Monday, January 30, 2006

Are We Made of Stardust?



IN context of the cyclical nature of this universe, it is behooving to us to ask the question about what exactly that "stardust" is made up of. So we had some inkling for us lay people as to what had currently landed for us to answer this question.

The primary objective of the Stardust mission is to capture both cometary samples and interstellar dust. Main challenges to accomplishing this successfully involve slowing down the particles from their high velocity with minimal heating or other effects that would cause their physical alteration. When the Stardust Spacecraft encounters the Comet Wild 2, the impact velocity of the particles will be up to 6 times the speed of a rifle bullet. Although the captured particles will each be smaller than a grain of sand, high-speed capture could alter their shape and chemical composition - or even vaporize them entirely.


So while they had designed the experimental process to catch "stardust," did we in all our understanding see the reasons why this process was to become the experimental challenge it was? They had to be convinced, that using these dollars to make the undertaking part of the conclusions, on a supernova scale, these "elements" could have been comparatively analyized, as to what is left for us to inspect and measure in relation?

Many of the more common elements were made through nuclear fusion in the cores of stars, but many were not as well. Because nuclear fusion reactions that make elements heavier than iron require more energy than they give off, such reactions do not occur under stable conditions that occur in stars. Supernovae, on the other hand, are not stable, so they can make these heavy elements beyond iron.

In addition to making elements, supernovae scatter the elements (made by both the star and supernova) out in to the interstellar medium. These are the elements that make up stars, planets and everything on Earth -- including ourselves.


Part of the expulsion from supernovic explosions is the evidence that we can gather. While the demonstrative fawcetts of analysis give us inklings in this model below, the real story is how such explusions had taken their place in the overall view in formation of this universe.

It is as if we must put on a special kind of glasses, and see all that we are doing in a geomtrical expressive stage, that runs through the topological and homophoric relations that we could say, indeed D-brane analysis will have served it theoretcial purpose, and shed new light on this process.

While I engage it simplistically and speak simplestically on it's developement, there are technical aspect that are very far from my having the native tongue of math, that I could show this. But other people are, which is quite satisfying.

Sunday, January 29, 2006

The Landscape of the Neighborhood

Can you imagine the photography used in those days, and what we have today in terms of our digital cameras. It certainly is amazing in comparison.

I was lucky enough to have pictures saved of my great grandparents. It is always interesting to see where you came from, and what the background is in one's history. Some think Plato less than human in emotions and some think a unhappy existance. It truly is not so.:)

Some might wonder indeed what is so beautiful about this landscape below. Really, when you see the fields waving as they do close to harvesting season, you'd realize how captive it is.

Some might of thought I would have been talking about the "stringy theory issues" but no, this is about something else. It's about the views of what my Great grandparents saw when they came to this country, and saw some of what you are seeing here.

I wanted to add a earlier post written last year It was Called,

Where Memories are Stored in Time

Fortunately the person behind this lense caught a important part of my bloodline's history. Using the camera, they caught a "frame" of this history and quickly, it was dismissed to the realization, that the imagination no longer requires us to see what we could create in mind. We have come to rely on what can be created for us?


Life memory does not include the images that are beammed through time for us and encapsulated? Do we remember?  Posted by Hello

Have we forgotten, the clean air that once pervaded this planet? They took the population of this countries people and urbanized them to city dwellings?


Everyone has a family history. This is part of mine. The world was very much different then. Posted by Hello

Have we forgotten the room that existed for people, to make there livelihoods? Today, to become more concerned with a window view of some office. Is it the status that would allow our mind to roam in a freer space, then the four walls confined?


City Dwellers have forgotten their roots. Water that might have been scarce in the summer sun, would be collected as ground water. This was used to feed the livestock, and support the families drinking concerns.

Today we turn on taps and and we don't give this another thought. Posted by Hello

As we look to our grandchildren skating on the pond, and look "beyond" to the landscape, what mind is it that the frame of all these images are recorded, and forgotten for ever?

Every child now does not see, what ever child before them saw. Every child does not know what the parent knows? Have we become good modulators of form?

I wanted to add this post that was previously written as well.

Where Hockey Started, and Horses Live

Platos Human face?

There is a human side to the faces of Bloggers? We just tend to forget, that human attributes could have been wiped out in a very technical world.

This is of my grand children feeling the ice in November of 2005.


