Pages

Showing posts with label astrophysics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label astrophysics. Show all posts

Monday, January 08, 2007

Hubble Maps the Cosmic Web of "Clumpy" Dark Matter in 3-D


Three-Dimensional Distribution of Dark Matter in the Universe
This three-dimensional map offers a first look at the web-like large-scale distribution of dark matter, an invisible form of matter that accounts for most of the universe's mass. This milestone takes astronomers from inference to direct observation of dark matter's influence in the universe. Because of the finite speed of light, regions furthest away are also seen as they existed a long time ago. The map stretches halfway back in time to the beginning of the universe.

The map reveals a loose network of dark matter filaments, gradually collapsing under the relentless pull of gravity, and growing clumpier over time. This confirms theories of how structure formed in our evolving universe, which has transitioned from a comparatively smooth distribution of matter at the time of the big bang. The dark matter filaments began to form first and provided an underlying scaffolding for the subsequent construction of stars and galaxies from ordinary matter. Without dark matter, there would have been insufficient mass in the universe for structures to collapse and galaxies to form.


Part of this reporting is the way in which one could look at the Cosmos and see the gravitational relationships, as one might see it in relation to "Lagrangian views" in the Sun Earth Relation.


Diagram of the Lagrange Point gravitational forces associated with the Sun-Earth system.


Make sure you click on the image for further information. Mouseovers as your cursor is placed over images or worded links are equally important. You learn about satellites and the way they travel through these holes.

While one can see "dark matter" in terms of it's constraints, what of "dark energy" as it makes it way through those holes? This reveals the expansionary nature in terms of dark energy being repelled, whether you like to think so or not. This explains the dark energy developing free of the dark matter constraints and explains the state of our universe.


LSST Homepage background image. (Image credit: LSST Corporation, Bryn Feldman) Design of LSST Telescope dome and local facilities, current as of January 2007. Google Inc. has joined with nineteen other organizations to build the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope, scheduled to see first light atop Cerro Pachón in Chile in 2013.
The Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) is a proposed ground-based 8.4-meter, 10 square-degree-field telescope that will provide digital imaging of faint astronomical objects across the entire sky, night after night. In a relentless campaign of 15 second exposures, LSST will cover the available sky every three nights, opening a movie-like window on objects that change or move on rapid timescales: exploding supernovae, potentially hazardous near-Earth asteroids, and distant Kuiper Belt Objects. The superb images from the LSST will also be used to trace billions of remote galaxies and measure the distortions in their shapes produced by lumps of Dark Matter, providing multiple tests of the mysterious Dark Energy.



Two simulations of strong lensing by a massive cluster of galaxies. In the upper image, all the dark matter is clumped around individual cluster galaxies (orange), causing a particular distortion of the background galaxies (white and blue). In the lower image, the same amount of mass is more smoothly distributed over the cluster, causing a very different distortion pattern.


Here in this post the example of "how one may see" is further expounded upon to show how dark matter and dark energy are in action as a 90% aspect of the cosmos, while the remaining 10% is a discrete measure of what is cosmologically matter orientated. We don't loose sight of these relationships, but are helped to further develope them in terms of this gravitational relationship.

See:
  • Dark Matter in 3D
  • COSMOS Reveals the Cosmos
  • Thursday, December 28, 2006

    First Stars Behind the Scene

    There are several recognized processes from the early universe that leave relic effects setting the stage for galaxy formation and evolution. We deal here with the first generarion of stars, primordial nucleosynthesis, the epoch of recombination, and the thermal history of various cosmic backgrounds.


    Part of understanding the time line is first knowing where the Pregalactic Universe exists in that time line.

    Plato:
    So given the standard information one would have to postulate something different then what is currently classified?

    A new Type III (what ever one shall attribute this to definition), versus Type I, Type IIa?


    The idea is to place the distant measure in relation to what is assumed of TYPE I, TypeIIa. It assumes all these things, but has to been defined further, to be a Type III. That's the point of setting the values of where this measure can be taken from.

    I wrote someplace else the thought generated above. It is nice that the world of scientists are not so arrogant in some places, while some have been willing to allow the speculation to continue. Even amidst their understanding, that I was less then the scientist that they are, yet recognizing, I am deeply motivated to understanding this strange world of cosmology and it's physics.

    When I wrote this title above I was actually thinking of two scenarios that are challenging the way I am seeing it.


    Credit: NASA/WMAP Science Team
    WMAP has produced a new, more detailed picture of the infant universe. Colors indicate "warmer" (red) and "cooler" (blue) spots. The white bars show the "polarization" direction of the oldest light. This new information helps to pinpoint when the first stars formed and provides new clues about events that transpired in the first trillionth of a second of the universe.


    First of these, was in terms of the time line and what we know of the WMAP demonstration given to us of that early universe. I of course inject some of what I know by past research to help the general public understand what is being demonstrated from another perspective.

