The Axion of the Quark Gluon Pasma?

In physics, an anomalon is a hypothetical type of nuclear matter that shows an anomalously large reactive cross section. They were first noticed in experimental runs in the early 1980s as short tracks in film emulsions or plastic leaf detectors connected to medium-energy particle accelerators. The direction of the tracks demonstrated that they were the results of reactions taking place within the accelerator targets, but they stopped so quickly in the detectors that no obvious explanation for their behavior could be offered. A flurry of theoretical explanations followed, but over time a series of follow-up experiments failed to find strong evidence for the anomalons, and active study of the topic largely ended by the late 1980s.

***

Professor Emeritus Piyare L. Jain is a particle physicist at University at Buffalo. On December 6, 2006, he claimed discovery of the long-sought axion subatomic particle. ^[1]

The discovery involved Jain's use of 3-dimensional photographic medium targets in heavy-ion particle accelerators; modern detectors using electronic sensors were unable to detect the axion due to the very short distances and times involved, but the physical medium was able to identify about 1,200 Axion traces over years of experiment. Jain is one of the few currently working physicists with experience with that type of detector, which had been largely abandoned in favor of the modern electronic detectors.

***

Axions, would also have stopped interaction with normal matter at a different moment than other more massive dark particles. The lingering effects of this difference could perhaps be calculated and observed astronomically. Axions may hold the key to the Solar Corona heating problem.[40] See: Axion

***

Uploaded on Jan 9, 2011

SETI Archive: http://seti.org/talks

The Sun's outer atmosphere or corona is heated to millions of degrees, considerably hotter than its cool surface or photosphere. Explanations for this long-standing enigma typically invoke the deposition in the corona of non-thermal energy generated by the interplay of convection and magnetic fields. However, the exact physical mechanism driving coronal heating remains unknown. During the past few years, recently built instruments like the Japanese Hinode satellite, the Swedish Solar Telescope in Spain and NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) combined with advanced numerical simulations have revealed a new window into how the Sun's atmosphere is energized. These results directly challenge current theories and highlight the importance of the interface region between the photosphere and corona for understanding how the solar atmosphere is heated. Dr. De Pontieu will present some of these results and describe how NASA's recently selected Interface Region Imaging Spectrograph, which is being built by Lockheed Martin's Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory in Palo Alto, in collaboration with NASA Ames, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO), Montana State University, Stanford University and the University of Oslo, will be able to address many of the outstanding issues and problems.

***

 An article on IAXO has been published in the September 2014 issue of the CERN Courier. You can see the online version of the article here (link is external), or dowload the full CERN Courier issue here (link is external).

The central component of iAXo is a superconducting toroid magnet. The detector relies on a high magnetic field distributed across a large volume to convert solar axions to detectable X-ray photons. The magnet’s figure of merit is proportional to the square of the product of magnetic field and length, multiplied by the cross-sectional area filled with the magnetic field.IAXO: the International Axion Observatory -Pg 9 Sept 2014(PDF)

Ovation Aurora

The Space Weather Prediction Center and the Space Weather Prediction Testbed have introduced a new Auroral Forecast test product in an effort to improve services to current customers and expand our customer base with new products. The Auroral Forecast product is based on the OVATION Prime model which provides a 30-40 minute forecast on the location and probability of auroral displays for both the northern and southern polar regions. The development and implementation of this model has been a joint effort. The model itself was developed by P. Newell at the Johns Hopkins, Applied Physics Lab. Scientists at the NESDIS National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) added further refinements to make the model run in real time. Researchers at the Space Weather Prediction Testbed validated the model and developed graphical displays. This model is driven by real-time solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field information from the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) satellite. The model is based on more than 11 years of data from the Defense Meteorlogical Satellite Program (DMSP) from which an empirical relationship between the solar wind conditions and the aurora location and intensity was developed. SEE: Ovation Aurora

***

SOHO EIT 304 Latest Image

***

Puffing in Large Scale Interactions

This combination of three wavelengths of light from NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory shows one of the multiple jets that led to a series of slow coronal puffs on Jan. 17, 2013. The light has been colorized in red, green and blue.

Image Credit: Alzate/SDO

A suite of NASA's sun-gazing spacecraft have spotted an unusual series of eruptions in which a series of fast puffs forced the slow ejection of a massive burst of solar material from the sun's atmosphere. The eruptions took place over a period of three days, starting on Jan. 17, 2013. Nathalia Alzate, a solar scientist at the University of Aberystwyth in Wales, presented findings on what caused the puffs at the 2014 Royal Astronomical Society's National Astronomy Meeting in Portsmouth, England. See: Puffing Sun Gives Birth To Reluctant Eruption

Iris-Interface Region Imaging Spectrograph

This graphic shows the IRIS observatory with the solar arrays removed. The orange section to the left is the spacecraft bus which includes the spacecraft support structure, the command and data handling system, power distribution system, reaction wheels, X- and S-Band communications systems, Li-Ion battery, magnetic torque rods, and electronics for the sun sensors. The section to the right of the spacecraft includes the instrument optics package and electronics, several components of the attitude control system, and the solar arrays. The instrument includes a 20cm telescope optimized for solar observations which feeds a 5 channel imaging spectrograph. The green section is the telescope assembly, the light blue section is the spectrograph, and the dark blue box is the separate instrument electronics box. Credit: LMSAL, LM ATC

NASA is getting ready to launch a new mission, a mission to observe a largely unexplored region of the solar atmosphere that powers its dynamic million-degree outer atmosphere and drives the solar wind. In late June 2013, the Interface Region Imaging Spectrograph, or IRIS, will launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. IRIS will advance our understanding of the interface region, a region in the lower atmosphere of the sun where most of the sun's ultraviolet emissions are generated. Such emissions impact the near-Earth space environment and Earth's climate. See:IRIS: Studying the Energy Flow that Powers the Solar Atmosphere