Why Canadians become Great at Hockey? Posted by Hello

It's always nice to feel the earth under your feet, or the smell of wood smoke from a fire burning. To hear the wind, and feel it effects on your face. The smell of horseshit is not always that endearing, but being in touch with one's human side you learn to empathize with those around you.


At twenty five below celcius you have to wonder about cozy temperatures of the far south Posted by Hello

The fellow on the left facing you is my boy.:) In the middle is his son Jake, and the mother to the right, with head not seen, Tisha.



So here we are.

Today Outside

So now I am going to bring you today and some of the nice things that reminds of us of where we are in our lives.

My wife was outside today, taking some pictures of the snow that fell yesterday. She said these pictures in particluar were taken to remind us of the winter,in the summer time, when it gets warm. Keep it as a screen saver

While the thing of nature would seem so cold, a snow that many down south would not see, it will remain strange and foreign to some. To us, it is a very beautiful scenery when the suns shines.




IN the Summer

She is very good at picture taking and I just wanted to show the collage of flowers that she grew outside our home. She indeed has the "green thumb" in this family.

Being Informed On things One might of Missed

Some links and slides given by Dr. Nick Evan. Clifford of Cosmic Variance relayed this information in a titled post called, "Return to the Fold"

Every model assumption has to involve the understanding of all "science processes." "If" any of these processes are missed, then the assumptions that we move from, to those speculations beyond models and further idealizations, will suffer under the idealization of correct thinking and hence, spread misconceptions.

This is not my ideal, so then indeed such an idea of working in the blogosphere is not to advance an ideal that I have about life and the learning that it has taken me too, but fully recognizing that to advance under the auspice of right thinking, requires further work and understanding of these science principles.

  • Two articles from Physics World - String Theory Meets QCD & The Gravity of Hadrons.

  • The Search for the Ultimate Theory - on steps towards grand unification.

  • Particles & Strings - an overview of the frontier of particle physics and string theory.

  • Brane World - an introduction to the latest ideas from string theory

  • Quarks & Strings - an introduction to the duality between quarks and string theory

  • Understanding Nothing - the physics of the vacuum.

  • Light Fantastic - talk for a laser show about Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and Particle Physics
  • Friday, January 27, 2006

    Cosmic Rays Collisions and Strangelets Produced?


    I like to think of
    Enlightenment in another way Jaffe:)

    While we had focused our attention on the airs about the earth, how would it been possible for us earthlings to push back the limitations on on our views that we could have seen cosmological data in context of all that we do in the environment?

    See QuarkStars on this.

    The collisions are strange: PHENIX can identify particles that contain strange quarks, which are interesting since strange quarks are not present in the original nuclei so they all must be produced. It is expected that a Quark-Gluon Plasma will produce a large amount of strange quarks. In particular, PHENIX has measured lambda particles. There are more lambda particles seen than expected.



    I thought I would go over existing post I made in April of 2005 (se revised version below)and correct some of the links that would be more appropriate to information released in the Blogs of Reference Frame, Cosmic Variance and Not Even Wrong's site about "Amanda and ICECUBE."

    Exotic physics finds black holes could be most 'perfect,' low-viscosity fluid

    Son and two colleagues used a string theory method called the gauge/gravity duality to determine that a black hole in 10 dimensions - or the holographic image of a black hole, a quark-gluon plasma, in three spatial dimensions - behaves as if it has a viscosity near zero, the lowest yet measured.


    These characteristics of superfluids are very interesting things to consider, as well as what is prodcuerd in "this action" as we are taken to the supefluid created. Think indeed, that this blackhole "is" the superfluid, and the strangelets, what are these? These never existed, until the superfluid was created?

    But in the 10 dimensions of string theory, the fluid of a black hole isn't like other fluids. Space-time is considered to be flat in our perception, Son said, and five of the extra dimensions are compacted into a small, finite sphere. In the remaining dimension, however, space is curved. Evaporation doesn't occur in this dimension, he said, because as particles radiate from the fluid they strike the curved edge of the dimension and are sent bouncing back into the black hole.



    These links help set up the thinking for information outside of LHC, that was given for perspective back earlier by John Ellis. The leading perspective on Microstate blackhole production was given then as well in the post with Quark Gluon perspectives, about strangelets produced.

    While I had thought these relevant to Dark energy creation in our Cosmo, I did not point directly to the nature of these strangelets gathering at the center of our planet. You had to follow all these posts in order to understand the effect of microstate production, not only in RHIC or LHC, but in the cosmic perspective gained from Pierre Auger experiments as well.

