Showing posts with label Microstate Blackholes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Microstate Blackholes. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Black holes, quantum information, and the foundations of physics

Volume 66, Issue 4, April 2013

Quantum mechanics teaches that black holes evaporate by radiating particles—a lesson indicating that at least one pillar of modern physics must fall. See: Black holes, quantum information, and the foundations of physics by Steven B. Giddings, in Physics Today, April 2013

Based on an image from NASA/CXC/M.Weiss
Citation: Phys. Today 66, 4, 30 (2013);
image of Untitled

of the Schwarzschild black hole solution can be depicted in different ways. In this representation, ingoing light rays always travel along ingoing lines heading toward the top and left at 45°; outgoing light rays asymptotically approach 45° lines at large radius . Massive particles, with their slower speeds, must travel within the light cones (blue) between outgoing and ingoing light rays, as illustrated by the red path. No light ray can escape to infinity from inside the vertical dotted line, the horizon located at the mass-dependent Schwarzschild radius (). Instead, any trajectory beginning inside the horizon is pulled to a central point, the singularity at = 0, where spacetime curvature becomes infinite.
Citation: Phys. Today 66, 4, 30 (2013);

Sunday, September 23, 2012

Black Hole Thoughts are Spoken: Complementarity vs Firewall

Black Holes: Complementarity vs Firewalls

  • Subtitle: Strings 2012
  • Speaker: Raphael Bousso
  • Location: Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
  • Date: 27.07.2012 @ 16:04

Ahmed Almheiri, Donald Marolf, Joseph Polchinski, James Sully

We argue that the following three statements cannot all be true: (i) Hawking radiation is in a pure state, (ii) the information carried by the radiation is emitted from the region near the horizon, with low energy effective field theory valid beyond some microscopic distance from the horizon, and (iii) the infalling observer encounters nothing unusual at the horizon. Perhaps the most conservative resolution is that the infalling observer burns up at the horizon. Alternatives would seem to require novel dynamics that nevertheless cause notable violations of semiclassical physics at macroscopic distances from the horizon. Black Hole: Complementarity vs Firewall

This lecture presents some particular thoughts that rang a bell for me in terms of what reporting was done here earlier on the thought experiments by Susskind on how one may interpret information gained by the process of entanglement to an observer outside the black hole.

See:The elephant and the event horizon 26 October 2006 by Amanda Gefter at New Scientist.

 Also See: Where Susskind leaves off, Seth Lloyd begins

Various neutron interferometry experiments demonstrate the subtlety of the notions of duality and complementarity. By passing through the interferometer, the neutron appears to act as a wave. Yet upon passage, the neutron is subject to gravitation. As the neutron interferometer is rotated through Earth's gravitational field a phase change between the two arms of the interferometer can be observed, accompanied by a change in the constructive and destructive interference of the neutron waves on exit from the interferometer. Some interpretations claim that understanding the interference effect requires one to concede that a single neutron takes both paths through the interferometer at the same time; a single neutron would "be in two places at once", as it were. Since the two paths through a neutron interferometer can be as far as 5 cm to 15 cm apart, the effect is hardly microscopic. This is similar to traditional double-slit and mirror interferometer experiments where the slits (or mirrors) can be arbitrarily far apart. So, in interference and diffraction experiments, neutrons behave the same way as photons (or electrons) of corresponding wavelength. See: Complementarity (physics)

See Also:

Monday, June 11, 2012

The Black Hole of What?

In networking, black holes refer to places in the network where incoming traffic is silently discarded (or "dropped"), without informing the source that the data did not reach its intended recipient.

When examining the topology of the network, the black holes themselves are invisible, and can only be detected by monitoring the lost traffic; hence the name.


Dead addresses

The most common form of black hole is simply an IP address that specifies a host machine that is not running or an address to which no host has been assigned.
Even though TCP/IP provides means of communicating the delivery failure back to the sender via ICMP, traffic destined for such addresses is often just dropped.
Note that a dead address will be undetectable only to protocols that are both connectionless and unreliable (e.g., UDP). Connection-oriented or reliable protocols (TCP, RUDP) will either fail to connect to a dead address or will fail to receive expected acknowledgements.

Firewalls and "stealth" ports

Most firewalls can be configured to silently discard packets addressed to forbidden hosts or ports, resulting in small or large "black holes" in the network.

Black hole filtering

Black hole filtering refers specifically to dropping packets at the routing level, usually using a routing protocol to implement the filtering on several routers at once, often dynamically to respond quickly to distributed denial-of-service attacks.

PMTUD black holes

Some firewalls incorrectly discard all ICMP packets, including the ones needed for Path MTU discovery to work correctly. This causes TCP connections from/to/through hosts with a lower MTU to hang.

Black hole e-mail addresses

A black hole e-mail address is an e-mail address which is valid (messages sent to it will not generate errors), but to which all messages sent are automatically deleted, and never stored or seen by humans. These addresses are often used as return addresses for automated e-mails.

See also

External links

Friday, January 27, 2012

The dimensionality and geometry of the extra dimensions

We investigate possible signatures of black hole events at the LHC in the hypothesis that such objects will not evaporate completely, but leave a stable remnant. For the purpose of de fining a reference scenario, we have employed the publicly available Monte Carlo generator CHARYBDIS2, in which the remnant's behavior is mostly determined by kinematic constraints and conservation of some quantum numbers, such as the baryon charge. Our fi ndings show that electrically neutral remnants are highly favored and a signifi cantly larger amount of missing transverse momentum is to be expected with respect to the case of complete decay. See: Black Hole Remnants at the LHC by L. Bellagambab, R. Casadioa;by, R. Di Sipioa;bz and V. Viventiax 16 Jan 2012

ATLAS Experiment © 2011 CERN  "Black Hole" event superimposed over a classic image of the ATLAS detector.

