Different Environment for Testing

State of Fear Revisited

Cooling the Warming Debate

See:

• The State of Fear

See Also:

•  ICARUS Proves Neutrinos At Least 10 Times Faster Than Light

• Getting Science Through: Misunderstood Terms In Science Communication

Particles that can hit the Earth's atmosphere at high speeds.

Source: University of Chicago Library

Enrico Fermi's notebook of December 1948 contains four pages that represent the genesis of his theory of cosmic rays, particles that can hit the Earth's atmosphere at high speeds. In these pages, he worked out the acceleration of cosmic rays due to a series of collisions with magnetic clouds moving through the universe, a process later named Fermi acceleration.SEE:Archive: Logbook

***

History of Cosmic Rays

• Introduction to Cosmic Rays
• Ultra-High Energy Cosmic Rays
• Detection of UHE Cosmic Rays
• History of the Air Fluorescence Technique
• The Fly's Eye (1981-1993)

TAUWER Test

TAUWER is a proposed astroparticle experiment to detect ultrahigh energy TAU neutrinos, using detector towers arrayed on a mountainside looking down into a valley. This test is to study the possibility of replacing Hamamatsu miniature PMTs with SiPMs for readout by determining the response of scintillation detectors with SiPM readout to low energy electrons, 2 GeV or lower, as the beam will provide. The detector itself is a compact package, previously used in a parasitic test beam run on December 15, 2010, to compare the relative timing of the signals from three counters for Minimized Ionized Particles.

The experiment will take some electron data with 1.5 cm of Pb in front of counter 2 or counter 3, and without the Pb for calibration purposes. The three scintillators are 0.7, 1.4, and 0.7 cm thick, each 19 x 19 cm square. Each has a single SiPM readout, seen in the picture. The SiPM operating voltage is 34 volts. This is introduced by BNC cables from power supplies in the electronics area. The red and white wires adapt the BNC cable to separate power and ground leads for the center counter. The SiPM signals are taken on RG174 cables to a local waveform digitizer (DRS4) adjacent to the optical box. The DRS4 is controlled by a PC located in the beam enclosure, operated remotely from the control room.
Name of Experiment:TAUWER Test

See Also: TAUWER aims for cosmic heights

Cosmic Screens

[Recommended] Five Showers (Windows only). This has five showers (alpha, proton. gamma, iron, etc) at 333 ns per time step, and with a much more user-friendly interface than the other showers below. The interface was made by Mark SubbaRao using a Director plugin written by Toshiyuki Takahei. 

See:COSMOS:AIRES Cosmic Ray Showers

***

Muon

The Moon's cosmic ray shadow, as seen in secondary muons generated by cosmic rays in the atmosphere, and detected 700 meters below ground, at the Soudan II detector.
Composition:	Elementary particle
Particle statistics:	Fermionic
Group:	Lepton
Generation:	Second
Interaction:	Gravity, Electromagnetic, Weak
Symbol(s):	μ−
Antiparticle:	Antimuon (μ+)
Theorized:	—
Discovered:	Carl D. Anderson (1936)
Mass:	105.65836668(38) MeV/c2
Mean lifetime:	2.197034(21)×10−6 s[1]
Electric charge:	−1 e
Color charge:	None
Spin:	1⁄2

The muon (from the Greek letter mu (μ) used to represent it) is an elementary particle similar to the electron, with a negative electric charge and a spin of ½. Together with the electron, the tau, and the three neutrinos, it is classified as a lepton. It is an unstable subatomic particle with the second longest mean lifetime (2.2 µs), exceeded only by that of the free neutron (~15 minutes). Like all elementary particles, the muon has a corresponding antiparticle of opposite charge but equal mass and spin: the antimuon (also called a positive muon). Muons are denoted by μ⁻ and antimuons by μ⁺. Muons were previously called mu mesons, but are not classified as mesons by modern particle physicists (see History).

Muons have a mass of 105.7 MeV/c², which is about 200 times the mass of an electron. Since the muon's interactions are very similar to those of the electron, a muon can be thought of as a much heavier version of the electron. Due to their greater mass, muons are not as sharply accelerated when they encounter electromagnetic fields, and do not emit as much bremsstrahlung radiation. Thus muons of a given energy penetrate matter far more deeply than electrons, since the deceleration of electrons and muons is primarily due to energy loss by this mechanism. So-called "secondary muons", generated by cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere, can penetrate to the Earth's surface and into deep mines.

As with the case of the other charged leptons, the muon has an associated muon neutrino. Muon neutrinos are denoted by ν_μ.