    I gave early history consideration so that you might understand a early concern of what mankind might have garnered in thinking, when in actuallity, this was happening naturally every time the cosmic rays penetrated the airs around the earth.

    You might well see now that these considerations have been logically followed and there has not been much help as I had been laying the ground work for how perspective is garnered about gravitational considerations. These though are quickly dissipating blackholes created in the airs, around this planet.


    Cosmic rays are nuclei and elementary particles always falling very fast on the earth from the universe. Enormous number of cosmic rays are always passing through our bodies. Cosmic rays was discovered by Victor Hess, who is an Austrian physicist, on 1912. He went up to the high altitude of 4000 meters by a balloon and found the ionization rate of the atmosphere is raised at the higher altitude by cosmic rays. After that, cosmic rays have been studied extensively and progressively, and mysteries in the Universe and the Nature are being revealed.

    Cosmic rays come from the neighborhood of the Earth and also far galaxies. Galactic and extra galactic cosmic rays are considered to be accelerated at dynamical astronomical objects, such as supernova remnants, neutron stars,and active galactic nuclei. After far-reaching long traveling, they plunge into the atmosphere and bring about nuclear interactions with nuclei of oxygen and nitrogen in the air. The extraterrestrial cosmic rays which come from outside the earth are conventionally called primary cosmic rays, and newly produced particles via the nuclear interactions are called secondary cosmic rays. The main components of the secondary cosmic rays are muon, neutrino, electron, gamma ray, and neutron. While electrons and gamma rays are absorbed into the air, muons and neutrinos can be observed even under the ground.


    Of course, this could all be speculation and misconceptions garnered in wrong thinking. So I'll leave it to the experts to correct the disemmination that would affront theoretical positions and hopefully I'll see such corrections. :)

    Update: Bloggery updating does not seem to be working, so I will recreate the post here for examination.

    4/16/2005

    Cosmic ray experiments must overcome tremendous obstacles. The flux of particles above 1019 eV is extremely low (about 0.5 km-2yr-1sr-1), so detectors need to probe a large effective area to detect sufficient flux. This requires earthbound observatories. Consequently, the high energy particle is detected indirectly, as cosmic ray primaries entering the Earth's atmosphere interact with atmospheric nuclei to produce large cascades of relativistic secondary particles known as extensive air showers.



    It somehow seems appropriate, that having been given some hint fom John Ellis of his research and interests, that the historical record could some how be brought into view. The appearnce of these references enhance later log entries on this site. A sort of moving backwards to get to the esence of what has happened in astrophysics and the journey tounderstand the nergies involved that speak to the idea of particle shower creation that had been consistent with reductionistics view we have gone through in the research of string theory.


    The highest energy particle ever observed was detected by the Fly's Eye in 1991. With an energy of 3.5 x 1020eV (or 56J), the particle, probably a proton or a light nucleus, had 108 times more energy than particles produced in the largest earth-bound accelerators. The origin of the particle is unknown. At such a high energy, and with its assumed charge, the path of this particle through the cosmos would have been relatively unaffected by galactic and intergalactic magnetic fields. Yet no plausible astrophysical source is known along the arrival direction, within the maximum possible source distance imposed by collisions with photons of the cosmic microwave background. This event remains a mystery! It is clear that it existed, but there is no obvious explanation for its source.


    These are some of the links that follow the early hisotry of our observations, so that we underrstand well that such cosmic rays are still viable arena for the understanding of these interactions. Sean Carroll may create the April's fool joke on mass migration from particle reductionistionism to astrophycics, but the truth is what is learnt is very applicable to both arenas and what had been learnt, can never be forgotten as we move our observations to the FLY'EYE

  • Collision Course Creates Microscopic "Blackholes"


  • Pierre Auger Observatory


  • Cosmological and Microstate Blackholes


  • Early history developement is sometimes important to understand the trends that intermingle began in branches of High Energy Particle Research and Cosmic particle research. We understood well the limitation that we would run into for the size of the coliders necessary for such observations that having understod the limits reached in this regard we see where one branch will push us to consider the world around us and the inertactions developing towards the understanding of thes ecosmic showers that we are experiencing.


    Extremely energetic cosmic rays interact with the cosmic background photons via pair creation and photopion production and lose their energies during their trip. Therefore there is upper limit of distances which they can propagete in the space with a given energy. The above figure shows this limit (so called attenuation length) in case of cosmic ray protons. You see the 2x10^20 eV particles cannot propagate longer than 30 Mpc (100 million light years), which sets the limit concerning the location of possible sources.