    This is what happens as you move through different scientists(Wayne Hu) thoughts to see the world in the way they may see it. This concept can be quite revealing sometimes giving a profound effect to moving the mind to consider the universe in new ways.



    "Lagrangian views" in relation may have been one result that comes quickly to my mind. Taking that chaldni plate and applying it to the universe today.



    Even though in the context of this post, we may see the universe in a "simple experiment" not just demonstrating the "early universe," but the universe in it's "gravitational effect" from that evolution to matter defined now.

    The Time Line


    Credit: NASA/WMAP Science Team
    The expansion of the universe over most of its history has been relatively gradual. The notion that a rapid period "inflation" preceded the Big Bang expansion was first put forth 25 years ago. The new WMAP observations favor specific inflation scenarios over other long held ideas.


    Looking to the "far left" of the image we see the place where the cosmic background is being demonstrated, while to the "far right" we see the satellite which has helped measure what we know of the early universe. So this "distant measure" has allowed us to understand what is behind the scene of what we know of cosmology today of events, galaxies and such.

    Second, what comes to mind is the Massive Blue Star of 100 Solar masses that would have been further out in terms of the billions of years that we may of sought in terms of our measures. So this would be of value I would assume in relation to model perspective and measures?

    So the distance measure has been defined then by understanding the location of the cosmic background and the place where the Blue giants will have unfolded in their demise, to the creation of blackholes.


    The processes in the Universe after the Big Bang. The radio waves are much older than the light of galaxies. From the distortion of the images (curved lines) - caused by the gravitation of material between us and the light sources - it is possible to calculate and map the entire foreground mass.Image: Max Planck Institute of Astrophysics
    We don't have to wait for the giant telescope to get unparalleled results from this technique, however. One of the most pressing issues in current physics is to gain a better understanding of the mysterious Dark Energy which currently drives the accelerated expansion of the Universe. Metcalf and White show that mass maps of a large fraction of the sky made with an instrument like SKA could measure the properties of Dark Energy more precisely than any previously suggested method, more than 10 times as accurately as mass maps of similar size based on gravitational distortions of the optical images of galaxies.

    Tuesday, December 19, 2006

    Cosmic ray spallation


    As this NASA chart indicates, 70 percent or more of the universe consists of dark energy, about which we know next to nothing
    Other explanations of dark energy, called "quintessence," originate from theoretical high-energy physics. In addition to baryons, photons, neutrinos, and cold dark matter, quintessence posits a fifth kind of matter (hence the name), a sort of universe-filling fluid that acts like it has negative gravitational mass. The new constraints on cosmological parameters imposed by the HST supernova data, however, strongly discourage at least the simplest models of quintessence.


    Of course my mind is thinking about the cosmic triangle of an event in the cosmos. So I am wondering what is causing the "negative pressure" as "dark energy," and why this has caused the universe to speed up.


    SNAP-Supernova / Acceleration Probe-Studying the Dark Energy of the Universe
    The discovery by the Supernova Cosmology Project (SCP) and the High-Z Supernova team that the expansion of the universe is accelerating poses an exciting mystery — for if the universe were governed by gravitational attraction, its rate of expansion would be slowing. Acceleration requires a strange “dark energy’ opposing this gravity. Is this Einstein’s cosmological constant, or more exotic new physics? Whatever the explanation, it will lead to new discoveries in astrophysics, particle physics, and gravitation.


    By defining the context of particle collisions it was evident that such a place where such a fluid could have dominated by such energy in stars, are always interesting as to what is ejected from those same stars. What do those stars provide for the expression of this universe while we are cognoscente of the "arrow of time" explanation.


    This diagram reveals changes in the rate of expansion since the universe's birth 15 billion years ago. The more shallow the curve, the faster the rate of expansion.


    So of course these thoughts are shared by the perspective of educators to help us along. But if one did not understand the nature of the physical attributes of superfluids, how would one know to think of the relativistic conditions that high energy provides for us?


    NASA/WMAP Scientific Team: Expanding Universe



    So recognizing where these conditions are evident would be one way in which we might think about what is causing a negative pressure in the cosmos.

    Given the assumption that the matter in the universe is homogeneous and isotropic (The Cosmological Principle) it can be shown that the corresponding distortion of space-time (due to the gravitational effects of this matter) can only have one of three forms, as shown schematically in the picture at left. It can be "positively" curved like the surface of a ball and finite in extent; it can be "negatively" curved like a saddle and infinite in extent; or it can be "flat" and infinite in extent - our "ordinary" conception of space. A key limitation of the picture shown here is that we can only portray the curvature of a 2-dimensional plane of an actual 3-dimensional space! Note that in a closed universe you could start a journey off in one direction and, if allowed enough time, ultimately return to your starting point; in an infinite universe, you would never return.


    Of course it is difficult for me to understand this process, but I am certainly trying. If one had found that in the relativistic conditions of high energy scenarios a "similarity to a flattening out" associated with an accelerating universe what would this say about information travelling from the "origins of our universe" quite freely. How would this effect dark energy?

