Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Science’ Category

Here’s what we know for sure: Electrons whiz around “orbitals” in an atom’s outer shell. Then there’s a whole lot of empty space. And then, right in the center of that space, there’s a tiny nucleus — a dense knot of protons and neutrons that give the atom most of its mass. Those protons and neutrons cluster together (nucleons), bound by what’s called the strong force. And the numbers of those protons and neutrons determine whether the atom is iron or oxygen or xenon, and whether it’s radioactive or stable.

How nucleons behave inside an atom, is not really understood. Outside an atom, protons and neutrons have definite sizes and shapes. Each of them is made up of three smaller particles called quarks, and the interactions between those quarks are so intense that no external force should be able to deform them, not even the powerful forces between particles in a nucleus.

But for decades, researchers have known that the theory is in some way wrong. Experiments have shown that, inside a nucleus, protons and neutrons appear much larger than they should be. Physicists have developed two competing theories that try to explain that weird mismatch, and the proponents of each are quite certain the other is incorrect. Both camps agree, however, that whatever the correct answer is, it must come from a field beyond their own.

The nucleons, confined in their movements, have very little energy. They don’t bounce around much, restrained by the strong force.

In 1983, physicists at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) noticed something strange: Beams of electrons bounced off iron in a way that was very different from how they bounced off free protons, if the protons inside hydrogen were the same size as the protons inside iron, the electrons should have bounced off in much the same way.

While quarks the subatomic particles that make up nucleons, strongly interact within a given proton or neutron, quarks in different protons and neutrons can’t interact much with each other. The strong force inside a nucleon is so strong it is like Antaeus, the son of the sea god, Poseidon. But when he was lifted of the ground he could be crushed as Hercules did. It is how strong force holding together nucleons inside an atom,

This inherent integrity of an atom depends on this quality and it is truth of nature. Matter is not merely material but inbuilt truth,-indicated by matter plus. Galilieo founded modern science purely within areas it may be put to test, quantified and repeated tests showed same results under given circumstance. By doing so he restricted matter to the knowable leaving out the plus. Ever since we are left with confusing results as in the case of Hubble constant covered earlier. (Life Science-There is a giant mystery…/Rafi Letzter/ 2-1-20)

Benny

Read Full Post »

Measured one way, the universe appears expanding at a certain rate; measured another way, the universe appears to be expanding at a different rate. And, as a new paper shows, those discrepancies have gotten larger in recent years, even as the measurements have gotten more precise.

“We think that if our understanding of cosmology is correct, then all of these different measurements should be giving us the same answer,” said Katie Mack, a theoretical cosmologist at North Carolina State University (NCSU) and co-author of the new paper.

The two most famous measurements work very differently from one another. The first relies on the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB): the microwave radiation leftover from the first moments after the Big Bang. Cosmologists have built theoretical models of the entire history of the universe on a CMB foundation — models they’re very confident in, and that would require an all-new physics to break. And taken together, Mack said, they produce a reasonably precise number for the Hubble constant, or H0, which governs how fast the universe is currently expanding.

The second measurement uses supernovas and flashing stars in nearby galaxies, known as Cepheids. By gauging how far those galaxies are from our own, and how fast they’re moving away from us, astronomers have gotten what they believe is a very precise measurement of the Hubble constant. And that method offers a different H0.

“If we’re getting different answers that means that there’s something that we don’t know,” Mack told Live Science. “So this is really about not just understanding the current expansion rate of the universe — which is something we’re interested in — but understanding how the universe has evolved, how the expansion has evolved, and what space-time has been doing all this time.”

Weikang Lin, also a cosmologist at NCSU and lead author of the paper, said that to develop a full picture of the problem, the team decided to round up all the different ways of “constraining” H0 in one place.Here’s what “constraining” means: Measurements in physics rarely turn up exact answers. (Think what this would be if lifted into the field of  forensic science, No murder may be pinned on the guilty.) Instead, they put limits on the range of possible answers. And by looking at these constraints together, you can learn a lot about something you’re studying. (In legal terms it would be a technical loophole). Looking through one telescope, for example, you might learn that a point of light in space is either red, yellow or orange. Another might tell you it’s brighter than most other lights in space but less bright than the sun. Another might tell you it’s moving across the sky as fast a planet. None of those constraints would tell you much on their own, but taken together they suggest  you are looking at Mars.