    Other Information Shamelessly Boorrowed:

  • Search for Diffuse Cosmic Gamma Rays above 200 TeV
    Cassiday, G.L. et al.1991, Ap.J., 375,202.

  • A Search for Evidence of Point Sources in the Cherenkov Flash Data From Fly's Eye II
    Elbert, J.W. et al.1991, ICRC, 1,265.

  • Search for Point Sources of U.H.E. Gamma Rays Using the Utah Cherenkov Array
    Corbato, S.C. et al.1991, ICRC, 1,281.

  • The High Resolution Fly's Eye (Hires): Parameters and Motivation
    Borodovsky, J. et al.1991, ICRC, 2,688.

  • Description and Status of the High Resolution (Hires) Fly's Eye Experiment
    Au, W. et al.1991, ICRC, 2,692.

  • Observations of Real and Simulated Showers Using the First Two High Resolution Fly's Eye (Hires) Mirrors
    Borodovsky, J. et al.1991, ICRC, 2,696.

  • Study of Extensive Air Showers (EAS) Detected with the Fly's Eye and the UMC Air Shower Array
    Green, K.D. et al.1991, ICRC, 4,347.

  • Shower Simulations for the Fly's Eye
    Gaisser, T.K. et al.1991, ICRC, 4,413.

  • Limits on Deeply Penetrating Particles from the Fly's Eye Detector
    Cooper, R. et al.1991, ICRC, 4,623.
  • What the M really stands for

    A more serious problem: The name M-theory is slightly ambiguous. It can be used to refer to both the particular eleven-dimensional theory which Witten first proposed, or it can be used to refer to a kind of Uber theory which looks in various limits like the various string theories. Ashoke Sen has suggested that more general theory could go by the name U-theory, which might stand for Ur, or Uber, or Ultimate, or Underlying, or perhaps Unified. (It might also stand for U-duality, which is both a reference to Sen's own work and a kind of particle physics pun.)


    These guys are really tricky with the definitions, so theory of everything might read, "Underlying"? :)

    Thursday, January 26, 2006

    Quark Stars

    Quark stars signal unstable universe By William J. Cromie
    Gazette Staff

    In orbit around Earth, a satellite called the Chandra X-ray Observatory surveys the universe for sources of X-rays, which come from hot, active places. Such places include neutron stars, the still energetic corpses of burnt out stars once more massive than the Sun. When such stars use up their hydrogen fuel they explode into bright supernova, then their cores collapse into an extremely heavy ball of neutrons enveloped in a thin atmosphere containing iron and other debris from the explosion. In the core of the dying star, extreme pressure breaks atoms down into protons, neutrons, and electrons. The protons and electrons combine into neutrons, and the remaining material is so heavy that one tablespoon of it weighs about four trillion pounds.



    A "central theme" arises in my mind, when I think about how this dark energy came into being.



    If held to current technologies and pre producable themes held in context of our cosmo, can we take such levels of dark energy production to be from the cause of strange quark productions?

    It is difficult for me to understand why the whole process is not involved in this geometrical assertion to what happens at the beginning of this universe, has "pre big bang implication" that was necessary to understand, before we can ever agreed on what the expansionary process might entail under the guise of how this dark energy is produced. How the lensing is lent to the nature of the dark energy, that we would see gravitonic consequences of accepting a fifth dimensional possibility? Would lend credence to the nature of the "spacetime fabric" as gravtonic considerations?

    As a layman it is puzzling to me, so you have to forgive my mistakes and misunderstandings and as I learn I hope to deal with this appropriately. It is not my desire to spread misconceptions


    RX J185635-375: Candidate Quark Star
    Explanation: Is RJX J185635-375 really so small? Previously, this compact star held claim to being the closest neutron star -- only 150 light-years away. Now new observations and analysis indicate not only a larger distance, roughly 450 light-years, but a very small radius for RXJ J185635-375, pictured above. One hypothesized solution holds hope a RJX J185635-375 is actually a not a neutron star but a quark star -- something new. Now quark stars are truly strange -- some may have made a transition to type of matter known as strange quarks. Quark stars, were they to exist, can be intermediate between neutron stars and black holes in size and density. Quark stars can also be more compact and cool faster than neutron stars. In fact, some might even be ultracompact -- so dense that light itself can orbit. Future observations will likely settle the controversial claims of RJX J185635-375's distance and radiative geometry, and hence determine if a previously undiscovered type of beast roams the sky.