    In physics, a perfect fluid is a fluid that can be completely characterized by its rest frame energy density ρ and isotropic pressure p.

    Real fluids are "sticky" and contain (and conduct) heat. Perfect fluids are idealized models in which these possibilities are neglected. Specifically, perfect fluids have no shear stresses, viscosity, or heat conduction.

    In tensor notation, the energy-momentum tensor of a perfect fluid can be written in the form

    [tex] T^{\mu\nu}=(\rho+p)\, U^\mu U^\nu + P\, \eta^{\mu\nu}\,[/tex]



    where U is the velocity vector field of the fluid and where ημν is the metric tensor of Minkowski spacetime.

    Perfect fluids admit a Lagrangian formulation, which allows the techniques used in field theory to be applied to fluids. In particular, this enables us to quantize perfect fluid models. This Lagrangian formulation can be generalized, but unfortunately, heat conduction and anisotropic stresses cannot be treated in these generalized formulations.

    Perfect fluids are often used in general relativity to model idealized distributions of matter, such as in the interior of a star.


    So events in the cosmos ejected the particles, what geometrical natures embued such actions, to have these particle out in space interacting with other forms of matter to create conditions that would seem conducive to me, for that negative pressure?

    Cosmic ray spallation is a form of naturally occurring nuclear fission and nucleosynthesis. It refers to the formation of elements from the impact of cosmic rays on an object. Cosmic rays are energetic particles outside of Earth ranging from a stray electron to gamma rays. These cause spallation when a fast moving particle, usually a proton, part of a cosmic ray impacts matter, including other cosmic rays. The result of the collision is the expulsion of large members of nucleons (protons and neutrons) from the object hit. This process goes on not only in deep space, but in our upper atmosphere due to the impact of cosmic rays.

    Cosmic ray spallation produces some light elements such as lithium and boron. This process was discovered somewhat by accident during the 1970s. Models of big bang nucleosynthesis suggested that the amount of deuterium was too large to be consistent with the expansion rate of the universe and there was therefore great interest in processes that could generate deuterium after the big bang.

    Cosmic ray spallation was investigated as a possible process to generate deuterium. As it turned out, spallation could not generate much deuterium, and the excess deuterium in the universe could be explained by assuming the existence of non-baryonic dark matter. However, studies of spallation showed that it could generate lithium and boron. Isotopes of aluminum, beryllium, carbon(carbon-14), chlorine, iodine and neon, are also formed through cosmic ray spallation.



    Talk about getting tongue tied, can you imagine, "these fluctuations can generate their own big bangs in tiny areas of the universe." Read on.


    Photo credit: Lloyd DeGrane/University of Chicago News Office
    Carroll and Chen’s scenario of infinite entropy is inspired by the finding in 1998 that the universe will expand forever because of a mysterious force called “dark energy.” Under these conditions, the natural configuration of the universe is one that is almost empty. “In our current universe, the entropy is growing and the universe is expanding and becoming emptier,” Carroll said.

    But even empty space has faint traces of energy that fluctuate on the subatomic scale. As suggested previously by Jaume Garriga of Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona and Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University, these fluctuations can generate their own big bangs in tiny areas of the universe, widely separated in time and space. Carroll and Chen extend this idea in dramatic fashion, suggesting that inflation could start “in reverse” in the distant past of our universe, so that time could appear to run backwards (from our perspective) to observers far in our past.

    Thursday, November 16, 2006

    Three Ring Circus: Dark Energy

    "Observations always involve theory."Edwin Hubble


    Hopefully some day, I will be accepted as a student of this universe, and it's intrigue?



    Sometimes it is necessary to understand that having come to different consclusion about the geometry of this universe that underneath the complexity of these equations a schematic drawing of reality is unfolding? I think this is where Einstein's success came from? So assume from this point a supersymmetrical view of the universe?

    You can check out Wayne Hu's site for further info on computer simulation below


    A simulation of large-scale structure
    formation
    As the Universe expands, galaxies become more and more distant from each other. For an observer, such as ourselves, it appears that all other galaxies fly away from us. The further the galaxy, the faster it appears to recede. This recession affects the light emitted by the distant galaxies, stretching the wavelengths of emitted photons due to the Doppler redshift effect. The distance between galaxies is proportionalto the measure of this effect 1+z, where z is what astronomers call redshift. The redshift can be measured for each object if its spectrum is measured.


    All three geometrical positions demonstrated below each held the cosmologists to views of our universe. But we now know that Einstein may have been right. What allows us to think this way?

    Sorry about the quality of artistic rendition. But you get the jest right?

    Why is the universe speeding up, and what does this mean geometrically? There has to be some physics going on that would explain this? What may this be?

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


    Of course this information is based on 2003 data but the jest of the idea here is that in order to go to a "fast forward" the conditions had to exist previously that did not included "sterile neutrinos" and were a result of this "cross over."

