’t understand much about it. That’s a whole different physics, one that doesn’t fit in well with quantum mechanics. That was the problem that haunted Einstein his entire life. He never stopped trying to solve it. And if he couldn’t do it, don’t expect help from me. You’re right, though; Einstein never did give up his belief in a deterministic universe. In his physics, determinism was preserved, while everything else fell apart.”
“So tell me about it,” Don said. “If a ball is still a ball and we can calculate its velocity and position in Einstein’s universe, then what do you mean ‘everything fell apart?’”

“Basically,” replied Jade, “relativity doesn’t come into significant play until you’re working with velocities at close to the speed of light. When those speeds are approached, compared to say, the speed of a bullet, space and time measurements become radically different when measured relative to each other. In Einstein’s Special Theory Of Relativity the space and time measurements of the system under study are tied to the frame of reference of the observer. A yardstick and a clock traveling at close to the speed of light will measure thirty-six inches and identify twelve o’clock to an observer in that reference frame, but when the same yardstick and clock are measured against other frames of reference, say like here on earth, earth clocks will run slow and yardsticks will measure less than thirty-six inches. Sir Isaac Newton’s absolute space and time collapsed under the weight of Einstein.”

“Oh yeah, now I understand,” replied Don. “Bullets are small compared to the sun, so their length is measured with a short yardstick while sun spots are large compared to bullets, so they’re measured with long yardsticks, right!”
“That’s not exactly what I said, Don. Measuring rods traveling at close to the speed of light,” said Jade, “when compared to measuring rods here on earth measure short, and the same goes for clocks, they run slow. And, vice versa, when earth clocks are compared to clocks traveling at close to the speed of light, then those clocks run slow. I don’t know why. I’m not an Einstein. I guess it has something to do with the constancy of the velocity of light, but other than that it’s a mystery to me, just like it must be a mystery to you. Look, I can see we’re not getting anywhere here, especially since I’ve already admitted I don’t know much about Einstein’s theories. Let’s just say that by using Einstein’s equations, a person can figure out how to measure both the length and speed of an earth bullet and the length and speed of a bullet traveling at close to the speed of light and then communicate that knowledge to an alpha centurion—provided that the alien understands the equations. Once again, I don’t now how that can be done, but I do know it has something to do with Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, which further develops the concept of the space-time interval. A space-time interval, when measured relative to different reference frames, does not vary, but don’t ask me to explain that because I can’t.”

“Fair enough,” Don replied. “Don’t explain.”
“Now that I think of it, though,” said Jade, “I need to put just a little perspective into what I just said.”
“Do you really?” said Don.
“Have another drink, Don,” Jade replied.
“Determining the change of change in different reference systems,” Jade continued, “is no small accomplishment, but there is something even more amazing going on here. Einstein’s equations let us in on an astounding universe, a universe absolutely different from the one that Euclid mapped out for us a couple millenniums ago. The universe discovered by Einstein even astounded Einstein, but it wasn’t the oddness of it all that astounded him, it was the simple fact that it could be discovered in the first place! He said, ‘The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible.’ If you ask me, that statement says it all.”

“If that’s true,” Don interrupted, “then Einstein must have died a pretty frustrated man because based on what you’re telling me here, nobody is even close to comprehending a universe that is free of contradictory laws. What’s comprehensible about that?”

“We don’t know everything, Don,” Jade replied, “but we do know a hell of a lot more than we used to. We are beginning to understand ‘who and what we are’ in a whole different light. It’s true that our knowledge is limited by statistical analysis at the quantum level, but it works, and it works well. That, according to Bohr and Heisenberg, was pretty important all by itself. According to the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics, the model attributed to Bohr and Heisenberg, it doesn’t matter what’s going on at the quantum level, what matters is that in all possible experimental situations we can, within certain limits, predict the outcomes. Understanding reality, according to the Copenhagen Interpretation, lies beyond the capabilities of rational thought. The laws governing individual events are, at the quantum level, completely discarded. Only mathematical laws governing aggregations apply. According to quantum mechanics, it is not possible, even in principle, to know enough about the present to make a complete prediction about the future. Even with the best possible measuring devices, it is still not possible.”

“You talk as if Bohr and Heisenberg are gods,” said Don. “To me they’re just two more scientists, two among many, doing their job! I’m sure there are different opinions out there. Einstein certainly didn’t agree. One day another Einstein will come along and see through it all, and on that day the Copenhagen Interpretation, or whatever you call it, will be no more. What are you suggesting anyway, that all progress stops because you want it to? I don’t think so, and I’m glad.”

“You could be right,” Jade responded, “but overcoming all the history that’s still building in quantum mechanics is a daunting task for anyone. Einstein wasn’t the only physicist who disliked the theory. Many have tried to dislodge the Copenhagen interpretation. In every instance, however, the physical world has intervened and said, ‘Your questions are meaningless.’ No physicist likes being told that. When a wave behaves like a particle and a particle behaves like a wave, the concepts that used to define the physical world no longer apply. Nature now requires a marriage of ideas that in the past were designed to live apart. Neil’s Bohr just got tired of fighting the inevitable. That’s when he started seeing things in a complimentary light.”

“Complimentary what?” said Don.
“That was Bohr’s big contribution to quantum mechanics,” replied Jade. “He basically said that there are no waves out there. There are no particles running around, either. That strange animal that interacts with the experiments, the quantum of action, is all there is. Because Bohr believed that, he introduced the idea of complementarity. He considered the particle picture and the wave picture as two complementary descriptions of the same reality, each description being only partly correct and having a limited range of application. For Bohr, the entity ‘electron,’–just like the other elementary entities of physics—had two irreconcilable aspects, which must be invoked in order to explain, in turn, the properties of the entity. To give a full description of atomic reality, each picture is needed, and both descriptions are to be applied within the limitations given by the uncertainty principle. In fact, when the queen of England knighted Bohr for his work in physics, he was forced to pick a family coat of arms, and so he picked the Chinese symbol of Tai-chi. Because he believed that reality had to be visualized in both its complimentary and contradictory aspects, but not at the same time, he felt that, at least at the level of the quantum of action, the basic idea of Eastern mysticism’s yin/yang reality had been confirmed.”

“Yeah, that sounds about right,” I said, “I remember reading somewhere, maybe in Capra, that in the Buddhist relationship between form and emptiness, cooperation exists. That relationship cannot be conceived as a state of mutually exclusive opposites because it represents two aspects of the same reality. From one perspective it appears to be contradictory, but from another perspective it becomes the unifying aspect of that very same reality. Just like at the quantum level, where an event, in order to be wholly an event, exhibits both contradictory and complimentary aspects, so too in Buddhism, the void and the forms that are created from it, exist in a dynamic unity. But, there’s something that still bothers me. What about that observer-generated reality stuff that Capra talked about in his book? How does that fit in with the quantum of action? What’s that all about, anyway?”