This image shows the Heliophysics System Observatory (HSO). The HSO utilizes the entire fleet of solar, heliospheric, geospace, and planetary spacecraft as a distributed observatory to discover the larger scale and/or coupled processes at work throughout the complex system that makes up our space environment. The HSO consist of 18 operating missions: Voyager, Geotail, Wind, SOHO, ACE, Cluster, TIMED, RHESSI, TWINS, Hinode, STEREO, THEMIS, AIM, CINDI, IBEX, SDO, ARTEMIS, Van Allen Probes Credit: NASA

NASA operates a system observatory of Heliophysics missions

The Heliophysics System Observatory (HSO) showing current operating missions, missions in development, and missions under study. Credit: NASA

NASA operates a system observatory of Heliophysics missions, utilizing the entire fleet of solar, heliospheric, and geospace spacecraft to discover the processes at work throughout the space environment. In addition to its science program, NASA’s Heliophysics Division routinely partners with other agencies to fulfill the space weather research or operational objectives of the nation. See: What are our current capabilities to predict space weather?

See Also:

• Heliophysics

Space Weather

Circular Coronal Mass Ejection A coronal mass ejection (CME) erupted from just around the edge of the sun on May 1, 2013, in a gigantic rolling wave. CMEs can shoot over a billion tons of particles into space at over a million miles per hour. This CME occurred on the sun’s limb and is not headed toward Earth. The video, taken in extreme ultraviolet light by NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO), covers about two and a half hours. Credit: NASA/SDO

Current Space Weather Conditions

Prepared jointly by the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA,
Space Weather Prediction Center and the U.S. Air Force.
Updated 2013 May 01 2200 UTC

Joint USAF/NOAA Solar Geophysical Activity Report and Forecast
SDF Number 121 Issued at 2200Z on 01 May 2013

Auroral Activity Extrapolated from NOAA POES

See Also:

• Tips on Viewing the Aurora

Radiation Belt Storms Probes Launched

 NASA hosted a two-day event for 50 social media followers on August 22-23, 2012, at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. NASA's twin Radiation Belt Storm Probes (RBSP) are scheduled to lift off aboard a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket at 4:08 a.m. on August 23. Designed for a two-year primary science mission in orbit around Earth, RBSP will provide insight into our planet's radiation belts, and help scientists predict changes in this critical region of space.

 http://youtu.be/w0SaKPuocRA 

NASA's Radiation Belt Storm Probes blasted off from Cape Canaveral on August 30th, 2012. Bristling with sensors, the heavily-shielded spacecraft are on a 2-year mission to discover what makes the radiation belts so dangerous and so devilishly unpredictable.

"We've known about the Van Allen Belts for decades yet they continue to surprise us with unexpected storms of 'killer electrons' and other phenomena," says mission scientist David Sibeck, "The Storm Probes will help us understand what's going on out there." 

Each of the two Storm Probes is bristling with sensors to count energetic particles, measure plasma waves, and detect electromagnetic radiation. Learn more

See: The Radiation Belt Storm Probes

See also: 

• Radiation Belt Storm Probes (RBSP)

Radiation Belt Storm Probes (RBSP)

The launch of an Atlas V carrying NASA's Radiation Belt Storm Probes (RBSP) payload was scrubbed today due to weather conditions associated with lightning, as well as cumulus and anvil clouds. With the unfavorable weather forecast as a result of Tropical Storm Isaac, the leadership team has decided to roll the Atlas V vehicle back to the Vertical Integration Facility to ensure the launch vehicle and twin RBSP spacecraft are secured and protected from inclement weather. Pending approval from the range, the launch is rescheduled to Thursday, Aug. 30 at 4:05 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time. See:  RBSP Launch Targeted for No Earlier Than Aug. 30

RBSP is being designed to help us understand the Sun’s influence on Earth and Near-Earth space by studying the Earth’s radiation belts on various scales of space and time. 

The instruments on NASA’s Living With a Star Program’s (LWS) Radiation Belt Storm Probes (RBSP) mission will provide the measurements needed to characterize and quantify the plasma processes that produce very energetic ions and relativistic electrons. The RBSP mission is part of the broader LWS program whose missions were conceived to explore fundamental processes that operate throughout the solar system and in particular those that generate hazardous space weather effects in the vicinity of Earth and phenomena that could impact solar system exploration. RBSP instruments will measure the properties of charged particles that comprise the Earth’s radiation belts, the plasma waves that interact with them, the large-scale electric fields that transport them, and the particle-guiding magnetic field. 

The two RBSP spacecraft will have nearly identical eccentric orbits. The orbits cover the entire radiation belt region and the two spacecraft lap each other several times over the course of the mission. The RBSP in situ measurements discriminate between spatial and temporal effects, and compare the effects of various proposed mechanisms for charged particle acceleration and loss. See: RBSP

Credit: NASA/Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory

Engineers at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel, Md., prepare to place Radiation Belt Storm Probes spacecraft "B" in a thermal-vacuum chamber, where they can make sure the propulsion system will stand up to the range of hot, cold and airless conditions RBSP will face in outer space. This round of testing took place in late October-early November 2010.

