The Book: A Chapter Still to be Read

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

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

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

Against Symmetry

Against symmetry (Paris, June 06)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Leon Lederman and Starting Out

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

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

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

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

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

Can we find “it” eventually explaining a very natural thing?

Oh-My-God particle

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

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

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

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

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

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

Astronomy Picture of the Day

Gamma-Ray Moon

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

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

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

This entry was posted in Cosmic Rays, Pierre Auger, Self Evident. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The Book: A Chapter Still to be Read

  1. Phil Warnell says:

    Hi Plato,First let me express my hope that for you and yours that Christmas was a joyous one filled with all the aspirations of the time. In glancing this way today I noticed your post in respect to what the more general thoughts are of many as what the LHC may have us learn. That in regards to all the talk, even among some scientists, that it will have us able to explore the conditions that existed in the universe moments after its beginnings. This of course may be true for the average energies at the time, yet certainly not in respect to the nature of space and time as it was. That has me mindful that despite all our wit and ingenuity there will remain things that we will never know for certain by way of experiment and thus need to discover other means to come to know them if we feel that we must.Best to you and yours,Phil

  2. Plato says:

    Hi Phil,Yes it was a nice Christmas Phil.Where we live my son and his wife, along with their three granddaughters stayed behind to spend it with her side. We took the time yesterday to visit.Phil:That in regards to all the talk, even among some scientists, that it will have us able to explore the conditions that existed in the universe moments after its beginnings.It's more then just that Phil. The backtracking "is directional" in that it is taking us to a closer understanding of where the four forces are to be joined. As well, to see through the earth. Calorimetry evidence of particulate evidence that make up the materialistic views.What is the principal that all things form around Phil?Once these validations processes are completed then we again turn to the cosmos where we will look again with the push science has taken us to in measure.While this is a exercise in the views of what amounts to a moment in the very beginning of time, the question you speak about in terms of what it shall do for us has yet to be correlated. I give some previews above, as well below.:)This is my passion to understand the background of information. How we learn to see the reality around us with this experimental basis as well to explore how applications may be used to push past the materialistic model for an accounting of what transpires after the coat comes off. Helps one to understand what the jacket we put on conceals.I am going to try and bring together the years this blog has been in operation so you understand what it is that provides some of my thinking and how "Color of Gravity" became a model in a sense of how this beginning forms in us. "Grokking" takes on special meaning when the understanding of a "different perspective" takes us out of our comfort zone, to a least try and see the world in another light.Best,

  3. Phil Warnell says:

    Hi Plato,I’m certainly gladdened to hear that both you and all of yours had a wonderful Christmas and trust this was the same for welcoming in the New Year. To address and continue your last response is I think best summed up in saying that even though we may differ at times as what direction of theory may be the most promising or sometimes what be the most important elements in relation to the struggles of humanity. However what I’m convinced we do share is the recognition that the subjective and objective aspects are inseparably intertwined and thus both must reflect what is ultimately true. This complimentary aspect of nature’s truth in fact has become more evident as time progresses, rather than diminished, although I find both the practitioners of the sciences and many philosophies each primarily finding one as being significant in opposition to the other.So to start the New Year off I’ve torn a page from you book and wrote a blog piece that serves as both an extension and follow up to a Backreaction article and my subsequent comment. I hope that you might enjoy it as to further understand the world and my position regarding our mutual struggles in having a need to know.Best,Phil

  4. Plato says:

    Hi Phil,Thanks again for the good wishes.Unfortunately on the morning of January 1st I am up at 3:00 am to prepare to head off for work, so the Mrs. was texting all parts of the family as they were texting her.I am glad this filled the space for her when I had to catch some sleep before the hour rang into the new year.So now I can finally relax as a couple of days off are now here.I was glad to see your update on your blog, as I follow what you are thinking, and taking the opportune time to draft your own info piece is sometimes a good exercise in itself to gather one,s thoughts about things.I like seeing that initiative as with Bee and Stefan's setting the pace for thinking about things,and subsequent comments transpiring in the method for writing and gather info to help one understand better the situation. I am definitely all for this. The blogs that update are placed here for a reason as to let me know what these good scientists are doing and thinking about these days.So I came across the term Phenomenology before as I had mentioned with regards to Cosmic Variance before they went over to the Discovery blog. Steven's comments at your blog entry of course are important in terms of clarifications. As well Bee's clarifications.Phil:However what I’m convinced we do share is the recognition that the subjective and objective aspects are inseparably intertwined and thus both must reflect what is ultimately true.Yes, I see this way as you imply in regards to the objective and subjective especially in correlation to the truth seeking in relation to the science process.Phil:although I find both the practitioners of the sciences and many philosophies each primarily finding one as being significant in opposition to the other.Phil what they don't realize is that the correlation as you pointed out above in regards to the truth can be whatever truth you settle upon "may not be one with all the current information," yet, this is an effective relationship to what transpires all around that perspective, is like a magnetic that attracts likewise and establishes the world according too. You see, it can be totally wrong and the person can formulate the things that gather around this principal which materializes in context too.So once this is recognized and established it is very important that one does not crystallize their position firmly and "remain open" without building walls in science that reduce the effectiveness of exchange, while holding one's own perspective. These things I am saying are to me what demonstrate a "casual connection to the reality that exists." In science, what saids that such situations are not valid and connected? So one moves to the quantum level and things seem bumpy does not remove the connection we have to the particulate expressions that form around this opinion.So with every move forward in the science, is a balance between what one is thinking and the progressive context of the science in experimentation.Not only am I looking at where science is current, but also what is foremost in scientists thought patterns leads to an interesting understanding of the work that they are doing. Tapping into those processes are what allows me to come very quickly to where science is positioned currently and what I have expressed in terms of defining a specific space. That space "is inside" in my views as well.Best,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s