    Laval Nozzle

    Are we Creating the circumstances for dynamical situations. Has geometrical implications from the dynamical perspective of accretion disks part of the evolving universe?



  • Strangelets Form Gravitonic Concentrations?

  • Quark Gluon Plasma II: Strangelets
  • Tuesday, January 24, 2006

    Spacetime 101

    Here's some basic background covering how mathematical models of space and time have evolved since ancient times, from the Pythagorean Rule to Newtonian mechanics, Special Relativity and General Relativity.





    For the roads leading to one's view of the strange world of non-euclidean views had to offer, I of course needed some model from which to work. As I looked at the model above and the transfer of higher dimensional thinking, the very idea and contrast to the lower image represented, how would you associate gravity in the diagram but watch the circle valution along side of gravity that emegres from the 2d discription as a energy valution, and relationship to gravity, evolving from mass, energy interconnectivity. I have to apologize as I was developing and am developing.



    I do not know if this is right to assign my view above, while one did not know the evaluation of 1R as I watch DRL assessment of what can no longer be considered as valid, I have to wonder why such observations are not thought about more intricately as the valuation of that circle is considered. The comparison was drawn between the two pictures of the spacetime fabric above here, and below.

    Let's now start analysing a 2D case, that of the classic Flatland example, in which a person lives in a 2D universe and is only aware of two dimensions (shown as the blue grid), or plane, say in the x and y direction. Such a person can never conceive the meaning of height in the z direction, he cannot look up or down, and can see other 2D persons as shapes on the flat surface he lives in.


    So if you follow the dimensional analysis, there is a systemic procedure that one has to follow, that does not have to be held in context of KK interpretation to this point, but it does help if you think about the very basis of this graduation that certain statements make themself known.

    Degrees of freedom(Wiki 24 Jan 2006)

    Zero dimensions
    Point
    Zero-dimensional space
    One dimension
    Line
    Two dimensions
    2D geometric models
    2D computer graphics
    Three dimensions
    3D computer graphics
    3-D films and video
    Stereoscopy (3-D imaging)
    Four dimensions
    Time (4th dimension)
    Fourth spatial dimension
    Tesseract (four dimensional shapes)
    Five dimensions
    Kaluza-Klein theory
    Fifth dimension
    Ten, eleven or twenty-six dimensions
    String theory
    M-theory
    Why 10 dimensions?
    Calabi-Yau spaces
    Infinitely many dimensions
    Banach space (only some have infinitely many dimensions)
    Special relativity
    General relativity


    Would you dimiss a comment by Greene because of the speculation you have felt about him that you might not recognize, what is being said as you watch that circle develope alongside of the sphere, as it moves through the 2d discription? Here's what mean, as I had focused on Brian Greene's words.

    Angular momentum can twist light cones and even make time travel possible in theory if not in practice.


    The familiar extended dimensions, therefore, may very well also be in the shape of circles and hence subject to the R and 1/R physical identification of string theory. To put some rough numbers in, if the familiar dimensions are circular then their radii must be about as large as 15 billion light-years, which is about ten trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion (R= 1061) times the Planck length, and growing as the universe explands. If string theory is right, this is physically identical to the familiar dimensions being circular with incredibly tiny radii of about 1/R=1/1061=10-61 times the Planck length! There are our well-known familiar dimensions in an alternate description provided by string theory. [Greene's emphasis]. In fact, in the reciprocal language, these tiny circles are getting ever smaller as time goes by, since as R grows, 1/R shrinks. Now we seem to have really gone off the deep end. How can this possibly be true? How can a six-foot tall human being 'fit' inside such an unbelievably microscopic universe? How can a speck of a universe be physically identical to the great expanse we view in the heavens above?
    ( Brian Greene, The Elegant Universe, pages 248-249)

    Fifth dimension(wiki 24 Jan 2006)
    Abstract, five dimensional space occurs frequently in mathematics, and is a perfectly legitimate construct. Whether or not the real universe in which we live is somehow five-dimensional is a topic that is debated and explored in several branches of physics, including astrophysics and particle physics.


    Five dimensions in physics
    (Wiki 24 Jan 2006)

    In physics, the fifth dimension is a hypothetical dimension which would exist at a right angle to the fourth dimension

    Monday, January 23, 2006

    Hyperspace


    Science is that human activity in which we aim to show towards nature that respect that in a democracy we endeavor to show towards each other."



