Ask any question you want about Physics

a reply to: Hyperboles

The advantage is as follows

The energy of a particle in its full form is E^2 = P^2C^2 + M^2C^4 , not the old E=MC^2 the nearest equivalent is E=gMC^2 where the g there takes case of the addition of momentum to the expression.

So when a particle collides in an accelerator, you get a range of so called 'centre of mass' energies because of the momentum carried by the particle and if it is a composite object, the addition of momentum of the internal quarks.

heavy nuclei collisions are nice to study due to the binding of the heavy nucleon and a high energy collision between two large composite objects giving the possibility to create a dense quark-gluon plasma by essentially trying to smash the ions apart at high energy. If you think of two protons colliding, you can create a high energy 'hadronisation' process which appear as two highly energetic jets of particles that emanate out from a collision point.

In a heavy ion collision it is the hope that they are absorbed by the high density nucleon material and that in turn creates a quark gluon plasma, conditions similar to that shortly after the big bang. Studying this speculative state would be useful for confirming behaviour of various nuclear synthesis models. It also allows modelling of material speculated to be at the cores of highly degenerate compact stellar objects such as neutron stars for example...

The list is longer than just this however.

a reply to: Hyperboles
A purpose of the proton proton collisions was to find the Higgs.
The different purpose of the heavy ion collisions is to study conditions as close to the "big bang" conditions as the accelerator can produce. At extremely high temperatures many times hotter than the sun's core temperature, a quark-gluon plasma (QGP) is formed by the heavy ion collisions, a state the early universe is thought to once have been in. They want to learn more about that QGP and about how it forms into more ordinary matter and maybe some not so ordinary matter too. Here's an article about it:

Heavy ions and quark-gluon plasma

Hmm I see Eros already provided a better and more detailed answer while I was writing mine, thanks for that Eros!

ok thanks. but this QGP being a theoretical entity, how might they observe it or what kind of detection technique is at play here. since head on collision are few and far between.
moreover do they actually believe that they have found the higgs
a reply to: ErosA433

a reply to: Hyperboles

First thing you need to understand is that you have a number of detector systems at the LHC, you have ATLAS, ALICE, LHCb and CMS. These are large scale composite particle detectors design to perform fine grain particle tracking, high accuracy energy determination and particle identification. They all have slightly different characteristics and performance.

On the inside close to the crossing point, there is typically a barrel vertex and tracking detector, on the outsides are calorimeters designed to stop particles and determine deposited energy.

SO a quark gluon plasma would only be produced for a short amount of time, the event topolgy however would be very different to a normal proton-proton collision. I personally don't quite know what they'd look like but the potential to have a high multiplicity of jets, maybe potential for missing momentum, particle fragmentation... to be honest the list is endless.

Collision rates are not actually that few, the bunch spacing in the LHC is about 25ns, the collision rate per second when running proton proton mode can reach 600 million events per second.

They are thus doing high statistics determination of events. They are not doing single shots here, they run almost constantly and collect petabytes of data. They then run reconstruction across all the data, and figure out on an event by event basis, what energy and momentum etc collisions occurred at and what kind of byproducts came off. They do this in 3d space, allowing selection of 'on centre of mass collisions' as well as off centre or boosted collisions. They are able to determine a hell of a lot of information. this isn't just a machine with a few flashing lights.

And yes, higgs determination has been confirmed by both ATLAS and CMS with independent data sets and differently designed detectors. They look for the higgs production based on several different decay channels. The different channels or decay branches have different statistical confidence levels, but, the thing that is important is that they are well over the 7 sigma level currently the last i knew. Which means, the Higgs, is most definitely a thing.

ok tks. you mean 600 million head on collisions per / sec, but may not all be exactly squarely head on.
tho higgs boson lot of people question that.
imo dark matter particle is the higgs particle, if you can call it higgs
a reply to: ErosA433

a reply to: Hyperboles

Which is exactly the point i was making. Not all interactions are the same, if you have a non head on collision, the event topology and momentum distribution of that collision will appear extremely different to a near head on collision the spacial and energy resolution of the detector systems allow quite good determination of that kind of effect.

Not many scientists who have experience in statistical analysis, physics and high energy physics question it at all... the main group of people who question it are arm chair scientists with little more than high school experience in physics or science... at least from my experience talking to people.

Also... the higgs rapidly decays... thus it by definition cannot be dark matter... looks up...

Ok tks.
Now returning back to my original ques: how would gravity and time affect the nuclear reactions fission and fusion.
a reply to: ErosA433

a reply to: Hyperboles

The issue is similar to Arbs statement, your question is extremely vague and much like your posts historically when you ask vague questions, it always appear it is being done in bad faith and you are looking fishing for a hole or something specific.

So why not for example, tell us the context of your question, explain to how you think it affects it and we can then maybe get the context.

So in terms of nuclear fission and fusion, the processes are different in a manner.

In Fission, you are basically splitting nuclei, typically in a reactor or weapon this is done with plutonium or uranium, and a specific isotope of which, which has a tendancy to break into fragments when absorbing a neutron... part of this process which is important is the production of more neutrons than you put in which then go on to interact. In Fission, the critical component is having material enriched to a high level but not in a self sustaining reactive mass. So in a weapon system typically it is about bringing fissile material together and being able to hold the material critical for a short amount of time to push the chain reaction into a self sustaining run away. The other way is to compress a sub critical mass to achieve extra density to push it critical.

Fusion is where you combine or push an element to tunnel through the coulomb barrier and bond nucleons together, small nucleons will release some of their mass as binding them together appears as a more internally stable configuration. Fusion isn't specifically a chain reaction in that you have to force the conditions to be present, that is, high material density and high energy. In a weapon the key is providing heat and compression at the same time, or within a very short period of time in order to trigger the fusion. In a thermonuclear weapon, typically you have a fission stage to provide heat and compression for the fusion stage but it isn't a simple process. It requires focusing of the x-ray and gamma ray burst output of the fission stage and a focussing of the explosive compression.

SO what role does time and gravity play in fission? gravity? seems to basically play a 5th order roll, the weapon or device is basically a passive thing. Time? well all that is really important is that events that occur in sequence have to occur with a small time period, but, over all, the passage of time specifically is quite ill defined in your question. The densities we are talking about need to only be achieved for a short period, the gravitation generated by a fusion or fission weapon... is the same as the mass of material it contains...

a reply to: ErosA433

See a few muons a day deep underground here, pretty clear they are not electrons, not only that but also neutrinos, the signals are pretty distinct but hey, no worries right.... Pretty amusing to me when someone who clearly has no idea at all about the evidence present in particle physics starts to dictate what it is and isn't. Oh well... Love to know what exactly it is that we see 2km underground that produce lovely cherenkov cones in our detector... predominantly downward facing. for the amount of 'noise' being claimed there is a hell of a lot of unique topology.

this is not just not right, it is not even wrong...

...

I have few cameras here, a setup detector to detect the holy spirits and the body of god...
quite very complicated assembly indeed.. not so easy to understand for someone who don't know the religion...
it is obviously, people not studious in this manner will ignore or even deny the facts I do and discover here.

never the less, the readings are clear... god and the holly spirits are real and very reliable in they doings.. so I can monitor them every day a few times a day...

they allays come in double and leave after a while. they always come from the right and go to the top.
how fast they do the transition right-top tells me, if it is the god himself or the angel following him.

I know that what I say is right, because I have build the detectors to do exactly this, detect the holy spirits

so... ErosA433
my detectors react to charged particles the spirits influence as they move, pushing them ( the charges ) around, what gives me readings on my screen.. and I use a counter as well to measure the time displacement as they move...
it the counter counts 5 they ( the spirits ) stays and look around, and if I count 7, the spirit just moves away...

my teacher was very wise, his knowledge is indisputable, no way I would ever question it !
he told me god is green, so I have build my detectors to see the green, not the other colors,just green.. god is green.
I have even designed my detector to see the green and nothing else.. was difficult you now.. all the other colors I have to ignore.
but I'm sure god is green, this is what I was told and I believe it

I was thinking once, by mistake, what if the green comes not from god but from the other thing he moves through...
stupid me... god is green, always was and always ever will be..

--- sarcasm off...

question !!

how exactly one detects a muon? a Muon Detector ??

As the name “Compact Muon Solenoid” suggests, detecting muons is one of CMS’s most important tasks. Muons are charged particles that are just like electrons and positrons, but are 200 times heavier.... bla bla bla... muons can penetrate several metres of iron without interacting, unlike most particles they are not stopped by any of CMS's calorimeters. Therefore, chambers to detect muons are placed at the very edge of the experiment where they are the only particles likely to register a signal.

not interacting with several meters of iron ??
charged particles of -1 ??
how comes ??
even 200 times "heavier" than protons still move through billions of iron proton-electron atoms..
electric interaction is 1/r^2, no matter of mass...
what is mass anyway ?? tell me !


for me it looks like it is not a particle, but a EM bubble, a high slope wave in EM propagating for 2.2 μs...

talking about particles...
an particle is something you can collect... electron is an particle, proton is an particle
all the other LHC inventions are not particles.. they are bubbles in EM field

the name particle suggest it is some part of something else, electron, proton, parts of the atom, something that is.
and it means it exists, all the time, not just for 2.2 μs

whatever... god is green

tks, but the flow process suggests otherwise
speed of compression -> impact loading -> gravity++ of core -> time compression , wouldn't it?
time compression is valid till the casing ruptures, so it has to play a role
a reply to: ErosA433

a reply to: Hyperboles

still not really making any sense

and as for KrzYma there im not even going to entertain it
ok well i will a tiny bit... so basically you are saying this document is entirely wrong... based on... a few sentances and statements... and of course zero experimental evidence.

journals.aps.org...

well the time is running much faster inside the casing than outside it. So it has to play into the nuclear reaction process
than currently understood.
a reply to: ErosA433

a reply to: Hyperboles

A mass of a few kg isn't going to warp time a huge amount. Density is important yes but the material in a fusion device wont even get high enough to be degenerate let alone create any kind of GR affect.