See Also:

• Sampex

Volcano and Aurora

Volcano and Aurora in Iceland
Image Credit & Copyright: Sigurdur H. Stefnisson

Explanation: Sometimes both heaven and Earth erupt. In Iceland in 1991, the volcano Hekla erupted at the same time that auroras were visible overhead. Hekla, one of the most famous volcanoes in the world, has erupted at least 20 times over the past millennium, sometimes causing great destruction. The last eruption occurred only twelve years ago but caused only minor damage. The green auroral band occurred fortuitously about 100 kilometers above the erupting lava. Is Earth the Solar System's only planet with both auroras and volcanos? See: Astronomy Picture of the Day

It is of great consequence that while we understand the sun has it's place in the sky,  do we understand the interactions that are taking place as the Earth radiates as well? If thunderstorms can releases information for us,  then it puts a whole new spin on what is happening within Earth's space.

See:

• Schumann resonance

Also See:

• 100 years ago: The discovery of cosmic rays

Solar Weather

Sunspot 1283 Bristling With Flares: An X1.8 and An M6.7 - UPDATED

09.08.11

 

The Sun as viewed by the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) in 193 angstrom. The verticle black area near the center is the coronal hole. Credit: NASA/SDO

› View larger UPDATE: 09.09.11 - A strong geomagnetic storm is in progress following the impact of a CME around 7:30 EDT on Sept. 9th. This could be the first of several hits from a series of CMEs expected to reach Earth during the weekend, related to the sunspot 1283 flares during the week. High-latitude sky watchers should be alert for auroras after nightfall.

A high-speed solar wind stream flowing from a large coronal hole should reach Earth on Sept. 11-12 sparking even more aurora.

Space Weather

3-day Solar-Geophysical Forecast issued Aug 07 22:00 UTC

Solar Activity Forecast: Solar activity is expected to be very low to low with C-class flares likely from Region 1093 and 1095 (S18E19). A chance of M-class activity is possible from Region 1093.

Geophysical Activity Forecast: Geomagnetic field activity is expected to be mostly quiet with an isolated chance of unsettled levels during the next three days (08 - 10 August). See: Today's Space Weather

 ***

Classifications

Solar flares are classified as A, B, C, M or X according to the peak flux (in watts per square meter, W/m²) of 100 to 800 picometer X-rays near Earth, as measured on the GOES⁻⁴ W/m². Within a class there is a linear scale from 1 to 9, so an X2 flare is twice as powerful as an X1 flare, and is four times more powerful than an M5 flare. The more powerful M and X class flares are often associated with a variety of effects on the near-Earth space environment. Although the GOES classification is commonly used to indicate the size of a flare, it is only one measure. This extended logarithmic earthquakes show similar power-law^[3]

 ***

Michel Tournay,
Chisasibi, Quebec, Canada
Aug. 4, 2010

 

The whole sky was green, purple, I had a hard time deciding where to aim my cameras! Here are 3 pictures taken from a long series to make an animation of the movement. Nikon D3s , 10 000 ASA, 10.5 mm f2.8 set at full frame to get wider than the Dx format ! the last one was taken with a Nikon D3 with a 28mm f1.4 at 3200 ASA See: Aurora Photo Gallery 2010

The Physics of Mind

It might be that the laws change absolutely with time; that gravity for instance varies with time and that this inverse square law has a strength which depends on how long it is since the beginning of time. In other words, it's possible that in the future we'll have more understanding of everything and physics may be completed by some kind of statement of how things started which are external to the laws of physics. Richard Feynman

While by myself and my explanations, it may seem mystical indeed. In my years of research previous, it was much so. But the research is no less important then the realization that the world in which we live is governed by the list of ways that we measure. A selection from the "sensorium" to have it gain in "probable pictorial outcomes, by recognizing "the crossed wired" in our views, as one more variable?


You may use the scientific measure to take "three pictures" of the same thing, and of this, what physics is attached to what we observe out there in space? What computer processes had we detailed in the "depth of seeing" as we explore the "physics of approach," and see what beautiful pictures of Hubble, or other satellites that we gain much from the beauty of pictures received.

So a picture of the sun taken "over time" in gamma ray detection. What view is that in our depths of reason to understand the sun has certain processes to it? That what we seen in the relation to mind as a physics approach is no less important to what we observe, and are a part of.



The Mind on Physics

Is it possible to predict what a person is thinking of - or even what they are planning to do - based alone on their current brain activity? This project investigates ways to decode and predict a person’s thoughts from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. The key is that each thought is associated with a unique brain activation pattern that can be used as a signature or for that specific thought. If we train a classifier to recognize these characteristic signatures we can read out a person’s thoughts from their brain activity alone. Such “thought reading” can reveal how information is neurally encoded in the brain. The idea is that it is only possible to decode a thought if one knows the correct code. This research has many potential application, as for example in detection of deception, in the control of computers and artificial prostheses by brain activity, or even (more controversial) in market research.

So the onus is on the researcher to gain much more with the depth of reason. So in having sought science to help, one might deal with how we are relating to our world. Is it the beauty that detracts from what lies underneath, or that we understand with a greater measure the valuation we have had with that exchange with reality?

Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Berlin-

Brain regions from which it was possible to "read out" peoples' intentions. In specific regions fine-grained patterns of brain activity showed slight differences depending on whether a person was preparing to perform an addition or a subtraction. From activity patterns in the green regions it was possible to read out covert intentions before subjects began to perform the calculation. From the regions marked in red it was possible to read out intentions that were already being acted upon.

A Scientists Multiversial Bubble



I get excited sometimes when I write, and this is one of those times.

I have see how the scientists engaged. I had lacked a "complete view" of their reality. I saw records of what the "bubble of experience allows them too" in their writings. That they could be, separate from all that exists around them, yet, they are apart of the greater aspect of reality. How dangerous are their voices in lacking, what those of the layman are lacking, when a layman speaks with authority?