    There is no doubt my views are biased. For all the wrong reasons I have cited the questions about how I see, has been strongly encouraged. There is no leader for me in this question( driven in my own research), with something that lead me through the mathematics and divergences from Euclidean perspectve.

    It was joined on a level with the geometrical implications of GR conclusions and assignments to Rienmann's positive views. Held in context of his teacher, I have given respect to the Gausssian approach of thinking, and definitions, assigned Hyperspace. If I see Gaussian coordinates as viable, then how shall I refrain myself from seeing in such spaces?

    So of course this is troubling to me, that if I was to proclaim my true belief in the religiousity of stringevangelism, then how could I ever give someone the clear and concise picture of this graduation?

    So shall I put aside my views of the translation given to hyperspatial views, in context of all the "colorings" I have given the "dynamical relation" of what is not seen, and is hidden, I want to understand this better, from the layman point of view.

    So a strong debate needs to be fuelled in regards to the validation process of what hyperspace actually means. Has it been a means to an effort to geoemtrically assign right thinking through the stages of what we have been given to perspective. That the beginning of this universe, had circumstances given to micro perspective views, had lost touch with the validation process, that this geometry, could have ever given credence in mathematical basis. There are no physics at that level, yet my view had been reduced to the superfluid.

    While "the debate" is not mine, by layman status, I do follow the logic.

    Deflating Hyperspace" by: David Pacchioli (Research/Penn State, Vol. 16, no. 4 (December, 1995))

    For Chernosky, a Ph.D. candidate in English literature, this isn't exactly the same thing as asking what hyperspace means. Hyperspace seems to mean a lot of things, and then again not to mean much at all; its meaning shifts with the user, if not with the wind. It is, Charnesky writes, "an almost empty signifier capable of almost limitless application."

    "This fuzziness," he adds in person, "is its power." It is also a quality that puts hyperspace in rather crowded company. Our language is loaded with terms appropriated from science for use in popular discourse. Along the way, the borrowed word's highly technical, narrowly precise -- not to say arcane -- meaning is typically transformed. What emerges is a fluttering, eye-catching, all-purpose concept that can be used interchangeably for explaining the weather or selling toothpaste.


    So conduct becoming, and of what I asked of others I am working to see this transition through. How I still believe in "my God, my religiousneess, and faith in humanities struggle for perfection" and still offer, perspective here, while biased?

    No one speaks here so I have to lead myself through intuitive journies, if there is not the willingness at other points in the blogopshere for this debate to take place. Of course, in my silent way I will try and be fair. I like to thank Peter for the toning down that has taken place.

    What views have been put out there then that we could answer and put aside comparative functions to "alien cultures" and all the sort, to speak a truth that would move perception accordingly.

    Are mathematcians divided in this case?

    Hyperspace(23 Jan 2006)

    Hyperspace theories are concerned with theoretical systems that have more than the familiar three spatial dimensions. Hyperspace theories are largely a mathematical theory but their developers often attempt to make them of use to physicists. Hyperspace theorists generally believe that the laws of nature are simpler in higher dimensions


    What are Degrees of Freedom


    If we travel to Peter Woit's site, can we point to the article introduced and go from there? If I quote the next source above, then this would have given reason to wonder if the trailing thoughts of those who wished to deal with this(above Wiki article and references), might create recognition of some of the things Peter Woit is describing.

    So lets open it here then.

    Einstein Has Left the Building
    By JOHN HORGAN
    Published: January 1, 2006 NYTimes

    Today, government spending on physics research has stagnated, and the number of Americans pursuing doctorates has plunged to its lowest level since the early 1960's. Especially as represented by best sellers like "A Brief History of Time," by Stephen Hawking, and "The Elegant Universe," by Brian Greene, physics has also become increasingly esoteric, if not downright escapist. Many of physics' best and brightest are obsessed with fulfilling a task that occupied Einstein's latter years: finding a "unified theory" that fuses quantum physics and general relativity, which are as incompatible, conceptually and mathematically, as plaid and polka dots. But pursuers of this "theory of everything" have wandered into fantasy realms of higher dimensions with little or no empirical connection to our reality. In his new book "Hiding in the Mirror: The Mysterious Allure of Extra Dimensions, from Plato to String Theory and Beyond," the physicist Lawrence Krauss frets that his colleagues' belief in hyperspace theories in spite of the lack of evidence will encourage the insidious notion that science "is merely another kind of religion."



