A first look at the Earth interior from the Gran Sasso underground laboratory

The Gran Sasso National Laboratory (LNGS) is one of four INFN national laboratories.

It is the largest underground laboratory in the world for experiments in particle physics, particle astrophysics and nuclear astrophysics. It is used as a worldwide facility by scientists, presently 750 in number, from 22 different countries, working at about 15 experiments in their different phases.

It is located between the towns of L'Aquila and Teramo, about 120 km from Rome
.
The underground facilities are located on a side of the ten kilometres long freeway tunnel crossing the Gran Sasso Mountain. They consist of three large experimental halls, each about 100 m long, 20 m wide and 18 m high and service tunnels, for a total volume of about 180,000 cubic metres.

***
Slide by Takaaki Kajita

In June 1998 the Super-Kamiokande collaboration revealed its eagerly anticipated results on neutrino interactions to 400 physicists at the Neutrino ’98 conference in Takayama, Japan. A hearty round of applause marked the end of a memorable presentation by Takaaki Kajita of the University of Tokyo that included this slide. He presented strong evidence that neutrinos behave differently than predicted by the Standard Model of particles: The three known types of neutrinos apparently transform into each other, a phenomenon known as oscillation.

Super-K’s detector, located 1000 meters underground, had collected data on neutrinos produced by a steady stream of cosmic rays hitting the Earth’s atmosphere. The data allowed scientists to distinguish between two types of atmospheric neutrinos: those that produce an electron when interacting with matter (e-like), and those that produce a muon (μ-like). The graph in this slide shows the direction the neutrinos came from (represented by cos theta, on the x-axis); the number of neutrinos observed (points marked with crosses); and the number expected according to the Standard Model (shaded boxes).

In the case of the μ-like neutrinos, the number coming straight down from the sky into the detector agreed well with theoretical prediction. But the number coming up through the ground was much lower than anticipated. These neutrinos, which originated in the atmosphere on the opposite side of the globe, travelled 13,000 kilometers through the Earth before reaching the detector. The long journey gave a significant fraction of them enough time to “disappear”—shedding their μ-like appearance by oscillating into a different type of neutrino. While earlier experiments had pointed to the possibility of neutrino oscillations, the disappearance of μ-like neutrinos in the Super-K experiment provided solid evidence.

Kurt Riesselmann

***

Click on this BlogTitled link

The Borexino Collaboration announced the observation of geo-neutrinos at the underground Gran Sasso National Laboratory of Italian Institute for Nuclear Physics (INFN), Italy. The data reveal, for the first time, a definite anti-neutrino signal with the expected energy spectrum due to radioactive decays of U and Th in the Earth well above background.

The International Borexino Collaboration, with institutions from Italy, US, Germany, Russia, Poland and France, operates a 300-ton liquid-scintillator detector designed to observe and study low-energy solar neutrinos. The low background of the Borexino detector has been key to the detection of geo-neutrinos. Technologies developed by Borexino Collaborators have achieved very low background levels. The central core of the Borexino scintillator is now the lowest background detector available for these observations. The ultra-low background of Borexino was developed to make the first measurements of solar neutrinos below 1 MeV and has now produced this first, firm observation of geo-neutrinos.

Geo-neutrinos are anti-neutrinos produced in radioactive decays of naturally occurring Uranium, Thorium, Potassium, and Rubidium. Decays from these radioactive elements are believed to contribute a significant but unknown fraction of the heat generated inside our planet. The heat generates convective movements in the Earth's mantle that influence volcanic activity and tectonic plate movements inducing seismic activity, and the geo-dynamo that creates the Earth's magnetic field.

More above......

***

Links borrowed from here

Browsing experiments
 • auger (7 photos)
 • borexino (6 photos)
 • cobra (6 photos)
 • cresst (5 photos)
 • cryostem (2 photos)
 • cuore (5 photos)
 • cuoricino (3 photos)
 • dama (9 photos)
 • eastop (4 photos)
 • ermes (2 photos)
 • genius (3 photos)
 • gerda (1 photos)
 • gigs (3 photos)
 • gno (6 photos)
 • hdms (2 photos)
 • hmbb (1 photos)
 • icarus (19 photos)
 • lisa (1 photos)
 • luna (5 photos)
 • lvd (4 photos)
 • macro (4 photos)
 • mibeta (1 photos)
 • opera (26 photos)
 • tellus (1 photos)
 • underseis (8 photos)
 • vip (1 photos)
 • warp (10 photos)
 • xenon (4 photos)
 • zoo (3 photos)

*** 

See Also:

PHENIX Muon Spectrometers

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

Defining the Space your Living In

The general theory of relativity is as yet incomplete insofar as it has been able to apply the general principle of relativity satisfactorily only to gravitational fields, but not to the total field. We do not yet know with certainty by what mathematical mechanism the total field in space is to be described and what the general invariant laws are to which this total field is subject. One thing, however, seems certain: namely, that the general principal of relativity will prove a necessary and effective tool for the solution of the problem for the total field.Out of My Later Years, Pg 48, Albert Einstein

Because Albert Einstein ended his career there, it did not mean such progressiveness would not move forward to include such an attempt to consider the "total field." By definition and allocation of a "step off point" people began to consider this possibility and sought such reformation in thinking as well

It is always the effort to see that such progressions in thought could have transformed any thinking person by the laws and rule of measure that will hold perspective toward the future. These are always being redefined by experiment, and such validations are adjusted then, to what we now use them for.

A new way to measure climate? A gravitational perspective held by Grace?