This is not to lash out at the scientist, but make him/her aware of the greater potential of information that exists. That speaking "from a solid foundation" just as important as what we read and take part in, as we read the journalism of science.

Who is the Teacher

For me it has been the many who now actively engage by participating in the world of blogging, that I can now say I been so lucky. That what was so distant from, can now become a part of my life. Before this it was books, and I had to piece meal, but now I see the result of many scientists who have helped, greatly developed by giving and that example.

I lacked experience, and thus too, am trying to find my way. Live by example. So too, the teacher assumes that what he teaches, is lived by in his own history, and so of his forbears. So should we become humble in our approaches? That we have so much to learn, and that as human beings, we are not so far apart in our adventures into describing what reality is to us.

There is this demand then of the qualitative measure of that reality that it could be infinite, holds uncertainty, yet we would only see part of it? We are a part of it.

That the mind and it's subjective thoughts could now become part of science is the route "that many a scientists lacked" while holding all the technological values to what is seen in front of them. It to arose out into "validations of measure" as to how mind can be seen.

So quickly I could be dispelled that I thought indeed am I a teacher? What credentials do I have? What gave me authority? While I most certainly say you would be right, and thus, I have been living my fate in amongst the world I develop by my opinion. By "how flowery" I had become.

But without the "physical teacher" what said that we could not develop into "a teacher" and that all of us could not have this teacher within them? I would not dismiss the "rules of law" or be "sanctioned a journalist" when I too blog. But imagine the access to the "greater ability of information" has changed the way you and I can see. What is your history?

WE give this empowerment to people by giving access of information to them. I would say that by seeing this empowerment "outside of themself," I would not want them to know that they could not live to the higher validation of what a good teacher may mean. I would have to say thus, that it is "by the parent in us," that we see what has been transmitted, and that what can be transmitted, will be sent on to further generations.

That even those without being the parent, as a physical result in children raised, has this parent in them. Would a teacher as a parent know of this feeling as I would? I do not dismiss this in them because of what is real in them. Every measure of the parent in them is the advice they have unconsciously now used as this rule of measure. As they form their opinion of what is a good government had been the realizatin that as a adult now they can selectively say this is now my moral standard of law. I defne this government by what I value, and we had quickly lost the parent in all this? No that parent became a part of you. But you learnt to discern these difference between you as a adult and your parent as a adult. You realized your differences. You realized who you are as a adult.

Now about Gravity

What could I loose if such thoughts are introduced to "what may be possible" and you will have to line up all your sceptics, and it would still not dispel what I already know and have observed against all the gravitational laws as we know them.

I do not ever say stop what you are doing as a scientist. Do not loose these values, but unfortunately, I had seen something that is much like the course of events that will change any person. A "license plate" that holds symmetry? Einstein who was given "the gift of the compass," and I in no way align myself with the brilliance of their moments. But point out that each of us may have been given our own anomalies in life which will propel our searches.

I have mine.


The medium DDHome levitating in front of witnesses during an 1868 séance. It was said on this occasion that Home became curiously “elongated” as he rose into the air. Shortly afterwards, he appeared to float upright outside a third floor window. Home had his detractors, but was never discredited.
Image: Fortean Picture Library

The Perfect Sphere

Before I begin I had to mention the following two entries below that I wanted to do but was short on time.

This recording was produced by converting into audible sounds some of the radar echoes received by Huygens during the last few kilometres of its descent onto Titan. As the probe approaches the ground, both the pitch and intensity increase. Scientists will use intensity of the echoes to speculate about the nature of the surface.

I am following behind on the different posts that I wanted to write. One of them in relation to the descent of a "measure gatherer" (sounds primitive doesn't it?) and the sound values produced from that "descent on Titan." Can make it "sound ancient" while current research is of value.

Almost, as if one is a cave dweller blowing dried paint over their hands, could possibly be thinking of fire and rays cast while their own shadows made them think of a sun that can enter the cave, and chains that need to be broken from thinking so circumspect..:)



The second one I wanted to talk about was in relation to Themis and the Aurora Borealis. The labels will hopefully help with my previous research that I had done as well as other perspectives that allowed me to see this sun earth relationship. Quasar has currently dealing with that topic further in "Coronal Mass Ejection" as well and Backreaction entitled, "NASA launch of THEMIS Satellite."

Anyway on to the essence of this post and why it is troubling to me. Many would not know what goes on in my head as I am currently looking at the relationship of the Bose Nova to the jet productions that issue from such spiralled tendency. Accretion disc and the idea of such spiralling, to a pipe that follows to making anti-matter productions?

See Water in Zero Gravity, by Backreaction
How did this all arise? So you see such an idea of the sphere in a vacuum is a point from which to begin the search for things that were not there before, so we now know that such collisions can indeed produce "new" information?

The action taken, although seems related to what Arivero is saying, and of course I already have much on this in terms of Han Jenny, and the taking of the Chaldni plate to spherical relations. As an experiment with a "balloons and dyes using sound" similar to "sand on that same chaldni plate."

The Perfect Sphere and Sonoluminence.

Taleyarkhan.A second internal inquiry has found no evidence of misconduct.Credit: Purdue News Service

Purdue University officials today announced that a second and final internal inquiry has cleared bubble-fusion researcher Rusi Taleyarkhan of all allegations of research misconduct. "I feel vindicated and exonerated," Taleyarkhan says. "It's been a pressure cooker for about a year." But controversy surrounding Taleyarkhan's work isn't likely to die down any time soon.

Taleyarkhan is the chief proponent of the controversial notion of sonofusion, which suggests that sound energy can collapse bubbles in a way that yields more energy than was initially put in (ScienceNOW, 4 March 2002). Last year, an article in Nature reported that several of Taleyarkhan's colleagues at Purdue were upset by their encounters with him, suggesting that he allegedly obstructed their work and tried to stop them from publishing results that contradicted his own.

There has been some contention about the results, but this is far from what I wanted to show in terms of the geometrics involved. Patience as to the energy produced from this interaction of "sound on the surface transferred inside" to cause a spherical collapse.


Experimental apparatus used by the team at the University of Stuttgart. PMT = photomultiplier tube, PZT = piezoelectric transducer. Picture credit: Physical Review Letters

German researchers have measured the duration and shape of a sonoluminescence pulse for the first time. Sonoluminescence - the emission of light by bubbles of gas trapped in a liquid and excited by sound waves - is one of the most puzzling phenomena in physics. Although first discovered in 1934, physicists have yet to discover the underlying light emitting process.

Seeing the tensorial action on the bubble moving sound inside, I had wondered about how such a collapse could increase the temperatures involved to produce this "super higgs fluid." Lubos Motl never gave this much thought and I of course am impressionable when it comes to the science mind. I could not shake it.

Ultrasound can produce temperatures as high as those on the surface of the Sun and pressures as great as those at the bottom of the ocean. In some cases, it can also increase chemical reactivities by nearly a millionfold.

So we "assign fluids" as one might the "vacuum in space" to illustrate what we have as our way with these bubbles? These claims have not been fantastical other then what the science had been designed for, yet I am drawn to the schematics and geometrics.

So yes the ways in which the size of the blackhole could all of sudden collapse is critical here, to producing further results in what is required of the new physics? So looking for "such experimental processes" is always part of my resolve to understand the geometrics involved.

Please be patient while I am learning.


Axisymmetry is also broken in the fluid bells, which assume the form of polyhedra

See further information in regards to Broken Symmetry.

So the idea here that was troubling was the way in which the symmetry was broken in terms of the fluid flows demonstrated by the Broken Symmetry examples.

My perception is much different here in that the dynamical relation of "the super fluid", may have it's correlation in the Navier stokes equations. This is by "insinuation on my part." How preposterous such a thing to think that the conditions had to be "spelt out first" in order for us to understand the "new physics" beyond the standard model?

Navier-Stokes Equations

The Navier-Stokes equations, named after Claude-Louis Navier and George Gabriel Stokes, are a set of equations that describe the motion of fluid substances such as liquids and gases. These equations establish that changes in momentum in infinitesimal volumes of fluid are simply the product of changes in pressure and dissipative viscous forces (similar to friction) acting inside the fluid. These viscous forces originate in molecular interactions and dictate how viscous a fluid is. Thus, the Navier-Stokes equations are a dynamical statement of the balance of forces acting at any given region of the fluid.

Using the geometrical basis of my thought pattern established as a point in a circle, or a point with "no boundary", it seems it is very difficult to talk about the universe if one does not include the way in which such dynamicals can perpetuate the energy within this system.

In fact, in the reciprocal language, these tiny circles are getting ever smaller as time goes by, since as R grows, 1/R shrinks. Now we seem to have really gone off the deep end. How can this possibly be true? How can a six-foot tall human being 'fit' inside such an unbelievably microscopic universe? How can a speck of a universe be physically identical to the great expanse we view in the heavens above?

(Brian Greene, The Elegant Universe, pages 248-249)

Thus too, the understanding, that if you turn Einstein's equation E=mc² inside/out then what had you done? All "matter states" have then been assigned a energy value? Qui! Non?

Plato:

Layman scratching head while faceless expression of Boltzmann puzzlement takes hold?

How is one suppose to find "a equilibrium" in such a "low entropic state?"

If we were to experimentally challenging any thinking with "relativistic processes" how could they have ever emerged out of the BB? Maybe, it was a "highly symmetric event" for any asymmetry to show itself as "discrete measures" defined in relation to the "energy of probable outcomes?"

Where did such reductionism begin for us to ask about the "cross over?"

We needed high energy perspective to realize that we were still talking about the universe. Are there any other processes within the cosmos that can be taken down to such rejuvenated qualities to new universes being born that while the arrow of time is pointed one way, that the universe itself allowed such expression to continue in the expansion rate, and the speed up?

A Higg's fluid? Something had to be "happening now" that would dictate?

Forgive me here for my ignorance in face of those better equipped.

So you are looking for "this point" where things cross over? It is highly supersymmetric, yet, we know that such matter states have been detailed and defined as "discrete" asymmetric matter states.

I made a comment above that needed to be looked at again so I am placing it here while it suffers it's fate in another location. The basis of the argument is an ole one indeed that has long been exchanged by Smolin and Susskind.

Now it is again one of those things that I am trying to make sense of while one could go off in a philosophical direction. While the "facts of the matter" and experimental results dictate my thinking here.

It's the fault of that ole' Platonic thinking, and the Pythagorean basis of the universe in expression thingy. The universe is very dynamical geometrically while one debates the essence of inflation and disregards what allows such an expression to bring "other ideas" into the fold. How this "eternal idea" can bring other factors in terms of the speed up into consideration, while one ponders why such a thing is happening?

Neutrino Oscillations? Hmmmm.......

Oscillating flavors The three neutrino mass eigenstates are presumed to be different coherent superpositions of the three flavor eigenstates (ne, nm, and nt) associated with the three charged leptons: the electron, the muon, and the tau. There is good evidence that only two of the three mass eigenstates contribute significantly to ne. In that approximation, one can write

Just another fancy way of looking at CNO and the law of Octaves? :) While some thought space was empty, there were aspects of that space "which was alive" regardless of the asymmetrical realization of the discrete matters?