    Krauss and Susskind versus Horgan


    Peter Woit:
    I don’t see Horgan here criticizing the attempt to quantize gravity as “frivolous”. His criticism of physicists as having “wandered into fantasy realms of higher dimensions with little or no empirical connection to our reality”, is a justifiable one that deserves to be seriously addressed. Krauss and Susskind’s comment that Horgan would be surprised that both of them think that new degrees of freedom will be needed to characterize elementary particle physics doesn’t seem to have any basis in fact. Horgan isn’t making broad claims that physicists shouldn’t look for new degrees of freedom, he is very specifically referring to the use of extra space-time dimensions.

    Sunday, January 22, 2006

    Earth Bound Solutions to All Possible Pathways

    Will I might have been guilty of taking Physics down a road so similar in conceptualization bastardizing, that I would have driven a nail in the very deaths of what could have emerged from the outcome of all possibilties? That we were indeed attached to the consequences of our ever actional decisive forays into human contact. Decision making, action orientated, outcomes, of the original simplectic intiated ideas?

    It had to arise from something?

    Would it be so easy to lay out the pathway required, that each of us woud have recognized our time in existance, would have indeed been the measure of all things that we choose to endorse in our ever perfecting evolution as cyclcical choices of perfecting our thinking.

    This is a interesting thought held in my mind when you think of about what is held in context thinking, if we hold the photons in context of earthbound recognitions of those time orientated distances.

    Many will know instantly what this means while others, scoff at the notion that we could have seen such influences telling us anything useful about the space of these interactions.

    All the while the initial plectic recognition of Gellman's arose to complexities. We lost sight of the simple ideas about what might happen to the spin rotations over those vast distances? That the connectiveness, would have ever acknowledged equative relations that these two photons under the squared earthbound views, would include all probabilites being still held to view. While we still look at all possible actions? So what about time indeed.

    Einstein's prettty girl scenario and hot stove, served to help me see conceptual framesworks about speed attributions of the nature of fast and slow moving world in terms of our earthbound considerations. This action was decisive, and held in context of that experience. He helped me to see that experience is indeed fleeting, depending on our circumstances, where such nature would have embedded the very nature of the spacetime fabric itself to include, how we will measure that distance of mind.

    Is there another story here that we might be convinced of a rational behind?

    Here is something that Brian Greene mentions to reinforce where I had come to in looking at the completion of that chapter.

    the quantum entanglement would become so spread out through these interactions with the environment that it would become virutually impossible to detect. For all intents and purposes, the original entanglement between photons would have been erased.

    Never the less it is truly amazing that these connections do exist, and that craefully arranged labratory conditions they can be observed over significant distances. They show us, fundamantally, that space is not what we once thought it was. What about time?
    Page 123, The Fabric of the Cosmo, by Brian Greene

    Does gravity vary over time?

    If you did not have this in mind, what value would you attribute gravity in any scenario, as you mull over all the geometrical implications if a positive geometric solutions to Riemann's spherical solutions. The persective that GR holds for us, in our considerations?

    Theory, experiment and fine structure

    Were it not for relativity, the three states with different J would all have the same energy, and the light emitted in the transition would have a single frequency of about 277 000 GHz. However, relativistic effects mean that the states have slightly different energies, and when this light is analysed carefully, splittings of the order of 10 GHz are seen.



    If ever driven to micro-perspectives how would time been of value if held to the quantum perspective as a strong enviriomental influence. One which spreads out all interactive phases that we could no longer discern, a viable solution to what is presented to us, unless in "symmetry breaking" realizations. So what was that beginning. Again Kravstov computer simulations help to drive that concept home.

    Another laser beam is used to make the atoms fluoresce, and the amount of fluorescence is measured as a function of the microwave frequency to plot a "resonance curve". An ultra-precise measurement of time can be made by measuring the frequency of the peak in this resonance curve (see "Atomic clocks" by Pierre Lemonde in Physics World January 2001 pp39-44).


    So simplicity for me asks what image in mind would hep one to discern entropic valuation to what this universe had become from temperature orientated view of that early universe, to have said, "that the probabilites that are evident now, have become like this?"

    Two things formed in my mind as to the consequence of numbered systems, and pascal triangle, as to the source of all probabilitistic valuations and the marble drop held in context of BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION.

    So having defined the early universe and quantum valution arising from temerature, it helps to think about the outcome emerging from what had never been understood or have in "measured stick," to what would become our universe today? It still is the earthboud experience that we have, has emerge from astate that was equal in it's determinations. Ideas are like that.