Here is a question:

Does the observer effect apply only to humans or does it apply to animals? As in, what type of being causes the observer effect and what doesn't plus why?

originally posted by: Hyperboles
well the time is running much faster inside the casing than outside it. So it has to play into the nuclear reaction process
than currently understood.
a reply to: ErosA433

No, not "much faster". You'd be hard pressed to measure the time differential, it would be so tiny. Do the math and see what differential you come up with and if it's not immeasurably small, you did it wrong. It's like the example I use of dropping a paper clip to the floor. You can measure the acceleration of the paper clip to the ground, but you can't measure the acceleration of the earth toward the paper clip, though in theory the masses accelerate toward each other. One acceleration is measurable and the other is not. Your supposed time differential would be another such not measurable difference.

originally posted by: Purpapengus
Here is a question:

Does the observer effect apply only to humans or does it apply to animals? As in, what type of being causes the observer effect and what doesn't plus why?

It even applies to inanimate objects like tire pressure gauges or thermometers. Most tire pressure gauges let a little bit of air escape while applying the gauge to the tire so by observing the tire pressure with such a gauge, you have altered the very thing you are trying to measure via a form of the observer effect. I also noticed a case of the observer effect in my kitchen, using two meat thermometers, one with a larger mass than the other. I noticed the thermometer with the larger mass was having a larger observer effect on temperature measurements than the smaller mass thermometer. Here is the thread.

The "observer effect": Is it proof the system is "aware it's being observed?"

Sean Carroll also debunks some nutty ideas about "observer effect" in this video, saying that video cameras and rocks or anything else that can interact with the system being "observed" make perfectly good "observers" in the quantum mechanical sense of observing a quantum mechanical system.

Sean Carroll - What are Observers?


Of course he points out that some people have other ideas, but to me they seem nutty and hideously anthropocentric, though Carroll is a bit more tactful than that in disagreeing with the anthropocentric view.

the amount of impact loading is huge otherwise you will not get the critical mass/density/gravity to start a nuclear process, so time compression has to be huge
a reply to: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: Hyperboles

A mass of a few kg isn't going to warp time a huge amount. Density is important yes but the material in a fusion device wont even get high enough to be degenerate let alone create any kind of GR affect.

fusion device is more critical as you have to achieve insane photon pressures and fusion temps for which huge density / time compression would be required.

originally posted by: Hyperboles
the amount of impact loading is huge otherwise you will not get the critical mass/density/gravity to start a nuclear process, so time compression has to be huge
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I'm afraid you don't understand nuclear engineering any better than you understand pendulums. No impact loading is required to start a supercritical chain reaction, as demonstrated in some nuclear accidents in 1945 and 1946, using the 6.2 kg spherical core seen below.

A review of criticality accidents

All they needed to do to make the core go from subcritical to supercritical was stack some blocks around the core which acted as reflectors. There was no "impact load" in doing so, and even in the Little Boy design, there wasn't a requirement for "impact load", only a very quick joining of the two subcritical masses that needed to be fast enough to avoid a "fizzle". They were shaped to join together. The projectile was sort of donut-shaped and that donut fit around a mating target mass.

If you have more mass than 64 kg then you have more mass than the 64 kg of uranium in the "Little Boy" device so time compression around you would be more than time compression around 64 kg of uranium, which is not much in either case.

Since E=mc^2, the energy released from "Little Boy" came from converting a small amount (less than a gram*) of that 64 kg of uranium mass into energy.

*"The amount of matter converted to energy in the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima was about 700 milligrams, less than one-third the mass of a U.S. dime."

discovermagazine.com...

a reply to: Hyperboles

There are two excellent books about the development of the bomb:

"Dark Sun - The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb" and "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" - both by Richard Rhodes. Pages 578 - 581 of the second book describes the initiation event and how it was developed. Doesn't go into a lot of detailed physics, but discusses the general idea behind initiation. Long books, but very good reads if you have the time.

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_2?keywords=richard+rhodes&qid=1557666544&s=gateway&sr=8-2

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_6?keywords=richard+rhodes&qid=1557666565&s=gateway&sr=8-6

that accident did not start a chain or nuclear reaction. pendulum? where does it fit in here.
a reply to: Arbitrageur