“That’s just another aspect of how phenomena manifests at the quantum level,” responded Jade. “The classical notions of space, time, causality–objective reality, break down at the quantum level. Remember there are no waves propagating. According to most physicists, the wave function is not quite a thing, it is more like an idea that occupies a strange middle ground between idea and reality, where all things are possible but none are actual. An electron is not a particle either, it is more like a process, always forming, always dissolving. It can’t be detected until it interacts with a measuring device and even if it does interact we don’t know if it interacts with the device per se, or if it interacts with the last link in the chain of events that define the experiment—the consciousness of the human observer. The physicist, Erwin Schrödinger, devised a thought experiment to illustrate that point.

“You put a cat in a box with some poison gas. When the gas is released, the cat dies. The release of the gas is triggered by radiation decay. The decay is totally arbitrary. In classical physics, the cat dies at the time of the decay, but in quantum mechanics the cat dies when the observation is made, when the last link in the chain of events that defines the experiment occurs. At the time of observation when the box is opened the wave function collapses and possibility becomes actuality. Of course, common sense tells us that can’t be true, but that’s precisely the point, common sense breaks down at the quantum level, things are ‘different’ at that level. So the question remains, ‘Is it, or when is it, necessary to include human consciousness in our descriptions of the world?’ Or, put another way, ‘what role does measurement play in an experiment?’ Does it provide a description of the world under study or does it actually create that world?’ Quantum Mechanics has a hard time answering questions like that.”

“Maybe one day that situation will be better understood,” I said. “But until that day comes, talk about ‘objectivity’ is probably best left to the Buddhists. They don’t have a problem with ‘independent reality’ because there isn’t any; for them, everything is interdependent. My subjective world and the objective world are, for an enlightened Buddhist, just words referring to mutually conditioned relations woven into one fabric; subject and object are not just inseparable, they are indistinguishable.”

“Funny you should point that out,” responded Jade, “I mean, that words interfere with reality, because many physicists believe the same thing. Many physicists believe that the wave function is not an accurate representation of what’s really going on ‘out there.’ Rather, they believe the wave function is an abstract creation whose manipulation somehow yields the probabilities of real events that happen in space and time. But that’s only part of the story, and perhaps a small part, too. In fact, the mathematician von Neumann, the same guy who developed a mathematical proof rejecting the notion of hidden variables in quantum mechanics, believed the problems surrounding quantum phenomena had nothing to do with nature, but, rather, they had everything to do with language. We impose, with our symbolic thought processes, the categories of ‘either-or.’ Language does not allow a mixture of A and not A. The boundaries of discourse, rather, are set by discriminating A from not A. Outside that boundary nonsense rules; where ‘separate parts’ are not applicable, language cannot go. Classical physics discriminates between A and not A, therefore, moving particles and waves can be analyzed. A pictorial description of nature is never a problem there. At the atomic level, however, it is not possible to visualize or describe waves because they are not there—they are purely mathematical constructs. Where things are not things, quantifiers like inside, outside, before, after, between, or connected are not applicable. Where language and logic do not apply, nothing more can be said.”

“It seems that physicists,” I replied, “at the quantum level at least, find the same road block that the Eastern sages discovered long ago; at that point, the language of neti neti, the language of not this not that–is all that’s left. At that level all investigations end, and we are left with mere words that say nothing.”

“Well, I wouldn’t put it quite so negatively,” Jade responded, “after all, at that level, something else comes into play; that is, if you are a sage—isn’t that where infinite wisdom and infinite creativity begins?”

“Okay, then maybe we’ve come full circle,” I said. “We’re back to the endless transformation of energy that the yin, yang symbol represents.”
“For sure, Neil’s Bohr would agree with that,” Jade replied, “but I think a little poetry is more appropriate here. After all, who better to entrust a description of the indescribable then the poet! If my memory holds, in some Upanishad it says, ‘He on whom the sky, the earth, and the atmosphere are woven, and the wind, together with all life-breaths, Him alone know as the one Soul.’”

“Yo! Fellows,” Don interjected, “We’re out of beer. No more beer, no more poetry, pleeease. Thanks for the beer, though. Don’t take offense, but somehow listening to you guys made me feel like I was waiting for Godet. If you ask me, it ain’t going to happen. Goodnight, see you in the morning!”

buzzz

Tripbot — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:07:12 +0000

i’ve never found it so hard to tell which half is… half…drink a little more than half, 50ml… 100mg dmx…. sipping juice inbetween…bitter aftertaste on the back of my throat…more juice…mmh….

and now i wait…and wait….and wait…

ting-a-ling… 15 mins in…heart pounding…i can feel it…the notepad is shaking as i write this…looks wierd…seismic waves….i think it’s how i’m writing…still waiting….

20 mins in…lie down for a bit…get up…nerves play run and catchers on my back…if it doesn’t hit me in 10 mins i’m having more…

fuck…

legs buzzing… fan on… music…

welcome to sky valley…

sit on the floor…leaning against the wall…music takes me somewhere…thoughts take me somewhere else…body lying perfectly still….

conversing with real people giving me real responses…is this my mind’s treat for freeing it from the confines of my skull? the failure that is the human anatomy… yet to evolve…head falls to a side…return to the music….

climb onto bed….every inch of me buzzing…bumblebee…nature’s vibrator…dmx is a battery…i become a vibration…an electron jumping shells…or shelves?

don’t know if i slept or not…but i fel good…receive a text…respond easily…it’s wearing off…

took out the bottle…downed the other half…now i wait for the second part….

Visa Electron wird gebührenpflichtig

ryanairblog — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 13:38:18 +0000

Autor: ryanairblog

Schlechte Nachrichten gibt Ryanair am heutigen Montag, den 30. November 2009 bekannt.
Die Visa Electron-Card, welche bisher für Flugbuchungen auf Ryanair.com kostenlos benutzt werden kann, wird zum 01. Januar 2010 gebührenpflichtig.

Im Gegenzug dazu wird die Mastercard Prepaid nun das neue gebührenfreie Zahlungsmittel.

Was mach von dieser Entscheidung halten soll, bleibt wohl jedem selbst überlassen. Das es für Tausende Passagiere, die bisher wegen Ryanair eine Visa-Electron beantragt hatten zu Zusatzkosten kommt, ist nicht von der Hand zu weisen.

Ein gutes Angebot hat mal wieder Entropay. Sie bieten eine kostenlose Prepaid Mastercard an.

Die Pressemitteilung findet ihr auf ryanair.com

Ce petrecere reuşită!

paulgsandu — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 10:03:14 +0000

Muzica în care se transformau lucrurile din jurul meu ca nişte culori amestecate la întâmplare avea nevoie de un călător obosit şi lipsit de gânduri, de un al fel de cutie de rezonanţă. tristeţea mea nu era de ajuns, nici mâna mea pe jumătate visată care ardea cu o flacără albăstruie, nici ochiul meu care începuse să picure pe dinăuntru şi să se alungească ca o lămâie. stând în fotoliu, cu capul electrificat pe jumătate, pe jumătate mirosind a petrol, oscilând între cele două lumi ca între două sicrie în care ar trebui să mă închid, aşteptam să mă înlocuiască în ambele lumi altcineva şi să mă lase să plec. din când în când îmi roteam încheietura mâinii drepte şi pipăiam cu cealaltă mână limbile neclintite ale acelor de ceas, subţiri ca nişte dumnezei de vată de zahăr ca nişte fire de salivă. stăteam în fotoliu ca într-un osuar, perfect nemişcat, cu picioarele adunate sub mine, de pază. unele lucruri o luaseră înaintea timpului, mâna mea de exemplu care ardea cu o flacără albăstruie îmi zâmbea dintr-un viitor care se îndepărta mereu ca o durere în ploapa subţire. apoi cealaltă mână începea să fumeze ca un înger păzitor aşezat de-a dreapta mea, în silă. şi iată cum am coborât atunci pe covor, picioarele mele au traversat încăperea dintr-un romb în altul, ritualic, am început să simt insecte minuscule eclozându-mi sub piele cu pocnete înfundate şi scurte; unele îşi luau zborul, altele se adânceau tot mai mult în carnea şi în oasele mele, devorându-le ca o flacără albăstruie; când am reuşit să privesc pe geam, în jurul meu se umpluse de aripi minuscule şi rozalii, de la celălalt capăt al încăperii fotoliul mă privea neîncrezător şi eu i-am făcut un semn să vină, aş fi vrut să mă aşez acolo, la geam, insecte minuscule ţeseau în jurul meu o pânză lipicioasă şi fină cu găuri la fel de mici ca o pată oarbă de pe retină; trebuia neapărat să dau un telefon, să încerc ceva, viaţa mea nu trebuia să se dizolve în felul ăsta, eu avem alt destin, existenţa mea trebuia să străbată până în cealaltă cameră şi să iradieze de acolo în ceilalţi, să se multiplice ea însăşi ca nişte insecte, să-şi treacă făptura larvară asupra tuturor, să invadeze distanţa dintre mine şi lume ca o spumă; dar nu mai eram în stare să disting nimic, decât zumzetul miliardelor de aripi minuscule care gravitau în jurul meu şi care devorau flacăra albăstruie a mâinii mele intrând şi ieşind din mine ca dint-un stup. din mecanismul complex al trupului meu vorbitor rămăseseră numai câteva metafore cu rotiţele defecte şi câteva oase pline de crăpături şi de găuri; aş fi vrut să fac o ultimă încercare să transcend şi să plec, când am auzit pocnetul ascuţit de balon plin cu aer al inimii mele care se vărsase pe podea. şi numai privind mai atent, cu ochiul care se resorbise pe jumătate, am văzut că balonul ce tocmai plesnise era nu inima, ci vezica urinară, iar lichidul care se împrăştiase cu un miros dulceag era galben şi înţepător ca un aer stătut într-o cameră goală.

Ce petrecere reuşită!, m-am gândit, când ultimul electron în care locuia sufletul meu s-a desfăcut în trei cuarci minusculi cu aripi rozalii, dizolvându-mă eu însumi, în semn de moarte, ca un insecticid inofensiv, ca un cub de zahăr într-o cană cu lapte.

จุลทรรศน์อิเล็กตรอนทางทันตแพทยศาสตร์

SoClaimon — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:17:35 +0000

3201705 จุลทรรศน์อิเล็กตรอนทางทันตแพทยศาสตร์ Electron Microscopy in Dentistry

ชีววิทยาของเนื้อเยื่อของช่องปากและใบหน้า ในระดับเซลล์ และโมเลกุล การเตรียมเนื้อเยื่อ เพื่อศึกษาด้วยกล้องจุลทรรศน์อิเล็กตรอน การทำงานของกล้องจุลทรรศน์อิเล็กตรอนชนิดส่องผ่านและส่องกราด หลักการในการแปลผล จากภาพถ่ายจุลทรรศน์อิเล็กตรอน

(Biology of orofacial tissues in cellular and molecular level; methodology of preparation of the tissues for electron microscopy; mechanism of transmission and scanning electron microscopy; principle of electron micrograph interpretation.)

(3201705 จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย)

ปฏิบัติการจุลทรรศน์อิเล็กตรอนทางทันตแพทยศาสตร์

SoClaimon — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:15:59 +0000

3201706 ปฏิบัติการจุลทรรศน์อิเล็กตรอนทางทันตแพทยศาสตร์ Electron Micorscopy in Dentistry Laboratory

ปฏิบัติการเกี่ยวกับการเตรียมเนื้อเยื่ออ่อนและแข็งของช่องปากและใบหน้า เพื่อศึกษาด้วยกล้องจุลทรรศน์อิเล็กตรอนแบบส่องผ่านและแบบส่องกราด การใช้กล้องจุลทรรศน์อิเล็กตรอน วิธีการถ่ายภาพและวิธีการอ่านภาพถ่ายจุลทรรศน์อิเล็กตรอน

(Laboratory practice in tissue preparation of soft and hard tissues from orofacial structures for study with transmission and scanning electron microscope; the procedure of operation of electron microscope; electron microscope photography; electron micrograph interpretation.)

(3201706 จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย)

El misterio de los positrones galácticos

portalhispano — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:37:43 +0000

El telescopio de rayos gamma de la ESA, INTEGRAL, resuelve uno de los misterios sobre la formación de antimateria en el centro galáctico

La antimateria no es sólo un término de ciencia ficción. Las partículas de antimateria se crean y se destruyen cotidianamente en los aceleradores de partículas y también en nuestra galaxia. En las regiones centrales de la Vía Láctea se produce abundantemente antimateria. Los astrónomos estudian este proceso desde que detectaron su existencia, en la década de los setenta. El telescopio de rayos gamma de la Agencia Europea del Espacio (ESA), INTEGRAL, ha resuelto ahora uno de los misterios relacionados con la formación de antimateria en el centro galáctico.

Un positrón es la antipartícula del electrón, es decir, una partícula que tiene la misma masa que el electrón y la misma carga, aunque de signo opuesto. Las leyes de la física nos dicen que si un electrón y un positrón colisionan, se aniquilan, y del proceso resultan dos o más fotones. En los casos en que el positrón y el electrón en colisión no sean partículas muy energéticas, el resultado suele ser la emisión de dos fotones, cada uno con una energía igual a la energía en reposo del electrón (o del positrón, no olvidemos que sus masas son iguales), es decir 511 kelectronvoltios (keV).