    So you had to see simplicity settling into our minds in such a way that If Plato indeed points up, then you would understand immediately, what he is pointing too. If you hold that image in mind of the triangle, then how would you ever assess Riemann's hyptohesis, as to the spirlaic outcome of Ulam's spiral indications? While the spiral opens up to the vast potential of outcome originating from ideas, it still settles into minds in it's concrete form.

    So you have to define this relationship very carefully, and if I had said Liminocentrically topologically organized, what the heck would I have been saying?


    Heaven's ephemeral Qualities?


    It seems it would have far reaching enlightening features of what the buddhist mind might have to offer? What subtle arrangement the conceptual framework might have said about our everyday interactions with each other? Then you might have said what color indeed are the emphemeral qualities to our [mathematical]decisive minds that we would choose such abstract colors as yellow in our mental appreciations of what nature hides in the color of flowers around us? :)

    Saturday, January 21, 2006

    Drawing a Venn diagram: Entanglement Issues

    Plectics, by Murray Gellman
    It is appropriate that plectics refers to entanglement or the lack thereof, since entanglement is a key feature of the way complexity arises out of simplicity, making our subject worth studying.




    The person above was kind enough to send information held in context of picture link for consideration, to help out with comprehension. I mean certain things hold us to consequences, that while I might have been thinking of Einsteins example of a pretty girl and a hot stove, this thinking did not pass my attention when one held the photon to certain enviromental influences as we gave these things thought processes. I context of "gravity as the square," is appropriate I think, about what combinations are realistic.



    At the very heading of this post there is a link directly attached for consideration in context of all these possibilties. Some things come to mind in terms of Feynman's toy models, as strict interactive phase that we would like to keep track of. So what one might have done to say, hey, if we are given a possibility of scenarios about Entanglement issues, how shall we solve these interactive phases, as we try to build a multiphase integrative model held in context that perfect human being.

    Entanglement applies to two or more particles even if one of them is used as input to the two slit experiment, it is not applicable to single particle experiments.


    YOu know it is not that simple, but there are always grand designs on what we think something is nifty in society, as we progress our models of the future. As to how we will create the perfect models for apprehension about our universe, and how we interact with it.

    Pictorial represenations can be very useful in presenting information or assisting reasoning. Venn diagram is an example. Venn diagrams are used to represent classes of objects, and they can also assist us in reasoning about the relations between these classes. They are named after the English mathematician John Venn (1834 - 1923), who was a fellow at Cambridge University.


    While it is true that I am being fascinated by mathematical processes, and how they are used in our visionary quest for understanding, one would have to be a computer to remember all the interactive phases that could have manifested from a situation held in context of a "societal problem." One we might have encountered in our lifetimes.

    It's statistical outcome that held to such micromanagement processes, would have been lost on all our minds, if we did not think some science process could have been touted with all these combinations.



    Each time I am presented with this thinking, the elementals of the model for apprehension, it always seemed easier to me to just have a look and see what "buddhist principles" are telling us about how we have a hold of our world in all it's realisms. The choices we make, and how we are to conduct ourselves "becoming." Einstein used that term well I think.

    So why such association and "combinations", that we have move the thinking here to what was gained in our emotive and abstract thinkings, as productive human beings? To see what a new foundational logic is being developed around our lives. Did we did not readily see the significance of the technologies involved. One had to dig a little deeper I think.

    So here is a preview of what entanglement issue has been shown to help orientate views on this issue. Some diagram perhaps, to show the developing scenarios around such entanglement issues?



    Quite early these indications about the possibilties of entangled states, raised all kinds of questions in my mind. Thinking of Hooft and others, about the issues of classical quantum processes, over top of these wide and incomprehensible statistical possibilties, seems held under the auspice of our reality model. That "square", given earthbound recognizitons, happily according to the basic pricniples, have so far held our views in gravitational model assumptions. IN essence, we have boxed the views on entanglement. As we have boxed Andrey Kravstov computerized model of the orignations of this universe in a supersymmetrical view of origination. What could have arisen from such situations. Probable outcomes?

    Whether such a "quantum computer" can realistically be built with a value of L that is large enough to be of practical use is a topic of much debate. However, the mere possibility has led to an explosive renaissance of interest in the host of curious and classically counterintuitive properties associated with entangled states. Other phenomena that rely on nonlocal entanglement, such as quantum teleportation and various forms of quantum cryptography, have also been demonstrated in the laboratory