Contents 1 History 2 Muon sources 3 Muon decay 4 Muonic atoms 5 Use in measurement of the proton charge radius 6 Anomalous magnetic dipole moment 7 See also 8 References 9 External links

History

Muons were discovered by Carl D. Anderson and Seth Neddermeyer at Caltech in 1936, while studying cosmic radiation. Anderson had noticed particles that curved differently from electrons and other known particles when passed through a magnetic field. They were negatively charged but curved less sharply than electrons, but more sharply than protons, for particles of the same velocity. It was assumed that the magnitude of their negative electric charge was equal to that of the electron, and so to account for the difference in curvature, it was supposed that their mass was greater than an electron but smaller than a proton. Thus Anderson initially called the new particle a mesotron, adopting the prefix meso- from the Greek word for "mid-". Shortly thereafter, additional particles of intermediate mass were discovered, and the more general term meson was adopted to refer to any such particle. To differentiate between different types of mesons, the mesotron was in 1947 renamed the mu meson (the Greek letter μ (mu) corresponds to m).
It was soon found that the mu meson significantly differed from other mesons: for example, its decay products included a neutrino and an antineutrino, rather than just one or the other, as was observed with other mesons. Other mesons were eventually understood to be hadrons—that is, particles made of quarks—and thus subject to the residual strong force. In the quark model, a meson is composed of exactly two quarks (a quark and antiquark) unlike baryons, which are composed of three quarks. Mu mesons, however, were found to be fundamental particles (leptons) like electrons, with no quark structure. Thus, mu mesons were not mesons at all (in the new sense and use of the term meson), and so the term mu meson was abandoned, and replaced with the modern term muon.

Another particle (the pion, with which the muon was initially confused) had been predicted by theorist Hideki Yukawa:^[2]

"It seems natural to modify the theory of Heisenberg and Fermi in the following way. The transition of a heavy particle from neutron state to proton state is not always accompanied by the mission of light particles. The transition is sometimes taken up by another heavy particle."

The existence of the muon was confirmed in 1937 by J. C. Street and E. C. Stevenson's cloud chamber experiment.^[3] The discovery of the muon seemed so incongruous and surprising at the time that Nobel laureate I. I. Rabi famously quipped, "Who ordered that?"

In a 1941 experiment on Mount Washington in New Hampshire, muons were used to observe the time dilation predicted by special relativity for the first time.^[4]

Muon sources

Since the production of muons requires an available center of momentum frame energy of 105.7 MeV, neither ordinary radioactive decay events nor nuclear fission and fusion events (such as those occurring in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons) are energetic enough to produce muons. Only nuclear fission produces single-nuclear-event energies in this range, but do not produce muons as the production of a single muon would violate the conservation of quantum numbers (see under "muon decay" below).

On Earth, most naturally occurring muons are created by cosmic rays, which consist mostly of protons, many arriving from deep space at very high energy^[5]

About 10,000 muons reach every square meter of the earth's surface a minute; these charged particles form as by-products of cosmic rays colliding with molecules in the upper atmosphere. Travelling at relativistic speeds, muons can penetrate tens of meters into rocks and other matter before attenuating as a result of absorption or deflection by other atoms.

— Mark Wolverton (September 2007). "Muons for Peace: New Way to Spot Hidden Nukes Gets Ready to Debut". Scientific American 297 (3): 26–28. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=muons-for-peace.

When a cosmic ray proton impacts atomic nuclei of air atoms in the upper atmosphere, pions are created. These decay within a relatively short distance (meters) into muons (the pion's preferred decay product), and neutrinos. The muons from these high energy cosmic rays generally continue in about the same direction as the original proton, at a very high velocity. Although their lifetime without relativistic effects would allow a half-survival distance of only about 0.66 km (660 meters) at most (as seen from Earth) the time dilation effect of special relativity (from the viewpoint of the Earth) allows cosmic ray secondary muons to survive the flight to the Earth's surface, since in the Earth frame, the muons have a longer half-life due to their velocity. From the viewpoint (inertial frame) of the muon, on the other hand, it is the length contraction effect of special relativity which allows this penetration, since in the muon frame, its lifetime is unaffected, but the distance through the atmosphere and earth appears far shorter than these distances in the Earth rest-frame. Both are equally valid ways of explaining the fast muon's unusual survival over distances.

Since muons are unusually penetrative of ordinary matter, like neutrinos, they are also detectable deep underground (700 meters at the Soudan II detector) and underwater, where they form a major part of the natural background ionizing radiation. Like cosmic rays, as noted, this secondary muon radiation is also directional.

The same nuclear reaction described above (i.e. hadron-hadron impacts to produce pion beams, which then quickly decay to muon beams over short distances) is used by particle physicists to produce muon beams, such as the beam used for the muon g − 2 experiment.^[6]

Muon decay

See also: Michel parameters

The most common decay of the muon

Muons are unstable elementary particles and are heavier than electrons and neutrinos but lighter than all other matter particles. They decay via the weak interaction. Because lepton numbers must be conserved, one of the product neutrinos of muon decay must be a muon-type neutrino and the other an electron-type antineutrino (antimuon decay produces the corresponding antiparticles, as detailed below). Because charge must be conserved, one of the products of muon decay is always an electron of the same charge as the muon (a positron if it is a positive muon). Thus all muons decay to at least an electron, and two neutrinos. Sometimes, besides these necessary products, additional other particles that have a net charge and spin of zero (i.e. a pair of photons, or an electron-positron pair), are produced.

The dominant muon decay mode (sometimes called the Michel decay after Louis Michel) is the simplest possible: the muon decays to an electron, an electron-antineutrino, and a muon-neutrino. Antimuons, in mirror fashion, most often decay to the corresponding antiparticles: a positron, an electron-neutrino, and a muon-antineutrino. In formulaic terms, these two decays are:

.