If the fundamental Planck scale is of order a TeV, as the case in some extradimensions scenarios, future hadron colliders such as the Large Hadron Collider will be black hole factories. The non-perturbative process of black hole formation and decay by Hawking evaporation gives rise to spectacular events with up to many dozens of relatively hard jets and leptons, with a characteristic ratio of hadronic to leptonic activity of roughly 5:1. The total transverse energy of such events is typically a sizeable fraction of the beam energy. Perturbative hard scattering processes at energies well above the Planck scale are cloaked behind a horizon, thus limiting the ability to probe short distances. The high energy black hole cross section grows with energy at a rate determined by the dimensionality and geometry of the extra dimensions.See: High Energy Colliders as Black Hole Factories: The End of Short Distance Physics

Trackbacks for hep-ph/0106219

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Atlas Experiment Simulated Black Hole Photos

ATLAS Experiment © 2011 CERN  A new view of a black hole event. ATLAS collision events. In some theories, microscopic black holes may be produced in particle collisions that occur when very-high-energy cosmic rays hit particles in our atmosphere. These microscopic-black-holes would decay into ordinary particles in a tiny fraction of a second and would be very difficult to observe in our atmosphere.
The ATLAS Experiment offers the exciting possibility to study them in the lab (if they exist). The simulated collision event shown is viewed along the beampipe. The event is one in which a microscopic-black-hole was produced in the collision of two protons (not shown). The microscopic-black-hole decayed immediately into many particles. The colors of the tracks show different types of particles emerging from the collision (at the center).
Photo #: black-hole-event-wide

ATLAS Experiment © 2011 CERN  "Black Hole" event superimposed over a classic image of the ATLAS detector.

See: Atlas Photos

Saturday, September 19, 2009

Macroscopic Similarities in a Microscopic World

Berkeley Lab Technology Dramatically Speeds Up Searches of Large DatabasesJon Bashor

In the world of physics, one of the most elusive events is the creation and detection of “quark-gluon plasma,” the theorized atomic outcome of the “Big Bang” which could provide insight into the origins of the universe. By using experiments that involve millions of particle collisions, researchers hope to find unambiguous evidence of quark-gluon plasma.

It's not just about "mathematical abstraction" but of seeing what good it can be used for. One can be in denial about the prospects but while it gives perspective to current situations, in that it helps to direct thinking forward instead feeling as if "you are just floating in space without being able to move."

Helpless are we? Not considering flapping one's wings?

Imagine indeed then,  trying to orientate direction toward the spacecraft when "floating in space" seems like having to attempt to ride a bicycle for the first time, so one should  know we must balance ourselves while doing the appropriate movements directed to where we want to go. It's something that has to be learn in theoretical enterprise while still held to earth's environ?

There might be a middle way. String theory's mathematical tools were designed to unlock the most profound secrets of the cosmos, but they could have a far less esoteric purpose: to tease out the properties of some of the most complex yet useful types of material here on Earth.

Both string theorists and condensed matter physicists - those studying the properties of complex matter phases such as solids and liquids - are enthused by the development. "I am flabbergasted," says Jan Zaanen, a condensed matter theorist from the University of Leiden in the Netherlands. "The theory is calculating precisely what we are seeing in experiments."
See:What string theory is really good for

So how has this helped the idea of "minimum length?"

Using the anti–de Sitter/conformal field theory correspondence to relate fermionic quantum critical fields to a gravitational problem, we computed the spectral functions of fermions in the field theory. By increasing the fermion density away from the relativistic quantum critical point, a state emerges with all the features of the Fermi liquid. See:String Theory, Quantum Phase Transitions, and the Emergent Fermi Liquid
So we have a beginning here for consideration within the frame work of Condense matter theorist state of existence? String theory is working along side of to direct the idea of matter formation?


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

Proving that under certain conditions the quark-gluon plasma behaves according to such calculations is an exciting discovery for physicists, as it brings them a little closer to understanding how matter behaves at very small scales. But the challenge remains to determine the properties of the plasma under other conditions.

"We want to measure when the quark-gluon plasma behaves like a perfect fluid with zero viscosity, and when it doesn't," says Lauret. "When it doesn't match our calculations, what parameters do we have to change? If we can put everything together, we might have a model that reproduces everything we see in our detector."
See:Probing the Perfect Liquid with the STAR Grid

Looking back in time toward the beginning of our universe has been one of the things that have been occupying my time as I look through experimental procedures that have been developed. While LHC  provides a template of all the historical drama of science put forward,  it is also a platform in my mind for pushing forward perspective from "a beginning of time scenario" that helps us identify what happens in that formation. Helps us to orientate space and what happens to it.

It provides for me a place where we can talk about a large scale situation in terms of the universe as to what it contains to help motivate this universe to become what it is.

Cycle of Birth, Life, and Death-Origin, Indentity, and Destiny by Gabriele Veneziano

In one form or another, the issue of the ultimate beginning has engaged philosophers and theologians in nearly every culture. It is entwined with a grand set of concerns, one famously encapsulated in an 1897 painting by Paul Gauguin: D'ou venons-nous? Que sommes-nous? Ou allons-nous? "Where do we come from? What are we? Where are we going?"
See here for more information.

So how did this process help orientate the things that were brought forward under the idea that the universe is a "cosmological box" that people want to talk about, while in my mind ,it became much more flexible topic when Venezianno began to talk about what came before. What existed outside that box. Abstractly, the box had six faces, to which direction of possibilities became part of the depth of this situation. It was a matter indeed of thinking outside the box.

I know that for some,  why waste one's time, but for me it is the motivator( not God as a creator, but of what actually propels this universe) and to what can exist now that draws my attention. It has been ever so slightly pushed "back in time" to see that the universe began with "microscopic processes that defines the state of the state of the universe in the way it is now." The LHC should be able to answer this although it is still restricted by the energy valuation given to this process.