La detección de radiación con esta energía, que cae en el dominio de los rayos gamma, se considera una señal inequívoca de que está teniendo lugar la aniquilación de electrones y positrones, es decir, de materia y antimateria. Y ésa es justamente la emisión que se detecta en el centro de la Vía Láctea. Se sabe que es un proceso relacionado con las explosiones de supernova o con estrellas muy masivas. La principal fuente de positrones en la Vía Láctea es el decaimiento radiactivo de isótopos de níquel (56Ni), titanio (44Ti) y aluminio (26Al), que han sido expulsados al medio interestelar durante las explosiones de supernovas o por vientos estelares de las llamadas estrellas Wolf Rayet, muy masivas.

54 millones de segundos

Los instrumentos del satélite INTEGRAL detectan precisamente rayos gamma. El análisis de 54 millones de segundos de observación realizados por INTEGRAL ha permitido elaborar un mapa detallado de las zonas de emisión de radiación de 511 keV en la Vía Láctea. Así se ha visto que la emisión se concentra fundamentalmente en la región central de nuestra galaxia, pero también se detecta el disco galáctico. La emisión en el disco no es simétrica, es decir, la cantidad de radiación emitida no es la misma a uno y otro lado del centro de la galaxia.

Pero aún hay más. La diferencia de luminosidades entre el centro y el disco galáctico es cuatro veces superior a la diferencia entre la densidad de supernovas (y por tanto de la producción esperada de positrones) en una y otra región. Es decir, en función de la radiación emitida en ambas regiones, cabría esperar que en el centro de la galaxia se detectaran más supernovas que en el disco. Y no es así. ¿A qué se deben entonces las diferencias en la cantidad de antimateria? ¿Qué hay que no encaja en la teoría? Estos hallazgos obligaron a los expertos a revisar sus teorías sobre la producción de positrones.

Más antimateria en el centro

Finalmente, los astrónomos han dado con la solución al interrogante de los positrones galácticos. Una de las hipótesis de partida suponía que el positrón, al ser una partícula cargada, se vería afectado por los campos magnéticos en nuestra galaxia, y no sería capaz de viajar muy lejos de las zonas donde había sido generado antes de ser aniquilado. Es decir, detectar radiación de 511 keV en regiones donde no hay fuentes conocidas de positrones implicaría la existencia de otras fuentes de producción de positrones, no consideradas hasta el momento. En realidad, este planteamiento no es válido: no es correcto suponer que los positrones no pueden alejarse de las zonas donde fueron creados. Los positrones sí pueden viajar grandes distancias en la galaxia, porque la interacción con fluctuaciones magnéticas no es tan intensa como para afectarles significativamente.

www.elpais.com

¿Por qué hay más materia que antimateria?

Uno de los principales misterios de la física es por qué el universo observable está hecho en su mayor parte de materia. La teoría dice que en el universo temprano, muy poco después del Big Bang, las cantidades de materia y antimateria debieron de estar en equilibrio; algo debió de ocurrir para que la mayor parte de la antimateria decayera o fuera aniquilada. La existencia de la antimateria no fue confirmada experimentalmente hasta 1932. Los rayos cósmicos de alta energía que impactan en la atmósfera terrestre generan cantidades pequeñas de antimateria. También en los aceleradores de partículas, como el LHC que comienza a ponerse en marcha en el CERN, cerca de Ginebra, se produce antimateria.

Arma lu' Ion

Dr.Parazitu — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:22:01 +0000

Te-ai intrebat vreodata daca Ion, celebrul personaj din bancurile cu Ion si cu Maria, are o arma?! si daca are cum arata?:)) Da are, uite in imaginea de mai jos cum arata, e si personalizata.

IT IS FUNNY

waterfriend — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:44:19 +0000

It is funny.
In Hindi, it is RAM,
In Kannada, it is RAMA.
In Malayalam, it is RAMAN.
In Malayalam, we address AMME.
In other languages it is AMMA.
SASI of our language becomes SHASHI in Hindi.
In Hindi, we write steshan for the English word station, even though there is a separate letter for the sound sh of SHED.

I found chemistry written as kemistry, electron written as elektron in the web site of a Danish university. Why didn’t the Americans do so. They have cahanged many English spellings.

Formation of a quantum wire - Parabolic potential well

Arun — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 12:33:27 +0000

This post deals with a Matlab simulation showing the formation of a quantum wire, i.e. a parabolic potential well.

Such potential profiles can be easily realized by negatively biasing 2 metallic plates (also known as gates) separated by a short distance as shown in the figure below. Split-gate technique is one method used to form (fabricate) such structures.

2 plates (on top) with negative charge

In the following movie, the potential starts with a flat profile (at zero/ground potential) when there is no charge on the plates. As the negative potential is increased the potential under the plates rises and the fringing field (field that is not directly under the plates) pulls the neighboring potential along with it – almost like lifting the ends of a bed sheet. The title calls it the ‘Parabolic potential well’ since the transverse cross section (section along the width) shows a parabolic shape for the potential along the width of the wire.

The Length and Width axis of the wire are in units of nano-meter (1 nm = 1*10^-9 m, i.e. 1 billionth of a meter). Nanometer is the typical unit for length used for measuring dimensions in the nano world. The Potential axis is in arbitrary units of electric potential. All the numeric values are chosen to represent typical values seen in actual experiments.

Once the wire is formed in the simulation, it is rotated (in the above video) to give a clear view of its shape (remember the edges are electric potential and not physical walls/matter). The last segment of the video shows the top view of the wire which will be a useful view to get used to when we will pass electrons through the wire. The color bar on the right hand side gives the value of the potential at any point in the wire based on the color gradient; maximum is 25 (red) and minimum is 0 (blue).

Feel free to post any questions…………… thanks

Stupid Topic on Yahoo

asiancutie93 — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:50:32 +0000

I know it shouldn’t even be considered to be under the Science/Medicine catagory, but apparently Yahoo.com thinks so. Sigh.

The topic is “What Soft Drinks are Doing to Your Body” and here’s the link- http://health.yahoo.com/experts/drmao/20270/what-soft-drinks-are-doing-to-your-body/

But really, is this really new in the health world? We know both diet soda and regular soda is bad for you, but that doesn’t mean you should never ever drink it!