The calculation will be considered from the Earth frame of reference. The length is then unaffected since it is in the Earth frame. The halflife is in the muon frame, so must be considered to be time dilated in the Earth frame. You may substitute values for the height and the muon speed in the calculation below

See:Muon Experiment in Relativity

While one may use this knowledge then with an attempt to discover new vaults of "time in measure" and recorded for historical pursuance by civilizations hidden in the pyramids, such efforts revealed nothing. They were not thinking the right way. It is the model developmental aspect which I have demonstrated over and over again that we can conceal the history of memories under such a analogical tool for pathways in the human sphere of perspective?

Illustrations: Sandbox Studio See:Secrets of the Pyramids By Haley Bridger Symmetry Magazine

***

Such dynamical thinking then is the realization that our views had been transformed from straight lines and such to geometric that help us to think dynamically in the world around us.

The Friedmann equation which models the expanding universe has a parameter k called the curvature parameter which is indicative of the rate of expansion and whether or not that expansion rate is increasing or decreasing. If k=0 then the density is equal to a critical value at which the universe will expand forever at a decreasing rate. This is often referred to as the Einstein-de Sitter universe in recognition of their work in modeling it. This k=0 condition can be used to express the critical density in terms of the present value of the Hubble parameter.

For k>0 the density is high enough that the gravitational attraction will eventually stop the expansion and it will collapse backward to a "big crunch". This kind of universe is described as being a closed universe, or a gravitationally bound universe. For k<0 the universe expands forever, there not being sufficient density for gravitational attraction to stop the expansion.

Friedman Equation What is _pdensity.

What are the three models of geometry? k=-1, K=0, k+1

Negative curvature

Omega=the actual density to the critical density

If we triangulate Omega, the universe in which we are in, Omega_m(mass)+ Omega(a vacuum), what position geometrically, would our universe hold from the coordinates given?

If such a progression is understood in the evolution of the geometry raised in non euclidean perspectives, this has in my view raised the stakes on how we perceive the dynamical valuation of a world that we were lead into from GR?

***

"In a sentence, the observations are spectacular and the conclusions are stunning," said Brian Greene of Columbia University in New York City. "WMAP data support the notion that galaxies are nothing but quantum mechanics writ large across the sky." "To me, this is one of the marvels of the modern scientific age."

Such dynamics then are not just held to what we see of the earth frame but of what we hold in terms of our cosmological recognition of those same dynamics. How much sand then when reductionism has run it's limit that we say how far our perspective has gone into the powers of ten, that we see a limit had been reached?

This pursuance did not in the reductionist point of view reduce our apprehension of the world around us but we engaged the world to see that such length contractions are still vital measures for perspective.

IN the "mean time," we live in a vary dynamical world. If dark energy or dark matter seemed unrealistic then what measure of that space shall you consider to be, and that it shall not be, in the relationship of "time variable moments?"

IN the space of our cosmos we saw a satellite measure say that the expansion is speeding up/slowing down? Does this take away the dynamics of non euclidean geometries to say that this is an abstract version of math of what does not exist?

Here L is called the Lagrangian. In simple cases the Lagrangian is equal to the difference between the kinetic energy T and the potential energy V, that is, L = T – V. In this interactive document we will approximate a continuous worldline with a worldline made of straight connected segments. The computer then multiplies the value of (T – V) on each segment by the time lapse t for that segment and adds up the result for all segments, giving us an approximate value for the action S along the entire worldline. Our task is then to move the connected segments of the worldline so that they result in the minimum total value of the action S.

While such a explanation had been served by understanding how one can rescue another and how two different people can get their quicker is the idea that such a plan is possible in the recognition of the cosmos as well. You just had to learn to see inan dynamical way as well.

The Lagrange Points

The easiest way to see how Lagrange made his discovery is to adopt a frame of reference that rotates with the system. The forces exerted on a body at rest in this frame can be derived from an effective potential in much the same way that wind speeds can be inferred from a weather map. The forces are strongest when the contours of the effective potential are closest together and weakest when the contours are far apart.....

A contour plot of the effective potential (not drawn to scale!).

In the above contour plot we see that L4 and L5 correspond to hilltops and L1, L2 and L3 correspond to saddles (i.e. points where the potential is curving up in one direction and down in the other). This suggests that satellites placed at the Lagrange points will have a tendency to wander off (try sitting a marble on top of a watermelon or on top of a real saddle and you get the idea). A detailed analysis (PDF link) confirms our expectations for L1, L2 and L3, but not for L4 and L5. When a satellite parked at L4 or L5 starts to roll off the hill it picks up speed. At this point the Coriolis force comes into play - the same force that causes hurricanes to spin up on the earth - and sends the satellite into a stable orbit around the Lagrange point.

The geometries as a whole seen in a local region, is the rule of law, as we move outward in space, or how else could we consider the dynamical movement that least resistance can fuel a path traveled with the least amount of energy expended?

***

See:

Non Euclidean Geometry and the Universe

Principal of Least Action

Gran Sasso and the Pyramid

Permanence of Fact in Literature

John Updike in 1955.

John Hoyer Updike (18 March 1932 – 27 January 2009) was an American novelist, poet, short story writer, art critic, and literary critic. Updike's most famous work is his Rabbit series (Rabbit, Run; Rabbit Redux; Rabbit Is Rich; Rabbit At Rest; and Rabbit Remembered). Both Rabbit is Rich and Rabbit at Rest received the Pulitzer Prize. Describing his subject as "the American small town, Protestant middle class," Updike was widely recognized for his careful craftsmanship, his highly stylistic writing, and his prolific output, having published more than twenty-five novels and more than a dozen short story collections, as well as poetry, art criticism, literary criticism and children's books. Hundreds of his stories, reviews, and poems appeared in The New Yorker, starting in 1954. He also wrote regularly for The New York Review of Books. His work attracted a significant amount of critical attention and he was considered one of the most prominent contemporary American novelists.[2] Updike died of lung cancer on January 27, 2009.