    If we look back to the measures of supernova Ia measure and find that in that time measure there were differences in the inflationary aspect of that universe, then, the universe today would have allowed us to consider the universe quite capable of changing it's speed of inflation.

    While indeed we had held to inverse square law in our assumptions, what shall we do now? As you know, spending a couple of years on my own, I am learning, and yes, it shows sometimes. The "idea back then" presented by Savas Dimopoulos of Stanford University. "This gives us a totally new perspective for addressing theoretical and experimental problems," is what was understood in any theoretical development by scientists then and today?

    Inverse Fourth Power Law


    Savas Dimopoulos of Stanford University
    Instead of the Newtonian inverse square law you’ll have an inverse fourth power law. This signature is being looked for in the ongoing experiments.


    Also, I wouldn't one to think that the experimental process had been defunct what we are doing with Cosmic ray collision processes, to not include it with what the LHC is doing as well. Not only have we created the conditions for it in LHC we recognize as a natural process.

    While we know of the components of our universe distributed we understand that their is a part of this whole thing that is casing some questions about what we had thought held to the big bomb's inverse square law rules.

    What is causing the Speed increase?

    While indeed the layman here speculates, it made more sense if we can now explain what is going on. It has been a long journey in terms of comprehension development but I must say it has been rewarding.



    So while indeed I show cosmos particle showers here, it is to point out something that helps to fuel the idea behind the speeding up and slowing down of the universe? Cross over production demonstrate in LHC serves also to speak to the fluctuations in "differing speeds of inflation" in our cosmos?

    The "crossover" is a point in the collision process of LHC. So by creating these conditions in the LHC, we have effectively recognized where the "new physics" will emerged from. Also, it presents the opportunity for the "first time here" to address what the effects of the LHC will do for us in terms of what has been presented in terms of the dark energy announced below.



    So as close as we came to discerning the mass of the neutrino, what have we now come to know? That their could be "a form" of dark matter? The "point here" was to look for the crossover that was taking place and presenting the opportunities for "new physics" to emerge.

    The Los Alamos data revealed a muon anti-neutrino cross over to an electron neutrino. This type of oscillation is difficult to explain using only the three known types of neutrinos.


    I have some "thought bubbles" percolating to the surface awareness of my mind(a philosopher?), so we will have to see what strange brew materializes. This is a post in developmental mode.

    Scientists using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope have discovered that dark energy is not a new constituent of space, but rather has been present for most of the universe's history. Dark energy is a mysterious repulsive force that causes the universe to expand at an increasing rate. Investigators used Hubble to find that dark energy was already boosting the expansion rate of the universe as long as nine billion years ago. This picture of dark energy is consistent with Albert Einstein's prediction of nearly a century ago that a repulsive form of gravity emanates from empty space. Data from Hubble provides supporting evidence to help astrophysicists to understand the nature of dark energy. This will allow them to begin ruling out some competing explanations that predict that the strength of dark energy changes over time.



    The title itself of this blog post is not to make fun of what is happening in cosmology right now with the new announcement today. It is about "forcing the mind" to look at "Friedman's equation" in each of the rings. Now the thought is the "whole show" is the Einstein cosmsological constant circus and entertainment, that is happening simultaneously.

    Yet it is the idea of the "oscillating nature" behind the geometrical principals that is what I am speculating about.

    But thanks to good professor below there is an more in depth explanation shared.



    Maybe with the development of the vision, "beyond the spacetime" we had come to know and love, we have now come to a unique point in time? That we understand the greater "depth of the universe" is now open for questions about it's inherent nature?

    Wednesday, November 15, 2006

    What is Dark Matter/Energy?

    When Chaos Goes Quantum?

    All events shown here (except KEK test detector) were generated by Monte-Carlo simulation program, written by Clark. The visualizing software which produced the detector images was written by Tomasz.


    While the sun was easily recognizable building "monte carlo" patterns in computer technology developed from SNO work made such views easily discernible?

    Imagine putting all that information through a single point? That "point" is important in terms of the energy perspective. It reveals something very interesting about our universe.

    If such experiments as listed here are to be considered in the "forward perspective" then what do you think we have gained in our understanding of supersymmetry? Yes indeed, the undertanding is amazing with the reading of what is given to us below in the Interaction.org links.

    The complexity of the information seems well, like, "ligo information" being transcribed into a working image of the cosmos? Complexity of all that information/energy is being processed through the LHC experiment. Consider it's energy values, and all that is being produced as "particle constituents" and yes, there is more.

    Cosmic particle collision understanding in this correlation of experiment at LHC, we learn much about the universe.

    Quantum physics has revealed a stunning truth about “nothing”: even the emptiest vacuum is filled with elementary particles, continually created and destroyed. Particles appear and disappear, flying apart and coming together, in an intricate quantum dance. This far-reaching consequence of quantum mechanics has withstood the most rigorous experimental scrutiny. In fact, these continual fluctuations are at the heart of our quantum understanding of nature.