The mean lifetime of the (positive) muon is 2.197 019 ± 0.000 021 μs^[7]. The equality of the muon and anti-muon lifetimes has been established to better than one part in 10⁴.

The tree-level muon decay width is

where I(x) = 1 − 8x − 12x²lnx + 8x³ − x⁴; is the Fermi coupling constant.
The decay distributions of the electron in muon decays have been parameterised using the so-called Michel parameters. The values of these four parameters are predicted unambiguously in the Standard Model of particle physics, thus muon decays represent a good test of the space-time structure of the weak interaction. No deviation from the Standard Model predictions has yet been found.

Certain neutrino-less decay modes are kinematically allowed but forbidden in the Standard Model. Examples forbidden by lepton flavour conservation are

and .

Observation of such decay modes would constitute clear evidence for physics beyond the Standard Model (BSM). Current experimental upper limits for the branching fractions of such decay modes are in the range 10⁻¹¹ to 10⁻¹².

Muonic atoms

The muon was the first elementary particle discovered that does not appear in ordinary atoms. Negative muons can, however, form muonic atoms (also called mu-mesic atoms), by replacing an electron in ordinary atoms. Muonic hydrogen atoms are much smaller than typical hydrogen atoms because the much larger mass of the muon gives it a much smaller ground-state wavefunction than is observed for the electron. In multi-electron atoms, when only one of the electrons is replaced by a muon, the size of the atom continues to be determined by the other electrons, and the atomic size is nearly unchanged. However, in such cases the orbital of the muon continues to be smaller and far closer to the nucleus than the atomic orbitals of the electrons.

A positive muon, when stopped in ordinary matter, can also bind an electron and form an exotic atom known as muonium (Mu) atom, in which the muon acts as the nucleus. The positive muon, in this context, can be considered a pseudo-isotope of hydrogen with one ninth of the mass of the proton. Because the reduced mass of muonium, and hence its Bohr radius, is very close to that of hydrogen^{[clarification needed]}, this short-lived "atom" behaves chemically — to a first approximation — like hydrogen, deuterium and tritium.

Use in measurement of the proton charge radius

The recent culmination of a twelve year experiment investigating the proton's charge radius involved the use of muonic hydrogen. This form of hydrogen is composed of a muon orbiting a proton^[8]. The Lamb shift in muonic hydrogen was measured by driving the muon from the from its 2s state up to an excited 2p state using a laser. The frequency of the photon required to induce this transition was revealed to be 50 terahertz which, according to present theories of quantum electrodynamics, yields a value of 0.84184 ± 0.00067 femtometres for the charge radius of the proton.^[9]

Anomalous magnetic dipole moment

The anomalous magnetic dipole moment is the difference between the experimentally observed value of the magnetic dipole moment and the theoretical value predicted by the Dirac equation. The measurement and prediction of this value is very important in the precision tests of QED (quantum electrodynamics). The E821 experiment at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) studied the precession of muon and anti-muon in a constant external magnetic field as they circulated in a confining storage ring. The E821 Experiment reported the following average value (from the July 2007 review by Particle Data Group)

where the first errors are statistical and the second systematic.

The difference between the g-factors of the muon and the electron is due to their difference in mass. Because of the muon's larger mass, contributions to the theoretical calculation of its anomalous magnetic dipole moment from Standard Model weak interactions and from contributions involving hadrons are important at the current level of precision, whereas these effects are not important for the electron. The muon's anomalous magnetic dipole moment is also sensitive to contributions from new physics beyond the Standard Model, such as supersymmetry. For this reason, the muon's anomalous magnetic moment is normally used as a probe for new physics beyond the Standard Model rather than as a test of QED (Phys.Lett. B649, 173 (2007)).

See also

• Mumesic atom
• Muonium
• Muon spin spectroscopy
• Muon-catalyzed fusion
• List of particles

References

1. ^ K. Nakamura et al. (Particle Data Group), J. Phys. G 37, 075021 (2010), URL: http://pdg.lbl.gov
2. ^ Yukaya Hideka, On the Interaction of Elementary Particles 1, Proceedings of the Physico-Mathematical Society of Japan (3) 17, 48, pp 139-148 (1935). (Read 17 November 1934)
3. ^ New Evidence for the Existence of a Particle Intermediate Between the Proton and Electron", Phys. Rev. 52, 1003 (1937).
4. ^ David H. Frisch and James A. Smith, "Measurement of the Relativistic Time Dilation Using Muons", American Journal of Physics, 31, 342, 1963, cited by Michael Fowler, "Special Relativity: What Time is it?"
5. ^ S. Carroll (2004). Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity. Addison Wesly. p. 204
6. ^ Brookhaven National Laboratory (30 July 2002). "Physicists Announce Latest Muon g-2 Measurement". Press release. http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/pubaf/pr/2002/bnlpr073002.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-14. 
7. ^ [1]
8. ^ TRIUMF Muonic Hydrogen collaboration. "A brief description of Muonic Hydrogen research". Retrieved 2010-11-7
9. ^ Pohl, Randolf et al. "The Size of the Proton" Nature 466, 213-216 (8 July 2010)