***

Current knowledge and scientific discovery help to align our thinking. They help us to recognize what had been "set in stone" in literature, as a passing thought in that day of poetry creation. So every progression in terms of knowledge has it's predecessors, and from that, the old and the new contrast each other. We know a little more.

Cosmic Gall by John Updike-Telephone Poles and Other Poems, Knopf, 1960 
 

Neutrinos they are very small.
They have no charge and have no mass
and do not interact at all.
The earth is just a silly ball
To them, through which they simply pass,
Like dustmaids down a drafty hall
Or photons through a sheet of glass.
They snub the most exquisite gas,
Ignore the most substantial wall,
Cold-shoulder steel and sounding brass,
Insult the stallion in his stall,
And, scorning barriers of class,
Infiltrate you and me! Like tall
And painless guillotines, they fall
Down through our heads into the grass.
At night, they enter at Nepal
And pierce the lover and his lass
From underneath the bed – you call
It wonderful; I call it crass.

(italicized added for emphasis)

***

STATEMENT: EVIDENCE FOR MASSIVE NEUTRINOS FOUND by Dave Casper

Cerenkov Radiation

By classifying the neutrino interactions according to the type of neutrino involved (electron-neutrino or muon-neutrino) and counting their relative numbers as a function of the distance from their creation point, we conclude that the muon-neutrinos are "oscillating." Oscillation is the changing back and forth of a neutrino’s type as it travels through space or matter. This can occur only if the neutrino possesses mass. The Super-Kamiokande result indicates that muon-neutrinos are disappearing into undetected tau-neutrinos or perhaps some other type of neutrino (e.g., sterile-neutrino). The experiment does not determine directly the masses of the neutrinos leading to this effect, but the rate of disappearance suggests that the difference in masses between the oscillating types is very small. The primary result that we are reporting has a statistical significance of more than 5 standard deviations. An independent measurement based on upward-going muons in the detector confirms the result at the level of more than 3 standard deviations.

Gran Sasso and the Pyramid

What good is a universe without somebody around to look at it?
Robert Dicke

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.

Now of course most of you know the namesake with which I use to explain, is an aspect of the development of what are "shadows" to many of us, also, reveal a direction with which we know is "illuminated." We are streaming with the "decay path" all the while there is a sun behind us that shines.

Now it is always an interesting thing for me to know that secret rooms can be illuminated, given the right piece of equipment to do the job. Somethings that will stop the process, and others, that go on to give indications of which these "massless particles" can travel.

But no where is the penetration of the pyramidal model more apparent to me, is when it is used to explain the "rise of the colour theory" used on this site, to explain the nature of emotive sufferings, and it's ascensions, with which we can place the "colour of gravity" to it's rightful place. While one can discern the patterns in an ancient philosophical game of chance, what use to explain the underlying structure of abstraction, as we peer into the materiality of the object of this post? Do you know it's inherent geometrical nature, as an expression?

Maybe, this is the Plato in me? Not a criminal "who hides" having perpetrated crimes against humanity, spouting a philosophy that some would pretend hides behind "the garb" of some "quantum cosmology?"

Yes, no where is this measurable in nature at this time, other then to know that a philosophical position is being adopted. It may allow one to understand the brain's workings, alongside of the fluids that emotively run through our bodies. The "eventual" brain development toward it's evolutionary discourse, with the matter distinctions becoming apparent in the brain's structure, may be greatly enhanced in our futures?

This is what is progressive to me about the work of Kip Thorne and Archibald Wheeler, as we look at the experimental processes of gravitational waves and the like, in LIGO. Is this proof of the gravitational waves? Is this proof of the Geon denoted by Wheeler to express, or the bulk, teaming with the gravitons?

An event in the cosmos, allows us, while standing in the decay path of the expression, and as we turn with it, to know that a source can initiate, and allows us to see it's disintegration.

WE are concerned with all the matter distinctions, while beyond this, is the expression of these schematically drawn rooms of energy, as we particularize them into neat boxes(things) for our entangled views, and loss of sight?

To me, such a sun exists at our centres and such analogies, as I have drawn them here is to recognize that such a "heliocentric view" is not the idea behind our observations of the ego distinctions about self in the world, but a recognition of our connection to what pervades all of us, and connects us.

Now this path streams onwards, no different then in the way we move into the materiality of the world we live in. While of course you see the bodies of our expression. You see the "emotive functionings" on our faces, primitive as it can be, as well as, the intellectual abstraction that is part of the inherent pattern of that expression into materiality. The "sun still shines" from that deeper place inside.

Secrets of the PyramidsIn 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.

I am Lost/Not Lost

While the descent into the matters, one tends to loose sight of what is happening around them. Such a thing is the human part of us, as we think we are in the moment.

While one may think they are in this "way station" it is ever the spot that we assign ourselves with or selections and happenings that we are connected too, in ways that are never understood, or looked for, as we progress these views about the reality we live in?

How much farther is our eyesight granted into the materiality of things as we progress ever deeper into nature's structure, to think, this will bring us ever closer to that sun that shines inside?

Lost souls were given directions in the manuals of the ancients to decipher this relationship with the world we live in, so that the understanding about perplexing paradigms that ensue the mind, may be set, "to live life" not to experience it's death. But to prepare that life beyond the limitations with which we assign our perception according to these material things.

The CrossOver Point within the Perfect Fluid?

I had been following this research because of what I had been trying to understand when we take our understanding down to a certain level. That level is within the context of us probing the collision process for evidence of "some new physics" that we had not seen before.