I'm trying here. You needed a background for it?

The triple alpha process is highly dependent on carbon-12 having a resonance with the same energy as helium-4 and beryllium-8 and before 1952 no such energy level was known. It was astrophysicist Fred Hoyle who used the fact that carbon-12 is so abundant in the universe (and that our existence depends upon it - the Anthropic Principle), as evidence for the existence of the carbon-12 resonance. Fred suggested the idea to nuclear physicist Willy Fowler, who conceded that it was possible that this energy level had been missed in previous work on carbon-12. After a brief undertaking by his research group, they discovered a resonance near to 7.65 Mev.

Now I am not pro or against anything, just trying to make sense of the disparity of such anthropic reasonings. So what processes in Cern reveals such an idea? Muons?

What's that saying? The devil is in the details :)

So we want to define our relationship with the world in some computerized method? It has always been something of a struggle to explain how one may see the world as they lose the focus of distinctive sight and hearing and soon realize that if they are all amalgamated, you might get this idea of the gravitationally inclined atomized in some computerized process? Feelings?:)

You finally learnt something about yourself?

A thought crossed my mind. A fictional story?

It’s interesting what calorimetric measure can do when you are looking at cosmological events. So, the photon becomes descriptive in itself?

Of course speaking of Glast here. Building alliances?


Perhaps Quantum Gravity can be Handled by thoroughly reconsidering Quantum Mechanics itself?

You are working “to set” the course of events? So we have this description then of the universe and it’s “phase transitions.” It’s behind the “value of the photon in it’s description and escape velocity” and it’s value also “gravitationally linked?”

So technology now stops the photon in flight? We can then “colour our views with the gravitationally inclined?”:) A “philosophical take” on new computerized development with feeling?

The leading computer technologies here is not to diverge from what I moved too in terms of understanding the human condition. This is very important to me, and includes not only our biological functioning, but our resulting affect from the physiological one as well.

So while "you think" I hope to chart the colours spectrally induced oscillatory universe from the "photon stop over" and subsequent information held in that abeyance. Sure it's a story of fiction right now, but in time I would like to see this connection to reality.

It may only rest at this time in conceptual framework that was constructed from what was available in the physics and science at our disposal, while I had to move forward slowly.

It was important to understand why there would be such divergences in perspective and how these would be lined up? Some of course did not want to take the time, but it was important to me to understand the "philosophical position" taken.



One could just as well venture to the condense matter theorist and said, what building blocks shall we use? One should not think the "history of Platonism" without some "other influences" to consider. Least you assign it to a "another particular subject" in it's present incarnation? An Oscillatory String Universe?

So the evolution here is much more then the "circumspect of the biological function," but may possible include other things that have not been considered?

Physiologically, the "biological function" had some other relation? So abstract that I assigned the photon? So I said "feelings," while Einstein might assigned them to a "short or long time" considering his state of mind? :)

More thought of course here on the "fictional presentation" submitted previous. As a layman I have a problem in that regard. :)

So no one knows how to combine thermodynamics and general relativity? Hmmm....Boltzmann puzzle..hmmmmm...and I slowly drift off in thought.

Our work is about comparing the data we collect in the STAR detector with modern calculations, so that we can write down equations on paper that exactly describe how the quark-gluon plasma behaves," says Jerome Lauret from Brookhaven National Laboratory. "One of the most important assumptions we've made is that, for very intense collisions, the quark-gluon plasma behaves according to hydrodynamic calculations in which the matter is like a liquid that flows with no viscosity whatsoever."

How does relativity ever arise out of such a situation? If "tunnelling was to occur" where would it occur, and where would "this equilibrium" find comparative Lagrangian relations in the universe? These perspectives are leading to what we see in the WMAP polarization patterns?

Are there not "comparative features" that allows for the low entropic states, within the existing universe? Allows us to return to those same entropic states in their respective regions, while "feeding" the universe?

You had to look for the conditions that would be similar would you not? And "supporting evidence" to explain the current universe speeding up. These conditions would have to support that contention.

I am holding off producing any new posts until I can bring the discussion to a suitable ending where Lee Smolin admits the ideas are not yet completed in terms of of our understanding of the landscape?

Clifford has a good humour post about real estate in the extra dimensions. Of course you had to follow other discourses here to understand how one may view what is "current in the thinking?"

This "balance in perspective" is not just one or the other but on how such perspective is formed around it. So on the one hand you have this Anthropic approach in string theory, and then you have the "philosophical differences on the other?"

Your trying to explain it and in so doing revealing the train of thought that was established. One does not disavow the road leading to the physics established of course, and no where is this intentional on differing perspectives

Lee Smolin: "Here is a metaphor due to Eric Weinstein that I would have put in the book had I heard it before. Let us take a different twist on the landscape of theories and consider the landscape of possible ideas about post standard model or quantum gravity physics that have been proposed. Height is proportional to the number of things the theory gets right. Since we don’t have a convincing case for the right theory yet, that is a high peak somewhere off in the distance. The existing approaches are hills of various heights that may or may not be connected, across some ridges and high valleys to the real peak. We assume the landscape is covered by fog so we can’t see where the real peak is, we can only feel around and detect slopes and local maxima.

The History of "Star Shine to Now"

In "The String Saga of Star Shine" I gave a distant measure of how we might seen any event from that time to now.

But before I begin I wanted to link Lubos's mention of article from David G to him, to point out the method and determinacy with which I gave the "String Saga Star Shine" it's inital point of measure "from" to our currrent infomration present in this universe now.

