Showing posts with label Pierre Auger. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pierre Auger. Show all posts

Friday, June 17, 2011


TAUWER is a proposed astroparticle experiment to detect ultrahigh energy TAU neutrinos, using detector towers arrayed on a mountainside looking down into a valley. This test is to study the possibility of replacing Hamamatsu miniature PMTs with SiPMs for readout by determining the response of scintillation detectors with SiPM readout to low energy electrons, 2 GeV or lower, as the beam will provide. The detector itself is a compact package, previously used in a parasitic test beam run on December 15, 2010, to compare the relative timing of the signals from three counters for Minimized Ionized Particles.

The experiment will take some electron data with 1.5 cm of Pb in front of counter 2 or counter 3, and without the Pb for calibration purposes. The three scintillators are 0.7, 1.4, and 0.7 cm thick, each 19 x 19 cm square. Each has a single SiPM readout, seen in the picture. The SiPM operating voltage is 34 volts. This is introduced by BNC cables from power supplies in the electronics area. The red and white wires adapt the BNC cable to separate power and ground leads for the center counter. The SiPM signals are taken on RG174 cables to a local waveform digitizer (DRS4) adjacent to the optical box. The DRS4 is controlled by a PC located in the beam enclosure, operated remotely from the control room.
Name of Experiment:TAUWER Test

See Also: TAUWER aims for cosmic heights

Sunday, June 12, 2011

Oh My God Particles

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

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

 The lessons of history are clear. The more exotic, the more abstract the knowledge, the more profound will be its consequences." Leon Lederman, from an address to the Franklin Institute, 1995

Centaurus A - one of the closest galaxies with an active galactic nucleus - although it is over 10 million light years away. If you are looking for a likely source of ultra-high-energy cosmic rays - you may not need to look further. Credit: ESO.

Recent observations by the Pierre Auger Observatory have found a strong correlation between extragalactic cosmic rays patterns and the distribution of nearby galaxies with active galactic nuclei. Biermann and Souza have now come up with an evidence-based model for the origin of galactic and extragalactic cosmic rays – which has a number of testable predictions.

They propose that extragalactic cosmic rays are spun up in supermassive black hole accretion disks, which are the basis of active galactic nuclei. Furthermore, they estimate that nearly all extragalactic cosmic rays that reach Earth come from Centaurus A. So, no huge mystery – indeed a rich area for further research. Particles from an active supermassive black hole accretion disk in another galaxy are being delivered to our doorstep. See:Universe Today: Astronomy Without A Telescope – Oh-My-God Particles
The links that follow below are dated and may be open to corrections with current data.

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

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

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


If some of physicists' favourite theories about extra dimensions are correct, it would also be possible for high-energy cosmic-ray particles from space to create black holes when they collide with molecules in the Earth's atmosphere. These black holes would be invisibly small, with a mass of only 10 micrograms or so. And they would be so unstable that they would explode in a burst of particles within around a billion-billion-billionth of a second.

One of the mysterious "Centauro" events seen by the Brazil ­Japan collaboration operating X-ray emulsion chambers at an altitude of 5200 m on Mt Chacaltaya in the Bolivian Andes. Given the number of hadrons seen in the lower chamber (left) physicists are intrigued by the relative lack of corresponding electromagnetic effects in the upper chamber (right).

Can Centauros or Chirons be the first observations
of evaporating mini Black Holes?

Among the various extensions of the Standard Model to energies beyond 1 TeV, one of the most attractive alternatives to the (Supersymmetric?) Great Desert Scenario is the TeV-gravity hypothesis with large extra dimensions [1]. According to it, matter particles and vector gauge bosons are open-string excitations, attached to a 3-brane (our world), which is embedded into compactified D-dimensional bulk space, where the closed-string excitations, including gravity, can propagate. This is the simplest possibility. Specific realizations of this idea and alternative scenaria may be found in [2]. Apart from a certain philosophic and aesthetic attraction of such models, they lead to the exciting possibility of experimental discovery of unification of the Standard Model with Quantum Gravity within the next few years, in the forthcoming accelerator, neutrino and cosmic-ray experiments [3, 4, 5].

Moreover, one could even claim that Quantum Gravity phenomena are already present in existing cosmic-ray data [6]. In the present paper we shall argue that the long-known Centauro-like events (CLEs) may be due to the formation and subsequent evaporation of mini black holes (MBHs), predicted in TeV-gravity models.


Sunday, December 27, 2009

The Book: A Chapter Still to be Read

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

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

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

Against Symmetry

Against symmetry (Paris, June 06)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Leon Lederman and Starting Out

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

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

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

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

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

Can we find "it" eventually explaining a very natural thing?

Oh-My-God particle

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

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

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

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

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

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

Astronomy Picture of the Day

Gamma-Ray Moon

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

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

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

Tuesday, February 03, 2009

Bringing the Heavens Down to Earth

"We all are of the citizens of the Sky" Camille Flammarion

The Flammarion woodcut. Flammarion's caption translates to "A medieval missionary tells that he has found the point where heaven and Earth meet..."
The widely circulated woodcut of a man poking his head through the firmament of a flat Earth to view the mechanics of the spheres, executed in the style of the 16th century cannot be traced to an earlier source than Camille Flammarion's L'Atmosphère: Météorologie Populaire (Paris, 1888, p. 163) [38]. The woodcut illustrates the statement in the text that a medieval missionary claimed that "he reached the horizon where the Earth and the heavens met", an anecdote that may be traced back to Voltaire, but not to any known medieval source. In its original form, the woodcut included a decorative border that places it in the 19th century; in later publications, some claiming that the woodcut did, in fact, date to the 16th century, the border was removed. Flammarion, according to anecdotal evidence, had commissioned the woodcut himself. In any case, no source of the image earlier than Flammarion's book is known.

I thought I would borrow the title of this blog posting, "Bringing the Heavens Down to Earth," as it exemplifies some of the understanding I have of what is happening we point our fingers to the sky and beyond. What we shall see taking place in the earth's Environ then as we recognize Earth's Earthbound?

The ole woodcut above I think explains this nicely. It's like "breaking a barrier" that has been imposed on our thinking. Too reveal, that the experimental procedures had been progressive and laid out the understanding of where new physics shall reside. It comes after the cross over-point, and in this respect it is important that we recognize where this focus is allocated to help orientate in a most generalizable level where such experimental procedure has taken us.

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

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

Cosmic rays have been long been recognized as a background to the search for rare new physics processes in collider experiments. This was the case for the LEP detectors and it will certainly be the case for ATLAS and CMS. A thorough understanding of the development of cosmic rays in the overburden of ATLAS will be a useful tool in understanding the cosmic ray background and consequently how to minimize this background.

This page is aimed at those of us who wish to use the tools developed by the group working on simulating the development of cosmic rays (mostly muons) in ATLAS with a view to studying cosmic ray backgrounds to future searches.


  • Man Looking into Outer Space
  • Cascading Showers from the Cosmos
  • Time as a Measure
  • Saturday, March 10, 2007

    Akeno Giant Air Shower Array (AGASA)

    A Quantum Gravity in the Lab a meeting held in regardsEcho: DDR as a Test Model was introduced by Bee of Backreaction.

    I thought it important that I give some background on what had transpired here to allow me to make certain comments in face of what they are proposing there in QGL.

    An International Facility to Study the Highest Energy Cosmic Rays See:Pierre Auger Observatory

    The historical background to this process is very enlightening when we come to investigate what the universe is doing in relation to what experiments on earth. This "correlation" is an important one these two experimental processes in how we see interactions of high energy particles.

    One day, some bright, enterprising physicist, perhaps inspired by this article, will complete the theory, open the doorway, and use the power of pure thought to determine if string theory is a theory of everything, anything, or nothing.

    Only time will tell if Einstein was correct when he said, "But the creative principle resides in mathematics. In a certain sense, therefore, I hold it true that pure thought can grasp reality, as the ancients dreamed."
    Michio Kaku
    See: Window On the Universe

    Having done this research on my own I was thinking already in context of the high energy particle collisions that were being recorded. In my blogging experience, I was some upset when I could no longer locate the article I did on the Fly's Eye and the oh my God Particle. "Revisited" help to point to this information obtained from wikipedia, but I had it long before.

    John Ellis was again instrumental here in pointing to information from the Pierre Auger experiments and is supplied in the labels

    shows arrival directions of cosmic rays with energies above 4 x 1019eV. Red squares and green circles represent cosmic rays with energies of > 1020eV , and (4 - 10) x 1019eV , respectively.
    We observed muon components in the detected air showers and studied their characteristics. Generally speaking, more muons in a shower cascade favors heavier primary hadrons and measurement of muons is one of the methods used to infer the chemical composition of the energetic cosmic rays. Our recent measurement indicates no systematic change in the mass composition from a predominantly heavy to a light composition above 3 x 1017eV claimed by the Fly's Eye group.

    Knowing that such high energy particles did indeed react with what we measure in the Sno or Ice Cube was just one more part of the neutrinos from the new physics that were being developed as well.

    MAGIC is an imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescope or IACT that has started measuring since the commissioning ended in late 2004. The project is funded primarily by the funding agencies BMFB (Germany), MPG (Germany), INFN (Italy), and CICYT (Spain).

    Wednesday, February 14, 2007

    Strangelets and Strange Matter

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

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

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

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

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

    Odd behavior?

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

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

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

    Pierre Auger on Cosmic Rays

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

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

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

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

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

    Beam Trajectories

    This summer, CERN gave the starting signal for the long-distance neutrino race to Italy. The CNGS facility (CERN Neutrinos to Gran Sasso), embedded in the laboratory's accelerator complex, produced its first neutrino beam. For the first time, billions of neutrinos were sent through the Earth's crust to the Gran Sasso laboratory, 732 kilometres away in Italy, a journey at almost the speed of light which they completed in less than 2.5 milliseconds. The OPERA experiment at the Gran Sasso laboratory was then commissioned, recording the first neutrino tracks.

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

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

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

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

    Tuesday, November 28, 2006

    Breakthrough Propulsion Physics?

    Shuttle Main Engine Test Firing-1981-A remote camera captures a close-up view of a Space Shuttle Main Engine during a test firing at the John C. Stennis Space Center in Hancock County, Mississippi.
    Spacecraft propulsion is used to change the velocity of spacecraft and artificial satellites, or in short, to provide delta-v. There are many different methods. Each method has drawbacks and advantages, and spacecraft propulsion is an active area of research. Most spacecraft today are propelled by heating the reaction mass and allowing it to flow out the back of the vehicle. This sort of engine is called a rocket engine.

    While the topic here is about how travel is possible, it is the idea that "new physics" can some how propelled forward the mass in space to do the things of travel necessary.

    In addition, a variety of hypothetical propulsion techniques have been considered that would require entirely new principles of physics to realize. To date, such methods are highly speculative and include

    Within the definitions of the literature it is then possible to deduce what is required? So this saves me the time while speaking to the new physics, of having to explain the rudimentary understandings of how I can leaped forward. No less, the idea of the "thought experiment" that is put in front of us that we create the dialogue necessary, with or without impute, to advance one's thinking.

    Credit: NASA CD-98-76634 by Les Bossinas. Artist's depiction of a hypothetical Wormhole Induction Propelled Spacecraft, based loosely on the 1994 "warp drive" paper of Miguel Alcubierre.


    The term breakthrough propulsion refers to concepts like space drives and faster-than-light travel, the kind of breakthroughs that would make interstellar travel practical.

    For a general explanation of the challenges and approaches of interstellar flight, please visit the companion website: Warp Drive: When? The Warp-When site is written for the general public and uses icons of science fiction to help convey such notions. This website, on the other hand, is intended for scientists and engineers.

    How is a Blackhole Determined?

    PLato:Remember the "closed loop process?"

    From the "blackhole horizon" what value would, "to e or not to e" speak too, if "one" was falling into the blackhole and "one" was out? Are they separated? What is our "state of the universe" then?

    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".

    IN the process of discovering the gravitational variances in space of "gravitational effects" how is it that a spaceship could become sensitive to the variations of that travel and slow down, if it did not have a way in which to calculate these fluctuations?

    There’s a place from which nothing escapes, not even light, where time and space literally come to end. It’s at this point, inside this fantastic riddle, that black holes exert their sway over the cosmos … and our imaginations.

    There’s a place from which nothing escapes, not even light? So I have to re-educate some people so that they understand the limtiations that have been applied to current thinking, by what is currently out there in terms of what we know about blackholes. So breaking from of those limitation on perspective is very important with what we know now. How we can determine a blackhole.

    So here to then is a wider perspective about lagrangain perspective of space that is needed in the understanding of travel in space. Implications of ways and means to determine the needed velocities of the space craft to move forward within context of determinations of gravitational influences.

    Special Lagrangian geometry in particular was seen to be related to another String Theory inspired phenomenon, "Mirror Symmetry". Strominger, Yau and Zaslow conjectured that mirror symmetry could be explained by studying moduli spaces arising from special Lagrangian geometry.
    Dr. Mark Haskins

    So while our imagination is being captured by this "gravitational concentration" in the cosmos what use to discern the nature of the "closed loop process" if we did not consider the "thought experiment" of Susskind as I have spoken to it in the last couple of posts?

    Hawking radiation owes its existence to the weirdness of the quantum world, in which pairs of virtual particles pop up out of empty space, annihilate each other and disappear. Around a black hole, virtual particles and anti-particles can be separated by the event horizon. Unable to annihilate, they become real. The properties of each pair are linked, or entangled. What happens to one affects the other, even if one is inside the black hole.

    The first order of business here is that we use methods based on the understanding of the "link of entanglement" around what is inside the blackhole as a measure? What that photon is telling us in relation to the gravitational considerations influencing the space craft? IN this way, "calibration technique" allows for variances in the determination of what we see in the perspective of the cosmos as a vital differential understanding of that pathways through space.

    IN "weak field understanding" we know the loop process is symmetric? Also, if gravity is combined to electromagnetism, what value the photon for determination if we had not understood this relation to gravitation effects in the cosmos? So this process then is understood in terms of developing the means to travel in space that was before not so easily determined(escape velocities for mass in space), but has now been shattered by moving beyond the paradigms of previous thought processes?

    This is the benefit of thinking "thought experiments" to progress any idea. Now what has been written here, is it right or wrong?

    The Propulsion System?

    AIRES Cosmic Ray Showers

    Also no where have I revealed the propulsion system need in order for the space craft to exceed the gravitational variances within the cosmos

    Gamma Ray production in particle creation?

    The Pierre Auger Observatory in Malargue, Argentina, is a multinational collaboration of physicists trying to detect powerful cosmic rays from outer space. The energy of the particles here is above 1019eV, or over a million times more powerful than the most energetic particles in any human-made accelerator. No-one knows where these rays come from.

    Such cosmic rays are very rare, hitting an area the size of a football field once every 10 000 years. This means you need an enormous 'net' to catch these mysterious ultra high energy particles. The Auger project will have, when completed, about 1600 detectors.

    Understanding the collision process within context of our own planet, and what information is received from other events within the cosmos allows us "to rebuild" what happens no less then what "LIGO operations" and it's gathering techniques, allows us from the complexity of the information to a thing of beauty?

    The H.E.S.S. telescope array represent a multi-year construction effort by an international team of more than 100 scientists and engineers

    So how shall we identify such sources if we had not considered the "light house effect?"

    Black Hole-Powered Jet of Electrons and Sub-Atomic Particles Streams From Center of Galaxy M87

    Tuesday, October 17, 2006

    A new LHC experiment is born!

    The LHC experiments are mostly on a very grand scale, with huge detectors and collaborations of as many as 2000 people; however, LHCf, like TOTEM, is quite special. The detectors are much smaller and LHCf has an equally small collaboration of just 22 people. The collaboration led by Yasushi Muraki, with members from Japan, Italy and the US, has just finished testing its detectors.

    The focus of the experiment is to study the forward moving particles in the proton-proton collisions at the LHC. This will be used to compare the various shower models widely used to estimate the primary energy of ultra high-energy cosmic rays, with energy in the region of 1019 eV (10 billion billion electronvolts). When the proton-proton collisions occur at the LHC pions are produced just as in a cosmic ray air shower. The amount of these secondary particles produced at the LHC can be measured accurately with the LHCf detectors, since the energy and direction of the primary beam is well known. The data will then be compared with the models used by the cosmic ray community.

    Although discovered as long ago as 1912 by the Austrian physicist, Victor Hess, cosmic rays remain mysterious. In particular, physicists would like to know more about the origins of the very high energy cosmic rays, up to 1020 eV that have been observed during recent decades. Some important experiments, such as the Pierre Auger Cosmic Ray Observatory in Argentina (See CERN Courier, July/August 2006), the Telescope Array experiment in the US and the HESS experiment in Namibia are dedicated to this research (See CERN Courier, February 2005). The LHCf experiment aims to give some valuable data to input into these studies; many of the physicists participating in LHCf are also involved in these and other projects related to cosmic rays.

    The detectors of LHCf will be placed on either side at 140 m from the ATLAS interaction point. This location will allow for observation of particles at nearly zero degrees to the proton beam direction. The detectors consist of two towers of sampling calorimeters designed by Katsuaki Kasahara from the Shibaura Institute of Technology. Each of them is made of tungsten plates and plastic scintillators of 3 mm thickness for sampling.

    Many of the physicists from LHCf have reunited from the former SPS experiment UA7, which also focused on forward physics. The LHCf experiment will be simulating cosmic ray collisions nearly 1000 times more energetic than UA7 was able to access. The energy of proton collisions in the LHC will be equivalent to a cosmic ray of 1017 eV smashing into the atmosphere. Therefore, LHCf will use the LHC beams to test the interaction models of cosmic rays to higher accuracy.

    Did you know?

    Cosmic rays are charged particles, mainly protons, but also alpha particles (helium nuclei) or heavier nuclei that bombard the Earth's atmosphere from outer space. These nuclei collide with the nuclei in the upper atmosphere producing many secondary particles, which in turn collide with other nuclei in the lower atmosphere. This process continues in a cascade, producing a shower of billions of particles reaching the ground.

    Cosmic rays show a wide range of energy. The low energy cosmic rays are plentiful (many thousand per square metre every second), many of which come from the sun. The highest energy cosmic rays, up to 1020 electronvolts, are very rare, arriving at a rate of one per square kilometre per century! The source of ultra high energy cosmic rays remains a mystery, as the primary ray seems to come from all directions.

    This, when we had thought science was at an end?

    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, June 09, 2006

    High Energy Particle Creations: PLacing the Universe into Perspective?

    "String theory and other possibilities can distort the relative numbers of 'down' and 'up' neutrinos," said Jonathan Feng, associate professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at UC Irvine. "For example, extra dimensions may cause neutrinos to create microscopic black holes, which instantly evaporate and create spectacular showers of particles in the Earth's atmosphere and in the Antarctic ice cap."

    While it is a microstatic view of what began from the early universe, such model creations as to the viability of the time line, seems really important to me. THis is a layman's view of course amongst the towers of well educative minds. So I thought I would add it.

    Ah, it seems again, while thoughts are being held in mind, and some confusion on my part, the answers make themself known. It seems fate destines the mind's question, like an attractor of a kind? That all things come to those who wait?:)

    AIRES Cosmic Ray Showers

    The resource to the right index are really quite good, when it comes to Cosmus. I had forgotten why I had linked it, only to find how these particle creations are understood. Animations bountiful, to help the layman mind understand what is going on.

    Make sure you let the animation load below. Also, the significance of high energy particle creation of secondaries, while dissipative states exist in plamatic considerations, what effect again is being sited here in the questions of mind tha we see some result on earth here?

    The Pierre Auger Observatory in Malargue, Argentina, is a multinational collaboration of physicists trying to detect powerful cosmic rays from outer space. The energy of the particles here is above 1019eV, or over a million times more powerful than the most energetic particles in any human-made accelerator. No-one knows where these rays come from.

    As you move through this information, it is really wonderful that such summations having gone over again and again, seem to solidfy what exactly is being sought and is currently understood.

    It works that way sometime when you get a group of people together who have been through it all, and repeat all the current data they have for where exactly they are standing now. This thought of course is arisen from what Sean posted in regards to the PI institue in Canada and the group that got togehter there.

    Jack, one of the comentors of course is asking why this stufff is being repeated over and over again, and the answer above is basically what is necessary to initiate new thought provoking situations, to what is already known?

    That just seems to be the way of it.


  • Pulsars and Cerenkov Radiation

  • How Particles Came to Be?
  • Wednesday, June 07, 2006

    It's Alive: Cosmic Ray Recordings

    I was doing some visiting around to see what Jacque Distler was doing and of course some blog entries are more dear to the heart, when you have followed the history and found correlative statements that bring the subject home for consideration.

    Jacque Distler:
    Travis Stewart reports that the LHC’s ATLAS detector has seen cosmic ray events, an excellent sign that things are working as they should.

    Seen it's value in other ways immediately. So of course speaking on cosmic rays this entry was inviting and of course leads from one thing to another. Finally then, leading you to the very source of the article in question. It is good that Travis Steward gave the updated source indications of his article, for further reading.

    Atlas enews

    A major milestone for the Inner Detector project has been accomplished in early May as cosmic rays going through both the barrel Semiconductor Tracker (SCT) and Transition Radiation Tracker (TRT) have been successfully recorded in the SR1 building on the ATLAS experimental site at CERN.

    Insinuated Problems within Own Blog?

    Well after doing some work here to figure out, "what was what," I realized I had spelt John Bachall's name wrong (It should be Bahcall) on the entry url search, which did not show up under that search function as Bachall. Da.

    Gosh, I feel like a fool sometimes:)One of those things where the brain is indeed working faster then my fingers on the keys can type.

    It does not mean Lubos Motl, that by spelling names wrong like Gellman(Gell-Mann) or Feynmen(Feynman)that one is any less on aptitude, or that if one reads Smolin, they are part of some "other class of people" that you relate.

    We have to be nice to people, regardless of their religious leanings "atheistic or not? Or, it is possible, those of older age may call you a heathen? :)

    Pierre Auger and John Ellis's work

    So herein lies some more information for the lay person who wants to explore what Pierre Auger and others were doing, while John Bahcall was educating us in the ways of cosmic particle collision events.

    See Also:

  • Why Higher Energies

  • The Blackhole as a Superfluid: It's Viscosity
  • Sunday, April 02, 2006

    Nodes and Anti-nodes

    Tool's for measure.

    The center of the gyroscope is a jewel-like sphere of fused quartz. These spheres, the size of Ping-Pong balls, are the roundest objects ever made by man. The tiny spheres are enclosed inside a housing chamber to prevent disruption from sound waves, and chilled to almost absolute zero to prevent their molecular structure from creating a disturbance. The accuracy of these gyroscopes is 30 million times greater than any gyroscope ever built.

    Making Strings in the lab, made me think of Clifford and the ice cream mix that he was privy too, by joining condense matter [ahem...string:] theorists, on a Friday night? :)Nitrogen, and superconductors seem to go hand in hand? Made me think of GPB and [whoops my mistake-not-nobium sphere], were mention for a reason.:)

    Normally I do not like to encourage such a view held to speculations, but the transferance to 3d effective thinking and all that, had me look at WMAP, was a process lead through by valuating sound in such analogies. As a layman, I hope I am forgiven.

    Is it the process?

    Visitors' shadows manipulate and reshape projected images of "Buckyballs." "Buckyball," or a buckminsterfullerene molecule, is a closed cage-structure molecule with a carbon network. "Buckyball" was named for R. Buckminster "Bucky" Fuller (1895-1983), a scientist, philosopher and inventor, best known for creating the geodesic dome.

    The purposeful arrangement of individual atoms bears some resemblance to the methods monks use to laboriously create sand images particle by particle, however, Eastern and Western cultures use these bottom-up building practices with very different perceptions and purposes.

    Photo and text credit: © 2003 Museum Associates/Los Angeles County Museum of Art

    To me it is a interesting way of seeing what is happening in space held by perception. BUcky balls and such, from my early days of reading BuckminsterFuller and his interesting building concepts, had somehow morphed into dynamical triangulation, used in the monte carlo method of quantum gravity perceptions.

    Dr. Jenny's cymatic images are truly awe-inspiring, not only for their visual beauty in portraying the inherent res-ponsiveness of matter to sound (vibration) but because they inspire a deep re-cognition that we, too, are part and parcel of this same complex and intricate vibrational matrix -- the music of the spheres! These pages illumine the very principles which inspired the ancient Greek philosophers Heraclitus, Pythagoras and Plato, and cosmologists Giordano Bruno and Johannes Kepler.

    Dimensional views of the "quark to quark measure" had me see the dynamics of this distance?

    How much more then would such a weak field describe for us the oscillation of the neutrino, from one phase state to another. One distance to another? A revealled in cosmic rays, as "new physics perhaps" that extends beyond the standard model?

    Paul Dirac

    When one is doing mathematical work, there are essentially two different ways of thinking about the subject: the algebraic way, and the geometric way. With the algebraic way, one is all the time writing down equations and following rules of deduction, and interpreting these equations to get more equations. With the geometric way, one is thinking in terms of pictures; pictures which one imagines in space in some way, and one just tries to get a feeling for the relationships between the quantities occurring in those pictures. Now, a good mathematician has to be a master of both ways of those ways of thinking, but even so, he will have a preference for one or the other; I don't think he can avoid it. In my own case, my own preference is especially for the geometrical way.

    If for one moment you continue the thought processes in light of visionary changes sought by and spoken in context of polarization effects in the WMAP, then such views have a profound effect, to what was always interesting data from cosmological apprehensions in discovery.

    Mikheyev-Smirnov-Wolfenstein effect92 April 2006 wikipedia)
    The Mikheyev-Smirnov-Wolfenstein effect is a particle physics process which acts to enhance neutrino oscillations in matter.

    While dynamic functions are being revealled to me of microprocesses( phases states), these dynamics are always interesting from what the geometrical perpecive of what was derived from Dirac.

    A "three dimensional view" of what may be happening in the abstraction of space dynamics seen in UV perspective described in analogy to Gauss's coordinates?

    Something much more profound and detail in a greater depth of thinking of an abstractual nature perhaps? B Field dynamics, would be a interesting comparison while holding mind in geometrical abstraction?

    Antineutrinos From Distant Reactors Simulate the Disappearance of Solar Neutrinos
    The potential importance of the Kamland results goes well beyond the solar-neutrino problem. Particle theorists hope that the masses and flavor compositions of the neutrino mass eigenstates will help point the way to an encompassing unification beyond today's manifestly incomplete standard model of fundamental particles and their interactions. Detailed knowledge of the neutrino states might also elucidate a central problem of cosmology: How did matter come to dominate over antimatter in the immediate aftermath of the Big Bang? Does the mixing of neutrino states harbor the symmetry-breaking mechanism that could have done the trick?

    Oscillating flavorsThe three neutrino mass eigenstates are presumed to be different coherent superpositions of the three flavor eigenstates (ne, nm, and nt) associated with the three charged leptons: the electron, the muon, and the tau. There is good evidence that only two of the three mass eigenstates contribute significantly to ne. In that approximation, one can write

    The question always arises in my mind about the quantum harmonical oscillations, as part of a much larger inherent feature of reality, with which we might view WMAP. Or, events that arise from the sun. Could such analogy, born in the sun's process spit out the nature of the neutrino?

    The plates can be made visible by mounting a mirror behind the row of plates, angled so that the top of the plates are visible to the audience (same idea as in Polarization by Scattering). Create the optimum angle for the front rows, as the back rows will be looking down on the plates anyway. Make sure the cello bow is nice and tactile by treating it with rosin before the performance. Sprinkle the sand on the plates so that it forms an even cover. Don't overdo the amount.

    Friday, March 03, 2006

    All Particles of the Standard Model and Beyond

    Polchinski Elected Member Of National Academy of Sciences

    Polchinski's discovery of D-branes and their properties is, according to the Academy citation, "one of the most important insights in 30 years of work on string theory."

    Can I tell a little story before I head into the essence of this posted thread below?

    From one mechanic to another

    I am not a mechanic by trade. Yet I had taken apart, and put back together motors which ran and ran well. Through a transition period, and without a place in which to do this work myself, I decided to give it to "a mechanic" to work on. Pay the price, which was well beyond my means at that time. With three children a wife, and barely making it, I asked for help financially. It was cold, and snow blowing.

    After picking up my motor and installing it. Making sure everything was right, I went for a slow drive to seat my rings in newly honed out cylinders. Well, much to my dismay and lots of dollars, blue smoke clouded the world behind me.

    Taking it back home, I called the mechanic, and told him what was happening. "It was something you must of done," he siad.

    So, I called another mechanic. He compression tested the cylinders for me, and to my dismay and his, one of the cylinders was not up to par.

    So what things did I learn?

    That I could have "one mechanic go against another," for the shoddy work that was done? No, it doesn't work that way.

    After tearing off the head, I had found they had broken the oil and compression rings, as they pushed the compressed rings and piston, back into the cylinder. They had cracked them while doing this. The cracked ring gouged the cylinder wall, as it went up and down on the crankshaft.

    Were there things I might have done different now? Maybe pressure tested the cylinders before hand?

    Anyway, on to the subject of this post.

    After doing my research and investigations into how the standard model itself might have been displayed, I selected two events, that were very discriptive of what might have happened, when taken as a whole story of the science in progress.

    These were censored by Peter Woit on his site and removed. These lead to questions that might have implicated "string theory" as part of the process of inquiry beyond the standard? See Icecube.

    If one holds to the idea that they had assumed a counter position to currents trends, then would it not include the theoretical approach well understood, that it also attached, not just a geometrical association, but one described in the physics process as well?

    As a layman, this was proving itself, as I looked at the diversity of the geometrical models choosen to represent that abstract world. See B Field and Hitchins. Genus Figures, and topology, on this site.

    More and more, it had weighted heavily on my mind, that the consistancy through which selected comments were shown, were to hold validation processes as to anti-string theory. As tones of select comments, as very disconcerting to me, but through his awareness Peter did strived to referee.

    The overall message, was not one with the care which Cosmic Variance had ascertained it's caution of String evangelistism, or Lubos Motl's declaration as well, that the underlying motivation, was more to provide a "general widesweping statement" that applied to the string model development as a whole.

    IMpressional Minds
    If as a student, having now moved toward my senior years, how could I have turned back the clock of time, that I might have stood beside any of these leaders of science?

    That I had to accustom myself to the very level on which my opinion would not have mattered coming from layman status. So being on the bottom of the totem pole, I accept the resolve to which such treatment was dealt. It was a small price to pay.

    So imagine then, what the overall message by Peter has done to those prospective entries into the world of, might now have said, why should we now enter, being the brunt of what good science men hate, would have us believe?

    The Reductionistic Process
    Is it incorrect to say that the events of the collision process are incapable of decribing all fawcetts of the standard model?

    So by concentrating on the collision process itself, what factors would have said that no, the standard model does not fit the current processes in LHC? Does not fit the process in high energy collision process to earths atmospheric conditions, for evdience of? See Pierre Auger expeirments here. See John Bachall and the Ghost particle.

    So by closely looking at the poor man's version, what process would lead one to believe that the standard model was inclusive in this interactive process as well?

    Here's the post in full. It was in response to Jack Safartti's comments and the document in which he had wrote was in contradiction of what I had learnt of the "possible new physics?" THis is of course held within context of collider results and the micro perspective results, created the form of quark Gluon Plasma. A superfluid?

    So both events involved, "microstate blackhole" recognitions.

    Post removed from Peter Woits comment section

    In regards to facing nightmares

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

    The link was added here now.

    If one follows the logic development, Jack's position becomes a interesting one to question. As well, such thoughts about cosmic collisions, and the high energy particles cosmological events. Microstate blackhole processes are the poor man's experimental pallete. Just as valid the dissipative state created in the collider.

    The resulting end product is what is being explore with ICECUBE. It is all consistent with the standard model. Right from, the start of the collision process, to the resulting shower created.

    Jack has some explaining to do?

    (To help anonymous understand better I hope the student does not feel s/he has to learn string theory in order to be valid in existance. Also, the interactive shower from the collison process with high energy article is well understood and what comes from it.

    He deletes yours too.! Oh look, what we have in common?:) What drivel have you drummmed up?)

    Anyway. As I was saying.

    This is not to slight Peter Woit in the slighest, but to move him to consider the enormity with which the process of string/M theory is involved in the standard model expression. As fundamental particles and the interactions thereof.

    To reject the model on the basis of preference, is of course for any who choose to follow which road. But to say that such a process should not be followed would have been a erroneous statement, as well as influencing the general population by such ascertions of preference aghast and in reaction.

    Of course I recognized it is his blog and his comment section. On the basis of his dislike for anyone, can do anything they like, within reason right?


  • History of the Universe and the Standard model