In an earlier post I had posited that Scientists are looking at universe from the wrong end of the telescope. Closer home things appear reliable and Laws of Newton or Kepler can be proved. Our predicament is that of the Flying Dutchman the more he sails the coast line further eludes him. He sees only what he believes in. Having failed to understand God as the Creator of Universe, sail he must never arriving at the one article that holds everything in order. What reason! What pother!

(Ack: How the Universe Stopped Making Sense/Life Science/Space/Rafi Letzter/Oct. 11,2019)

Benny

Read Full Post »

Einstein presented a set of equations, now known as the Einstein field equations, that became the framework of his theory of general relativity. The equations explain how matter and energy warp the fabric of space and time to create the force of gravity. At the time, both Einstein and astronomers agreed that the universe was fixed in size and that the overall space between galaxies did not change. However, when Einstein applied general relativity to the universe as a whole, his theory predicted an unstable universe that would either expand or contract. To force the universe to be static, Einstein tacked on the cosmological constant.

A single number, called the cosmological constant, bridges the microscopic world of quantum mechanics and the macroscopic world of Einstein’s theory of general relativity. But neither theory can agree on its value.

A decade later Edwin Hubble discovered that our universe is not static, but expanding. The light from distant galaxies showed they were all moving away from each other. This revelation persuaded Einstein to abandon the cosmological constant from his field equations as it was no longer necessary to explain an expanding universe. In 1998, observations of distant supernovas showed the universe wasn’t just expanding, but the expansion was speeding up. Galaxies were accelerating away from each other as if some unknown force was overcoming gravity and shoving those galaxies apart. Physicists have named this enigmatic phenomenon dark energy.

It is so dark no one has come up with a plausible answer. Think of the Emperors New clothes. Predicament of royal tailors must be somewhat like Physics grappling with the problem of dark energy.

So one way is to simply call the cosmological constant as dark energy. “The cosmological constant [or dark energy] currently constitutes about 70% of the energy content in our universe, which is what we can infer from the observed accelerated expansion that our universe is presently undergoing. Yet this constant is not understood,” Lombriser* said. “Attempts to explain it have failed, and there seems to be something fundamental that we are missing in how we understand the cosmos. (*Lucas Lombriser, an assistant professor of theoretical physics at the University of Geneva in Switzerland)

What is certain is that there is a fundamental problem in physics.  One need not be surprised if we have Hubble constant also showing different readings ( see my posts titled Hubble (In)constant ) It is like missing a single buttonhole in my shirt and always getting button through the button holes thereafter is a waste of time. It is thus with Science trying to explain how our physical universe works.( Ack: Live Science/tom childers/Einstein’s biggest blunder etc.,)

Read Full Post »

Traditional computers based on silicone-chip store all data as 1s or 0s,.Moore’s Law dictated that computing power would double every two years. Now it is outpaced by quantum computing. These make calculations with entangled particles, or qubits, And it turns out, they’re gaining on ordinary computers at a spookily fast, “doubly exponential rate.” That means that processing power grows by a factor of 2. 2raised to the power of 2 (4), , then 2^2^2 (16), then 2^2^3 (256), then 2^2^4 (65,536), and so on. And it’s all captured by a new law of computing, known as Neven’s Law,

What exactly is Neven’s Law? Named after Hartmut Neven, the director of the Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab at Google who first noticed the phenomenon, the law dictates how quickly quantum processors are improving,

Human laws are meant to go faster than ever before but how far? These are patterned after already existing so how faster our thoughts can travel? God is a spirit meaning that it is charged by Power and Wisdom so intuition is knowledge ,life experience compressed into as with any charged particle given a spin. time and space are rather in the field so when question arises flee or fight, it is answered simultaneously.

Science inform us particles can get entangled and simultaneously charged particles can work as one. So our spirit and soul shall have their meanings set in a different language. “Can two walk together, except they be agreed? Amos3:3)” refers to entangled particles one signifying God’s will and the other of man and it shall define faith.