    The dance of quantum particles has special significance today because it contributes to the dark energy that is driving the universe apart. But there’s a problem: the vacuum has too much energy. A naive theoretical estimate gives an amount about 10120 times too large to fit cosmological observations. The only known way to reduce the energy is to cancel contributions of different particle species against each other, possibly with a new symmetry called supersymmetry. With supersymmetry the result is 1060 times better—a huge improvement, but not enough. Even with supersymmetry, what accounts for the other 60 orders of magnitude is still a mystery.

    Physics theory predicts that one of the most important particles in the quantum vacuum is the Higgs particle. The Higgs pervades the vacuum, slowing the motion of particles, giving them mass, and preventing atoms from disintegrating. Since it fills the vacuum, the Higgs itself contributes to the embarrassing factor of 10120.

    The next accelerators are opening a window on the pivotal role of symmetry in fundamental physics. New discoveries will teach us about the role of the Higgs particle and supersymmetry in defining the vacuum. Such discoveries are key to understanding what tames the quantum vacuum, a topic that is fundamental to any real understanding of the mysterious dark energy that determines the destiny of our cosmos.


    It took me a long time to get to the very point made in terms of the supersymmetrical valuation by understanding what existed "before" was transform from to being by presented another possibily on the other side.

    "In fact, these continual fluctuations are at the heart of our quantum understanding of nature."

    The only known way to reduce the energy is to cancel contributions of different particle species against each other, possibly with a new symmetry called supersymmetry.


    It had to be taken down to a reductionistic point of view in order for this to make any sense. You needed experiments in which this was made possible. Without them, how could we be "lead by science?"

    Conclusions


    Particle physics is in the midst of a great revolution. Modern data and ideas have challenged long-held beliefs about matter, energy, space and time. Observations have confirmed that 95 percent of the universe is made of dark energy and dark matter unlike any we have seen or touched in our most advanced experiments. Theorists have found a way to reconcile gravity with quantum physics, but at the price of postulating extra dimensions beyond the familiar four dimensions of space and time. As the magnitude of the current revolution becomes apparent, the science of particle physics has a clear path forward. The new data and ideas have not only challenged the old ways of thinking, they have also pointed to the steps required to make progress. Many advances are within reach of our current program; others are close at hand. We are extraordinarily fortunate to live in a time when the great questions are yielding a whole new level of understanding. We should seize the moment and embrace the challenges.


    A new LHC experiment is born, is an effect from what existed before? What come after.

    Yes, the idea is that universe was not born from colliding particles, but from the supersymetical valuation that existed in the universe in the very beginning. You had to know, how to get there. That such events are still feasible, and are being produced cosmologically as we see evidenced in the "fast forward" experiment.

    Thursday, November 09, 2006

    The Cosmic Connection to Climate


    Cars and industrial activity contribute to the 7 gigatons of carbon dioxide released each year into the atmosphere.Credits: EuroNews

    Some thoughts about this were being contemplates as I was slowly awaking this morning. I was actually thinking of one more image about seeing Gr being measured by how Grace is looking at and being used to look at the planet in other ways as well.



    I'll add that later.

    Variation of Cosmic ray flux and Global cloud coverage by Henri Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen, 26 NOvember 1996

    Some historical perspective about eight years ago below here raises question about what this cosmic connection might mean from a wider perspective.

    CERN plans global-warming experiment(1998)

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

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


    Looking at this places some extra thinking about what could be taking place in the cosmos, effectively creating the circumstance "also" for changes with regard to earth's climate?



    At what point would such intensity of the event in the cosmos cause the larger scenario to be played out, that it also, may have been a contributing factor to what we think about global warming here?



    See this link here for further thoughts about the increase in the "lighthouse effect" and how such intensities may be considered in light of the following thoughts being demonstrated here.


    This is not to dissuade people from thinking about the current considerations that are man made but raised questions in my mind about the consequences of other factors which may or may not be contributing to global climate changes.

    A missing link in climate theory

    The Danish National Space Center (DNSC) is a research center under the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. The research activities include astrophysics, solar system physics, geodesy and space technology.
    The experimental results lend strong empirical support to the theory proposed a decade ago by Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen that cosmic rays influence Earth’s climate through their effect on cloud formation. The original theory rested on data showing a strong correlation between variation in the intensity of cosmic radiation penetrating the atmosphere and the amount of low-altitude clouds. Cloud cover increases when the intensity of cosmic rays grows and decreases when the intensity declines.

    It is known that low-altitude clouds have an overall cooling effect on the Earth’s surface. Hence, variations in cloud cover caused by cosmic rays can change the surface temperature. The existence of such a cosmic connection to Earth’s climate might thus help to explain past and present variations in Earth’s climate.

    Interestingly, during the 20th Century, the Sun’s magnetic field which shields Earth from cosmic rays more than doubled, thereby reducing the average influx of cosmic rays. The resulting reduction in cloudiness, especially of low-altitude clouds, may be a significant factor in the global warming Earth has undergone during the last century. However, until now, there has been no experimental evidence of how the causal mechanism linking cosmic rays and cloud formation may work.

    ‘Many climate scientists have considered the linkages from cosmic rays to clouds to climate as unproven,’ comments Eigil Friis-Christensen, who is now Director of the Danish National Space Center. ‘Some said there was no conceivable way in which cosmic rays could influence cloud cover. The SKY experiment now shows how they do so, and should help to put the cosmic-ray connection firmly onto the agenda of international climate research.’


    Thursday, October 19, 2006

    Central Theme is the Sun



    A lot of times people do not understand the effects something can have and after we see these effects, we wonder how did we ever miss the importance of what layed underneath this process in Physics.


    Richard Feynman-Dancing With Neutrinos-Nova



    Much as we looked at the stars above, the views became much clearer with hubble and such, that we see the depth is necessary as we quantum dynamically learn to see with a greater comprehension.

    481 MeV muon neutrino (MC) produces 394 MeV muon which later decays at rest into 52 MeV electron. The ring fit to the muon is outlined. Fuzzy electron ring is seen in yellow-green in lower right corner. This is perspective projection with 110 degrees opening angle, looking from a corner of the Super-Kamiokande detector (not from the event vertex). Option -show_non_hit was used to show all PMTs. Color corresponds to time PMT was hit by Cerenkov photon from the ring. Color scale is time from 830 to 1816 ns with 15.9 ns step. The time window was widened from default to clearly show the muon decay electron in different color. In the charge weighted time histogram to the right two peaks are clearly seen, one from the muon, and second one from the delayed electron from the muon decay. Size of PMT corresponds to amount of light seen by the PMT. PMTs are drawn as a flat squares even though in reality they look more like huge flattened golden light bulbs.


    Now it is important to me that when I seen the relationships of physics extolling itself in nature, I wanted to understand how this evidence came to be. But, before I lay what nature has shown me, I wanted to explain a little further what I am starting put together in my head, about what has become common in our understanding, was not easily so from a theoretical/concept/idea standpoint. That it was indeed "progressive/reductionistic" as our views became ever more progressive as we see the same picture of the cosmo(astrophysics) in an ever widening view of understanding.

    The neutrino detector for the Super-Kamiokande experiment in Japan contains ultrapure water surrounded by an array of thousands of photo-tubes, arranged to catch the flashes of light from neutrino interactions in the water. In 1998, researchers at "Super-K" found evidence for a small mass for neutrinos coming to earth from particle interactions in cosmic rays. If neutrinos, until recently thought to be massless, actually do have a mass, the implications will be profound, not only for particle physics but for astronomy and cosmology. At right is the MINOS collaboration at the Department of Energy’s Fermilab, before a slice of the 10,000-ton detector they will build to capture neutrino interactions. The MINOS experiment will use beams of accelerator-produced neutrinos by Fermilab's Tevatron to investigate neutrino mass.


    Now the lesson above is quite simplistic in the sense that what was once held in theoretical views could/would have made it's way into the depths of how we see things now in nature. So in having understood that process, I wanted to show two more that you might be interested in?


    Astronaut's view of the Aurora Australis, or southern lights, from aboard Space Shuttle Discovery 1991 (Courtesy: NASA)


    The picture below here is what I see from my backyard when mist and rain has fallen.



    So here you have it. A couple of views of nature that have been exemplifed in our search for understanding. What does this all reveal to you? Well, that's the continung saga of what the depth of perception has endowed all us human beings, as we look ever deeper into the nature of the cosmo, and the beginning of this universe.

    While we had been given the Sun to look at in one of it's diverse ways, I wanted and did show that meeting the views of how we look at things. That it had been extended, by understanding the "valuation of the energy" as it has ensued from the very heart of what that burning sun is. How we gain immediate results, not ony in the particle showers, but of what evidence we have lain before us, as the physical outcome, as we look from space, and how, we look from earth.

    See:

  • SOLAR B and Van Ellen Belts
  • Tuesday, July 25, 2006

    Clifford and The Singularity

    Horatiu is referring to a mathematical similarity between the physics of the real world, which govern RHIC collisions, and the physics that scientists use to describe a theoretical, “imaginary” black hole in a hypothetical world with a different number of space-time dimensions (more than the four dimensions — three space directions and time — that exist in our world). That is, the two situations require similar mathematical wrangling to analyze. This imaginary, mathematical black hole that Horatiu compares to the RHIC fireball is completely different from a black hole in the real universe; in particular, it cannot grow by gobbling up matter. In other words, and because the amount of matter created at RHIC is so tiny, RHIC does not, and cannot possibly, produce a true, star-swallowing black hole.


    See:

  • So how far back to the beginning, and if we had thought supersymmetry could exist, would it be in the most perfect fluid?

    I place this picture and article above so that one keeps perspective about the similarites of the "micro versus the macro" perspective and "not" that the "disaster scenario" could create the "large blackhole?" But wait?

    I am thinking in terms of what could create "the situations" for what is coming into being. Is it acummulative? I am not sure from the "many colldial events" that one could see happen? Hence my focus, to what not ony is created in the "collidal event," but to the cosmic particle colllsions as well. How rare are these? I speak on the "history of strangelets" from that point.

    Anyway onward here.

    Clifford:
    Seriously his talk is all about the physics of certain type of spacetime singularites-such as the one that live's in our universe's past-and whether life can make sense of the idea of space and time coming into being after sucha singualrity, while not existing prior to that


    I should start off from a quote of Clifford's of Cosmic Variance, becuase of Q's insistance in regards to the descritpions of singularities and my lacking an understanding and somewhat confusion. I thought I would do some more research here.

    There are "certain assumptions" I am making and this is in regard to the a statement Clifford makes, is held as a question in my mind of what exists before anything can emerge into the spacetime? While he has called this beginning "spacetime" and reference "another state" before this, what is it? This is what holds my assumption and idea about what the singularity is doing.

    Lubos Motl:
    We need to get closer to the "theory of everything", regardless of the question whether the destination is a finite or infinite distance away. (And yes, the path should not be infinitely long because there is no physics "below" the Planck length.)


    I place this, too support what Clifford is saying in regards to the what is emergent into the spacetime from what I understand(Strings as a building block on the road too, not as the source of this "emergent property?"). Where do all these dimensional ideas then reside? You can't ignore this, or what Lubos "is saying" about talking about the past? Everytime one's perception changes, the hisory changes too? It forces you to look at the future in a new way?

    Not Newtonian

    It is certainly not the Newtonian version I am thinking about. People tend to think of these as diamonds(?) or something like that as a Pea? I tend away from that thinking, because it just doesn't chive with what is tramsmitted into what "being [is] in spacetime?," if you don't have a foundation from which to work?

    Call them coordinates and in it, the spactime emerges, and from that "okay" the looking at the arrow of time which implies to me a simplier supersymmetrical idea, looking back. So how did you get there? The outside/inside "quandry that stretches the mind capbailites" while chasing the "idea" as Brian Greene's Koan?

    There is something to be said in how "ideas emerge from all the information gathered and accumulated" spontaneousily bursts into a new form? The mind goes through a bit of a change? See's differently. Reinmann accomplishement along with those of the geometrical forbears(shoulder's of giants) help to change how we see geometrics.

    Briefly I pick up the Kurzwelian book on singularities, and find that a greate rperspective is need beyond what is espoused. A new stage in the thinking, beyond what society is thought to be headed. Some reject Kuhnian thinking but this is revolutionary to bme in what an dhow th emind proceeds in bringing down to earh the ideas that await to form in mind. Another place perhaps? A way of dipping the "toe" into the stream, and letting all that "informtaion" flow through you?

    A black hole in astrophysics often has two distinct meanings. The first is the black hole in a general relativistic sense - the extreme gravitational case with a singularity in space-time - while the second is a simpler Newtonian approach: a black hole is just a point mass. While both of these meanings are used, often interchangeably, throughout the literature, it is important to remember that no astrophysical observation has yet been made that can distinguish between the two; to date, the Newtonian point mass is all we need. In the future, with better X-ray observations and a detection of gravitational waves, this may change.



    First off I wrote the post Singularities should be rewritten as "a question" of what I was seeing inregards to our universe. What is in our universe's past. The reason for it's inflation. The reason for entropic valuations that become complicated and end in some chaos reasoning that Sean askes of those to solve in the Three body solution? I think this ahas already been done from what I understood so that push me towards lagragian perspective s and the other assumptions I have about this beginning and what existed before it?

    Here's what I write:

    Plato:
    If the initial states at the beginning of the universe are to be in concert with particle reductionism, and the particle creations that I have exemplified in how particles came into being, then, the understanding of what can be transmitted through the blackhole is extremely important as a valuation of what appears over time?


    So I have to say yes I am quantum characteristically driven to see this universe as it existed in a state held in our perceptions, of what it has become today. So of course I was looking back, with new knowledge of what the futre is to become. Why shouldn't it matter what help to draive this situation in the universe we have to day not hold perspectove abot what has emerged in the spacrtime as we know it?

    Strominger:
    The old version of string theory, pre-1995, had these first two features. It includes quantum mechanics and gravity, but the kinds of things we could calculate were pretty limited. All of a sudden in 1995, we learned how to calculate things when the interactions are strong. Suddenly we understood a lot about the theory. And so figuring out how to compute the entropy of black holes became a really obvious challenge. I, for one, felt it was incumbent upon the theory to give us a solution to the problem of computing the entropy, or it wasn't the right theory. Of course we were all gratified that it did.
  • Sunday, April 23, 2006

    Concepts of the Fifth Dimension

    "Yet I exist in the hope that these memoirs, in some manner, I know not how, may find their way to the minds of humanity in Some Dimensionality, and may stir up a race of rebels who shall refuse to be confined to limited Dimensionality." from Flatland, by E. A. Abbott



    Oskar Klein
    September 15, 1894 - February 5, 1977


    Dealing With a 5D World

    A black hole is an object so massive that even light cannot escape from it. This requires the idea of a gravitational mass for a photon, which then allows the calculation of an escape energy for an object of that mass. When the escape energy is equal to the photon energy, the implication is that the object is a "black hole."



    Herein, I also make the assumption:

    The Spacetime Fabric, "is" the Fifth dimension.

    Now of course, how do such assumptions make their way into my thinking and visualizations that I do? The seeing, of what mathematics and it's symbology had done for those who might see the geometry of expression, as a very vital way of thinking in the abstract world of mind, analogous, to the computer screen in front of us?


    Juan Maldacena:

    The strings move in a five-dimensional curved space-time with a boundary. The boundary corresponds to the usual four dimensions, and the fifth dimension describes the motion away from this boundary into the interior of the curved space-time. In this five-dimensional space-time, there is a strong gravitational field pulling objects away from the boundary, and as a result time flows more slowly far away from the boundary than close to it. This also implies that an object that has a fixed proper size in the interior can appear to have a different size when viewed from the boundary (Fig. 1). Strings existing in the five-dimensional space-time can even look point-like when they are close to the boundary. Polchinski and Strassler1 show that when an energetic four-dimensional particle (such as an electron) is scattered from these strings (describing protons), the main contribution comes from a string that is close to the boundary and it is therefore seen as a point-like object. So a string-like interpretation of a proton is not at odds with the observation that there are point-like objects inside it.



    (Wikipedia 23 April 2006)
    Similarly, in general relativity, the fourth dimension is manifested in observable three dimensions as the curvature of path of a moving infinitesimal (test) particle. 't Hooft has speculated that the fifth dimension is really the spacetime fabric.


    Linked paragraph above was pointed out to a link you to further thoughts on this. It was a strange revelation of sorts to think that such a process could lead you to such thinking, as well, as leading one to understand how General Relativity becomes a result of of String theory.

    It just made so much sense as I watched this developement take place in this geometrical extension of thought, that to a beginning, from a point to a line to a plane, was raised in mind, as a short cut to the brane world understandings. I really do not undertsand how I made this jump, but never the less, it took me to a fifth dimensional referencing.



    The work of Banchoff helped in this understanding. In using image production, our 2d computer screens, as example, shows the work we are doing in the abstract space of mind.

    While I am still ever the student, such thinking moved from the ideas of General Relativity, and it's geoemtrical nature, moves one into the dynamical regions of thought. Held, in regards to those curvatures. I just tend to see them in this way after understanding the "geometrical nature." So too, the undertanding of General Relativity means, and in this assumption, "gravity" becomes the terminology that I see in the dynamcis of that universe.

    Can I help seeing the thought of humanity so capable in the mind, to relate choices to the heart and the feather weighting truth, that I also had come to see the gravity of that situation? IN such thoughts, Einsteins analogy of the Pretty girl always come to mind. It was a conceptual leap of sorts, as well as beautifully laid out model of GR as to our understanding in terms of what gravity means.

    From strong to weak, and all the understanding of the place, where a flat plane of which no gravity exists, is a place where such transitions take place in my mind. Is this true or not? The very thinking of brane developement lead me to think in a 2 dimensional framework, yet I am well aware of the fifth dimensional views that this framework supplies. Is it wrong? I would have to rely on competent readers of the Brane world to have them say ye or nay, as to the thoughts being portrayed here.

    (Wikipedia 23 April 2006)
    In physics and mathematics, a sequence of N numbers can be understood to represent a location in an N-dimensional space. When N=5, one of these numbers is sometimes colloquially called the fifth dimension. This usage may occur in casual discussions about the fourth dimension, which, in the context of physics, refers to time, coming after the first three spatial dimensions (up/down, left/right and forwards/backwards). 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.


    Lisa Randall:
    My most recent research is about extra dimensions of space. Remarkably, we can potentially "see" or "observe" evidence of extra dimensions. But we won't reach out and touch those dimensions with our fingertips or see them with our eyes. The evidence will consist of heavy particles known as Kaluza-Klein modes that travel in extra-dimensional space. If our theories correctly describe the world, there will be a precise enough link between such particles (which will be experimentally observed) and extra dimensions to establish the existence of extra dimensions. Dangling Particles,By LISA RANDALL, Published: September 18, 2005 New York Yimes


    The extensions beyond what we had always taken for meaning as "seeing," is the undertanding that all 3 space coordinated directions with time, are embedded in some "design" beyond that frame of reference held to General Relativity. If it wasn't, how could anything working beyond this, be found as a coordinated result?

    (Wikipedia 23 April 2006)











    Figure 2. Clebsch's Diagonal Surface: Wonderful