Science > Physics > Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Robert Karl Stonjek" |
| Date: |
15 Aug 2005 06:17:03 PM |
| Object: |
Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark
13 August 2005
Dana Mackenzie
Magazine issue 2512
When a supercomputer took on a particle smasher in a race to pin down the
ephemeral quark, the stakes could hardly have been higher
IT WAS a true clash of the titans. In the blue corner: a multimillion-dollar
particle accelerator. In the red: one of the world's most powerful
supercomputers. Both were battling to pin down the lifetime of an ephemeral
subatomic particle known as the D-meson. Their deadline was 30 June.
Two days ahead of their target, the 20 or so theorists behind the
supercomputer announced their answer. For 48 nail-biting hours, they waited
for their rival's result. They knew that if their numbers tallied, the
supercomputer approach would have what it takes to revolutionise our
understanding of the subatomic world. So when the 150-strong team at the
accelerator finally announced that its answer matched, the theorists were
over the moon.
It is a pretty impressive achievement, even by today's standards in
theoretical physics. For 30 years, researchers have been battling to make
sense of the strong force - the glue that sticks ...
The complete article is 2538 words long
Summary and full text links at NewScientist
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18725121.800
--
Posted by
Robert Karl Stonjek
.
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
15 Aug 2005 11:29:59 PM |
|
|
"Robert Karl Stonjek" <stonjek@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:Pn9Me.86253$oJ.75095@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark
13 August 2005
Dana Mackenzie
Magazine issue 2512
When a supercomputer took on a particle smasher in a race to pin down the
ephemeral quark, the stakes could hardly have been higher
IT WAS a true clash of the titans. In the blue corner: a
multimillion-dollar
particle accelerator. In the red: one of the world's most powerful
supercomputers. Both were battling to pin down the lifetime of an
ephemeral
subatomic particle known as the D-meson. Their deadline was 30 June.
Two days ahead of their target, the 20 or so theorists behind the
supercomputer announced their answer. For 48 nail-biting hours, they
waited
for their rival's result. They knew that if their numbers tallied, the
supercomputer approach would have what it takes to revolutionise our
understanding of the subatomic world. So when the 150-strong team at the
accelerator finally announced that its answer matched, the theorists were
over the moon.
It is a pretty impressive achievement, even by today's standards in
theoretical physics. For 30 years, researchers have been battling to make
sense of the strong force - the glue that sticks ...
The complete article is 2538 words long
Summary and full text links at NewScientist
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18725121.800
--
Posted by
Robert Karl Stonjek
What these ***** munchers don't seem to understand is that if they manage to
make a stable quark mass (so they can look at the fucken' thing) it will
spell our doom. Quark matter almost approaches black hole densities, and it
will almost instantly eat through the mass of the accelerator they used to
create it, and get loose inside our planet where it will proceed to eat our
planet from the inside out, just like a malignant cancer. No doubt these *****
holes will ejaculate all over themselves with excitement as they take their
measurements of our planetary destruction. Now, you may say this is only a
study, and it can't hurt anyone. Yeah right. The 'theory' will make it
easier to make a negative strangelet. For all our protection, this study
should be burned and the people who made it, along with the particle
accelerator people, should be shot. Let's face it.: When the announcement
that a strangelet was produced and escaped confinement at the LHC, will you
accept the head of the accelerator team saying that, "Geez, who woulda thunk
it? We're reeeeally sorry, ok?"
Uh-huh.
Greysky
www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Autymn D. C." |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
17 Aug 2005 08:14:14 AM |
|
|
Greysky is an ignorant troll. Don't listen to him. Cosmic rays
hitting the Earth's air are already powerful and frequent enough to
make 100 black holes a day.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
17 Aug 2005 08:36:20 AM |
|
|
"Autymn D. C." <lysdexia@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1124284454.008369.255430@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Greysky is an ignorant troll. Don't listen to him. >
Oh Aut * ymn, your fangs are showing. Perhaps it's just professional
jealousy. Remember, jea * lousy is really lousy.
Cosmic rays
hitting the Earth's air are already powerful and frequent enough to
make 100 black holes a day.
Perhaps they do, perhaps they do. *You* certainly don't know enough about
what's happenin' in the upper atmosphere to know how natural quark mass
production is ameliorated by the natural environment in the upper
atmosphere. Remember, baby, particle production inside the rings of a super
collider is strangely absent of all the wild particles that are found in
nature. I certainly do not want to place our planet at risk just so a bunch
of ***** faced 50 year old virgins can see real quark matter being formed...
the risk of stability within the limited environment is too great. Any
theoretical understanding that will allow these coffee boys to increase
their chances of seeing strangelet production also allows for an increased
chance of strangelet birth at lower energy levels- and that is a risk I
wouldn't even wish on your estrogen driven head.