• S.H. Neddermeyer, C.D. Anderson (1937). "Note on the Nature of Cosmic-Ray Particles". Physical Review 51: 884–886. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.51.884. 
• J.C. Street, E.C. Stevenson (1937). "New Evidence for the Existence of a Particle of Mass Intermediate Between the Proton and Electron". Physical Review 52: 1003–1004. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.52.1003. 
• G. Feinberg, S. Weinberg (1961). "Law of Conservation of Muons.". Physical Review Letters 6: 381–383. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.6.381. 
• Serway & Faughn (1995). College Physics (4th ed.). Saunders. p. 841. 
• M. Knecht (2003). "The Anomalous Magnetic Moments of the Electron and the Muon". In B. Duplantier, V. Rivasseau. Poincaré Seminar 2002: Vacuum Energy – Renormalization. Progress in Mathematical Physics. 30. Birkhäuser. p. 265. ISBN 3-7643-0579-7. http://books.google.com/?id=me6ftonVM_EC&pg=PA265&lpg=PA265&dq=%22The+Anomalous+Magnetic+Moments+of+the+Electron+and+the+Muon%22&q=%22The%20Anomalous%20Magnetic%20Moments%20of%20the%20Electron%20and%20the%20Muon%22. 
• E. Derman (2004). My Life As A Quant. Wiley. pp. 58–62. 

External links

• Muon anomalous magnetic moment and supersymmetry
• g-2 (muon anomalous magnetic moment) experiment
• muLan (Measurement of the Positive Muon Lifetime) experiment
• The Review of Particle Physics
• The TRIUMF Weak Interaction Symmetry Test

***

Comment on Backreaction made to Steven

Hi Steven

Would we not be correct to say that unification with the small would be most apropos indeed with the large?

Pushing through that veil.

My interest with the QGP is well documented, as it presented itself "with an interesting location" with which to look at during the collision process.

Natural Microscopic blackhole creations? Are such conditions possible in the natural way of things? Although quickly dissipative, they leave their mark as Cerenkov effects.

As one looks toward the cosmos this reductionist process is how one might look at the cosmos at large, as to some of it's "motivations displayed" in the cosmos?

What conditions allow such reductionism at play to consider the end result of geometrical propensity as a message across the vast distance of space, so as to "count these effects" here on earth?

Let's say cosmos particle collisions and LHC are hand in hand "as to decay of the original particles in space" as they leave their imprint noticeably in the measures of SNO or Icecube, but help us discern further effects of that decay chain as to the constitutions of LHC energy progressions of particles in examination?

Emulating the conditions in LHC progression, adaptability seen then from such progressions, working to produce future understandings. Muon detections through the earth?

So "modeled experiments" in which "distillation of thought" are helped to be reduced too, in kind, lead to matter forming ideas with which to progress? Measure. Self evident.

You see the view has to be on two levels, maybe as a poet using words to describe, or as a artist, trying to explain the natural world. The natural consequence, of understanding of our humanity and it's continuations expressed as abstract thought of our interactions with the world at large, unseen, and miscomprehended?

Do you think Superstringy has anything to do with what I just told you here?:)

Best,

Hi Steven,

Maybe the following will help, and then I will lead up to a modern version for consideration, so you understand the relation.

Keep Gran Sasso in your mind as you look at what I am giving you.

The underground laboratory, which opened in 1989, with its low background radiation is used for experiments in particle and nuclear physics,including the study of neutrinos, high-energy cosmic rays, dark matter, nuclear decay, as well as geology, and biology-wiki


Neutrinos, get set, go!

This summer, CERN gave the starting signal for the long-distance neutrino race to Italy. The CNGS facility (CERN Neutrinos to Gran Sasso), embedded in the laboratory's accelerator complex, produced its first neutrino beam. For the first time, billions of neutrinos were sent through the Earth's crust to the Gran Sasso laboratory, 732 kilometres away in Italy, a journey at almost the speed of light which they completed in less than 2.5 milliseconds. The OPERA experiment at the Gran Sasso laboratory was then commissioned, recording the first neutrino tracks.

Because I am a layman, does not reduce the understanding that I can have, that a scientist may have.

Now for the esoteric :)

Secrets of the Pyramids In a boon for archaeology, particle physicists plan to probe ancient structures for tombs and other hidden chambers. The key to the technology is the muon, a cousin of the electron that rains harmlessly from the sky.

What kind of result would they get from using the muon. What will it tell them?:)

Best,

The Book: A Chapter Still to be Read

While the LHC is hibernating until February next year, outreach efforts are not on hold. Here in Germany, there is a nice exhibition on tour, called "Die Weltmaschine". This means literally the "world machine" – somewhat better than the "big bang machine", but finding a catchy but not misleadingly bombastic name for the LHC seems to be a challenge.Weltmaschine

I know that not all people like the name of the experiment at LHC in context of the Big Bang Machine, but as a worldly excursion mandated by many scientists it is a perspective that has pushed our views back in time, to one measured in microseconds, while Steven Weinberg set the clock running in our cosmological views.