A magnet levitating above a high-temperature superconductor, cooled with liquid nitrogen. Theoretical physicists have now used string theory to describe the quantum-critical state of electrons that can lead to high-temperature superconductivity. (Credit: Mai-Linh Doan / Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons) See:

Physical Reality Of String Theory Shown In Quantum-critical State Of Electrons

Quantum soup

But now, Zaanen, together with his colleagues Cubrovic and Schalm, are trying to change this situation, by applying string theory to a phenomenon that physicists, including Zaanen, have for the past fifteen years been unable to explain: the quantum-critical state of electrons. This special state occurs in a material just before it becomes superconductive at high temperature. Zaanen describes the quantum-critical state as a 'quantum soup', whereby the electrons form a collective independent of distances, where the electrons exhibit the same behaviour at small quantum mechanical scale or at macroscopic human scale.
See  Also:

Fermions and the AdS/CFT correspondence: quantum phase transitions and the emergent Fermi-liquid

A central mystery in quantum condensed matter physics is the zero temperature quantum phase transition between strongly renormalized Fermi-liquids as found in heavy fermion intermetallics and possibly high Tc superconductors. Field theoretical statistical techniques are useless because of the fermion sign problem, but we will present here results showing that the mathematics of string theory is capable of describing fermionic quantum critical states. Using the Anti-de-Sitter/Conformal Field Theory (AdS/CFT) correspondence to relate fermionic quantum critical fields to a gravitational problem, we compute the spectral functions of fermions in the field theory. Deforming away from the relativistic quantum critical point by increasing the fermion density we show that a state emerges with all the features of the Fermi-liquid. Tuning the scaling dimensions of the critical fermion fields we find that the quasiparticle disappears at a quantum phase transition of a purely statistical nature, not involving any symmetry change. These results are obtained by computing the solutions of a classical Dirac equation in an AdS space time containing a Reissner-Nordstrom black hole, where the information regarding Fermi-Dirac statistics in the field theory is processed by quasi-normal Dirac modes at the outer horizon.

Saturday, October 14, 2006

"Lead by Physics," Faces the "Trouble With Physics"

The Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven National Laboratory is a world-class scientific research facility that began operation in 2000, following 10 years of development and construction. Hundreds of physicists from around the world use RHIC to study what the universe may have looked like in the first few moments after its creation. RHIC drives two intersecting beams of gold ions head-on, in a subatomic collision. What physicists learn from these collisions may help us understand more about why the physical world works the way it does, from the smallest subatomic particles, to the largest stars

Well I have to deal with first things first here. This article above correlates the one given by Stefan. This is not to contest what you are saying, just to show you the informtaion I myself had gone through to arrive at the conclusions I do.

Ion-Smashing Yields New Knowledge, But Some Still Question Risk
By Carolyn Weaver

Seen from above, the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, or RHIC, at New York’s Brookhaven National Laboratory, looks like a racetrack. And it is a kind of race track: two “beam pipes” in a tunnel nearly four kilometers around, in which gold nuclei are accelerated to close to the speed of light, and are crashed into each other at intersecting points along the way. Out of the kinetic energy of those collisions, new matter is created for a brief instant: a shower of quarks and gluons, the smallest particles known – and at seven trillion degrees, hotter than anything now in the universe.

Brookhaven physicist Peter Steinberg
“It’s basically a living embodiment of E=mc squared,” says Brookhaven physicist Peter Steinberg. “Einstein’s theory told us a hundred years ago that you can trade off energy for mass, and vice versa. We’re essentially converting the kinetic energy, the energy from the motion of these nuclei, converting it into lots of particles.”

The four detectors that bestride the collision points are massive machines, with “time projection chambers” that record the collisions and their after-moments. The latest results made big news last year when Brookhaven physicists reported that the quark-gluon plasma was not a gas as expected, but rather a very dense liquid.

You say strangelets do not exist? And that no connection has been found between string theory, and strangelets. I have to then argue my case so you see it in light of what the reductionistic physics is actually doing, while string theory and it's energy values hover overhead of all these interactions. How th epaticle inclination must also include microstate blackhole creation.

So bear with me if you can.

Hi Plato,

strange matter and strangelets are a very interesting topic, but, unfortunately, there has been no experimental evidence for them so far. They are not really connected to string theory either, besides the fact that it was an early paper of Witten that resuscitated interest in them with nuclear physicists, I think.

Strangelets have been thought of as possible culprits for RHIC disaster scenarios (besides the ubiquitous black holes ;-), and as responsible for potential cosmic ray particles beyond the GZK cutoff.

But as far as I know, there has been no experimental verification of any of these ideas (and the world still exists: RHIC has produced no greedy strangelets which would have eaten up the Earth).

In the case of the potential quark star you cite, RX J185635-375, again, and unfortunately, as far as I remember, it came out that the radius determination was not completely safe. Bottomline was that this star could be well understood as a common neutron star. I am not completely sure, though, about the current status of this object, whether it is thought to be a quark star or not.

Anyway, it is a good example for an exciting observation which is reported in the press, but which has to be partially revisd later - only that these revisions don't make in the press releases. I guess it would often be quite interesting to have a kind of follow-up reporting, where one could read what is, eventually, the fate of some discovery that has been announced in the press.

The strange particles I was talking about are not strangelets, but the common hadrons with strangeness, especially the Ξs and the Ωs, with two and three strange quarks, respectively. These are the particles that I had mentioned in my earlier post, and whereof I should finish the second part, finally ;-). You typically find much more of these particles in nucleus-nucleus collisions than in (properly scaled) nucleon-nucleus collisions, which is a strong indication for an intermediate QGP state, where stange-antistrang quark pairs can easily be produced.

Best, stefan

One, as we know can make wide sweeping generalization about the physics and why is it that any position taken by any scientist would not have been one that becomes the point of departure for all scientists? An example her ei the rationship to the Heavy Ion collsions an dstringtheory and by this very nature to the strangelets as postulated.

This article below is to correlate with the article you showed me of 2004, while I had made this ocnlusion myself early in 2006, lets not forget the number of people involved in the "ghost particle, and Pauli" through out the years and what we have seen theoretically of the strangelets as they had been related to the disaster scenario as consequential microstate blackholes created in the RHIC and LHC.

Is this too drastic a scenario to have you think about what all these “particles in press” are saying about the science, that any one scientist themselves might be following to correct? You say, "just get it right?" Well there are many within the blogs who are writers for those articles? Why do you think they are amongst you?