Of course soda has sugar in it. SUGAR IS NOT BAD FOR YOU. I’m sick and tired of hearing about something is bad just because it has sugar in it. Simple sugars such as glucose is needed in order for people to live, because it is used in glycolysis in cells to make 2 ATP (energy). Then the by-products of glycolysis go through the Kreb cycle to make 2 more ATP (energy). Finally, the by-products of the Kreb cycle go through ETS (Electron transport system) to make 32 more ATP (energy). Sugar is only bad if you have too much of it, because your liver is very effecient. The liver stores the sugar by making it go through the process of dehydration synthesis, which is taking a hydrogen (H) from 1 glucose molecule and hydroxide (OH) from another glucose molecule to bind them together to form a bigger molecule that isn’t easy to break down, that way when the body needs it, it can use hydrolysis, using water to break down the bigger molecule, so that it is again 2 glucose molecules so they can be used to make ATP (energy).
Just because sugar isn’t bad for you, that doesn’t mean you should drink soda/pop/soft drinks all the time!!! People have to understand that the human body is like a super computer that can heal itself of viruses and other problems. In order to have problems with your pancreas, heart, immune system, and experiencing other diseases such as types of cancers, osteoporosis, and diabetes, you have to drink A LOT of soda/pop/soft drinks. Even though it will not harm you a lot, please note that if you drink 1 can of soda, that’s 1 pound every 19 days. If you keep that up for a year, that’s about 19-20 lbs of excess calories. If you do not have a steady amount of exercise and a proper diet, I would suggest not having a soda every day. Soda is just meant to be a food that is for special occasions such as holidays and celebrations. But of course when people like something, they get the maintality “Well, if I’m going to die and people say it’s not really hurting me, what’s the big deal? I want it every day!” and that is wrong. Yes, do not worry about the health affects of soda/pop/soft drinks if you only have them maybe once a week. If you are intaking more than that average, that yes, you should worry about the health risks.
Insomnia is not just caused by caffeine and excess sugar. Many people in society also suffer from depression, drug abuse, and other problems that lead to insomnia, and you know what? I bet some of those people also drink soda/pop/soft drinks. Now, you shouldn’t drink soda right before you go to bed, but as long as you lead an active lifestyle or if you just have it in the morning (meaning you can burn the calories quickly and it won’t effect you at night), drinking soda/pop/soft drinks should not give you insomnia.

Even though I am against articles/columns like this, I am conscious of what I eat and drink. However, the human body isn’t a perfect science. There are people who smoked since they were 17, and lived until they were in their 90s, having experienced none of the symptoms or diseases that are caused by smoking. Then there are people who lead a proper lifestyle, but then develop colon cancer out of the blue.

Just pay attention to your body and keep yourself at an average weight for your height, eat mostly healthy foods with lots of vitamins, and once in a while, do something that’ll get you moving. And remember, human beings have something called SELF CONTROL.

I learned this from my father. His family has a history of diabetes, heart disease, and obesity. He got fat (he was 5ft. 6 inches tall, and weighed 200lbs). But he didn’t want to be that heavy anymore, he couldn’t play with me or my older brother because of his weight, he had breathing problems, he developed type 2 diabetes. So he did what he knew he had to do, he gradually lost weight using diet and exercise. In 3 years, he lost 60lbs and has kept it off for four years now.

And it’s hard to lose weight, I know, I had my own weight problems too even though I never drank soda/pop/soft drinks. I am 5ft. 2 inches tall, and I weighed 136 lbs (which is over-weight / close to obesity for that height). But through self control and watching what I eat (NO I DIDN’T STOP EATING THINGS LIKE CHOCOLATE AND OTHER SWEETS, I JUST ATE THEM ONLY ON SPECIAL OCCASIONS!), I lost 33 lbs, and continuing to see improvements in my health.

Please know that I am not trying to offend those with weight problems. I am simply tired of articles/columns that talk about stupid subjects such as this.

Entropaykarte jetzt auch in Euro nutzbar

ryanairblog — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:20:23 +0000

Autor: ryanairblog

Über die Vorzüge der Entropaykarte wurde in diesem Blog schon viel diskutiert. Bisher war es so, dass Entropaykarten unbedingt in der Abrechnungswährung “britische Pfund” (GBP) beantragt werden mussten, damit Ryanair sie als Visa-Electron-Karte aktzeptierte und die Flugbuchung somit kostenlos war.

Ab sofort können Entropaykarten auch in Euro beantragt werden. Diese werden ebenfalls als Visa-Electronkarten ausgegeben und bei der Flugbuchung entfällt somit auch hier die Kreditkartengebühr.

Beantragt werden kann die Karte auf www.entropay.com
Weitere Informationen über die Flugbuchung ohne Kreditkartengebühren sind HIER im Ryanair-Blog zu finden.

Promesses électorales

elinkasara — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:29:51 +0000

Vendredi 23 octobre 2009, Soir 3, reportage . « Décision de justice ». Le présentateur annonce une

Capturing Quasiparticles

dedekusn — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:55:59 +0000

A physics research team from the University of St Andrews and Cornell University in the USA has mana

One Atom, Nine Dimensions!

pluribusone — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:36:07 +0000

The Hermetic philosophy states: As above, so below. Could it be that the lowly invisible atom, composed of protons, neutrons, and electrons, is, after all, microcosmic—a simplified model of Omniverse? Our use of Noetitek™, which subsumes and surpasses Hermetism, says yes. In the midst of the complexity of 21^st century particle physics, we offer an unconventional perspective, an uncomplicated view. The following paragraphs will serve as brief introduction:

The atom, smallest complete unit of space-time-mind in our theory, has within its synergetic structure three fundamental Reality-building components: protons, neutrons, and electrons. Protons are positively charged, electrons are negatively charged, and neutrons are neutral. The proton and neutron are each composed of three sub-units that science calls quarks, which lends credence to our overall conclusion because two-thirds of the dimensions of Omniverse (above) correspond with those atomic portions and parts (below). Except, however, no similar subatomic structure has been associated with the electron; at present, the scientific consensus appears to be that there is none.

Using the insights we developed in identifying and grasping the structure and meaning of the dimensions of Omniverse, we are able to infer, algebraically, the nature of the electron. Does the electron have a tripartite substructure? We say it does, and we predict that physicists will confirm this in the near future, perhaps as a side-effect of their search for the theorized Higgs boson (the “God particle”). Perhaps some device equivalent to a rainbow-making prism will eventually pry it apart, and what will they find? Quick answer: Whatever the shy cosmos chooses to reveal. Because, our best guess is that electrons, in total, form an infinitely processing triune Cosmic Brain.

a new ontology

brendannewlon — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:03:42 +0000

When I was reading Hegel in class, I was bothered by what I perceived as a fault in logic. It seemed to me that Hegel was claiming to follow arguments based on logic, while actually following the rules of grammar instead. He argued that if there is a world that was created, there must have been a creator. Creation requires a creator. Verb requires Noun. Why should the primacy of the noun be an assumption of logic?

Tonight I realized we have the same problem in physics. In a conversation about the wave-particle duality issue, I pointed out that we have not observed any such thing as “a” wave. We have seen “waving”. Even in water, it makes no sense to say that “a wave” is moving through the water. That would imply the existence of some thing being in the water. Actually there isn’t anything. The water is waving, that’s all. “The” wave doesn’t exist. “Waving” exists.

So what about other things? In the example above, to show that there was no “wave” I let the example include the existence of a replacement noun — “the” water. I’m not here to replace one noun with another, I’m here to propose that we live in a world without nouns. So what is “the” water actually? Hydrogen, Oxygen. What are they? Protons, neutrons, electrons… the standard model. What are they? The idea of an indivisible “atom” is gone. The hunt for subatomic particles brings the discovery of smaller and smaller “things” depending on the precision of our instruments. And we always find out later that what we thought we saw must actually have been something even smaller bouncing around.

Photons, for example, are “particles of light”. The trouble is, if light were particles, then shining two flashlight beams at right angles to each other would result in interference. The particles flying sideways would smack into the particles going forward and knock them off to an angle like billiard balls. To make sense of this, we’ve been taught to think of light as having dual nature: sometimes wave, sometimes particle. What if there’s no particle and no wave? Instead, I think “waving” can give an appearance of “photoning”. I suggest that there is no substance or substrate (like spacetime or hyperdimensional ethers) that is the “thing” or fabric doing the waving. I think that seeing waving gives an impression of a fabric where there isn’t any.

I suggest we get rid of the nouns (which we have never observed in physics or in reality*) and generate a means of using language that represents the world as we have actually observed it.

*For example when your hand presses against a wall, there is actually no physical matter making contact. What you feel is magnetic resistance between magnetic “fields” around the atoms in your hand and in the wall. The magnetic fields resist each other just like the positive poles of two magnets, and nothing “solid” in your hand ever touches anything “solid” in the wall. We have no reason to believe that either “object” is solid. In fact, in the history of science, from the very small to the very big, nobody has ever observed the existence of anything solid at all. Nobody has ever grabbed up an electron and said “yep, just like I thought, it’s a hard little bead.” In fact, we’ve seen “electrons” doing things that are impossible for any little “thing” to do. To become a magnetic field, an electron would have to extend itself infinitely in every direction, only spreading itself a bit thinner as it got farther from its center. And it does this at the speed of light. So we call them waves or fields instead of particles. But the question of what “a” wave actually is… that’s a question that is forever postponed.

String theory is pretty close to what I’m saying. They say that all these particles we think we’re observing as separate types of things are just little strings vibrating in different ways. If it vibrates with higher energy, it’s ultraviolet, lower energy vibration and the same “thing” is infrared. So verbs exist, and adverbs can modify them. “Vibrating fastly” is what we’ve been calling “A photon” being blue, and “vibrating slowly” is what we’ve been calling “a photon” being red.

I just want to point out that we have no reason (except for the real-world experience of things bumping into each other that we recently discovered wasn’t actually happening) to believe that there needs to be a “thing” in order for “it” to do an action. We have no reason to believe that verbs require nouns; that acts require actors. Everything we’ve observed in physics has been verbs, no nouns yet discovered. ANYWHERE. EVER. Why should we believe that “things” exist at all, when all we’ve ever observed has been the existence of “actions”?

Keep string theory, but get rid of the strings. There are no strings doing the vibrating. There is vibrating in different ways, and we interpret those different modalities of vibration as different kinds of “particles” because we are accustomed to believing that there must be a thing there to have done the action. Just like Hegel claimed that there must logically be a creator to have done the creating of the world. (I’m certainly not making an atheist theological argument. I’m only pointing out that Hegel’s argument wasn’t logical, it was grammatical.)

According to our observations, it would be more reasonable to assert the existence of verbs and adverbs (actions and their modalities) without claiming the existence of any nouns (objects or actors) anywhere in the “physical” universe.

…Which makes it much harder to draw conceptual models for the physics classroom.

This is not a scientific theory (not conceivably testable/falsifiable) and it is not a philosophy. It is an argument for the ontological primacy of verbs instead of nouns. It is also a suggestion that our language about processes observed in physics should not be inhibited by grammatical rules of languages, but should be free to reflect what is really observed, even if it sounds silly to talk that way at first.

“high-energy vibrating excited the electro-magnetic fielding…..and so on…” And that’s how your digital camera works.

PS. To all the REAL physicists out there: I’M SORRY I JUST DON’T KNOW ANY BETTER! PLEASE DON’T DEMONSTRATE THE PRINCIPLES OF NEWTONIAN PHYSICS ON MY BODY. but please do leave a comment!

The Smallest to Largest

Philip Metzger — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:27:52 +0000

Smallest to Largest

Have you ever looked around at everyday objects and wondered what they are made of? Easy some may say, wood for a desk, rubber for a tube, but then what is the wood and rubber made of? It is like an infinite path down the road of no return. But for everything as we know it, there is a beginning and an end – life and death. In this article I shall increment from the smallest proven known, and I emphasize on the words known and proven, particle, the photon, to the largest known proven object in existence, the universe. It turns out that this topic is more complicated that can be imagined and will be left open for discussion and review, and please note not all these particles and objects can be measure on the same scale system.

Photon: size 0
This is the beginning of our journey. A photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of the electromagnetic field and the basic “unit” of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation. The mass of a proton is zero but yet can still be observed at both microscopic and macroscopic level due to it not having a rest mass. They exhibit properties of both waves and particles in the sense that they can bump off each other yet behave normally like waves and are diffracted. The photon is massless, has no electric charge, and does not decay spontaneously in empty space. During a molecular, atomic or nuclear transition to a lower energy level, photons of various energy will be emitted, from infrared light to gamma rays with a speed of ‘c’ (speed of light) in open space. There is however a theorized smaller particle, namely the Higgs boson, aka the God particle. But we shall not divulged into that just yet until the folks at CERN make a hopeful discovery.

Neutrino: close to 0
Closely followed to the photon is the neutrino which as well has a mass of near 0. These particles are created as a result of radioactive decay or nuclear reactions such as those in the sun. Neutrinos are very difficult to discover as they pass through objects nearly unnoticeable. Only experiments deep underground where nothing can interfere have scientists observed these particles. Heres a fun fact, more than 50 trillion solar electron neutrinos pass through the human body every second.

Electron: 9.11 × 10^−31 kg
An electron is a subatomic particle that carries a negative electric charge. It has no known substructure and is believed to be a point particle with a mass that is approximately 1836 times less than that of our next particle, the proton. Electrons also have quantum mechanical properties of both a particle and a wave, so they can collide with other particles and be diffracted like light. Electrons are the particles that circulate around the nucleus of an atom. The electron has a mass of just 9.11 × 10^−31 kg.

Quark: < 1.67 × 10^−27 kg
The quark is a fundamental constituent of matter making up stable particles namely hadrons such as protons and neutrons.

Protons/Neutrons: ~1.67 × 10^−27 kg
Protons and neutrons usually form the nucleus of an atom and the majority of an atom’s weight (99.9%). They have a mass of around 1.67×10^−27 kg. The two particles are bound by nuclear force into atomic nuclei.

Atom: 1.67 × 10^−27 to 4.52 × 10^−25 kg
The atom is a basic unit of matter consisting of a dense, central nucleus surrounded by a cloud of negatively charged electrons and a mix of positively charged protons and electrically neutral neutrons at the centre. The masses of atoms range from 1.67 × 10^−27 to 4.52 × 10^−25 kg. More information can be seen in a periodic table.