Physics at this high energy scale describes the universe as it existed during the first moments of the Big Bang. These high energy scales are completely beyond the range which can be created in the particle accelerators we currently have (or will have in the foreseeable future.) Most of the physical theories that we use to understand the universe that we live in also break down at the Planck scale. However, string theory shows unique promise in being able to describe the physics of the Planck scale and the Big Bang.

Against Symmetry

Against symmetry (Paris, June 06)

The term “symmetry” derives from the Greek words sun (meaning ‘with’ or ‘together’) and metron (‘measure’), yielding summetria, and originally indicated a relation of commensurability (such is the meaning codified in Euclid's Elements for example). It quickly acquired a further, more general, meaning: that of a proportion relation, grounded on (integer) numbers, and with the function of harmonizing the different elements into a unitary whole.

What do Dark Matter and Missing Energy have to do with explaining "a region of space" that has not been validated in particulate design, could have amounted too, the change in direction from an oscillation signal to a change from one parameter of expression to another?

Supersymmetry was a bold idea, but one with seemingly little to commend it other than its appeal to the symmetry fetishists. Until, that is, you apply it to the hierarchy problem. It turned out that supersymmetry could tame all the pesky contributions from the Higgs's interactions with elementary particles, the ones that cause its mass to run out of control. They are simply cancelled out by contributions from their supersymmetric partners. "Supersymmetry makes the cancellation very natural," says Nathan Seiberg of the Institute of Advanced Studies, Princeton.


That wasn't all. In 1981 Georgi, together with Savas Dimopoulos of Stanford University, redid the force reunification calculations that he had done with Weinberg and Quinn, but with supersymmetry added to the mix. They found that the curves representing the strengths of all three forces could be made to come together with stunning accuracy in the early universe. "If you have two curves, it's not surprising that they intersect somewhere," says Weinberg. "But if you have three curves that intersect at the same point, then that's not trivial."
See:In SUSY we trust: What the LHC is really looking for

It is easy to see a matter thing forming around an idea, but it is not so easy to account for the energy that motivates this idea toward materialization. While we weigh heavily on one to an approximation of the standard model(Higgs), the other is less thought of while it has been cross referenced to a time that is very close to the beginning as well.

One also has to recognize that the state of all particulate expressions had to be reached,  as to the time we express in the possibility of where "all things emerge from"  in measure,  can be accounted for, as they travel through the earth and express them self in some cosmological mannerism all around us.

Leon Lederman and Starting Out

"The soul is awestruck and shudders at the sight of the beautiful." Plato

Leon Max Lederman (born July 15, 1922) is an American experimental physicist and Nobel Prize in Physics laureate for his work with neutrinos. He is Director Emeritus of Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) in Batavia, Illinois. He founded the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy, in Aurora, Illinois in 1986, and has served in the capacity of Resident Scholar since 1998.

In 1977, Fermilab discovered the bottom quark and in 1995 the top quark was found. The lessons of history are clear. The more exotic, the more abstract the knowledge, the more profound will be its consequences." Leon Lederman, from an address to the Franklin Institute, 1995

Is Leon Lederman a religious man? Shall one man's scientific basis of exploration determine the understanding of his work to a religious version?

One has to remember who coined the term the "God particle" in order to understand that when a limit is reached, a theoretical positioning is assumed in order to mathematically explain what is "beyond measure."

Can we find "it" eventually explaining a very natural thing?


Oh-My-God particle

On the evening of October 15, 1991, an ultra-high energy cosmic particle was observed over Salt Lake City, Utah. Dubbed the "Oh-My-God particle" (a play on the nickname "God particle" for the Higgs boson), it was estimated to have an energy of approximately 3 × 1020 electronvolts, equivalent to about 50 joules—in other words, it was a subatomic particle with macroscopic kinetic energy, comparable to that of a fastball, or to the mass-energy of a microbe. It was most likely a proton travelling with almost the speed of light (in the case that it was a proton its speed was approximately (1 - 4.9 × 10-24)c – after traveling one light year the particle would be only 46 nanometres behind a photon that left at the same time) and its observation was a shock to astrophysicists.

Since the first observation, by the University of Utah's Fly's Eye 2, at least fifteen similar events have been recorded, confirming the phenomenon. The source of such high energy particles remains a mystery, especially since interactions with blue-shifted cosmic microwave background radiation limit the distance that these particles can travel before losing energy (the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin limit).

Because of its mass the Oh-My-God particle would have experienced very little influence from cosmic electromagnetic and gravitational fields, and so its trajectory should be easily calculable. However, nothing of note was found in the estimated direction of its origin.

God then becomes a exclamation point about a space that is defined beyond measure. It is then about the responsibility of taking serious that what is beyond while used in the term the "God particle"  lead too, many avenues of research that are on going in "truth searching"  brought to bear on what is to become "self evident."

This is the responsibility of being "Lead by Science" that someone could easily be lead off to other avenues in terminology expressions(intelligent design) that does not have anything to do with the science in process, but is really a exclamation point about what "is" possible. We don't know yet,  does not mean, it does not exist.