The Universe on a String By BRIAN GREENE

This striking pattern of convergence, linking concepts once thought unrelated, inspired Einstein to dream of the next and possibly final move: merging gravity and electromagnetism into a single, overarching theory of nature's forces.

In hindsight, there was almost no way he could have succeeded. He was barely aware that there were two other forces he was neglecting — the strong and weak forces acting within atomic nuclei. Furthermore, he willfully ignored quantum mechanics, the new theory of the microworld that was receiving voluminous experimental support, but whose probabilistic framework struck him as deeply misguided. Einstein stayed the course, but by his final years he had drifted to the fringe of a subject he had once dominated.

Low and behold we measure the "high energy in our sun" but least we remember the lower ends of the spectrum how shall we ascertain the images of the Sun if we did not include the lower measures in what we discern of the "sterile neutrino?"

Lest we forget about the "idea of convergence here" we might again refer to Lee Smolin's Book, The Trouble with Physics." Might Brian Greene be referring to the "latest debate?"

The relationship here being expounded upon, holds this principal that Lee Smolin talks about in what a new theory can do. Pastes it in our heads as I have shown the historical value of what began with "Pauli's Ghost particle" as the "now" of today, askes us to consider the value of the "sterile Neutrino" as a value in the discernation of that weak gravitational field?

Arrow of Time?

Let's look at Kip Thornes definition of the "timeline(star shine's) history" shall we?


Dr. Kip Thorne, Caltech 01-Relativity-The First 20th Century Revolution

So here we are, fully appreciating and understanding the "measure of distance" as we look at the "new image" of the sun?



Yes, we are to include now not only the valuation of high energy dissertations here but what value we have of the immediate presence of the neutrinos from the sun. We now have a much more comprehensive view of what the sun saids to us over "this distance of time?" How we may look at the image as we look at the way the sun looks in that picture shown by JoAnne of Cosmic Variance above.

A lot of people do not understand that if you look to the cosmo, you do not just look at what is evident from observation, but that your observation is increased, as you enhance your perceptions about the "real depth" of that universe.

So the lesson here, is that the mathematics "first born to mind" is a very suttle thing, as we peer deeper into the very beginning of this universe. While Einstein did not see in the way we do now, the relevance of that distance in time, is still held to every mind to consider in GR, that the depth of perception s still needed on a quantum level.

While the point made here is "gravitational in nature," the issuance is from the "other dimensions" to now. Quantum dynamcically this has been revealled while the discrete notion has been applied to our thinking as the "oscillation factor" has been understood in the muon to electron neutrino?

So should I point to the nature spread out before us, as you look at the effect of the neutrinos on the Kamiokande screen? Other ways, that I have shown, as we look at the aurora borealis, or the rainbow in our skies?



The effect of "our reason" for such processes in physics are extremely versatile on a sociological level, that one might question indeed where such "pure thoughts in mathematics" could arise to the "symbolistic nature predating( monte carlo methods of computerization)" of that physics?

Model apprehension is part of the convergence that Lee Smolin and Brian Greene talk about, and without it, how could we look at nature and never consider that Einstein's world is a much more dyamical one then we had first learnt from the lessons GR supplied about gravity in our world?

Yes GR is still a theory, but with experimental consequences, much as the model string theory offers you, as we look at the oscillatory nature of what asymmetry provides for us, from that pure "high energy state?" Gravity, very strong, to what is weak in the measures of the neutrino characters?

I gave some pictures to consider while I continue. Some may move ahead of me if they like:) Maybe Stefan and Bee of Backreaction?

Central Theme is the Sun

A lot of times people do not understand the effects something can have and after we see these effects, we wonder how did we ever miss the importance of what layed underneath this process in Physics.


Richard Feynman-Dancing With Neutrinos-Nova


Much as we looked at the stars above, the views became much clearer with hubble and such, that we see the depth is necessary as we quantum dynamically learn to see with a greater comprehension.

481 MeV muon neutrino (MC) produces 394 MeV muon which later decays at rest into 52 MeV electron. The ring fit to the muon is outlined. Fuzzy electron ring is seen in yellow-green in lower right corner. This is perspective projection with 110 degrees opening angle, looking from a corner of the Super-Kamiokande detector (not from the event vertex). Option -show_non_hit was used to show all PMTs. Color corresponds to time PMT was hit by Cerenkov photon from the ring. Color scale is time from 830 to 1816 ns with 15.9 ns step. The time window was widened from default to clearly show the muon decay electron in different color. In the charge weighted time histogram to the right two peaks are clearly seen, one from the muon, and second one from the delayed electron from the muon decay. Size of PMT corresponds to amount of light seen by the PMT. PMTs are drawn as a flat squares even though in reality they look more like huge flattened golden light bulbs.

Now it is important to me that when I seen the relationships of physics extolling itself in nature, I wanted to understand how this evidence came to be. But, before I lay what nature has shown me, I wanted to explain a little further what I am starting put together in my head, about what has become common in our understanding, was not easily so from a theoretical/concept/idea standpoint. That it was indeed "progressive/reductionistic" as our views became ever more progressive as we see the same picture of the cosmo(astrophysics) in an ever widening view of understanding.

The neutrino detector for the Super-Kamiokande experiment in Japan contains ultrapure water surrounded by an array of thousands of photo-tubes, arranged to catch the flashes of light from neutrino interactions in the water. In 1998, researchers at "Super-K" found evidence for a small mass for neutrinos coming to earth from particle interactions in cosmic rays. If neutrinos, until recently thought to be massless, actually do have a mass, the implications will be profound, not only for particle physics but for astronomy and cosmology. At right is the MINOS collaboration at the Department of Energy’s Fermilab, before a slice of the 10,000-ton detector they will build to capture neutrino interactions. The MINOS experiment will use beams of accelerator-produced neutrinos by Fermilab's Tevatron to investigate neutrino mass.

Now the lesson above is quite simplistic in the sense that what was once held in theoretical views could/would have made it's way into the depths of how we see things now in nature. So in having understood that process, I wanted to show two more that you might be interested in?


Astronaut's view of the Aurora Australis, or southern lights, from aboard Space Shuttle Discovery 1991 (Courtesy: NASA)

The picture below here is what I see from my backyard when mist and rain has fallen.



So here you have it. A couple of views of nature that have been exemplifed in our search for understanding. What does this all reveal to you? Well, that's the continung saga of what the depth of perception has endowed all us human beings, as we look ever deeper into the nature of the cosmo, and the beginning of this universe.

While we had been given the Sun to look at in one of it's diverse ways, I wanted and did show that meeting the views of how we look at things. That it had been extended, by understanding the "valuation of the energy" as it has ensued from the very heart of what that burning sun is. How we gain immediate results, not ony in the particle showers, but of what evidence we have lain before us, as the physical outcome, as we look from space, and how, we look from earth.

See:

SOLAR B and Van Ellen Belts

Are Strangelets Natural?

Thus RHIC is in a certain sense a string theory testing machine, analyzing the formation and decay of dual black holes, and giving information about the black hole interior.

It is important that you look at the date of this article following, and what has subsequently arisen from "then to now." The title of this post asked a legitimate question and it was answered in response to the disaster scenario's presented to the LHC "recenty?" Check the date on it? Not so recent?

Discovering this raised the conclusiveness about what was comparative to the cosmic ray collisions. This lead us to believe, the microscopic blackhole creation was safe. Becuase it happened all the time in the space above us. Just as we may see the aurora borealis in our observation in the interaction with the sun, so too, in cosmic particle collisions in ways beyond the standard model.

So looking back?

SCIENTISTS ARE OFTEN ACCUSED of trying to play God. But obviously they can't really mimic the feats of the putative Creator of the Universe, and make a universe in the laboratory. Or can they? Before you snort in disbelief, you should know that some serious cosmologists have considered the idea. Indeed, one of them has already had a shot at creating a universe--albeit inside a computer. The idea dates back to the late 1970s, when Andrei Linde, now at Stanford University, and Alan Guth of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology separately came up with the concept of "inflation". According to this idea, an incredibly short, violent burst of expansion occurred around 10-32 seconds after the birth of the Universe. Propelled by concentrated vacuum energy, inflation boosted the size of the Universe from one billionth the width of a proton to the size of a grapefruit. That's what the theorists claim, but showing that inflation really did take place like this is hard... unless, of course, someone can recreate the right conditions in the lab and watch what happens. Linde and his colleagues have already done a dry run on a computer. "Setting up the simulations was hard work, and only on the seventh day did we finish the first series," he reported in Scientific American in 1994, adding in Strangelovian terms: "We looked at the shining screen, and we were happy--we saw that the universe was good!" This isn't enough for Linde: he wants to do it for real. But theory suggests that matter has to be squeezed to densities similar to those in the primordial Universe before such fields appear. No-one has the faintest clue how to create such densities, yet. Linde is sanguine about the dangers involved, if it ever becomes possible. "You can think of our Universe as being like a smooth surface, with one part of it inflating like a balloon. The new universe will be connected to ours by just a tiny passage--what we call a wormhole--the size of a subatomic particle." Quite how we'd know we'd succeeded isn't obvious, but at least there seems little danger of someone tumbling into the new universe by mistake, or anything nasty getting out.

THis one post includes "lots of link"s from the accumulation of my thinkng as a layman. I had gathered these as they unfolded, to help me understand what was introduced to me some time ago by Paul on the question in regards to the "Disaster Scenario at LHC."

Now in regards to "new physics" one needed to see what would come out of such collisions that would be produced, so one had to indeed follow that thinking which I did. How far from the truth of it was what was generated in the public eye distant from what was published by the reputable scientists?

Well you would have to judge for yourself, and "my excuse," well it has been provided for me, so one can say as a layman I am really distant from the current thinking.

So yes before Cosmic Variance and the disaster scenario, it was in our conversations that "Mooreglade of Superstrintheory.com forum" introduced the article of "A Blackhole Ate My Planet" which lead too "Fate of our Planet"

So you see, between then and now, I was able to construct accordingly as I was exposed to the information in regards to "both ways" to which Lubos implies in that statement in comment link?

Okay. Now the stage has been set.

What has been Lubos been saying?

That the connection in "B's question" again sets the stage for further thoughts?

That's just the way of it and who better then student who will make way for further insights, whether it be "Lubos or B?"

In the past my mistake was made to "mirror" Lubos with Peter Woit, because I needed to see what the others may offer in regards to the positions they adopted. Or, another example would have been Smolin and Susskind, who bounced off each other. Or, Gell-mann or Feynman. Or maybe even Plato and Aristotle shhown in the picturte at the top of this Blog?

IN the above case with Peter Woit, I did not learn much? The counter arguments as to why strings were failing in the road to experimental validation(sure we were preoccupied with it's validity then), and how this message was being put out there.

Be sure that more senior people agree with me that it is trivial to falsify that conjecture, including Susskind, Vilenkin, Banks, and others who have looked into it.

So where are we today in regard to strings? Lubo's reference to Banks, Vilenkin, and Susskind already asking these questions is a significant pointer to what has already transpired, and what days, weeks, years, have passed before we see this statement today?

You see how this is done?