Molecule: > 1.67 × 10^−27
A molecule, the smallest particle of a substance that retains all the properties of the substance, is composed of one or more atoms. A molecule may consist of atoms of a single chemical element, as with oxygen (O2), or of different elements, as with water (H2O). Most molecules are far too small to be seen with the naked eye, but there are exceptions such as DNA, a macromolecule, that can reach macroscopic sizes. Single molecules cannot usually be observed by light (as noted above), but small molecules and even the outlines of individual atoms may be traced in some circumstances by use of an atomic force microscope.

Red Blood Cells: 6-8μm
Red blood cells are the most common type of blood cell and the vertebrate body’s principal means of delivering oxygen to the body tissues via the blood. They take up oxygen in the lungs or gills and release it while squeezing through the body’s capillaries. There is no standard size for them, but average estimates put them at standard size of about 6-8μm.

Home Sapien: 100µm to 2.72m
The great home sapien, oh what a wonderful creature, James Sweitzer once said: “As much as we have progressed in science, we are still finite creatures with limited conceptual abilities and imperfect observational tools – but add one thing, we are curious at that”. We as a creature are the most highly evolved that lives on this planet Earth. What makes us is our highly developed brains, capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, and problem solving. We humans range in size, but the minimum and maximum is ambiguous, for at what stage do we become human once the little sperm enter the egg. Or are we only human once we are born? If we begin at the stage of the egg then we are 100 and 200 µm in diameter so to speak. The tallest human to determined was a man in USA namely Robert Pershing Wadlow at 2.72 m (8 ft 11.1 inches), but of course who knows, there could have been taller people back in the days.

Great Pyramid of Giza: 3.8 million metric tons
Located outside Cairo, Egypt, the great pyramid of Giza is the oldest and largest of the three pyramids located in the vicinity. Construction began around 2540BC and concluded around 20 years after. The pyramid was once 146.6 meters (480.97 feet) tall, but due to erosion is shrank down to a still impressive 138.8 m (455 feet). It is roughly 2,500,000 cubic meters. With an estimated weight of 3.8 million metric tons.

Three Gorges Dam: 34 million metric tons
Next on our list is the Three Gorges Dam, spanning the Yangtze River in China. The dam weighs about 34 million metric tons, has a length of 2,335 meters (7,661 ft) a height of 185 m (607 ft), and width (at the base) of 115 m (377.3 ft). The dams main structure was completed in 2006 for an estimated us$39 billion.

Mount Everest: 3.04 x 10^5kg
Mount Everest is the highest mountain on Earth, and the highest point on the Earth’s crust, as measured by the height above sea level of its summit, 8,848 meters (29,029 ft). The mass is estimated as 3.04 x 10^5kg. The mountain, which is part of the Himalaya range in Asia, is located on the border between Sagarmatha Zone, Nepal, and Tibet, China. Everest has claimed 210 lives, including eight who perished during a 1996 storm high on the mountain. Conditions are so difficult in the death zone that most corpses have been left where they fell. Some of them are visible from standard climbing routes.

Earth: 5.97 × 10^24 kg
Earth is the third planet from the Sun. It is the fifth largest of the eight planets in the solar system, and the largest of the terrestrial planets (non-gas planets) in the Solar System in terms of diameter, mass and density. Its Mean radius is 6,371.0 km and has an estimated mass of Mass 5.97 × 10^24 kg.

Jupiter: 1.90 × 10^27 kg
The next heaviest planet in our solar system is Jupiter with a mass of 317 Earths (1.90 × 10^27 kg). It is the fifth planet from the Sun and the largest planet within the Solar System. It is a gas giant with a mass slightly less than one-thousandth that of the Sun but is two and a half times the mass of all of the other planets in our Solar System combined.

Star: 2100 solar radii or 7 quadrillion Earths
I have groups all stars as one as they vary dramatically in size, our sun is a star and is in fact tiny compared to all others which really does get you thinking, first have a look at this image (notice the sun in that image is not even a pixel!) and then this video – that video should really get you thinking. Our sun has a diameter of 1.39×10^9 m with an estimated mass of 1.99×10^30 kg (332,900 Earths). Now to put that into perspective, the largest known star is VY Canis Majoris with a size between 1,800 and 2,100 solar radii (basically 1800 of our suns can fit in its radius). Assuming the upper size limit of 2100 solar radii, light would take more than 8 hours to travel around the star’s circumference, compared to 14.5 seconds for the sun. It would take over 7,000,000,000,000,000 (7 quadrillion) Earths to fill the volume of VY Canis Majoris.

Galaxy: 200 million LY
A galaxy is a massive, gravitationally bound system that consists of stars and stellar remnants, an interstellar medium of gas and dust, and an important but poorly understood component tentatively dubbed dark matter. Typical galaxies range from dwarfs with as few as ten million stars up to giants with one trillion stars, all orbiting the galaxy’s center of mass. These galaxies each consist of million to trillions of solar system, which makes you wonder, we cannot possible be alone, especially taking into account that fact that there are 100 billion observable galaxies. In 1961, Dr. Frank Drake developed an equation that estimates the number of technologically advanced civilizations that might exist in our Galaxy alone. Frank Drake’s own current solution to the Drake Equation estimates 10,000 communicative civilizations in the Milky Way.

In 2005, Japanese astronomers have discovered what they call the largest object in the universe: a colossal structure 200 million light-years wide that resembles a swarm of giant green jellyfish. This young galactic blob could reveal how and when the earliest galaxies formed.

Universe: 46.5 billion LY
The universe is the theoretical limit, the all encompassing region that holds everything together. The age of the Universe is about 13.7 billion years, but due to the expansion of space we are now observing objects that are now considerably farther away than a static 13.7 billion light-years distance. The edge of the observable universe is now located about 46.5 billion light-years away. It contains about 10^80 atoms, with the vast majority of the energy density contributed by the mysterious dark matter and dark energy. Some theories however state that the ‘World (meaning everything possible in this context)’ consists of many galaxies. Picture them as sheets of paper next to each other flowing in the wind. A theory developed from this was that two of these papers struck each other and started off the development of out universe from the big bang.

What really got me thinking is that atoms are somewhat like solar systems, with the sun as the nucleus and planets as electrons. Now atoms make up molecules in the same way that solar systems make up galaxies. Galaxies compose the universe along with the mysterious dark matter the same way that quarks and electrons, protons and neutrons make up atoms. So from this sort of ratio the universe contains all the galaxies and solar systems etc. what if the so called God particle is a universe?

The upper and lower boundaries of this list are not static and are just known facts we currently have. So lets summarize the scale line:
Photon – Neutrino – Electron – Quark – Proton/Neutron – Atom – Molecule – Red Blood Cell – Homo Sapien – Three Gorges Dam – Mount Everest – Earth – Jupiter – Star – Galaxy – Universe.