Benny

Read Full Post »

An electron is a small ball of negative charge that is smaller than an atom. Does it have a shape?
Conjure electrons as charges and it surrounds the nucleus of every atom that determine how chemical reactions proceed. Their uses in industry are abundant: from electronics and welding to imaging and advanced particle accelerators they are the main components of atoms making up the world around us.
As far as physicists currently know, electrons have no internal structure — and thus no shape in the classical meaning of this word. In the modern language of particle physics, which tackles the behavior of objects smaller than an atomic nucleus, the fundamental blocks of matter are continuous fluid-like substances known as “quantum fields” that permeate the whole space around us. In this language, an electron is perceived as a quantum, or a particle, of the “electron field.”
Suppose we treat fields as ‘entities’ in terms of space. Firstly we must adapt our definition of shape so it can be used at incredibly small distances, or in other words, in the realm of quantum physics. It gives us a way to define an electron’s properties such that they mimic how we describe shapes in the classical world. For example a photon striking a needle and deflecting it is a new indication of shape. Its shape is comparable to how we perceive in our macroscopic world the rays of light bouncing off different objects around us. It is a sensation of a fleeting flash but as tangible as inspiration when it can fire up another Hafiz or Keats who composed Ode to a Nightingale after hearing the bird. Yes one can dash out a couplet of exquisite beaut or see visions. When it happens it is not merely quantum field but the whole being has had a transcendental experience, which is other worldly to put it baldly. Simply put, we define shapes by seeing how objects react when we shine light onto them and when we are moved with its sensation to find meanings that were never thought up before it is truth. The Ode to the Nightingale has its own truth to which only the poet is the sole arbiter. Its enduring quality derives from it

What replaces the concept of shape in the micro world? Since light is nothing but a combination of oscillating electric and magnetic fields, it would be useful to define quantum properties of an electron that carry information about how it responds to applied electric and magnetic fields. Having said this when we walk on cloud number nine or shuffle our feet as though dragged down by some oppressive mood is how we we respond to space about us.
When I say I can feel presence of God who shall define my space, or its extent or what I can subjectively vouch as true?
Benny

Read Full Post »

In one fable posted some years ago I had posited an idea that at infinitesimal spaces while treating the headache of Zeus the spark created by the fire god must behave in such ways that the clot and the spark act as one. In that thought experiment, Erwin Schrödinger’s cat achieves a similar state: Cat in a box would be exposed to a radioactive particle that had even odds of decaying or not. Until the box was opened, the poor cat would be both alive and dead at the same time, which seemed clearly absurd to Schrödinger.In other words these are entangled. Entanglement as a quantum effect describes where particles separated by vast distances mysteriously link up their states. Scientists in 2016 have already created with quantum-entangled bacteria.
Usually, we describe quantum physics as a set of rules that governs the behavior of extremely tiny things: light particles, atoms and so on to which realm of livings things and bacteria belongs to another order. This larger world, at the bacterial scale (which is also our scale — the chaotic realm of life) isn’t supposed to be anywhere near that weird.

There’s just something about the quantum world that doesn’t seem to make sense in ours. Bouts of migraine in most sufferers seem to be triggered by solar flares. The light takes some eight minutes to reach us but it triggers migraine earlier than that. Why?
But scientists don’t agree on where the boundary between the ordinary and the quantum world lies — or if it even exists at all. Chiara Marletto, a physicist at the University of Oxford and a co-author on the recent paper, which was published Oct. 10 in The Journal of Physics Communications, said that there’s no reason to expect that there’s a limit on the size of quantum effects.

“I’m interested in studying the border where quantum rules stop applying,” she told Live Science. “Some people say that quantum theory is not a universal theory, so it does not apply to any object in the universe, but actually will at some point break down. My interest is to show that actually, that’s not the case.”

In 2017, a team of researchers based at the University of Sheffield in England said they had created a state of what’s known as quantum coupling in photosynthetic bacteria. They placed a few hundred bacteria in a tiny, mirrored room and bounced light around. (Based on the length of the mini room, only a certain wavelength of light persisted over time, known as the resonant frequency.) Over time, six of the bacteria appeared to develop a limited quantum connection to the light. So the resonant frequency of light inside the tiny room seemed to synchronize with the frequency at which electrons jumped in and out of position inside the bacteria’s photosynthetic molecules.
Marletto said that her model shows that this effect likely involved more than just quantum coupling. There was likely something going on even weirder than what those experimentalists described, she said.

The bacteria, she and her colleagues showed, likely became entangled with the light. What this means is that the equations used to define each of the waveforms — of both the light and the bacteria — become one equation. Neither is solvable without the other. (According to quantum mechanics, all objects can be described as both particle and wave, but practically speaking, in “large” objects like bacteria, the waveforms are impossible to see or measure.)