Greysky
www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Autymn D. C." |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
18 Aug 2005 09:54:27 AM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
Oh Aut * ymn, your fangs are showing. Perhaps it's just professional
jealousy. Remember, jea * lousy is really lousy.
jealousy of what?
Perhaps they do, perhaps they do. *You* certainly don't know enough about
what's happenin' in the upper atmosphere to know how natural quark mass
production is ameliorated by the natural environment in the upper
atmosphere. Remember, baby, particle production inside the rings of a super
collider is strangely absent of all the wild particles that are found in
Up there is a half-vacuum. In there is a strong vacuum. Our atom
smashers are hardly as powerful as berserk stars, and our black holes
die even quicker and sooner making an accretion shield before eating up
the place. To fall in, matter must be allowed an infinite while by
relativistic considerations, and one will have made a Schwarzschild jar
(market these for food or replicator preservation) before a hole.
nature. I certainly do not want to place our planet at risk just so a bunch
of ***** faced 50 year old virgins can see real quark matter being formed...
the risk of stability within the limited environment is too great. Any
theoretical understanding that will allow these coffee boys to increase
their chances of seeing strangelet production also allows for an increased
chance of strangelet birth at lower energy levels- and that is a risk I
wouldn't even wish on your estrogen driven head.
Calculate before whining. Strangelets are the key to future alien
technology, bub. In order to aggregate dangerous levels, the
interaction region must be much denser than atomic matter. This is why
the chances are so tiny for the world getting eaten.
-Aut
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
18 Aug 2005 11:27:27 AM |
|
|
"Autymn D. C." <lysdexia@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1124376867.762708.224010@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Greysky wrote:
Oh Aut * ymn, your fangs are showing. Perhaps it's just professional
jealousy. Remember, jea * lousy is really lousy.
jealousy of what?
Perhaps they do, perhaps they do. *You* certainly don't know enough about
what's happenin' in the upper atmosphere to know how natural quark mass
production is ameliorated by the natural environment in the upper
atmosphere. Remember, baby, particle production inside the rings of a
super
collider is strangely absent of all the wild particles that are found in
Up there is a half-vacuum. In there is a strong vacuum. Our atom
smashers are hardly as powerful as berserk stars, and our black holes
die even quicker and sooner making an accretion shield before eating up
the place. To fall in, matter must be allowed an infinite while by
relativistic considerations, and one will have made a Schwarzschild jar
(market these for food or replicator preservation) before a hole.
I find great comfort in the fact we can't yet make a decent black hole.
nature. I certainly do not want to place our planet at risk just so a
bunch
of ***** faced 50 year old virgins can see real quark matter being
formed...
the risk of stability within the limited environment is too great. Any
theoretical understanding that will allow these coffee boys to increase
their chances of seeing strangelet production also allows for an
increased
chance of strangelet birth at lower energy levels- and that is a risk I
wouldn't even wish on your estrogen driven head.
Calculate before whining. Strangelets are the key to future alien
technology, bub.
Oh, I didn't realize I am typing words at the person in charge of *alien
technology* here on earth. Should I have reported in to you before I built
my FTL radio, Autymn? Oh wait, I don't need strangelets to make my device
work... except for a handful of specialized parts, you could buy what you
need at radio shack...
In order to aggregate dangerous levels, the
interaction region must be much denser than atomic matter. This is why
the chances are so tiny for the world getting eaten.
Yeah, even I will say it's a small chance. But how small does it have to be
in order to risk everything there is? 1 in 10^40? 2 in 10^100? Nothing I
do here in my filthy 4th world shack has any chance of killing you. I think
it should be the same way all around. Look at it this way girlie, if the
worst happens, do you think you are going to get an invitation from the
president to join him, tony blair, and pals on their secret lunar base while
the earth is turned into a 100 ft. lump of strange matter? Hardly.
Greysky
www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Autymn D. C." |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
20 Aug 2005 06:00:54 PM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
I find great comfort in the fact we can't yet make a decent black hole.
If by decent, you mean terminal, then neither can astronomy. However,
sticking your finger in this little black hole will still make a hole
in it.