–openpit

Crookers interview

micksa — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:11:51 +0000

En av de flummigaste intervjuerna jag gjort tror jag. Har hört från andra som träffat dem att det tenderar att bli lite snöigt. 34 minuters material och det kändes tveksamt om jag ens kunde använda tio minuter.

Strunt samma, plockat ut det som känns intressant men det blir lite halvfånigt ibland. Vi pratade fram och tillbaka i säkert 20 minuter om hur de träffades. De drog alla möjliga historier men jag har klippt ihop det till en short-version

Jag har älskat Crookers remixar sedan säg 2005. Vi spelade alltid, alltid minst en Crookersremix i Electron. De producerar idag även egen musik, men jag föredrar definitivt deras mixar. Nya remixen av Miike Snows Animal är ju helt jävla fantastisk. (Lyssna på den längre ned) En fin pojke önskade den när jag spelade på Svanen förra veckan. Sen dansade han lyckligt och jag log som en nyfrälst.

Who are Crookers?
Italienska DJ’sen Bot & Phra. Blev välkända på electrobloggarna nån gång i mitten av 2000-talet då deras remixar ploppade upp överallt. Sen blev de kända för en större massa när deras remix på Kid cudis Day N’ nite blev stor.

Phra bor i en liten by på den italienska landsbygden, Bot inne i Milano. Jag frågar om de egentligen inte borde bo inne i Milano båda två eller kanske till och med flytta till en större stad för att kunna satsa ännu mer på musiken. Men de anser att på grund av internets framfart spelar det ingen roll vart man bor, vilket nog i och för sig är helt sant.

Det var genomgående lite svårt att greppa om de var seriösa eller inte. Vi pratade om vad de skulle göra om de inte jobbade med musik. Förslag på allt från fashion drugdelivery till pizzadelivery… Slutsatsen jag kunde dra var nog främst att det är bäst om de får syssla med musik. Det gör de ändå väldigt bra.

I intervjun hör du, förutom den svenska och de båda italienska ljuva stämmorna:

Crookers feat. Boy 8-bit – The Crow
Rye rye – Wassup wassup (Crookers rmx)
Crookers – Purple lens game (Bloody Beetroots rmx)

Lebizard rewind

elinkasara — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 13:01:29 +0000

Brooklyn, winter 09 Cher Comte de Lebizard, Ma dernière lettre date. Trois années sont passées. Je v

NASA poate crea orice obiect folosind fluxuri de electroni

anchetatorul — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 14:32:14 +0000

NASA a creat un sistem capabil sa contruiasca orice obiect folosind fluxuri de electroni (EBF3 – Electron Beam Freeform Fabrication). Sistemul poate crea ORICE componenta mecanica care intra in componenta unei nave spre exemplu. Astfel, in viitorul apropiat, astronautii vor putea sa isi fabrice singuri piesele care se defecteaza atunci cand se afla in misiuni. Folosind aceasta tehnologie costurile de productie scad de cateva ori fata de tehnologie folosita inainte.

El problema de Thomson o como distribuir N cargas en una esfera con energía total mínima

emulenews — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:38:49 +0000

El físico británico J. J. Thomson ganó el Premio Nobel en 1906 por el descubrimiento del electrón. En 1904 propuso un problema matemático muy difícil de resolver en general: ¿cuál es la configuración de mínima energía para N electrones (con una fuerza repulsiva 1/r²) en una superficie esférica? Para N pequeño obtener la solución óptima a este problema es fácil. Para 4, 6, y 12 corresponden a los vértices de un sólido platónico. Hasta N=400 se conocen las soluciones óptimas. Sin embargo, para N>400 sólo se conocen algunas pocas, el resto son sólo las mejores candidatos obtenidas por ordenador. Wales, McKay y Altschuler han obtenido por simulación las mejores configuraciones hasta el momento en el rango N de 400 a 4000. La vídeo muestra cinco de los nuevos resultados para N=400, 752, 1632, 3952, y 4352. Los tres primeros son configuraciones simétricas. Los dos últimos son configuraciones asimétricas ligeramente de menor energía que las simétricas observadas. ¿Serán óptimas? Nadie lo sabe pero la búsqueda de la demostración por ordenador continúa. Nos lo cuenta Tony Phillips, “Progress on the Thomson problem,” Take on Math in the Media, September, 2009.

Las 400 configuraciones óptimas fueron publicadas en David J. Wales, Sidika Ulker, “Structure and Dynamics of Spherical Crystals Characterised for the Thomson Problem,” Phys. Rev. B, 74, 212101 (2006) [Página con animaciones gif con los resultados óptimos]. El nuevo artículo con las soluciones cuasi-óptimas es David J. Wales, Hayley McKay, Eric L. Altschuler, “Defect motifs for spherical topologies,” Phys. Rev. B 79, 224115 (2009) [Página con animaciones gif con los resultados cuasi-óptimos].

En una configuración de mínima energía cada electrón está rodeado de 6 vecinos cercanos (hexágonos verdes en el vídeo) resultando en una carga efectiva nula, excepto ciertos electrones que están rodeados de 5 vecinos (pentágonos rojos) con una carga efectiva de +1, o de 7 vecinos (heptágonos azules) con una carga efectiva de -1. Siendo C_i el número de los vecinos cercanos al electrón i-ésimo, la red que conecta los electrones más cercanos entre sí define una triangulación de la superficie de la esfera con V=N vértices, E = (1/2) Σ_i C_i aristas y F = 2 E/3 caras. El teorema de Euler, V-E+F=2, aplicado a esta tringulación nos da Σ_i (6-C_i) = 12, es decir, la suma de las cargas efectivas debe ser igual a 12. El problema de optimización a resolver es dónde hay que colocar las cargas efectivas para minimizar la energía total.

Como se observa en el vídeo, para las configuraciones con N = 400, 752, 1632, 3952, y 4352, conforme N crece, el número de heptágonos también crece. Las tres primeras configuraciones son (aproximadamente) simétricas, con una simetría icosaédrica aproximada que en algunos casos, como para N=1632, es exacta. Lo más sorprendente es que en muchos casos, como los dos últimos ilustrados en el vídeo, las configuraciones simétricas no son siempre las de menor energía. La energía potencial se define geométricamente como P = Σ_i>j |r_i – r_j|-1, donde se ha representado el electrón i-ésimo con un vector unitario r_i in R³. Por ejemplo, para N=4352 la configuración cuasi-óptima tiene energía potencial P = 9311276, mientras que la configuración con 12 rosetas colocadas simétricamente (algo parecido a la configuración con N=1632 del vídeo) sólo alcanza un valor de P = 9311299. Es decir, una configuración más simétrica cercana a la mejor es sólo ligeramente peor. Realmente sorprendente.

Crise ironique

elinkasara — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:15:26 +0000

Paris, spring 2009 V. était de passage à Paris. Il avait besoin de trouver les pièces de rechange po