Evidence for Neutrino Oscillations from the LSND Experiment

One of the only ways to probe small neutrino masses is to search for neutrino oscillations, where a neutrino of one type (e.g. numubar ) spontaneously transforms into a neutrino of another type (e.g. nuebar ) For this phenomenon to occur, neutrinos must be massive and the apparent conservation law of lepton families must be violated. The probability for 2-flavor neutrino oscillations can then be expressed as P=sin2(2theta) sin2(1.27 m2L/E) , where theta is the mixing angle, m2 is the difference in neutrino masses squared in eV2, L is the neutrino distance in meters, and E is the neutrino energy in MeV. In 1995 the LSND experiment [1] published data showing candidate events that are consistent with numubar->nuebar oscillations. [2] Additional data are reported here that provide stronger evidence for numubar->nuebar oscillations [3] as well as evidence for numu->nue oscillations. [4] The two oscillation searches have completely different backgrounds and systematics from each other.

What valuation of this process allows us to think that while speaking to "probing this perfect fluid" that we had not discovered some mechanism within it, that allows us to see Coleman Mandula effects being behind, as a geometrical unfoldment from one state into another?

If we had looked at the Genus 1 figure then what avenue would help us discern what could come from the string theory landscape and the "potential hill" discerned from the blackhole horizon? What tunnelling effect could go past the hill climbers and valley crossers to know that you could cut "right through the hill?"

MiniBooNE opens the box

BATAVIA, Illinois—Scientists of the MiniBooNE1 experiment at the Department of Energy's Fermilab2 today (April 11) announced their first findings. The MiniBooNE results resolve questions raised by observations of the LSND3 experiment in the 1990s that appeared to contradict findings of other neutrino experiments worldwide. MiniBooNE researchers showed conclusively that the LSND results could not be due to simple neutrino oscillation, a phenomenon in which one type of neutrino transforms into another type and back again.

The announcement significantly clarifies the overall picture of how neutrinos behave.

So while I am looking for some indications as I did in the strangelet case, as, evidence of this crossover, this had to have some relation to how we seen the neutrinos in development. This was part of the development as we learnt of the history of John Bahcall.

John Bahcall 1934 to 2005 See also "John Bahcall and the Neutrinos"

Plato Apr 11th, 2007 at 8:47 pm

the quark-gluon plasma behaves according to hydrodynamic calculations in which the matter is like a liquid that flows with no viscosity whatsoever.” See here

No cross over point? What role would Navier Stokes play in this?

See here

This does not minimize the work we see of Gran Sasso in relation to the LHC project.

Honestly, I do not know how someone who could work on the project, could not know what they were working on? It as if the "little parts" of the LHC project only cater to the worker Bees working just aspects of the project and their specializations.

Whilst now, you go way up and overlook this project. To see the whole context measured within that "one tiny big bang moment." Trust me when I say, we shall not minimize the effect of calling the collision process as "one tiny moment," for you may never see the whole context of this project being developed for this "one thing."

I did not realize the shortcomings that scientists place on themselves when they do specialize. I just assumed they would know as much as I did and see the whole project? I do not say this unkindly, just that it is a shock to me that one could work the string theory models and not realize what they are working on. I have heard even Jacques say there is no connection and listening to Peter Woit, I was equally dismayed that he did not realize what the string theory model was actually doing as it found it's correlation in the developing views of how we look at the moments of creation.

Bigger is better if you’re searching for smaller

Neutrinos may be in CERN's Future

The next step will again be taken in Japan, with the new J-PARC accelerator starting in 2009 to send neutrinos almost 300 km, again to the Super-Kamiokande experiment, to probe the third neutrino mixing angle that has not yet been detected in either atmospheric or solar neutrino experiments. This may also be probed in a new experiment being proposed for the Fermilab NuMI beam. One of the ideas proposed at CERN is to probe this angle with an underwater experiment moored in the Gulf of Taranto off the coast of Italy, viewing neutrinos in a modified version of CERN's current Gran Sasso beam.

See "CERN and Future Experiments"

Plato Apr 12th, 2007 at 7:31 am

I think my comment on previous post of looking for the perfect fluid should have been here.

Also I do not think this changes how we look at string theory as a model probing the perfect fluid, and "the understanding" of developing a mechanism for this "cross over point?"

Topologically, how would this have been revealed in the string theory landscape??

See here and know that Clifford again deleted the short little post above. The point is I think for some reason once I mention string theory or evn M theory in relation to what is transpiring in the views of model development he doe not like this and would be support by Jacques as well.

That would be my job to convince them and anyone else that hold their views that taking our view to the microseconds, there is a definite relation to the timeline whether you agree with this or not. By introducing "the point of the cross over" you in effect have taken the model and presented it as part of the mechanism for this universe and effectively given new meaning to the "string theory landscape."

You may want it to be "background independent" like Lee wants it to be, but if you view the background as a oscillatory one, then any idea as configured to the mass of any particle, then you have define this particle as a energy relation? So Lee does not like the oscillatory universe?

See "Finiteness of String Theory and Mandelstam"

It is contained "within the moment" of the creation of this universe, yet, we do not know what design this particle is to be in context of the microscopic view of geometrical topologically finishes? As the Genus 1 figure and as an expression of this universe? You had to know what was lying in those valleys, and the potentials of expression, and I relay that in the blackhole horizon as a potential hill.

The time has come for some changes in this blog and I have been thinking about moving on. While a layman, I do not like to be treated like a fool. Maybe not educated fully and with some work to do, but never as a fool.

Blackhole evaporation: What's New From the Subatomic-Sized Holes ?

...the creative principle resides in mathematics. In a certain sense therefore, I hold it true that pure thought can grasp reality, as the ancients dreamed.Albert Einstein

See What is Cerenkov Radiation?