I had noticed the grouping and conversations between blogs that had been developing over the last year and half. I continue to see some of the same people. Some, that constantly referred to the reporting that goes on. So I had to address this or forever be banished to the realm of reporting as someone just profiled.

Strangelet Search at RHIC by STAR Collaboration

Three models of strangelet production in high-energy heavy-ion collisions have been proposed in the 1980s and 1990s: coalescence [10], thermal statistical production [11], and distillation from a Quark Gluon Plasma (QGP) [12, 13]. The first two models usually predict low strangelet production cross sections at mid-rapidity, as verified by measurements of the related processes of coalescence of nucleons into nuclei [14]. If a QGP is created in heavy ion collisions, it could cool down by distillation (kaon emission) and condense to strange-quark-rich matter in its ground state – a strangelet. However, this requires a net baryon excess and a non-explosive process in the collisions [12, 15]. Neither of these conditions is
favored at mid-rapidity in ultra-high energy heavy ion collisions, as suggested by results from the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at BNL [16]. Recently a new mechanism for strangelet

I want you to have a good look at the number of names listed in this Pdf file as well the universities involve.

Clifford of Asymptotia made this point clear about the vast network of scientists even within the string theory network of people and about who knows whom? Can you possibly know everyone, or, like the paper whose citations are referred to more as we refer to any particular scientist? We then come to see the make up and nature as we hold our views to the particular few.

So before I begin here I wanted to make it clear, that having spent considerable time as hobby and interest about science. It is not without my own motivations that the interest would be the memory of one’s childhood, or the magazine that we looked at, but the reality we are dealing with and what we call the “nature of things.”

An anomaly that cannot be explained nor shall it be removed because of the lack of evidence. It’s just one of those things that you cannot change in the person’s make up who has seen the world in a different way then normal. So shall he endeavor to accumulate all the things that are wrong to destabilization the view of truth of the world just so he can corrupt all those around him?

I ask myself the question about "what is natural" because I seen what scientists were doing to each other about the theoretical/concepts/ideas models that they were adopting in their research, that I wanted to make sure that what I had been researching had been as up to date.

Would one "leave out information that I had assembled" as they deal with me?

As I have said before while the students have been engaged in the classroom I had been following the physics development as best I could. Spent years watching and learning

So here's the thing.

If I did not answer Stefan at Backreaction about the information about strangelets then it might have been left off where Stefan decided too as he continues to show his elementary particle thinking( finish the second part Stefan).

Continued reference to strangelets might everyone think the conclusion as written I the way Stefan has shown it? Would information I had been developing have been less than the standard of what scientists hold as standard. How could anyone know it all? Hold the badge over the trial of LHC or RHIC and say I had broken the law with my insolence and corruptible behavior?:) Non! Qui?

So here again is the conundrum I had placed in front of me as I looked and interacted with the various blogs who have commented on Lee Smolin’s book, “The trouble With Physics.”

But first let me then deal with Stefan at Backreaction.

Lubos Motl:
Well, I think that even if someone believes that theoretical physics can't be trusted - and many people clearly do - there exists a less scientific argument why the accelerator won't lead to such a catastrophe: the Earth is bombed by a lot of very high-energy cosmic rays and the center-of-mass energy of the collisions is comparable to the LHC energies. So far, these collisions haven't destroyed the Earth, so it is reasonable that some additional collisions we create won't be able to do so either.

While I had these similar thoughts it was not wothpt some basis the Blogett would have pointe dyou to think about strnagelets and then in my own assumptions, the comic particle collsions from what Ellis had taught us to think about. Yes, it was the natural collider in space for sure, and it's "energy values" well beyond what is availiable at LHC.

So yes "Microstate creation of blackholes in space"

In strangelets do not exist, I had come to the same conclusion Stefan did about what is "theoretically challenged" might have engaged the thinking mind as to the relationship to what the neutrino may have been in that exercise of the QGP, compared to this one on strangelets.

So I gathered information to help me see the direction the physics was going. Least it escaped the mantra that I had been hearing exemplified in my dealings as best I can.

“Lead by the Physics.” Now I face, "the trouble with Physics."


  • Strangelets Do Not Exist?
  • The Fate of our Planet?
  • Are Strangelets Natural?-Saturday, September 30, 2006
  • Monday, October 02, 2006

    CP Violation

    The value of non-Euclidean geometry lies in its ability to liberate us from preconceived ideas in preparation for the time when exploration of physical laws might demand some geometry other than the Euclidean. Bernhard Riemann

    ON a macroscale the blackhole is a understanding of when we investigate curvature parameters with regards to the nature of our universe in spacetime. We understand this right?

    What are the "entropic valuations" being recognized as we look to a earlier time of when the QGP existed and then such manifestaion in the "matters states" have exemplified such characteristics as?

    Both space and spacetime can either be curved or flat.

    I am going to give you a quick summation of what GR is. It is about "Gravity." Now if you hold that in mind you should not loose any time with what I am telling you.

    Now, how is it that we can see the dynamcial nature of the universe, yet, we would not consider the effect of the presence of microstate blackholes in regards to such gatherings in the space, of what we call "spacetime?" What would "such gatherings" show of itself?

    A circle of radius r has a curvature of size 1/r. Therefore, small circles have large curvature and large circles have small curvature. The curvature of a line is 0. In general, an object with zero curvature is "flat."

    Think about the "circle" and it's 2D view of what the blackhole is doing in 3D +time in context of many blackholes. I always refer to "one" so you can see the comparative view that I am having little success in transferring to you, in what I am seeing.

    The curvature parameters are closely associated to the thermodynamic realizations. This is importnat not only on a cosmological level, but on a microstate as well.

    Lubos explains that here.

    There are lots of other examples what you can do to increase the number of black holes. Change the couplings so that the stars burn their fuel faster, and they will collapse into black hole faster. Reduce the gap between the Planck scale and the QCD scale, and nuclear collisions will be more likely to end up as black holes.

    It is quite obvious that the change of virtually any parameter of the Standard Model (plus inflation) in the right direction (one of the two directions) will result in an increase of the number of black holes. How can you doubt such a trivial thing?

    So there is something about the nature of our universe and the balance that it seeks to maintain of itself? Here we are, looking at events within the cosmo and "secular views of it's manfiestation" different then other locations within the universe. Yet not apart from it, or not indifferent to it's nature to be part of a larger picture?

    Silicon Vertex Tracker. The SVT is the heart of the BABAR experiment at SLAC—in the photo, physicists are putting the finishing touches on improvements to the detector. (Photo Courtesy of Peter Ginter)
    SLAC's BaBar collaboration has discovered that CP violation—an asymmetry between the behavior of matter and antimatter—exists even in a very rare class of particle decays. This result offers the most sensitive avenue yet for exploring matter-antimatter asymmetries, with implications for the future understanding of physics beyond the Standard Model.

    "BaBar has proven to be a fantastic instrument for exploring the origins of matter-antimatter asymmetries, allowing us to probe with exquisite precision very rare processes related to how the early universe came to be matter dominated," said David MacFarlane, BaBar Spokesperson and Professor at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.

    So here we are having been given the example of CP violation above and here?

    How is it that anything could be asymmetrical? :) So you introduce anti-matter and matter?

    (ambigram courtesy John Langdon)
    If we could assemble all the antimatter we've ever made at CERN and annihilate it with matter, we would have enough energy to light a single electric light bulb for a few minutes.

    As a observer Einstein made it clear that the observable universe has ideas attached to it. The "Pretty girl and the hot stove analogy" was compelling to those of us who recognized the values we may attach to life. "The Gravity of the situation?" How narrow our view of the world is when we feel the world is lost?

    But the hope and inspiration is, that the world has a bright future when we undertsand the implications of our views. Our involvement in the "toposense of reality? We are "part and parcel" of it?

    So, should we talk about the components of Heaven and Hell( my philosophical discourse on the nature of consciousness?)? You have to understand the picture and the dynamical nature this universe can say about it's entropic valuation?

    While I may have understood Omega, it didn't come to the nature it is by not including a geomtrical perspective about the nature of that same universe.

    That's my point. It had to arise from a earlier time and the manifestation is the matter states we are defining in correlation to the entropic valuations.

    While you see these as macro-characteristics and the relation to blackhole in 3d+time, the result is, a explanation of matter states in "macrostylistic beauty" we see in the events of the cosmo.

    If such inclinations to drive the energy to a ever smaller defined circle, as it gets smaller "the difference is" not so indiscernable that the events of the "particle showers" created are matter states that arise form the energy that was used.

    You see?:)

    The Ceiling

    The deeper implications of such a thought from perspective is focused upward? Yet such perspective can be made from other positions? So some minds were flexible? Others, were just engineers? ;)

    Understanding other worlds came naturally to him. Perhaps it was an inevitable consequence of being the child of Japanese Americans. His parents, though born in California, spent World War II behind barbed wire, guarded by people with machine guns: incarcerated by their own country as enemy aliens. Afterwards his father worked as a gardener, his mother a maid: two of the few jobs that were available to Japanese Americans. Kaku grew up poor, but one of the family treats was to visit the Japanese Tea Garden in San Francisco's Golden Gate Park. It turned out to be the place of a childhood epiphany. Wondering in the way that only a child does, Kaku looked at the carp swimming in a weedy pond and imagined how they would not be able to conceive of other worlds. "A carp engineer would believe that was all there is; but a carp physicist would see the ripples on the surface and start thinking about unseen dimensions," Kaku told me, laying the first of many lashes on his token engineer.

    The "ceiling" is the perspective of the carp, not the perspective of the "carp physicist."


  • Liminocentric Structures: Which Circle do you Belong Too?-Sunday, July 10, 2005

  • Ps: Some updates are curvature given for perspective. Think of a string, and any point on that string. What does the energy value of "that point" tell you in regards to the circle? The point on that string. It's just a way of looking at the string and the resonantial value assign along the string's length?

    Wednesday, September 27, 2006

    Cosmic Rays in Atlas

    Like Piglet describing the Heffalump in Winnie the Pooh by AA Milne, one knows this started out in some fantastical world. More then, the "inkblot" as a comparison leads too/from, a fictional story, and became the fantasy of Alice that had already been mathematically set in motion?

    So, theree are "ground rules" on using the inkblot in comparison to any microstate blackhole

    The flux of cosmic ray muons through the ATLAS cavern can be utilized as a tool to "shake down" the ATLAS detector prior to data taking in 2007.

    Additionally, a thorough understanding of the cosmic ray flux in ATLAS will be of great use in the study of cosmic ray backgrounds to the search for rare new physics processes in ATLAS.

    Again people like John Ellis lead us to the understanding of what Pierre Auger initiated in understanding this relation of cosmic particles and the issue coming to the forefront, in regards to the microstate blackhole production from these collisions.

    It is only today, that I discover the back ground process that was going on here, while it was bein worked out on Sabines's and Stefan's Backreaction site. I didn't relaize I was a "boucing board" from which the "questions in mind" were being initiated. Repeated comments "there" placed here in the comment sections to advance a position on what I thought.

    The momenta of the charged particles are measured from the curvature of their trajectories in a magnetic field provided by superconducting magnets. The volume and strength of magnetic field needed are not achievable with conventional magnets.

    We use each other as spring boards(nudges) to seeing a little further each time. That is defintiely appropriate to developing a good comprehension of the subject at hand, and creating insight to further information values gained in that research.


    Stefan and Sabines Backreaction site on Backreaction: Micro Black Holes

    A wonderful resource link to cosmic particles demonstrations

    Also my comment at Backreaction, has some more information in the search for understanding on microstate blackholes as well.

    Friday, September 22, 2006

    What is Natural?

    Fig. 2. Image showing how an 8 TeV black hole might look in the ATLAS detector (with the caveat that there are still uncertainties in the theoretical calculations).

    The question I would pose to those who do not have the dynamical nature of the universe in mind, are you happy with what you are seeing? Is it enough that your measure will be in the value of Steven Weinberg's first three minutes?

    Becuase I have taken you down to the microseconds, we can now see of this uiverse, do you think it so unlikely that the very methods for blackhole dyamics would not have include thermodynamic realizations held in context of the issue brought forward by the introduction by Paul of the Conformal Field theory and the issues relate to Penrose?

    Of course I jump ahead, based on the current knowledge base I have been able to put together by reading, sharing ideas and learning. So "you see," and "I see" what?

    Gamma ray detection is just the beginning of the lesson behind deeper perceptions of our universe and it is in this way that you are taken to view the universe on a much more dynamical level.

    But wait, I don't talk lightly of Planck scale and the measure of the square box.

    Nature (also called the material world, the material universe, the natural world, and the natural universe) is all matter and energy, especially in its essential form. Nature is the subject of scientific study. In scale, "nature" includes everything from the universal to the subatomic. This includes all things animal, plant, and mineral; all natural resources and events (hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes)

    On to the Validity of the LHC

    I encounter a concept the other day that took me back some. If we intercede and experiment to find the fundamental working associated with "dynamcial thinking" then how could one actually do this, while holding a "cosmological view" to all that we are exposed too in the space, around earth, and beyond?

    So of course, while we are being treated to the vast views given to us by Hubble and all the satellites, how much more could we have been satisfied to say, "look at what we have accomplished?"

    That is enough for the cosmologist is it not?

    In physics, natural units are physical units of measurement defined in terms of universal physical constants in such a manner that some chosen physical constants take on the numerical value of one when expressed in terms of a particular set of natural units. Natural units are intended to elegantly simplify particular algebraic expressions appearing in physical law or to normalize some chosen physical quantities that are properties of universal elementary particles and that may be reasonably believed to be constant. However, what may be believed and forced to be constant in one system of natural units can very well be allowed or even assumed to vary in another natural unit system. Natural units are natural because the origin of their definition comes only from properties of nature and not from any human construct. Planck units are often, without qualification, called "natural units" but are only one system of natural units among other systems. Planck units might be considered unique in that the set of units are not based on properties of any prototype, object, or particle but are based only on properties of free space.

    So as strange as it may seem "this concept" held in mind argues the validity of the LHC as a process that is "natural" as it is used to delve into the energies that allow us to see this "cascade of nature as particle manifestations. In this way, we have to support our views on what?

    So, we develope instruments to help us look to the very beginnings of creation? We talk about blackholes and we ask, "are these real?"

    Microstate Blackholes

    What gave us the ability to entertain such concepts that we again ask ourselves, "are these real?" All we had known is that Blackholes exist in nature? So the point I am making is that if you follow the natural costants, what use the microstate in, or as a valuation of what is real in cosmological association?

    If, as some suspect, the Universe contains invisible, extra dimensions, then cosmic rays that hit the atmosphere will produce tiny black holes. These black holes should be numerous enough for the observatory to detect, say Jonathan Feng and Alfred Shapere of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Fortunately while we were being occupied by the news of LHC and all the workers found busy there constructing, there were others who were very busy too. They were helping us see in ways that we were not accustom as well, in regards too, the cosmic particle collisions. Now what use this information if we had thought this avenue not fruitful and necessary?

    Nevertheless, astroparticle and collider experiments should provide useful input to the theoretical work in this area. Indeed, the signatures are expected to be spectacular, with very high multiplicity events and a large fraction of the beam energy converted into transverse energy, mostly in the form of quarks/gluons (jets) and leptons, with a production rate at the LHC rising as high as 1 Hz. An example of what a typical black-hole event would look like in the ATLAS detector is shown in figure 2.

    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.

    Lest the knowledge doesn't serve us then what will be the quest of LHC? What new route to be taken? And it is in this design of measure that we will see something more direct to the basis of what these energy valuations serve?

    CLIC is based on a novel technology in which an intense low-energy electron beam is used to generate an electromagnetic wave that is used to push a lower-intensity beam to much higher energies in a relatively small distance. It seems to be the only realistic chance of colliding electrons and positrons at multi-TeV energies so, if it works, it will allay (at least for a while) some of David Gross's concerns about the prospects for future big physics projects-John Ellis

    Saturday, August 26, 2006

    Beyond Spacetime?

    As well as bringing the accelerator's counter-rotating beams together, LHC insertion magnets also have to separate them after collision. This is the job of dedicated separators, and the US Brookhaven Laboratory is developing superconducting magnets for this purpose. Brookhaven is drawing on its experience of building the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC), which like the LHC is a superconducting machine. Consequently, these magnets will bear a close resemblance to RHIC's main dipoles. Following a prototyping phase, full-scale manufacture has started at Brookhaven and delivery of the first superconducting separator magnets to CERN is foreseen before the end of the year.

    Now some people do not like "alternate views" when looking at Sean's picture. But if you look at it, then look at the picture below, what saneness, sameness, could have affected such thinking?

    Lisa Randall:
    "You think gravity is what you see. We're always just looking at the tail of things."

    So we look for computerized versions to help enlighten. To "see" how the wave front actually embues circumstances and transfers gravitonic perception into other situations.

    Was this possible without understanding the context of the pictures shared? What complexity and variable sallows us to construct such modellings in computers?

    Okay so you know now that lisa Randall's picture was thrown inhere to hopefully help uyou see what I am saying about gravitonic consideration.

    Anything beyond the spacetime we know, exists in dimensional perspectives, and the resulting "condensative feature" of this realization is "3d+1time." The gravitonic perception is "out there?" :)

    Attributes of the Superfluids

    Now it is with some understanding that the "greater energy needed" with which to impart our views on let's say "reductionism" has pointed us in the direction of the early universe.

    So we say "QGP" and might say, "hey, is there such a way to measure such perspectives?" So I am using the graph, to point you in the right direction.

    So we talk about where these beginnings are, and the "idea of blackholes" makes their way into our view because of th reductionistic standpoint we encountered in our philosophical ramblings to include now, "conditions" that were conducive to microstate blackhole creation.

    The energy here is beyond the "collidial aspects" we encounter, yet, we have safely move our perceptions forward to the QGP? We have encounter certain results. You have to Quantum dynamically understand it, in a macro way? See we still talk about the universe, yet froma microscopic perception.

    Let's move on here, as I have.

    If you feel it too uncomfortable and the "expanse of space quantumly not stimulating" it's okay to hold on to the railings like I do, as I walked close to the "edge of the grand canyon."

    So here we are.

    I gave some ideas as to the "attributes of the superfluids" and the history in the opening paragraph, to help perspective deal with where that "extra energy has gone" and how? So you look for new physics "beyond" the current understanding of the standard model.

    So, it was appropriate to include the graviton as a force carrier? Qui! NOn?

    Sunday, July 16, 2006

    Star Lite Public Outreach

    In regards to the QGP(Quark Gluon Plasma) I thought such a creation important from the ideas of what happens in assessing any beginning?

    This thought arose from what was revealled in terms of "Microstate blackhole" production and the circumstances from such gold ion collisions.

    If we are lead experimentally to such a place, then what may we say of "reductionistic circumstances" and it's relation to the beginning of the universe?

    In my GRand Quantum conjecture, such thinking to have established the origins of "quantum perception" along with the understanding of GR and it's curvatures?

    Who would of thought such "an application" and ignore what is driving the perspective around blackhole hole creation? It's "microstate properties?"

    Andy Strominger:
    This was a field theory that lived on a circle, which means it has one spatial dimension and one time dimension. We derived the fact that the quantum states of the black hole could be represented as the quantum states of this one-plus-one dimensional quantum field theory, and then we counted the states of this theory and found they exactly agreed with the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy.

    I pointed out "Strominger" in this case to help direct the "existance of perception" simultaneously of what is being related, not only in our early universe, but from the understanding of what "quantum perception" is doing in relation to reductionistcally driven physics?

    Such a "relation and assumption of microstate blackholes," helps to direct supersymmetrical ideas, to what the "collapse of the blackhole is doing" in terms of the creation of this quark Gluon plasma state.

    Are they the same in terms of what happens in the cosmological blackhole and what is created in the collider?

    Ask a Astrophysicist

    The Question:Can you explain to me what quantum gravity is, and if so how does it relate to black holes?

    A quantum theory of gravity would involve particles passing 'gravitons' back and forth among themselves. This quantum theory would probably be a more accurate description of gravity, and might be accurate enough to describe the extreme conditions found at the center of a black hole.

    They both from what I have understood so far would have needed to account for the "classifications" Strominger had pointed out for us?

    What is Blackhole Entrophy?

    Suppose we have a box filled with gas of some type of molecule called M. The temperature of that gas in that box tells us the average kinetic energy of those vibrating molecules of gas. Each molecule as a quantum particle has quantized energy states, and if we understand the quantum theory of those molecules, theorists can count up the available quantum microstates of those molecules and get some number. The entropy is the logarithm of that number.

    When it was discovered that black holes can decay by quantum processes, it was also discovered that black holes seem to have the thermodynamic properties of temperature and entropy. The temperature of the black hole is inversely proportional to its mass, so the black hole gets hotter and hotter as it decays.

    One would have had to conclude that the "energy states" are very importnat here, as well as the nature, and the way such a process is related in terms of those reductionsitic energy derivations?

    Who is Boltzman? What is Chaos?

    In the presence of gravitational field (or, in general, of any potential field) the molecules of gas are acted upon by the gravitational forces. As a result the "concentration of gas molecules" is not the same at various points of the space and described by Boltzman distribution law:

    The "energy and decay(gravitonically considered and extended from the implication of GR)" have to be reconciled in our understanding of the blackhole, in regards to the nature of the microstate blackhole perceptions? The "evidentry" particle creations exemplify the energy distributions?

    Thursday, July 13, 2006

    GRand Quantum Conjecture

    My continued looked into the "fluids dynamics" had me wonder about the superfluid anomalies. How would the "sphere look" if it collapsed and allowed information to travel through it, based on what has been given here for perspective, when the "state of equillibrum" is arrived at?

    In regards to 3, let's just say the assumption is from a theoretcial standpoint, that microstate blackholes "are created." They are created in "cosmic particle collisions" as well?

    This is the premise from which I work, and how I gave "how particles are created," a beginning(dimensional referencing), and a basis from which all science becomes "evidentary" in the particle creations.

    Exotic physics finds black holes could be most 'perfect,' low-viscosity fluidVince Stricherz, University of Washington

    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.

    It is easy to see the difference in viscosity between a jar of honey or molasses at room temperature and a glass of water. The honey is much thicker and more viscous, and it pours very slowly compared with the water.

    Using string theory as a measuring tool, Son and colleagues Pavlo Kovtun of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and Andrei Starinets of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Ontario, have found that water is 400 times more viscous than black hole fluid having the same number of particles per cubic inch.

    Your points in conclusion,I, II, III

    III- from my conclusions as well.

    Again in above quote, I am defining the leading perspective on blackholes as they are being theoretically defined now, and will be subject to experimentation soon?:)

    Now again "backreaction in the laval nozzle" is up for inspection here as we delve deeper into the nature of the blackhole.

    Nature in Analog Models

    Analogue models of (and for) gravity have a long and distinguished history dating back to the earliest years of general relativity. In this review article we will discuss the history, aims, results, and future prospects for the various analogue models. We start the discussion by presenting a particularly simple example of an analogue model, before exploring the rich history and complex tapestry of models discussed in the literature. The last decade in particular has seen a remarkable and sustained development of analogue gravity ideas, leading to some hundreds of published articles, a workshop, two books, and this review article. Future prospects for the analogue gravity programme also look promising, both on the experimental front (where technology is rapidly advancing) and on the theoretical front (where variants of analogue models can be used as a springboard for radical attacks on the problem of quantum gravity).

    "Analogistical behaviors" help to push perspective, where before, our theoretical explorations had ran dry?

    These wormhole like 'blackholes' do not lead to other pocket universes, unless we choose to call another sector of space a pocket universe, like Europeans first called the land across the Atlantic the 'New World' or Australia 'Another World' yet still clearly part of this World we call Planet Earth.

    If we are to think that the overall context can be apllied to this universe, then such evidence "should be obtainable" as to the nature of such a beginning? But even still, to your point and aspect within this universe, we are looking for accontable methods to such dark energy creation?

    Every picture held in mind is a link to other pictures

    Each event in regards to gravitational collapse would be indicative of what can be "put back into this universe" and sustain it?

    Lubos Motl:
    The mechanism behind sonoluminiscence remains a bit controversial. Claiming that a thermonuclear fusion occurs during sonoluminiscence is among the more conservative explanations. The physicist Claudia Eberlein argued that the correct explanation is that the imploding bubbles create sonic black holes and the flashes are the counterpart of Hawking radiation as the sonic black hole evaporates. You should not think that this is an example of a very, very low energy quantum gravity because the sonic black holes have no connection with the scales of gravity. It is not a supercollider in a glass of beer. But let me admit that as an undergrad, I was excited by this proposal, at least for a few minutes, but I apparently forgot the details of that encounter.

    So by developing this picture of the "bubble collapse in sonofusion", and let's forget about the energy produced from such bubbles and focus on the geometrics of such a collapse. That's my point.

    Lubos Motl:
    Janice Granhardt has pointed out a press release that is two days old and arguably much more serious and potentially far-reaching than the news about "sonofusion" we described yesterday.

    That is part of my conjecture as well as the "unification factor" in my GRand Quantum perceptions.:)That if you remember Kip thorne's plate 27 you will understand that information from the collapse had to be sent over a great distance for us to make sense of the geometrical dynamics that are unfolding from that time and place.

    So you look for the gravitational waves that Webber initiated, and Kip Thorne encouraged in our measures of what is actually being transmitted. Kip Thorne is the father of the LIGO program?

    You must remember gravitational waves have not yet been verified, yet the theory of GR implicitly tells and is about gravity. It was thus taken further in my conclusions having understood that the creation of this infomration would allow one someday "to map" this very collapse in terms of the gravitonic information left in the bulk?

    This is "Dimensional orientated" from a beginning(11dimensional view?), from which evidence is "the 3+1."

    That's outside the box thinking? :)Cosmologists work "inside," as Clifford of Cosmic Variance once said?

    How then is such a gravitational heat generated from the boundary conditions(blackhole), which grows ever smaller in that collapse, and our energy valuations go higher to supersymmetical realizations? The present volume calculated in the extension of our universe would have to be in concert with the volume before such a collapse was to be expected?

    This "total energy value," assuming the universe is flat teeter's on the brink of ?:)

    Total dark energy would have to account for this and supernova events contributing as well as, particle collisions that go on all the time?

    So if space is not really empty, then what is it supposed to be filled with? Quantum harmonic oscillator and zeropoint?

  • Charlatan's Who Use Graviton
  • Wednesday, May 17, 2006

    Instead of the Pea, What New Paradigm?


    Imagine for one moment that this is all wrapped in a bubble(universe). Our views of earth, the hills and valleys, of the gravitational perspective, as I showed of earth as "time variable measure" now brought to conceptual realization for society.

    Einstein's playful example of the hotstove, remember?

    The picture you refer belongs to ISCAP and if you "refresh" that page a couple of times, you will see a number of pictures. They are important. Especially the "Lagrange points" How this perspective is used with satellites in space travel.

    This is a very important perception that is not understood very well. I have another picture that will explain it well. I have maybe given to much to absorb here?

    Hey hey
    Do you believe that Einstein will last forever and that presently visualized elementary particles are all there are?

    What happens on a cosmological scale is indeed explanable as I have shown.

    The trouble is when we move our perception to the quantum probabilities. I surmized these things in context of how we would determined information from the horizon, yet the value of energy determinations here ask us to consider the value assigned to particle inclinations. These energy determinations are still valid within context of the conformal field theories, as the map shows of Bekenstein bound.

    At this site you will find the new black boxes and calibration samples for the LHC Olympics! See: Revolutions for Change

    For example test runs in the olympics of the LHC to be done.

    Blackhole Production

    Blackhole production of course created some concern, while it was being answered in terms of strangelet developement. This spoke to blackhole production directly. But low and behold, how would any of us considered the context of the cosmic particle collisions that go on all the time, and from it, secondary particle showers that are presented to earth as microstate blackhole production, which quickly dissipates.

    So you might have thought indeed strangelet production from microstate blackholes in terms of cosmic particle colllisions?

    But the point is learning to identfy the very beginning, and like most I thought the singualrity was like a pea, while the energy valuation and quark gluon plasma created, has some effects that we have to consider? That were counter intuitive.

    Produced tunnelling? :)

    Thus, this changes the very dynamics of constructs that are being present here, in a philsophical format for consumption by a society that had reached critical density?

    While the energy valuation here would created certain effects. How would you apply this to the sociological developement of a society that welcomes, and from it, is born new possibilities?

    Paradigmal changes perhaps?

    Mental Constructs

    How would such a definition as mental construct find it's place among our interactions?

    Would we not need some "mental construct," to say that if the processes exist and we are fundamentally part of that process, are there different ways in which to measure our valuations in relation to how we might now see earth?

    So there is this "touching" in the way you have said it at a fundamental level and then there is the touching at another level? I am justing tryng to understand it from a frame of reference, yet the idea, ideal, is much finer in it's measure? Where did it begin?

    electron wave packet repelling eachother by exchanging virtual photons

    As you know this process is also encapsulated as part of GR.

    When you engage Gauss's thinking, Gauss's coordinates, it is not without "seeing in ways" that one might not be accustomed too, that we ask, how might we treat this subject?

    Yet, you look for "the consistancy" that is thread through all the geometric incursions we send our perceptions into? So what is this consistancy?

    While we entertain these distances, quark to quark measures, how will this ocnsistancy of thought be held to "a measure" while we send perception all the way down to the reductionist levels, and find that such a fluid allows new physics and idealogical valuations to be now interpeted according to the measures enforced?

    Of course the answer is very simplistic in my books and is one uesed to maintain this consistancy, yet, we would find there is no new geometry or new physics as far as we know, from that beginning point?