Of course you do not have to believe "is to easily dismiss," begs the question as to had one really used the inductive/deductive process to accurately see where one's position had settled,  is really a far cry from where scientists are actually working.

Astronomy Picture of the Day

Gamma-Ray Moon

Credit: Dave Thompson (NASA/GSFC) et al., EGRET, Compton Observatory, NASA

Explanation: If you could see gamma rays - photons with a million or more times the energy of visible light - the Moon would appear brighter than the Sun! The startling notion is demonstrated by this image of the Moon from the Energetic Gamma Ray Experiment Telescope (EGRET) in orbit on NASA's Compton Gamma Ray Observatory from April 1991 to June 2000. Then, the most sensitive instrument of its kind, even EGRET could not see the quiet Sun which is extremely faint at gamma-ray energies. So why is the Moon bright? High energy charged particles, known as cosmic rays, constantly bombard the unprotected lunar surface generating gamma-ray photons. EGRET's gamma-ray vision was not sharp enough to resolve a lunar disk or any surface features, but its sensitivity reveals the induced gamma-ray moonglow. So far unique, the image was generated from eight exposures made during 1991-1994 and covers a roughly 40 degree wide field of view with gamma-ray intensity represented in false color.

So too, they looked at the energy valuation of cosmic particle collisions and thought to draft similar conditions in the "man made version" to highlight the current plethora of energy expressed in the ways it has. Here,  it would be to assign a view according to a spectrum extended,  while these measures help us to understand the way we can look at the universe. Fermi/Glast,  is such a tool used today.

Mysterious Behavior of Neutrinos sent Straight through the Earth

This rendering depicts the future NOvA detector facility on the property. Rendering by Holabird & Root.

The NOνA experiment, a collaboration of over 180 scientists from some 28 institutions, will be the world’s most advanced neutrino experiment. NOvA physicists will address the question “What happened to the antimatter in the universe?” The Department of Energy’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory will send an intense neutrino beam from Fermilab in Illinois to the NOνA Detector Facility, a new international laboratory of the University of Minnesota’s School of Physics and Astronomy, in Ash River, about 40 miles southeast of International Falls, Minnesota.

Construction of the facility, supported under a cooperative agreement for research between the U.S. Department of Energy and the University of Minnesota, is expected to generate 60 to 80 jobs plus purchases of materials and services from US companies.

When the 15,000-ton NOνA detector is complete and installed at Ash River, physicists will use it to analyze the mysterious behavior of neutrinos sent straight through the earth from Fermilab in Illinois to the NOvA detector in Minnesota. The neutrinos travel the 500 miles in less than three milliseconds.
See:NOvA Neutrino Project

***

Using the NuMI beam to search for electron neutrino appearance.

The NOνA Experiment (Fermilab E929) will construct a detector optimized for electron neutrino detection in the existing NuMI neutrino beam. The primary goal of the experiment is to search for evidence of muon to electron neutrino oscillations. This oscillation, if it occurs, holds the key to many of the unanswered questions in neutrino oscillation physics. In addition to providing a measurement of the last unknown mixing angle, θ13, this oscillation channel opens the possibility of seeing matter/anti-matter asymmetries in neutrinos and determination of the ordering of the neutrino mass states.See:The NOνA Experiment at Fermilab (E929)

***

Geoneutrinos

Geoneutrinos, anti-electron neutrinos emanating from the earth, are expected to serve as a unique window into the interior of our planet, revealing information that is hidden from other probes. The left half of this image shows the production distribution for the geoneutrinos detected at KamLAND, and the right half shows the geologic structure. See First Measurement of Geoneutrinos at KamLAND.

***

For example, when neutrinos interact with matter they produce specific kinds of other particles. Catch the neutrino at one moment, and it will interact to produce an electron. A moment later, it might interact to produce a different particle. "Neutrino mixing" describes the original mixture of waves that produces this oscillation effect.

***

See also:Neutrino Mixing Explained in 60 seconds

So what about the Missing Energy?

"Death, so called, is but older matter dressed
In some new form. And in a varied vest,
From tenement to tenement though tossed,
The soul is still the same, the figure only lost." Poem on Pythagoras, Dryden's Ovid.

It is unfortunate to have endured the constant flutter of disbelief(cry of pseudoscience) as to what is possible in a given space, that we can say that we do not really have all the facts to it's understanding, yet, to know that in this region, new physics will be produced.

It is also unfortunate to have observed a whole generation of string theorists who have undergone this constant rebuttal and berating over and over again while standing strong to the "educative values" undermined by those who saw no benefit too. You maintained the perseverance of a "thought domain that cover regions within the valleys" to be speaking about a time just after the big bang. How would the normal population of scientists know this?

Thanks to the high collision energy and luminosity of the LHC, the ATLAS detector will be capable of revealing the existence of extra spatial dimensions in some substantial region of parameter space. The talk will summarize recent studies from the collaboration on different possible signals predicted by models where the dimensions are "large", where they are of size ~TeV^-1 or where they are "warped". These signals include direct emission of Kaluza-Klein states of gravitons, virtual effects of graviton exchange and gauge boson excitations. We shall also discuss the possibilities of observing black holes. mini review for search of eXTRA Dimentions

Now this question is an important one to me, because it is based on the amount of energy used in the collision process, and what is to come out of that collision process as tracks, adds up to so much energy. If these two numbers do not equal in parity then where has that extra energy gone?

This has always been a fundamental question to me of where I thought "new physics was to be found" and to have Tammaso Dorigo confirm this is quite a statement indeed of what is leading perspective in terms of what is to be measured and what is going to be measured in the proposed LHC experiments.

Missing Energy Kicks New Physics Models Off The Board

The signature of large missing energy and jets is arguably one of the most important avenues for the study of potential new physics signatures at today's hadron colliders.

The above concept marks an interesting turn of events: the years of the glorification of charged leptons as the single most important tools for the discovery of rare production processes appears behind us. The W and Z discovery in 1983 by UA1 at CERN, or the top quark discovery by CDF and DZERO in 1995 at Fermilab, would have been impossible without the precise and clean detection of electrons and muons. However, with time we have understood that missing energy may be a more powerful tool for new discoveries.

Missing energy arises when a violent collision between the projectiles -protons against antiprotons at the Tevatron collider, or protons against protons at the world's most powerful accelerator, the LHC- produces an asymmetric flow of energetic bodies out of the collision point in the plane orthogonal to the beams: a transverse imbalance. This is a clear signal that something is leaving the detector unseen. And it turns out that there is a host of new physics signals which can do precisely that.

A large amount of missing transverse energy may be the result of the decay of a leptoquarks into jets and neutrinos, when the latter leave undetected; or from the silent escape of a supersymmetric neutral particle -the neutralino- produced in the chain of decays following the production of squarks and gluinos; or it may even be due to the escape of particles in a fourth dimension of space -an alternative dubbed "large extra dimensions". see more in linked title above)

Now this is the thing that has troubled me most about scientists who are working and in the know, had not realized the necessity of pushing perspective back to a time to the first moments of the big bang(not just Steven Weinberg's first three minutes but of the microseconds just after the big bang) in order to understand what we are working on in terms of unification, and of where the products of this missing energy will spring forth from, as we move forward in the experiments to come.

The understanding then has always been in what is in that missing energy, to determine what new physics shall be, that such understanding was already there for the string theorist in their considerations. The contact point has already been defined for them, and reached two extremes. There is a reason why the missing energy escapes.

You had to know already where and what this "contact point meant" and what was to come out of it to know that dynamical qualities could exist in the big bang and where this big bang resides in the cosmos. That such energies can be reached there now. This required us to know that local events in the cosmos could contribute to the very nature of the cosmos and the state of the cosmos in the now. Like some cosmological constant "hidden and growing" in Omega.

To know that the dissipative results from micro collisions decaying fast too, did not mean we would be running short of the elements of this new physics either. It left it's remnants all around us to know that what can come out of such a collision point is not the story of the FLashForward scenario, but of things that travel through the earth to meet Gran Sasso and the likes. It was a whole plethora of particle disseminations that left missing energy around for us to explore in potential as some fictional substrate of the reality of nature that had not been seen before.

The State of Fear

It is one of those things I guess,  as you get older you completely forget part of one's thinking process that was started,  and never really went anywhere. Until that is, it is "awakened again" for introspection.

So if you find similarities to other bloggers and the title of this blog to theirs it is because four years ago I had started the thought process below in regards to climate change. I had created this blog called, "The State of Fear" in concert with reading the book, The State of Fear by Michael Crichton.

                                                                                                                       Adult mountain pine beetle,

                                                                                                                       Dendroctonus ponderosae

Some quotes from it were correlations in my mind about points made in context of the fiction that were relevant to me about where I lived and what was happening to the forests around me.

"I'm glad you do," Bradley said, gesturing for the kids to put their hands down. The only person talking today would be Ted Bradley. "But you may not know that global warming is going to cause a very sudden shift in our climate. Maybe just a few months or years, and it will suddenly be much hotter or much colder. And there will be hordes of insects and diseases that will take down wonderful trees."
"What kind of insects?" one kid asked.
"Bad ones," Bradley said. "The ones that eat trees, that worm inside them and chew them up." He wiggled his hands, suggesting the worming in progress.
"It would take a insect a long time to eat a whole tree," a girl offered.
"No it wouldn't!" Bradley said. "That's the trouble. Because warming means lots and lots of insects will come-a plague of insects-and they'll eat the trees fast!"

Page 402 of, The State of Fear by Michael Crichton

See also: You Kids Know What Global Warming Is?

*** 

Ecology of Thought

Now we have stocked in our wood shed the effects of this devastation that has run through our forests. I again have to interject not only with a scientific understanding but of one that emotively draws my attention to the "source of income" that has provided for the growth of my family, and the trees that support me today.

“I do not think anything, young man. I know. That is the purpose of my research - to know things, not to surmise them. Not to theorize. Not to hypothesize. But to know from direct research in the field. It’s a lost art in academia these days, young man-you are not that young- what is your name anyway?”
“Peter Evans.”
“And you work for Drake Mr. Evan?”
“No, for George Morton.”
“Well, why didn’t you say so!” Hoffman said. “George Morton was a great, great man. Come along Mr. Evans, and I will buy you some coffee and we can talk. Do you know what I do?”
“ I’m afraid I don’t, sir.”
“I study the ecology of thought,” Hoffman said. “and how it has led to a State of Fear.”

Michael Crichton, State of Fear, page 450

***

Now I have not spoken of what comes to past, as it may seem that prophecy has a way about it hidden in the fiction. To have been given the understanding that "prior knowledge" provides the thinking palate for what can come tomorrow in science, does not explain how is it that I could dream of this happening one day too, to see what I had envision long before. My wanting to save the forest perhaps.

Imagine a Genus 1 figured Tree , and it would not have been to unlikely that such vibrating could have amounted to "a signature" for the beetle to have it's dislikes( also patterned) motivating them to leave? But I think this now in retrospect of what was happening at the time in my dream and wonder about what evolves in terms of what came into expression(false vacuum to true) houses a description of the beetle somewhere in the valley of a vast theoretic expression.

So, I had a solution for this devastation that does not fit with the normal thinking, so I'll leave this alone too, because it would not be a satisfactory explanation to what the scientific process would be called as credible. You see I cared about what we were taking from the forest and I thought to explore avenues to provide for better growing seedlings, that replanting could immediately produce superior seedlings, hence a faster regrowth in areas to be replanted.

No one I think is better then nature to say what shall be and what shall not, but looking into the environment of what grows where and what soils are like, I couldn't help but think of what I could do to help give back to what we took out of the forests.

So how could I help Silviculture? By designing a better and stronger tree? No, again the perfect remedy is in what nature has provided.

***

In nature it is the cold, that has to be colder then, for an extended period in order to cut through the bark these bugs inject Blue Stain Fungi into the outer ring of the wood.  So nature by process of the beetle has left it's mark in what is called a "blue wood."

Natures past practise was to burn,  and in the forest, what quickly burns also returns to the previous states that existed long before we came along. This is the way of it as it had been in the past,  but today, we are very watchful of our forests and what can wipe out towns and cities very quickly if we left this unchecked.

So I have to apologize for my forgetfulness as to what was started before.

Do You Think This Cloud Experiment is Important?

"The aim of CLOUD is to understand whether or not cosmic rays can affect clouds and climate, by studying the microphysical interactions of cosmic rays with aerosols, cloud droplets and ice particles." This is one of the possible mechanisms for solar-climate variability since the solar wind – the stream of charged particles ejected from the sun – varies over time and affects the intensity of the cosmic rays that reach the Earth.See: On Cloud Nine

I have always refrained from speaking on the climate change topic mostly because I really did not know enough. I was uncertain as to whether we really had all the facts about what was taking place. This in no way was to limit the perspective on how we can make our world a better place, or create a better environ.

I just wanted these facts included in the assessment in terms of what scientists are actually doing now.  This then opens the mind up to whether the process here is valid one to take into consideration along with how we view climate change.

The Cloud Chamber in the Museum of Cavendish

Historically the validation of the process, it is necessary to converge on some notation about it's beginnings to know that it can evolve to what it is today. This is a necessary part of moving forward in experimental validation processes toward foundational thinking and our actions in the future. Our Actions now.

CLOUD – Cosmics Leaving OUtdoor Droplets

CLOUD is an experiment that uses a cloud chamber to study the possible link between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation. Based at the Proton Synchrotron at CERN, this is the first time a high-energy physics accelerator has been used to study atmospheric and climate science; the results could greatly modify our understanding of clouds and climate.
Cosmic rays are charged particles that bombard the Earth's atmosphere from outer space. Studies suggest they may have an influence on the amount of cloud cover through the formation of new aerosols (tiny particles suspended in the air that seed cloud droplets). This is supported by satellite measurements, which show a possible correlation between cosmic-ray intensity and the amount of low cloud cover. Clouds exert a strong influence on the Earth’s energy balance; changes of only a few per cent have an important effect on the climate. Understanding the underlying microphysics in controlled laboratory conditions is a key to unravelling the connection between cosmic rays and clouds.

The CLOUD experiment involves an interdisciplinary team of scientists from 18 institutes in 9 countries, comprised of atmospheric physicists, solar physicists, and cosmic-ray and particle physicists. The PS provides an artificial source of ‘cosmic rays’ that simulates natural conditions as closely as possible. A beam of particles is sent into a reaction chamber and its effects on aerosol production are recorded and analysed.

The initial stage of the experiment uses a prototype detector, but the full CLOUD experiment will include an advanced cloud chamber and a reactor chamber, equipped with a wide range of external instrumentation to monitor and analyse their contents. The temperature and pressure conditions anywhere in the atmosphere can be re-created within the chambers, and all experimental conditions can be controlled and measured, including the ‘cosmic ray’ intensity and the contents of the chambers.See:CLOUD–Cosmics Leaving OUtdoor Droplets

Again I am remaining open to all points of view that are scientifically based and point toward a better understanding of our relationship with the effects of what we are doing to our planet.

Taking Cosmic Rays for a spin