We are being "politically correct" (a sociological observation) when we change the wording of the "microstate blackhole production" to "Sub Atomic Sized Holes?" To maybe "inferr" the desired differences of cosmological blackholes, versus, what we see quickly evaporating in subatomic-sized to be revealed in a footprint?

David Kestenbaum, NPR-Alvaro De Rujula is a physicist at CERN, the world's largest particle physics laboratory. Three hundred feet below his desk, workers are building a massive particle accelerator that will be capable of reproducing energies present just after the big bang.

Let's pretend that the reporting was not so good back in 1999, and the information we had then was to cause some needless concerns? Good reporting already existed in term of what the Dark Matter was doing. Now it's okay if someone else saids it, and reveals all the dark matter info with Wikipedia. How nice:)Your credible?

Was there any evidence to think a method was already determined "back then" and has become part of the process of discovery?

Bad reporting?

At first bad reporting? Producing fear into the public mind?

In recent years the main focus of fear has been the giant machines used by particle physicists. Could the violent collisions inside such a machine create something nasty? "Every time a new machine has been built at CERN," says physicist Alvaro de Rujula, "the question has been posed and faced." August 1999

Peter Steinberg, when at Quantum diaries, lead us through this.

The creepy part of these kind of discussions is that one doesn't say that RHIC collisions "create" black holes, but that nucleus-nucleus collisions, and even proton-proton collisions, are in some sense black holes, albeit black holes in some sort of "dual" space which makes the theory easier.

Alvaro was the one who put "James Blodgett of Risk assessment" at ease in regards to strangelets. Now, could strangelets have been considered a consequence of the evaporation? Does this not look similar?

deconstruction: event display

Usually all physicists see are the remnants of a new particle decaying into other types of particles. From that, they infer the existence of the new species and can determine some of its characteristics.

SeeNeutrino Mixing Explained in 60 seconds

Now everything is safe and cozy with these subatomic-sized holes which would simply evaporate. :) How would you know "what is new" after the subatomic holes had evaporated? Are sterile neutrinos new?

While these paragraphs have been selective, they show that experimental processes are being used and detective work applied.

Current evidence shows that neutrinos do oscillate, which indicates that neutrinos do have mass. The Los Alamos data revealed a muon anti-neutrino cross over to an electron neutrino. This type of oscillation is difficult to explain using only the three known types of neutrinos. Therefore, there might be a fourth neutrino, which is currently being called a "sterile" neutrino, which interacts more weakly than the other three neutrinos.

Any add on experimental processes at Cern with regards to the LHC are reflect in this second paragraph?

"We find," Chiao said, "that a barrier placed in the path of a tunneling particle does not slow it down. In fact, we detect particles on the other side of the barrier that have made the trip in less time than it would take the particle to traverse an equal distance without a barrier -- in other words, the tunnelling speed apparently greatly exceeds the speed of light. Moreover, if you increase the thickness of the barrier the tunneling speed increases, as high as you please.

See Gran Sasso

So while one may think I have some "new process" to make the world happy, it is nothing of the sort. It is interpreting the current theoretical models in regards to current experimental research.

For some reason some scientist think that one can be devoid of this reasoning and apply it to any model/person, while the scientist/lay people already know what is required.

This has been reflected time and again through the interactions of scientist with the public. What is one to think when one scientist calls another scientists devoid of such reason, while he works to develop the string theory model. They don't like that do they?:)

So do you think that Clifford of Asymptotia is practising what he did not like in Peter Woit's summation of the state of affairs in string theory? That while criticizing him he was doing the same thing to others? I laughed when I came across the censoring post on Not even Wrong, and why I had to write my new article on Censoring.

I have never seen such "happy trigger fingers" as to deletion of posts that would contradict the statements Clifford could make about another person, or what Peter Woit could say about "Clifford censoring" statements. Peter provides a forum for those who feel shafted who could voice there displeasure?:)

Don't worry Peter I certainly won't be crying on your blog. Deletion knows it boundaries in terms of censoring there too.:) But anyway, onto the important stuff.

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. See Strangelets and Strange Matter

Tunnelling in the string theory landscape

Now it may not seem so odd that I would place a string theory landscape picture up for revue, and have one think about hill climbers and valley crossers. Would it be wrong not to include the "potential hills" and the thought of the "blackhole horizon?" It was "theoretical appealing" as a thought experiment to me, to think about what could traverse those potential hills. We had to use "a mechanism" to help us understand how the cross over point was being established and "new universes" begin to unfold? New particle creation from such collision processes had to be established first. Both at Cern and with "high energy particles from space." IceCube was to be the backdrop for the footprint, and resulting Cerenkov radiation from that collision process?

One needed to see such experiment as taking place currently to help us see the jest of where science is currently taking us on our journey's. So you had to be able to see this process in action back to the insecurities of our ignorance, in relation too, sub-atomic sized holes...ahem...dualites?

So you had to know that the collision process would detail some "crossover point" for consideration? What this means that "after the collision process" you are given a new particle with which to work.

You need to be able to capture this "new particle" and the mediums with which this is done, are the barriers that supply the back drop for foot prin,t to what can be traversed in faster then light potentials. Again Gran Sasso, and let's not forget ICECUBE.

Cross over point

Is it not important to see the experimental process as a natural one?

Bringing the Heavens down to Earth

If mini black holes can be produced in high-energy particle interactions, they may first be observed in high-energy cosmic-ray neutrino interactions in the atmosphere. Jonathan Feng of the University of California at Irvine and MIT, and Alfred Shapere of the University of Kentucky have calculated that the Auger cosmic-ray observatory, which will combine a 6000 km2 extended air-shower array backed up by fluorescence detectors trained on the sky, could record tens to hundreds of showers from black holes before the LHC turns on in 2007. See here

So here we are talking about the "before" and "after" and we had not spoken about the point of exchange here? If I were to tell you that such a reductionistic process had taken us to the limits what the heck could this mean? That we had indeed found the transference point of energy to matter, matter to energy and we say it may be the perfect fluids that supplies us this "anomalistic behaviour" with which we will introduce the GR? Talk about Navier-stokes in relation to the perfect fluid and what and how something can traverse through and come out on the other side?

Strangelets and Strange Matter

Of course I will point to some of the "inherent nature" that some scientists encounter as they develop the geometrical basis to "all the concepts could ever mean?" But first, "the journey."

If not fundamental, though, quark nuggets zipping around the galaxy would still be an amazing addition. And perhaps even more amazing, in the end, than any technically strange - or just generally bizarre - particles burrowing through the ground would be the fact that the planet is no longer just a block of dumb rock in their path. It is an ever better wired planet, monitored and thought about in ever more ingenious ways; it is a datasphere ever more sensitive to its surroundings and its own processes, from flashes in the upper atmosphere to rumblings in the core. We have made it a planet that notices things. We have made it an observant Earth.

You have to understand that if you are doing the research you want to know what "this avenue/hypothesis is to produce? It's almost as if "you understand" that the geometry exists under the "fundamental explanations of all concepts" as they are being developed. How a "different language" will be "put over top" of what is existing now schematically. We learn "to read" what has transpired from one who has more credentials then I, as I am only a student of the work.

At the same time how did such thought processes develop outward to experimental validation in the real world? So you must understand, that I too understand this process. Not only from a "conceptual understanding" but from it's associative analysis one as well. It allow me to develop intuitively into what work is now transpiring at Cern.

Strangelets are small fragments of strange matter. They only exist if the "strange matter hypothesis" is correct, in which case they are the true ground state of matter, and nuclei are actually metastable states with a very long lifetime.

Odd behavior?



A person most intense and preoccupied with the endeavours they work, will notice that time passes very quickly around them. It's as if the world bypassed them, as the focus had cost them the appearance or the attention needed to take care of themselves. "Should I care" as I think of them, whether their hair long or that their desk is pile high with paper?

Careful least you disrupt the train of thought, that while busy, the underlings stand ready to act according to the plans of the teacher.

I learnt over time to accept that even the academics will make allowances for the "uniqueness of individuals" even if that behaviour seems odd( sure call it detective work :0). To allow these attributes of the mind to go along with, the excellent and Nobel prize work that may be produced. Do you not think that Einstein in his last days was more concerned with the focus of his attentions then how dishevelled his hair was?

Pierre Auger on Cosmic Rays

"For in 1938, I showed the presence in primary cosmic rays of particles of a million Gigavolts -- a million times more energetic than accelerators of that day could produce. Even now, when accelerators have far surpassed the Gigavolt mark, they still have not attained the energy of 1020eV, the highest observed energy for cosmic rays. Thus, cosmic rays have not been dethroned as far as energy goes, and the study of cosmic rays has a bright future, if only to learn where these particles come from and how they are accelerated. You know that Fermi made a very interesting proposal that particles are progressively accelerated by bouncing off moving magnetic fields, gaining a little energy each time. In this way, given a certain number of "kicks," one could perhaps account for particles of 1018 -- 1020 electron volts. As yet, however, we have no good theory to explain the production of the very-high-energy particles that make the air showers that my students and I discovered in 1938 at Jean Perrin's laboratory on a ridge of the Jungfrau."

-- Pierre Auger, Journal de Physique, 43, 12, 1982

With introduction to the "Pierre Auger experiments" one learns to appreciate what the large Microscope can do. It allowed us to change the way in which we see cosmology working to include the "astrophysics approach to the description of the universe."

Do you think cosmology devoid of new theoretical approaches, as we venture into the even more abstract "D Brane" world? That we should exclude, such theoretics as a language over top of the process of physics, to not think it is not delving into the world of the geometries involved as well as that physics?

The microscopic process is much more diverse not only in terms of the language, but of how concepts can "cross over" into what we are doing with other approaches.

Beam Trajectories

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.

Now of course I opened the beginning of this blog post with a article that asks you to consider the domain in which they have considered earth and it's value as a experimental process. The "strange hypothesis" to which I am talking about as a "cross over analogies" to the developmental process of Cern.

The Pythagoreans were called mathematikoi, which means "those that study all"

Amazing isn't it? That if one understood that there was a original context for all that we create, then what shall this context be? So science asks, that the universal language display the mathematics as a basis of all "conceptual frameworks spoken" that are developed. This is, "the right way of it" as I have watched the scientists as they have developed their theories.

So we have this "microscopic view of reality" as the "power of ten" along with "this enlightenment" that taken over all our senses. What has happened now, as we venture out into the cosmos? What has happened when we've taken "theoretical positions" and adapted them to the processes of physics?

What is Cerenkov Radiation?

...the creative principle resides in mathematics. In a certain sense therefore, I hold it true that pure thought can grasp reality, as the ancients dreamed.Albert Einstein

Many do not recognize the process that unfolds in the developing perspectives about theoretics? Does one think it is divorced from reality that you could say, "hey this idea of course has no attachment to what exists and what we know exists and asks that you move forward with it."

Often you hear the "dreaded reference" to the AEther, and who can help but see where such revisions in thinking changed the society of scientists to put them on a new course?

Do you think the title was changed from the aether to the valuation of strings and the boson production evident in the bulk just to replay itself in the developing scenarios of our historical past? The past included a revision to the way we view that concept? That is it's effect in today's world. "The correction?"

As we know from Einstein’s theory of special relativity, nothing can travel faster than c, the velocity of light in a vacuum. The speed of the light that we see generally travels with a slower velocity c/n where n is the refractive index of the medium through which we view the light (in air at sea level, n is approximately 1.00029 whereas in water n is 1.33). Highly energetic, charged particles (which are only constrained to travel slower than c) tend to radiate photons when they pass through a medium and, consequently, can suddenly find themselves in the embarrassing position of actually travelling faster than the light they produce!

The result of this can be illustrated by considering a moving particle which emits pulses of light that expand like ripples on a pond, as shown in the Figure (right). By the time the particle is at the position indicated by the purple spot, the spherical shell of light emitted when the particle was in the blue position will have expanded to the radius indicated by the open blue circle. Likewise, the light emitted when the particle was in the green position will have expanded to the radius indicated by the open green circle, and so on. Notice that these ripples overlap with each other to form an enhanced cone of light indicated by the dotted lines. This is analogous to the idea that leads to a sonic boom when planes such as Concorde travel faster than the speed of sound in air

But we have to go back in history here to see where such influences have taken hold of the mind, from what was instituted in the neutrino search, to have the ideas swirl around and form new prospect researches, based on the ideas of women/men?



The story will follow here shortly. I would like to thank Paul on his early recognition of the bubble chamber events as they encourage research in 1998 to ponder the experiments in Cern to say?

Add your story so that this can be completed. I will add mine for a wonderful view of what research and developement does in regards to the way of "modelling to experiment."

Well since starting this blog entry there has only been two other examples that may be added to this entry as of today, yet, one by Commentor NC at Cosmic Variance while the other materialized over at Backreaction on the post done by Bee and Stefan.

A Look Back

Have a look at this image below first.



Variation of Cosmic ray flux and Global cloud coverage-a missing link in Solar-climate relationshipsby Henri Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen, 26 NOvember 1996

So this is wonderful that in one way, where my mind rebukes the lashing out of Peter Woit by evidence of ICECUBe and my ir/relevant comments, could have found sustenance in how things are to be explained further? More physics ...wonderful.

But I want to go back historically to view, so that one sees what was a picture "written by Paul" and his trip to Canada, held an observation that sends us back in time experimentally to look at, to find out, what Cern was doing in 1998. Thanks Paul

You ready?

CERN plans global-warming experiment(1998)

A controversial theory proposing that cosmic rays are responsible for global warming is to be put to the test at CERN, the European laboratory for particle physics. Put forward two years ago by two Danish scientists, Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen, the theory suggests that it is changes in the Sun's magnetic field, and not the emission of greenhouse gases, that has led to recent rises in global temperatures.

Experimentalists at CERN will use a cloud chamber to mimic the Earth's atmosphere in order to try and determine whether cloud formation is influenced by solar activity. According to the Danish theory, charged particles from the Sun deflect galactic cosmic rays (streams of high-energy particles from outer space) that would otherwise have ionized the Earth's lower atmosphere and formed clouds.

So what is this science based on?

The production of a high-intensity neutrino beam at CERN requires a complex facility. A proton beam produced and accelerated by the CERN accelerators is directed onto a graphite target to give birth to other particles called pions and kaons. These particles are then fed into a system comprising two magnetic horns which focus them into a parallel beam that is directed towards Gran Sasso. Next, in a 1000 metre-long tunnel, the pions and kaons decay into muons and muon neutrinos. At the end of this decay tunnel, an 18 metre thick block of graphite and metal absorbs the protons, pions and kaons that did not decay. The muons are stopped by the rock. Impervious to all such obstacles, the muon neutrinos will leave the CERN tunnels and streak through the rock on their 732 kilometre journey to Italy.

Now what does this have to do with Cerenkov radiation? Okay. I'm scratching my head now.

“CERN has a tradition of neutrino physics stretching back to the early 1960s,” said Dr Aymar, “this new project builds on that tradition, and is set to open a new and exciting phase in our understanding of these elusive particles.”

From the 1960's. Wow!

Imagine that someone might say to you that this is a "Rube Goldberg Machine" analogy as to what was the road leading to the understanding and the inclusiveness of microstate blackhole creation from particle collisions, as part of the continued story of the neutrino in action?

See:

So What Did I mean By Olympics?

Pulsars and Cerenkov Radiation

Evidence for Extra Dimensions and IceCube

Pierre Auger Observatory

In his excellent paper, Louis LePrince-Ringuet, citing a remark of Powell's at the Conference of Bagneres-de-Bigorre in 1953, declared that from that date on, particle accelerators took the place of cosmic rays, which more or less faded into the background. And yet, even today accelerators have not caught up with cosmic rays.

Pierre Auger on Cosmic Rays

"For in 1938, I showed the presence in primary cosmic rays of particles of a million Gigavolts -- a million times more energetic than accelerators of that day could produce. Even now, when accelerators have far surpassed the Gigavolt mark, they still have not attained the energy of 10²⁰eV, the highest observed energy for cosmic rays. Thus, cosmic rays have not been dethroned as far as energy goes, and the study of cosmic rays has a bright future, if only to learn where these particles come from and how they are accelerated. You know that Fermi made a very interesting proposal that particles are progressively accelerated by bouncing off moving magnetic fields, gaining a little energy each time. In this way, given a certain number of "kicks," one could perhaps account for particles of 10¹⁸ -- 10²⁰ electron volts. As yet, however, we have no good theory to explain the production of the very-high-energy particles that make the air showers that my students and I discovered in 1938 at Jean Perrin's laboratory on a ridge of the Jungfrau."

-- Pierre Auger, Journal de Physique, 43, 12, 1982

On the vast plain known as Pampa Amarilla in western Argentina, a new window on the universe is taking shape. There the Pierre Auger Cosmic Ray Observatory has begun its study of the universe's highest energy particles. These rare messengers should tell an important story about how they originate. Experiments have so far failed to decipher their message, and their existence has become a profound puzzle. The Auger Observatory is attacking this enigma of the highest energy cosmic rays with unprecedented collecting power and experimental controls.

John Ellis:

The next step will again be taken in Japan, with the new J-PARC accelerator starting in 2009 to send neutrinos almost 300 km, again to the Super-Kamiokande experiment, to probe the third neutrino mixing angle that has not yet been detected in either atmospheric or solar neutrino experiments. This may also be probed in a new experiment being proposed for the Fermilab NuMI beam. One of the ideas proposed at CERN is to probe this angle with an underwater experiment moored in the Gulf of Taranto off the coast of Italy, viewing neutrinos in a modified version of CERN's current Gran Sasso beam.

Aussois, Savoie, France

After "Neutrino 2004" the convergence of results from atmospheric, solar, reactor and accelerator experiments confirms the massive neutrino and gives the first opportunity to test physics beyond the Standard Model. The neutrino oscillations picture is still missing 3 fundamental ingredients: the mixing angle θ13, the mass pattern and the CP phase δ.

Future neutrino beams of conventional and novel design aimed at a megaton type detector could give access to these parameters. Such a detector would also be the next generation facility for proton decay searches and an invaluable supernovae neutrino observatory.

To understand the Higgs mechanism, imagine that a room full of physicists chattering quietly is like space filled with the Higgs field ...

So who is the professor that crosses the room? It is Albert Einstein:)

Any such Blackhole would quickly decay into a shower of Hawking radiation (mainly into standard model particles on our brane, rather than into grvaitons into the bulk). This shower of radiation would be quite different from showers arising from, say, the collsion of cosmic-ray proton with a atmospheric atomic nucleus. Gravity is "flavor blind," so when a microscopic blackhole evaporates it produces all the Standard Model particles with equal probability. Once one accounts for spin and color, it turns out that particles produced when a blackhole decays are about 72 percent quarks and Gluons, 18 percent leptons, and the rest are bosons. Such a distinctive shower of particles would be hard to miss. So there is the possibility that the Pierre Auger Observatory will detect blackholes.

Page 262, Out of this World, by Stephen Webb

Two of the tanks in the Pierre Auger Observatory are shown. They each hold 12 tonnes of clean water and are viewed by 3 X 8” diameter photomultipliers. The electronics for recording and data transmission are powered by solar cells. These tanks are placed close together so that cross-tank measurements of densities and arrival times can be made but the nearest neighbour for all other tanks is 1.5 km away. In this way 3000 km2 can be covered with only 1600 detectors.

CERN and Future Experiments

I needed to come back down to earth for a minute to see where the trend is going with those who shall lead us poor earthlings into the future of experimental research and profound understandings.

It would be nice to see perspectives by Lubos, PeterWoit the group here(meaning their blogs), as we look in this direction for a moment? Peter might be able to set his Dirac Moduli space views here?:)

Peter Woit for emphasizing the importance of the Dirac operator on the moduli space of Calabi-Yau four-folds and the importance of string theory to him.

The next step will again be taken in Japan, with the new J-PARC accelerator starting in 2009 to send neutrinos almost 300 km, again to the Super-Kamiokande experiment, to probe the third neutrino mixing angle that has not yet been detected in either atmospheric or solar neutrino experiments. This may also be probed in a new experiment being proposed for the Fermilab NuMI beam. One of the ideas proposed at CERN is to probe this angle with an underwater experiment moored in the Gulf of Taranto off the coast of Italy, viewing neutrinos in a modified version of CERN's current Gran Sasso beam.

So having quickly gone today I went to look at John Ellis site, and was formally introduced to some of the things that have been happening with him and avenues of experimentation that seem very interesting to me.

High Energy Physics Group

The Theory of Cosmic Rays

Cosmic rays, which have historically provided the first tool to study high-energy phenomena, are playing a new role in modern physics. The origin of high-energy cosmic rays, gamma rays and neutrinos is still an open question in astrophysics. On-going and future experiments will give us new information on astrophysical sources and on high-energy processes.

It still retains high energy considerations even in face of LHC questions about particle reductionism and the effects of dynamical interrelations as we see this travel in neutrino functions. I wanted to point to further information here in terms of micro-state black-hole detection. I get this soon.

2004 promises to be an exceptionally exciting year in General Relativity and Gravitation: the LIGO/VIRGO/GEO/TAMA network of detectors has begun generating scientific results, ushering in the era of gravitational wave astronomy. These detectors will search for gravitational wave signals of the collision of black holes, neutron star mergers and other astronomical events previously undetectable. The fundamentally new science of gravitational wave astronomy opens up a new window on the universe. Up until now, astronomy has relied on observations of electromagnetic wave signals (e.g. visible light, radio waves). The detection of gravitational waves offers a completely new perspective on the universe: they will enable us to "hear" the cosmic orchestra as well as to see it! GR17 will provide the scientific community with one of the earliest opportunities to discuss the first scientific results of this era.

I wanted to add a little more information here to further bolster this idealization that I have found in Brian Greene's statement about turning our views skyward in the hope of seeing strings and cosmological thinking in a new way.

Flight of the Phenix

If mini black holes can be produced in high-energy particle interactions, they may first be observed in high-energy cosmic-ray neutrino interactions in the atmosphere. Jonathan Feng of the University of California at Irvine and MIT, and Alfred Shapere of the University of Kentucky have calculated that the Auger cosmic-ray observatory, which will combine a 6000 km2 extended air-shower array backed up by fluorescence detectors trained on the sky, could record tens to hundreds of showers from black holes before the LHC turns on in 2007.