Oh, I didn't realize I am typing words at the person in charge of *alien
technology* here on earth. Should I have reported in to you before I built
my FTL radio, Autymn? Oh wait, I don't need strangelets to make my device
work... except for a handful of specialized parts, you could buy what you
need at radio shack...
What do you mean built? On your site I just saw a bunch of rambling
with ideas taken from tunnelling and evanescent waves. Where was the
parts list? I saw nothing like my contributions:
http://www.advancedphysics.org/viewthread.php?tid=2100#pid13718
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/41342d2843f91e7b/062f678540219118#062f678540219118
Yeah, even I will say it's a small chance. But how small does it have to be
in order to risk everything there is? 1 in 10^40? 2 in 10^100? Nothing I
do here in my filthy 4th world shack has any chance of killing you. I think
it should be the same way all around. Look at it this way girlie, if the
worst happens, do you think you are going to get an invitation from the
president to join him, tony blair, and pals on their secret lunar base while
the earth is turned into a 100 ft. lump of strange matter? Hardly.
I read (from my physics.about.com days) that the exponent was in the
50s. I don't believe in statistics and randomness anyway. The
worldeating strangelet must be made deterministically: It must have
enough energy, thus time dilation, to survive each and every next
feeding from the underground's nuclei so it grows instead of blows or
slows. That energy must come from somewhere first, then it must make
an astronomically-small alignment. Cosmic rays happen /all the time/
and everywhence that no earthbound smasher can compete with. We
should've seen jellied galactic cores by now.
-Aut
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
20 Aug 2005 09:20:34 PM |
|
|
"Autymn D. C." <lysdexia@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1124578854.529786.74580@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Greysky wrote:
I find great comfort in the fact we can't yet make a decent black hole.
If by decent, you mean terminal, then neither can astronomy. However,
sticking your finger in this little black hole will still make a hole
in it.
Oh, I didn't realize I am typing words at the person in charge of *alien
technology* here on earth. Should I have reported in to you before I
built
my FTL radio, Autymn? Oh wait, I don't need strangelets to make my device
work... except for a handful of specialized parts, you could buy what you
need at radio shack...
What do you mean built? On your site I just saw a bunch of rambling
with ideas taken from tunnelling and evanescent waves.
Really? Which parts? I wasn't aware any one else had built a working quantum
information transfer device. Perhaps you should take the time to actually
read the entire site from beginning to end. It shouldn't take someone with
your humongous brain more than an hour or 2 and you might get an
appreciation for what I have accomplished.
Where was the parts list?
Before I give out the parts list, you need to understand the how and the why
the universe allows superluminal information transfer of meaningful
information. This is all concept, Autymn. Did you know quantum theory
actually *demands* instantaneous transfer of information? Current wrong
interpretation of some very basic experimental results blinds most of us to
the true power and beauty of the universe of the very small. Once you are
clued in to the correct interpretational approach, 'Great Mysteries" show
childishly simple solutions.
If you had actually read my site, you wouldn't need to ask me about 'parts'.
I saw nothing like my contributions:
http://www.advancedphysics.org/viewthread.php?tid=2100#pid13718
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/41342d2843f91e7b/062f678540219118#062f678540219118
Well, I see by your 'contributions', aside from your feelings of infatuation
for Uncle Al, you are still stuck on EPR. I have gone far beyond EPR in my
approach, and my device bears little resemblance to the legions of calcite
crystal wielding experimenters pointing their lasers into their apparatus
hoping to create naturally entangled photons with which to send faster than
light Morse code. I take EPR for what it is: a signpost toward superluminal
communications. It's proof the universe makes use of this concept, but I
also know this: EPR will never make a superluminal communicator we can use.
Any approach relying on naturally entangled particles will NEVER work for
some very good and insurmountable reasons. Mainly the noisey nature of the
potential link, but also because it can't be controlled. It's all about
control. One day after you have grown up, you'll know this too.
Yeah, even I will say it's a small chance. But how small does it have to
be
in order to risk everything there is? 1 in 10^40? 2 in 10^100? Nothing
I
do here in my filthy 4th world shack has any chance of killing you. I
think
it should be the same way all around. Look at it this way girlie, if the
worst happens, do you think you are going to get an invitation from the
president to join him, tony blair, and pals on their secret lunar base
while
the earth is turned into a 100 ft. lump of strange matter? Hardly.
I read (from my physics.about.com days) that the exponent was in the
50s. I don't believe in statistics and randomness anyway. The
worldeating strangelet must be made deterministically: It must have
enough energy, thus time dilation, to survive each and every next
feeding from the underground's nuclei so it grows instead of blows or
slows. That energy must come from somewhere first, then it must make
an astronomically-small alignment. Cosmic rays happen /all the time/
and everywhence that no earthbound smasher can compete with. We
should've seen jellied galactic cores by now.
We don't because our theories are not complete. It is hubris to assume
something can not happen because we can't understand it. No point in being
right if you are dead and there will be no more babies to grow up to replace
you.
Greysky
www.allocations.cc
Learn to make a FTL radio.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Autymn D. C." |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
21 Aug 2005 11:57:16 AM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
Really? Which parts? I wasn't aware any one else had built a working quantum
information transfer device. Perhaps you should take the time to actually
read the entire site from beginning to end. It shouldn't take someone with
your humongous brain more than an hour or 2 and you might get an
appreciation for what I have accomplished.
I asked you a question.
The rambling was near the end, and it wasn't interesting enough to read
earlier.
Before I give out the parts list, you need to understand the how and the why
the universe allows superluminal information transfer of meaningful
information. This is all concept, Autymn. Did you know quantum theory
actually *demands* instantaneous transfer of information? Current wrong
Potentials are not information. Changes thereof are.
interpretation of some very basic experimental results blinds most of us to
the true power and beauty of the universe of the very small. Once you are
clued in to the correct interpretational approach, 'Great Mysteries" show
childishly simple solutions.
I know of no "Great Mysteries".
Well, I see by your 'contributions', aside from your feelings of infatuation
for Uncle Al, you are still stuck on EPR. I have gone far beyond EPR in my
No, he is infatuated with me. I said nothing about EPR.
approach, and my device bears little resemblance to the legions of calcite
crystal wielding experimenters pointing their lasers into their apparatus
hoping to create naturally entangled photons with which to send faster than
light Morse code. I take EPR for what it is: a signpost toward superluminal
I said nothing about entanglement.
communications. It's proof the universe makes use of this concept, but I
also know this: EPR will never make a superluminal communicator we can use.
Any approach relying on naturally entangled particles will NEVER work for
some very good and insurmountable reasons. Mainly the noisey nature of the
potential link, but also because it can't be controlled. It's all about
control. One day after you have grown up, you'll know this too.
Entanglement is not a signal; it's a conserved condition. There is no
signal to control. You ignored my references, which had nothing to do
with fake signalling.
We don't because our theories are not complete. It is hubris to assume
something can not happen because we can't understand it. No point in being
right if you are dead and there will be no more babies to grow up to replace
you.
We don't because we don't. It's not hubris to enforce determinism as
an approach to knowledge; it's the only way. Being dead means not
being right, dumbass. Learn how to argue.
-Aut
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
21 Aug 2005 04:46:35 PM |
|
|
"Autymn D. C." <lysdexia@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1124643436.824757.55440@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Greysky wrote:
Really? Which parts? I wasn't aware any one else had built a working
quantum
information transfer device. Perhaps you should take the time to actually
read the entire site from beginning to end. It shouldn't take someone
with
your humongous brain more than an hour or 2 and you might get an
appreciation for what I have accomplished.
I asked you a question.
The rambling was near the end, and it wasn't interesting enough to read
earlier.
Before I give out the parts list, you need to understand the how and the
why
the universe allows superluminal information transfer of meaningful
information. This is all concept, Autymn. Did you know quantum theory
actually *demands* instantaneous transfer of information? Current wrong
Potentials are not information. Changes thereof are.
Changes of state. The state of what? You really need to understand QM better
before you can know this. But at least you are trying....
interpretation of some very basic experimental results blinds most of us
to
the true power and beauty of the universe of the very small. Once you
are
clued in to the correct interpretational approach, 'Great Mysteries" show
childishly simple solutions.
I know of no "Great Mysteries".
That's too bad. You must not be aware of any really simple answers too. Your
life must be ...obtuse.
Well, I see by your 'contributions', aside from your feelings of
infatuation
for Uncle Al, you are still stuck on EPR. I have gone far beyond EPR in
my
No, he is infatuated with me. I said nothing about EPR.
Yah, Al is really the romantic type- just don't break his heart again. You
are literaly dripping with the results of EPR. Everything you say smacks of
entanglement. You don't see this?
approach, and my device bears little resemblance to the legions of
calcite
crystal wielding experimenters pointing their lasers into their apparatus
hoping to create naturally entangled photons with which to send faster
than
light Morse code. I take EPR for what it is: a signpost toward
superluminal
I said nothing about entanglement.
You are now.
communications. It's proof the universe makes use of this concept, but I
also know this: EPR will never make a superluminal communicator we can
use.
Any approach relying on naturally entangled particles will NEVER work for
some very good and insurmountable reasons. Mainly the noisey nature of
the
potential link, but also because it can't be controlled. It's all about
control. One day after you have grown up, you'll know this too.
Entanglement is not a signal; it's a conserved condition.
No, is isn't. A conserved quantity must be relativistically invariant
across all inertial frames, and an EPR-like instantaneous link is not. Maybe
you need to run some relativistic EPR expriments to know where the limits
are, eh?
There is no
signal to control.
You are being obtuse again. There is a signal, there just isn't a carrier to
control. Do you know anything about RF transmission / reception?
You ignored my references, which had nothing to do
with fake signalling.
No, I just dismissed them as being irrelevant.
We don't because our theories are not complete. It is hubris to assume
something can not happen because we can't understand it. No point in
being
right if you are dead and there will be no more babies to grow up to
replace
you.
We don't because we don't. It's not hubris to enforce determinism as
an approach to knowledge; it's the only way. Being dead means not
being right, dumbass.
And you arrived at this brilliant conclusion how...? Jeremy Bentham must be
rolling in his grave/platform. No wonder Uncle Al gives you sweetie eyes.
Learn how to argue.
Argue? I never argue because I don't like to, and also because I am always
right.
Greysky
.
|
|
|
| User: "Autymn D. C." |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
22 Aug 2005 01:28:27 PM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
I asked you a question.
Answer my question.
Changes of state. The state of what? You really need to understand QM better
before you can know this. But at least you are trying....
observable potential differences
That's too bad. You must not be aware of any really simple answers too. Your
life must be ...obtuse.
I must be aware of them. I understand anything. Stop making ***** up.
Yah, Al is really the romantic type- just don't break his heart again. You
are literaly dripping with the results of EPR. Everything you say smacks of
entanglement. You don't see this?
It must be you.
You are now.
I am now what?
No, is isn't. A conserved quantity must be relativistically invariant
across all inertial frames, and an EPR-like instantaneous link is not. Maybe
you need to run some relativistic EPR expriments to know where the limits
are, eh?
No it mustn't. Whatever limited conservation still doesn't mean it's a
signal. I don't believe in inertial frames anyway.
You are being obtuse again. There is a signal, there just isn't a carrier to
signal;
control. Do you know anything about RF transmission / reception?
No carrier means no signal. Would you like me to make the appropriate
sound? In the meantime, you can read about classical matter waves:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/3f76d6cd94967ca2/b18a47880cdaab95#b18a47880cdaab95.
No, I just dismissed them as being irrelevant.
wrong
And you arrived at this brilliant conclusion how...? Jeremy Bentham must be
rolling in his grave/platform. No wonder Uncle Al gives you sweetie eyes.
I'm still here.
Argue? I never argue because I don't like to, and also because I am always
right.
When I argue, I'm always right. That makes your nonarguments wrong.
-Aut
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bjoern Feuerbacher" |
|
| Title: Re: Article: Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark |
16 Aug 2005 04:14:11 AM |
|
|
Robert Karl Stonjek wrote:
Heavyweights battle to expose the naked quark
13 August 2005
Dana Mackenzie
Magazine issue 2512
When a supercomputer took on a particle smasher in a race to pin down the
ephemeral quark, the stakes could hardly have been higher
IT WAS a true clash of the titans. In the blue corner: a multimillion-dollar
particle accelerator. In the red: one of the world's most powerful
supercomputers. Both were battling to pin down the lifetime of an ephemeral
subatomic particle known as the D-meson. Their deadline was 30 June.
Two days ahead of their target, the 20 or so theorists behind the
supercomputer announced their answer. For 48 nail-biting hours, they waited
for their rival's result. They knew that if their numbers tallied, the
supercomputer approach would have what it takes to revolutionise our
understanding of the subatomic world. So when the 150-strong team at the
accelerator finally announced that its answer matched, the theorists were
over the moon.
It is a pretty impressive achievement, even by today's standards in
theoretical physics. For 30 years, researchers have been battling to make
sense of the strong force - the glue that sticks ...
The complete article is 2538 words long
Summary and full text links at NewScientist
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18725121.800
Is there anything in the article about the "naked quark" in the title?
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