Like Schrödinger’s proverbial cat in a box, the whole system seemed to exist in an uncertain netherworld. How often we have seen rational man interacting with rational men as we would assume every delegate, who deliberated around the table hammering out the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 and what did they produce? Just the opposite. Why speak of rational idea of man when he cannot fathom the weird world of justice and equality operating without? You deny justice with the most cogent arguments and quote instances out of the whole and what you produce is more misery and just opposite to your professed principles. This is entanglement on a moral plane. Between our physical universe and worlds created purely on abstract ideas only entanglement that is sustainable not by rules of men or by their material accomplishment but by moral laws. For me God is that moral being.

(Ack: Schrödinger’s Bacteria? Physics Experiment Leads to 1st Entanglement of Living Organisms-Nov.13.Rafi Letzer-Live Science)
Benny

Read Full Post »

“Science Education in the United States is the equivalent of a radically divided market because it takes place in 16,000 largely autonomous school districts. If a new drug is developed by a pharmaceutical company, it can be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and then sold to everyone in the United States. But “if you have figured out the equivalent of . . . the latest cure in science education, you must, in a sense, persuade 16,000 FDAs that this is the antidote to their ills. And therein lies one dimension of what makes this problem so massive.” When politics enter the hallowed halls of education there falls a shadow of votes that obscurantism carry. So creationism, intelligent design and many other opinions must also be allowed in. Where politics is matter of numbers one would assume mathematics ought to be high in priorities.

U.S. students with reported higher levels of confidence scored lower than students in other countries who reported themselves to be less confident. For example, 39 percent of U.S. students said that they usually do well in mathematics, while just 4 percent of students in Japan said the same. Yet the average mathematics score in the United States was considerably lower than that in Japan.“We tend to believe that a large determinant of a student’s success in school is ability,” Sullivan said. “In many other cultures and countries, it is perceived and believed that the correlation is with effort, with work, with investment, and self-discipline.”Here we have the finger on the pulse of anti-Science. Lack of self-discipline is the worm in the can: given the premium on wealth and affluence the privileged children can afford the best education and opportunities as we recently witnessed appointment of one to a top job had the whole nation divided. Parties either covered up the nominee’s past or dismissed the minority party as ‘playing politics. Politics has taken over civility truth and good manners. How can Science perform without scientific temper where truth must be shown for what is?
So bad science is where human potential had been already compromised by what wealth plays in the national blood stream. The young from privileged Haves develop rather affluenza and one of the legal luminaries who was recently elevated to the Supreme Court admitted in his diary that ‘obnoxious drunk’ more or less explained their status. It was achieved with no sweat and it is part of the American dream.
There remains a very sharp divide between the perceptions of leaders in the United States and the perceptions of parents. Even though most parents know that more mathematics and science are needed for students, they tend not to extend that reasoning to their own children. (Ack: 2. Science and Science Education in the United States/ Kathryn Sullivan, director of the Battelle Center for Mathematics and Science Education Policy at Ohio State Uni/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK26409)
Major threat to the future is our collective influence on the climate, environment and biodiversity, So, it’s important to have international conversations about how to combat the pressures humanity has placed on the world. And it’s much easier to solve the world’s problems, such as by combating climate change, than by packing up our things and going to a new planet. But politics can find yet another topic if climate control does not bring in votes and serve equally disastrous to the whole world. There must be a truism that a nation who achieves the superpower status may do ten victory laps and yet prove disastrous for future.

“It’s a dangerous illusion to think that we can escape the world’s problems by going to Mars,” In fact, robots — who will likely be better-adapted to space travel than humans — will mostly be the ones exploring the cosmos while man shall be still playing politics and keep Anti-Science alive and a threat. Robots are not truly a threat for the future as man is. “I don’t worry as much as some people do about AI taking over,” one Scientist said recently, “Humans evolved from earlier primates because of natural selection, and the traits that were favored were intelligence and aggression”. Electronics “are not engaged in a struggle for survival as in Darwinian selection, so there’s no reason why they should be aggressive,” he said. For that reason, they probably won’t kill off the human race and expand into the universe. That would be too “anthropomorphic” of them.”(Ack: Live Science)
Benny

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »