Environment-Clean-Generations

Environment-Clean-Generations
THE DEFINITIVE BLOG FOR EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT YOU LIVE IN, WITH REFERENCE TO LIFE, EARTH AND COSMIC SPACE SCIENCES, PRESENTED BY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER DORU INDREI, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND ENERGY SPACIALIST
"Life is not about what we know, but what we don't know, craving the unthinkable makes it so amazing, that is worth dying for." Doru Indrei
Custom Search
Showing posts with label physics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label physics. Show all posts

Cold Fusion Race: NASA, MIT, DARPA and CERN

Four months ago, Andrea Rossi demonstrated what he claims was a one-megawatt "Energy Catalyser" -- or E-Cat -- which produces power by cold fusion. This technology, also known as Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR), had been consigned to the deepest cellar of fringe science.

Now it's hammering on the cellar door, and Nasa, MIT, Darpa and Cern are among those peering through the keyhole, wondering if it should be allowed back in with respectable science. As part of Wired.co.uk's continued coverage of progress in this controversial field, we have investigated recent developments.

Nasa

Nasa has started giving very mixed signals on cold fusion. After years of silence on the issue, a piece appeared on its website stating that LENR tests carried out at Nasa's Glenn Research Centre "consistently show evidence of anomalous heat," indicating that cold fusion was taking place. There is also a link to a paper given at an LENR Workshop held at Glenn in September 2011. However, when questioned, a Nasa spokesman stated out that there was no Nasa cold fusion project, and no budget for it. The work appears to be carried out on the side by interested Nasa scientists.




Even more dramatically, on 16 January a video appeared on Nasa's Technology Gateway site, essentially a marketplace for commercialising technology developed at Nasa. This featured Dr Joseph Zawodny talking about his "Method for Enhancement of Surface Plasmon Polaritons to Initiate & Sustain LENR." In this Dr Zawodny says the technology has the potential to provide home heating and electricity, cleanly and without nuclear waste.

The video release was quickly followed by a long post on Dr Zawodny's blog explaining that he was expressing his own views on LENR and not those of Nasa. In response to the clamour from Rossi's fans, he stressed that he was not yet convinced the E-Cat works: "I am unaware of any clear and convincing demonstrations of any viable commercial device producing useful amounts of net energy."
Steven Krivit of New Energy Times used the Freedom of Information Act to get details of more Nasa LENR presentations and clearly there's quite a fan club there.

Cern

Meanwhile Cern is holding a colloquium on LENR, scheduled for 22 March. This will be available live via webcast, and will be given by Francesco Celani from the Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics.
Cern is of course a major bastion of mainstream science; a search of Cern's site shows just eight papers on cold fusion compared to over 8,000 on conventional hot fusion. The colloquium seems like inviting a heretic to preach in a cathedral. A recent presentation shows that Celani is a strong advocate for LENR, suggesting that the challenge now is understanding exactly how it works. (He also states that Rossi's claims, though not impossible, need independent verification)


MIT

MIT, which played a key role in discrediting the original cold fusion studies in 1989, might also be shifting its position a little. This January for the first time there was a short course called "Cold Fusion 101." This was taught by Peter Hagelstein, who has been working on LENR for many years. According to a report in Cold Fusion Times, the course included a working demonstration of LENR showing measurable excess of heat.

Darpa

Darpa, the Pentagon's Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency, has been quietly pursuing LENR for some years. Its budget plans for next year, released earlier this month, listed some significant achievements: "Continued quantification of material parameters that control degree of increase in excess heat generation and life expectancy of power cells in collaboration with the Italian Department of Energy. Established ability to extend active heat generation time from minutes to 2.5 days for pressure-activated power cells."
However, when contacted Darpa were unable to comment on this work.
But what of Andrea Rossi and Defkalion?

Andrea Rossi

In the meantime, Andrea Rossi has been playing the tightrope walker, always appearing to be a whisker from tumbling into the abyss. The University of Bologna terminated an agreement to explore the E-Cat after he failed to make a progress payment; but a later statement indicated it was still keen to work with him.
As New Energy Times noted, the original one-megawatt device which was supposedly sold to a mystery customer months ago has not moved. When he has free heating, why is his Bologna factory so cold that Rossi needs an overcoat in one video? Rossi responded in terms of the size of the space and the available E-Cats.
More digging by New Energy Times suggested that Rossi was not in fact working in partnership with National Instruments as he has claimed. However, a later statement by the company confirmed that Rossi's account was substantially correct, even if he was not an actual customer.

.........................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................

If Rossi has not produced anything tangible in the last few months, he has certainly come up with plenty of vapourware. The entire E-Cat design has been revamped and upgraded. Instead of costing thousands, the price of a ten-kilowatt domestic E-Cat will now be between 500-700 Euros. It will be the size of a desktop PC and able to directly replace existing boilers, and will be refuelled by changing a simple cartridge every six months. In a year or two's time, Rossi says it will also be possible to generate electricity from an E-Cat.
Rossi claims that almost 100,000 people have signed up to express interest in ordering an E-Cat: "You will be put in the waiting list and in Autumn you will receive a precise offer: at that point you will be free to cancel the order or confirm it. The deliveries could start within one year (could, not will)."

Rossi also claims that he will have a completely robotised production line which will churn out a million E-Cats in the first year alone. However, the very existence of the factory remains unproven, along with his mystery customer, mystery business partners, mystery suppliers and the mystery investors who now apparently control his company, Leonardo Corp.
Perhaps Rossi's "precise offer" might ask customers to make a deposit. It would take a very trusting soul to hand over cash without the sort of evidence that Zawodny and Celani seek.

Defkalion Green

While Rossi has declined to give any further public or scientific demonstrations, saying that he wants to leave it to the market, his rival Defkalion Green technologies has seemingly taken a much bolder approach. It has invited independent testers to carry out trials on its Hyperion LENR reactor.

We know that seven independent test groups will be involved, but there things get a bit murky. Non-disclosure agreements are in place, and it is not certain what information will be released or when: if the Very Big Oil Corporation finds the Hyperion works, it might prefer to talk to Defkalion itself rather than publicising it. (And big oil might just be interested -- the indefatigable Steven Krivit found that Royal Dutch Shell has started looking for opportunities to work with LENR experts.)

What we do know is that according to the test protocol, one live and one inert Hyperion will be tested side by side for 48 hours, with the inert machine acting as a control. Then the active component will be removed from the live and placed in the inert one, and the test will be run again, so the complete test will take a minimum of four days.
Defkalion has confirmed that the tests will start on 24 February. According to Sterling Allan of Peswiki, who visited Defkalion a couple of weeks ago, the first round of tests will be carried out by a Greek government organisation. Defkalion has not released anything about the identity of the testers.
So perhaps the Greek government will soon announce a fantastic new energy source, one that will solve the country's economic problems at a stroke and provide the world with unlimited cheap energy. No doubt they would love to do that… and the rest of us will also await test results with interest.


The Largest-Ever Quantum Calculation Uses 84 Qubits and Takes Just 270 Milliseconds



Vancouver-based quantum computer maker D-Wave Systems is the kind of company that often gets mixed reviews--either kudos for working on the very edge of a new and potentially groundbreaking technology, or dismissal for not exactly delivering the kind of Earth-shattering technology that people were perhaps expecting. Regardless, today D-Wave is marking one in the win column after announcing that it has achieved the world’s largest quantum computation using 84 qubits.

A quick quantum computing primer: qubits, or quantum bits, are the basic units of quantum information, comparable to (but quite different from) a classical bit. The main benefit of qubits is that they can exploit the laws of quantum mechanics to exist in two states simultaneously. In comparison to classical computing, that means a single superconducting qubit can exist as both a “one” and a “zero” at the same time, whereas a classical bit can only be one or the other.



.........................................................................................................................................................

More...

..........................................................................................................................................................

This vastly improves speed and computing power. It also has proven pretty difficult to execute. A decade ago quantum computers were using a handful of qubits to factorize numbers and do other grade-school level computations. And in recent years, they haven’t come much further forward, even as D-Wave released a $10 million 128-qubit quantum computer for sale.

To prove that quantum computing really is pushing forward, Zhengbing Bian at D-Wave used one of the company’s machines to tackle a very difficult calculation known as a “two-color Ramsey number.” This is somewhat explained by the “theorum on friends and strangers,” which you can feel free to read up on but will not be explained in detail here for reasons including, but not limited to, the fact that I can’t begin to adequately/coherently explain it. But the math isn’t the point here. The point is that the math is mind-numbingly difficult, and the quantum computer solved it in just 270 milliseconds.

The system required just 28 qubits to actually solve the Ramsey problem, using the other 56 for error correction. And, because this was a Ramsey problem that has already been solved by conventional means, Bian and company know that their D-Wave computer came up with the correct solution (it was 8).

Whether or not this glowing achievement is going to boost confidence in D-Wave’s technology and approach is yet to be seen, but the company already has some support in industry. A certain Mountain View-based Internet search company has taken an active interest in D-Wave’s computing technology, and last year Lockheed Martin bought one of D-Wave’s quantum computers for itself.

New Particle Discovered at LHC: the Chi-b(3P)


For the first time since the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) was opened in 2009, physicists from the UK think they've detected their first new subatomic particle.

Researchers from the University of Birmingham and Lancaster University analysed data from the ATLAS experiment, where particles of matter are shot at each other at close to the speed of light, in the hopes that interesting new particles will appear in the resulting subatomic carnage.



The data shows a clear indication of a particle called Chi-b(3P), which is pronounced kye-bee-three-pee. It's a forge of the bottom quark (also known as the beauty quark) and its antiquark.

..........................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................


Quarks are the building blocks of protons and neutrons, which in turn are the building blocks of atoms. Quarks come in a number of flavours like up, down, strange, charm, bottom, and top. This newly found particle tells us more about the strong nuclear forces that bind the quark and the antiquark.
The lighter partners of the Chi-b(3P) were observed in previous collision experiments around 25 years ago. This is a more excited state of Chi particle.

"Our new measurements are a great way to test theoretical calculations of the forces that act on fundamental particles, and will move us a step closer to understanding how the universe is held together," said Miriam Watson, a research fellow working in the Birmingham group .


Chi-b(3P) is also a boson, which are subatomic particles that obey Bose-Einstein statistics. A far more famous boson, the Higgs, is also being hunted for by the LHC. This theoretical field of particles is thought to give subatomic particles their mass as they wade through it. Earlier this month, physicists from the Cern research lab in Geneva announced that they have made significant progress in the hunt for the Higgs boson, but the result does not provide definitive evidence for the long-sought particle.With significantly more data to be gathered next year, "we can look forward to resolving this puzzle in 2012," said Atlas experiment spokesperson Fabiola Gianotti.
Environment Clean Generations

Neutrino Observatory - The Second-Largest Human Structure Ever Built


Forty different universities and institutions from across Europe are partnering on a project to build a neutrino observatory under the Mediterranean sea that will be the second-largest structure ever built by humans, after the Great Wall of China.
The KM3NeT telescope will have a volume of "several" cubic kilometres -- hence the odd name, which purportedly stands for "kilometre-cubed neutrino telescope". It will comprise of a number of towers -- each taller than the 830-metre Burj Khalifa in Dubai -- which will be filled with spheres containing photomultiplier tubes, which will record neutrinos passing through.


Neutrinos are notoriously tricksy little particles, formed in certain types of radioactive decay. They get their name because they carry no electrical charge, but that property also means that they can pass through matter virtually unimpeded, making them difficult to spot. Whereas an electron passing through a 3-centimetre thick sheet of metal will lose significant amounts of energy, a neutrino of the same energy would need something like a light-year's worth of heavy metal to lose the same amount.

..........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................


Peter Fisher, a particle physicist at MIT, explained to Popsci: "Anytime you detect a particle, what you're always doing is having the particle interact with some kind of matter, whether it's water, steel, air or ice. The less the particle interacts, the more material you need for it to interact in."


KM3NeT uses the ocean instead. Hundreds of metres of seawater act as a shield, blocking interference from particles generated in our atmosphere, and allow the photomultipliers to capture the bright blue flash caused when a neutrino hits the nucleus of an atom and produces a charged particle known as a muon.
Giorgio Riccobene, a staff researcher at the Italian National Institute for Nuclear Physics, said: "This is the light we look for to reconstruct the trajectory of the muon," Riccobene said. "So, in this sense, it is an underwater telescope. The water allows us to see the reaction more clearly."

The structure is still in the planning phases, and funding is proving problematic given the current state of European finances and politics, but if all goes well then construction could begin as early as 2012.
Environment Clean Generations

Closer for Higgs Boson, but Particle still Remains Elusive


Physicists from the Cern research lab in Geneva announced that they have made significant progress in the hunt for the Higgs boson, but the result does not provide definitive evidence for the long-sought particle.
The teams announced signals consistent with the appearance of the Higgs boson, and the results suggest a Higgs particle mass of about in the range of 115 to 130 gigaelectronvolts (GeV). However, the signals could also be explained if the Higgs field doesn't exist -- it could just be background fluctuation.

More data will be needed to establish the existence of the Higgs with confidence. The Atlas and CMS experiments will gather significantly more data in 2012 -- but until then, a definitive answer to the question "does the Higgs boson exist" is still out of reach.
"Given the outstanding performance of the LHC this year, we will not need to wait long for enough data and can look forward to resolving this puzzle in 2012," said Atlas experiment spokesperson Fabiola Gianotti.


Two teams of physicists working with Cern's Large Hadron Collider in Geneva are expected to announce that they have found the best evidence yet for the hypothetical elementary particle: the Higgs boson.
The teams -- Atlas and CMS -- have been working independently to hunt for signs of the elusive particle. But what is the Higgs boson, and why do you need to recreate events a fraction of a second after the Big Bang to find it?

..........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................


It's named after Edinburgh University physicist Peter Higgs, who proposed that atoms receive their mass from an invisible field that's spread throughout the cosmos. Like wading through treacle, atoms pick up mass as they whizz through the Higgs field.
The Higgs is an answer to the physics conundrum of why the building blocks of matter have a mass at all. This stops them from zipping about the universe at the speed of light, and allows them to bind together to form planets, humans, kangaroos and asteroids.

Its existence is essential for the Standard Model, which is the universally-accepted scientific theory to explain the dynamics of subatomic particles. The Higgs boson has always been the one missing ingredient to this model, but if it doesn't exist then the Standard Model shatters into pieces.


To find evidence for its existence, physicists built the LHC: a $10 billion (£6bn) particle accelerator that's housed in a 18-mile tunnel, deep beneath near the French-Swiss border. This monstrous physics laboratory can recreate conditions that existed a fraction of a second after the Big Bang.

The collider makes beams of protons move at close to the speed of light, before smashing them into each other. This spectacular head-on collision causes other types of particles to splinter off -- hopefully including the Higgs boson.
If it exists, the Higgs is so unstable that it would rapidly decay into more stable, and lighter subatomic particles. But that decay would leave behind a telltale fingerprint, showing up on the physicists' graphs as a very exciting bump.
CERN is to hold a seminar at 13:00 UTC on 13 December, "at which the ATLAS and CMS experiments will present the status of their searches for the Standard Model Higgs boson." The conference and a follow-up questions and answers session will be streamed over the web, here.

Turning Hydrogen Gas Into Metal


Today in relatively obscure but nonetheless meaningful scientific pursuits: two researchers at the Max-Planck Institute claim to have turned hydrogen into metal. That may seem unremarkable, but the fact is hydrogen--being an alkali metal--should exhibit the qualities of a metal under the right circumstances. Yet no one has ever coaxed the universe’s most abundant element into showing metallic qualities until now. Perhaps.
This all depends on how you qualify the term “metal.” There are some boilerplate qualifiers: Metals should conduct electricity and heat somewhat well, they should be malleable to some degree, and it makes sense that they should exist as solids under some circumstances.



But though many have tried, none have been able to make hydrogen behave like a metal under these criteria. Mikhail Erements and Ivan Troyan claim in a paper published in Nature Materials that they’ve done exactly that.
First, they placed some hydrogen in an alumina-epoxy gasket and placed that within a diamond anvil cell. This allowed them to test the opacity and electrical resistance of their sample via laser and electrodes, respectively.



Then, at room temperature, they dialed the pressure up to 220 gigapascals, at which point their sample became opaque and began to show conductive properties. In the next phase of their experiment, they also dialed down the temperature to roughly -400 degrees while upping the pressure to 260 GPa. Here, electrical resistance increased by 20 percent.

...........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................


This, they claim, is hydrogen exhibiting metallic properties.
Now, other researchers are going to have to replicate the se results before they can be described as truly meaningful. And then peer reviewers are going to have to hash out whether or not these qualities truly constitute “metallic” characteristics. What is most interesting is that they made hydrogen gas conductive at room temperature by applying pressure. Materials scientists have long been looking for superconductors that can move electricity over distances without losing so much of it as waste. Perhaps hydrogen was right there staring them in the face all along.

A Higgs Boson Announcement be Imminent from the LHC?


Physicists at the Large Hadron Collider could be getting an early Christmas present: the Higgs boson. According to the latest rumours, scientists at the LHC are seeing a signal that could correspond to a Higgs particle with a mass of 125 GeV (a proton is slightly less than 1 GeV).
Public talks are scheduled to discuss the latest results from Atlas and CMS, two of the main LHC experiments, on 13 December. This follows one day after a closed-door Cern council meeting where officials will get a short preview of the findings, whatever they may be.


"Chances are high (but not strictly 100%) that the talks will either announce a (de facto or de iure) discovery or some far-reaching exclusion that will be really qualitative and unexpected," wrote theoretical physicist Lubos Motl on his blog.
 ..........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................Motl also mentioned that an internal email sent to the Cern community suggests that results on the elusive Higgs -- which is required under the Standard Model of particle physics to provide mass to different particles -- will be inconclusive. This could mean that the finding is below the five-sigma threshold needed to definitively declare a discovery in physics.

But if the rumours are true, and the Higgs has been seen at 125 GeV, it could bolster the idea that there is physics beyond the Standard Model that describes the behaviour of subatomic particles. A 125 GeV Higgs is lighter than predicted under the simplest models and would likely require more complex theories, such as supersymmetry, which posits the existence of a heavier partner to all known particles.

Neutrino Experiment Repeat at Cern Finds Same Result


The team which found that neutrinos may travel faster than light has carried out an improved version of their experiment - and confirmed the result.
If confirmed by other experiments, the find could undermine one of the basic principles of modern physics.
Critics of the first report in September had said that the long bunches of neutrinos (tiny particles) used could introduce an error into the test.
The new work used much shorter bunches.

It has been posted to the Arxiv repository and submitted to the Journal of High Energy Physics, but has not yet been reviewed by the scientific community.
The experiments have been carried out by the Opera collaboration - short for Oscillation Project with Emulsion (T)racking Apparatus.
It hinges on sending bunches of neutrinos created at the Cern facility (actually produced as decays within a long bunch of protons produced at Cern) through 730km (454 miles) of rock to a giant detector at the INFN-Gran Sasso laboratory in Italy.
The initial series of experiments, comprising 15,000 separate measurements spread out over three years, found that the neutrinos arrived 60 billionths of a second faster than light would have, travelling unimpeded over the same distance.

The idea that nothing can exceed the speed of light in a vacuum forms a cornerstone in physics - first laid out by James Clerk Maxwell and later incorporated into Albert Einstein's theory of special relativity.


Timing is everything
 
Initial analysis of the work by the wider scientific community argued that the relatively long-lasting bunches of neutrinos could introduce a significant error into the measurement.
Those bunches lasted 10 millionths of a second - 160 times longer than the discrepancy the team initially reported in the neutrinos' travel time.
To address that, scientists at Cern adjusted the way in which the proton beams were produced, resulting in bunches just three billionths of a second long.
When the Opera team ran the improved experiment 20 times, they found almost exactly the same result.

"This is reinforcing the previous finding and ruling out some possible systematic errors which could have in principle been affecting it," said Antonio Ereditato of the Opera collaboration.
"We didn't think they were, and now we have the proof," he told BBC News. "This is reassuring that it's not the end of the story."

The first announcement of evidently faster-than-light neutrinos caused a stir worldwide; the Opera collaboration is very aware of its implications if eventually proved correct.
The error in the length of the bunches, however, is just the largest among several potential sources of uncertainty in the measurement, which must all now be addressed in turn; these mostly centre on the precise departure and arrival times of the bunches.
"So far no arguments have been put forward that rule out our effect," Dr Ereditato said.
"This additional test we made is confirming our original finding, but still we have to be very prudent, still we have to look forward to independent confirmation. But this is a positive result."
That confirmation may be much longer in coming, as only a few facilities worldwide have the detectors needed to catch the notoriously flighty neutrinos - which interact with matter so rarely as to have earned the nickname "ghost particles".
Next year, teams working on two other experiments at Gran Sasso experiments - Borexino and Icarus - will begin independent cross-checks of Opera's results.
The US Minos experiment and Japan's T2K experiment will also test the observations. It is likely to be several months before they report back.
Read more
Environment Clean Generations
Popsci



Racing to Create the Heaviest Element in the Universe


Two international teams are competing to create the heaviest element in the universe. Super-heavy elements are the elements at the bottom of the periodic table with an atomic number (the number of protons) above 104. The previous heaviest element, temporarily called ununoctium, was "discovered" in 2002, and the two teams are now attempting to produce elements 119 and 120.

Jon Petter Omtvedt, a professor of nuclear chemistry at University of Oslo, is working with scientists from Western Europe, Japan and the United States, running experiments at the German GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung. The other team is made up of Russian and American scientists working out of the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Dubna, Russia. "The competition is razor-sharp," said Omtvedt. "Super-heavy elements are highly unstable and very difficult to create. It is like finding something unknown in outer space."

Manufacturing a single atom of a new element is not sufficient to be credited with discovering a new element. The results need to be replicated. "No one will gain any recognition until another laboratory manages to recreate the experiment. In the worst case, it may take several decades before the experiment has been verified," said Omtvedt. The heavier a super-heavy element is, the longer it takes to produce, and the shorter it will remain intact. A single atom of element 106 could be created within one hour when it was first discovered, and that atom decayers into lighter elements in 20 seconds. An atom of element 118 could be created in one month, and its half-life (the time before half of it decayed) was a mere 1.8 milliseconds.

Two weeks ago, nuclear physicists at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, created 20 mg of the highly radioactive element berkelium. Each team vying to create element 119 was given 10 mg of berkelium. They will bombard a metal plate laced with berkelium atoms with a beam of titanium atoms. The teams are working on a tight schedule. Berkelium's half life is only 320 days, and once 320 days have passed, half of their sample will have decade into other elements. "It is extremely difficult to create intense titanium beams. To accomplish this, we have secrets that we will not share with others," said Omtvedt.

The basic principle of creating super-heavy atoms is simple: smash the atoms of one element into those of another and their protons will add up to create a new element. Titanium's 22 protons will join berkelium's 97 to create an atom with 119 protons, one atom of element 119. Most of the time, though, the atoms will collide and shatter or partially destroy each other. But rarely, "less than once a month," the protons will collide to create a complete atom. Detecting such a rare occurrence is a challenge. "You will have to detect this one atom on a metal plate where more than 100,000 superfluous events are occurring each second," Omtvedt said. The only way to detect the new atom is to observe the radioactive radiation it emits when it decays. There will be no evidence of the new element until it's already gone.
"We are working right at the cutting edge of what is experimentally possible," said Omtvedt. "In order to study the heaviest elements, we have to stretch the current technology to its utmost and even a little further."

LHC Laser Will Tear Apart the Fabric of Space


The Large Hadron Collider didn't destroy Earth, so physicists are  having another go. A team is planning to build an enormously powerful laser that could rip apart the fabric of space.

The Extreme Light Infrastructure Ultra High-Field laser will be 200 times more powerful than the most powerful lasers that currently exist on the planet, says John Collider, a member of the team and the director of the Central Laser Facility at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Didcot. "At this kind of intensity we start to get into unexplored territory, as it is an area of physics that we have never been before," he  told the Telegraph.Environment Clean Generations

The aim is to boil a vacuum. Vacuums are normally thought of as empty space, but physicists believe they actually contain  tiny particles that pop in and out of existence, so fast that it's difficult to prove they exist. By focusing the ELI Ultra-High-Field laser on an area of space, the team believes that the fabric of the vacuum can be pulled apart, revealing these particles for the first time.


The laser will be made up of 10 beams, each providing 200 petawatts of power for less than a trillionth of a second. As 200 petawatts is more than 100,000 times the amount of power produced by the world, the energy will need to be stored up over time in huge capacitors. At the crucial moment, that energy will be released to form metre-wide laser beams that will then be combined and focused down onto a tiny point. At that point, the intensity of the light will be greater than at the centre of the Sun.

In these conditions, it's hoped that these pairs of matter-antimatter particles -- which normally annihilate each other almost as soon as they form -- will be pulled apart, leaving tiny electrical charges, which the team hope to measure. Environment Clean Generations.The research could yield some insight into why the Universe appears to contain far more matter than we've so far been able to detect.

 The location of the laser hasn't yet been decided, but the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory's Central Laser Facility is in the running. Three prototypes for the laser will be constructed in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Romania, each costing £200 million and scheduled to become operational in 2015. If successful, the final laser will be built -- costing around £1 billion -- in either Britain, Russia, France, Hungary, Romania or the Czech Republic.

Wolfgang Sandner, coordinator of the Laserlab Europe network and president of the German Physics Society,  said: "There are many challenges to be over come before we can do that, but it is mainly a matter of scaling up the technology we have so we can produce the powers needed."

 read more

by"environment clean generations"

Newton's first paper online and free


More than 8,000 historical scientific papers from the Royal Society's archives are now accessible online for free.
Visitors to the website will be able to view Isaac Newton's first published scientific paper, Benjamin Franklin's account of his electrical kite experiment and geological work by a young Charles Darwin.


The papers are "fully searchable", adds the Royal Society, and all papers that were published more than 70 years ago are free to view.

The very first edition of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society was published in 1665; and was thus the first ever peer-reviewed journal. Its first editor, Henry Oldenburg, described it as "licensed by the council of the society, being first reviewed by some of the members of the same". Despite a spell in jail for Oldenburg, the Great Fire of London and the outbreak of plague, the journal is still published today.
It continues, says the Society in a press release, along the original design set out by Oldenburg with contributors "...invited and encouraged to search, try, and find out new things, impart their knowledge to one another, and contribute what they can to the grand design of improving natural knowledge, and perfecting all philosophical arts, and sciences."

The announcement follows the news of the launch of Open Biology -- the Royal Society's first open access journal, which is available only online. It will focus upon research in cell biology, developmental and structural biology, molecular biology, biochemistry, neuroscience, immunology, microbiology and genetics.
by "environment clean generations"

Let's Glide on Air with Supercooled Quantum Levitation


You probably saw that super viral quantum locking levitation video that bounced all over the Web last week (though technically it’s been around since summer) in which a team of researchers plays with some liquid nitrogen, a small superconducting disc, and some strange quantum phenomenon that makes the disc hover above a magnet, no strings attached. This week’s levitation vid taps a similar phenomenon known as the Meisnner effect to achieve this kind of levitation at a decidedly cooler scale: that of the hoverboard.


MagSurf, build by researchers at Universite Paris Diderot in France, flips the strange world of the quantum into a more sci-fi application, essentially turning a skateboard like platform into one big magnetic superconductor. Using liquid nitrogen, the team turn the platform super-cold, creating an electromagnetic field that is expelled from the inside of the board. It’s not quantum locking--the skateboard is too big to mimic that little super-cooled disc--but it provides enough outward magnetic force to float above a rail of permanent magnets.
It’s sort of like a Maglev train, and sort of not. But, says SmartPlanet, one group of researchers in Japan is reportedly working on scaling exactly this kind of technology into better levitating train tech. That sounds somewhat difficult, given the extremely low temperatures needed to make this kind of thing work. For your enjoyment, the quantum locking video--which is really cool if you haven’t seen it--is below.


by "environment clean generations"

Quantum Levitation


Researchers at the school of physics and astronomy at Tel-Aviv University have created a track around which a semi-conductor can float, thanks to the phenomenon of "quantum levitation". 


This levitation effect is explained by the Meissner effect, which describes how, when a material makes the transition from its normal to its superconducting state, it actively excludes magnetic fields from its interior, leaving only a thin layer on its surface.



When a material is in its superconducting state -- which involves very low temperatures -- it is strongly diamagnetic. This means that when a magnetic field is externally applied, it will create an equally-opposing magnetic field, locking it in place.


A material called yttrium barium copper oxide can be turned into a superconductor by exposure to liquid nitrogen -- which makes it one of the highest-temperature superconductors.

In the video it appears that a puck of yttrium barium copper oxide cooled by liquid nitrogen is repelling the magnets embedded on the handheld device. It also shows that the angle of the magnet can be locked in a magnetic field. Later in the video the puck can be seen to zoom round a circular track of magnets, in the same way that Maglev high-speed trains do.



by "environment clean generations"

A Possible Victory for Einstein


So it turns out that Einstein may not have been wrong about the universal speed limit. Not only is special relativity safe, it provides an explanation for those faster-than-light neutrinos. They’re not breaking the light-speed barrier; they just appear to be, thanks to the relativistic motion of the clocks checking their speed.


As we all remember, a few weeks ago some scientists at CERN set the physics world on fire when they shared data showing neutrinos were moving faster than light. Specifically, they were showing up at a distant neutrino detector about 60 nanoseconds faster than the time in which light would make the same trip. But the rules of physics said this could not be. 

The Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus team (which was not looking for this result, by the way) calibrated their clocks, measured their distances and crunched their numbers in search of an explanation. 

Flummoxed, they dumped their findings on the larger physics community, which proceeded to eviscerate the experiment. In the three weeks since, almost 100 papers have shown up on the preprint server arXiv trying to make sense of it all. Physicists have blamed everything from poor geodesy to ill-timed clocks, and other particle physics observatories are hard at work trying to replicate the results.
Now a Dutch physicist says it’s really very simple — the OPERA team overlooked the relativistic motion of their clocks. Technology Review's arXiv blog highlights the paper here.


OPERA was studying neutrino oscillation, in which these ghostly particles switch from one type to another. They were firing off muon neutrinos from a neutrino beam at CERN and sending them to Gran Sasso, Italy, where researchers counted how many of them had become tau neutrinos. Along with careful Earth-measuring, this experiment required super-precise synchronization of clocks at the two locations. The team did this with GPS satellites, which broadcast a time signal as they orbit about 12,500 miles above the Earth. The OPERA team had to calculate how long it takes for one of these time signals to reach the Earth. But they did not account for the clocks’ relativistic motion, according to physicist Ronald van Elburg at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands.



The radio signals travel from the satellites at light speed, which has nothing to do with the satellites’ speed. This is one of the central tenets of special relativity: “Light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body,” as Einstein put it himself.

But because the satellites are moving, from their point of view, the positions of the neutrinos and the detector are changing. The neutrinos are moving toward the detector, and the detector appears to be moving toward the neutrino source. So the distance between the origin and destination appears to be shorter than it would if it were being observed on the ground.


“Consequently, in this reference frame the distance traveled by the [particles] is shorter than the distance separating the source and detector,” van Elburg writes. This phenomenon is overlooked because the OPERA team thinks of the clocks as on the ground — which they are, physically — and not in orbit, which is where their synchronizing reference point is located.


Using the altitude, orbital period, inclination to the equator and other metrics, van Elburg calculates the error rate: “The observed time-of-flight should be about 32 ns shorter than the time-of-flight using a baseline bound clock,” he writes. This is done at both clock locations, so double that, and you get an early-arrival time of 64 nanoseconds. That pretty much accounts for the OPERA anomaly. 


“This paper shows that Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) happens to be less universal than the name suggests, and that we have to take in to account how our clocks are moving,” van Elburg writes.

Of course, his paper has not yet been published, and is subject to the same scrutiny and peer review as the OPERA folks, so we can’t accept van Elburg’s theory just yet. But it’s certainly a handy explanation. And it’s a lovely piece of irony, too — not only was Einstein’s special theory of relativity right all along, it even provides a reason why.
 by "environment clean generations"

Nobel Prize for Dark Energy


For today’s Nobel Laureates in Physics, it was pretty much a matter of when, not if. When the three winners and their teams announced back in 1998 that the universe was not only expanding, but accelerating, they shook cosmology to its core: Their findings said the universe would end not with a bang, but a whimper.
And the question of why — the mysterious force of dark energy, which accounts for about three-fourths of the mass-energy of the entire universe — is one of the greatest questions in modern science. 


Saul Perlmutter, Brian Schmidt and Adam Riess won for their shared discovery that the cosmos is expanding at an accelerating rate. They used ground and space telescopes to map the most distant Type Ia supernovae, and found these exploded stars seemed dimmer than they should have been. Type Ias are used as standard candles because astronomers know their brightness, which is extremely consistent, and can use this to measure their distance from us.

But measurements showed that these standard candles were not properly bright; they were fading. Something was going on, and it could easily have been blamed on the technology, or maybe the calculations. But both teams — the Supernova Cosmology Project and the High-z Supernova Search Team — found the same thing. The data showed that these standard candles were moving away at an accelerating rate.

This was an astounding finding. Everyone knew since Edwin Hubble that the universe was being flung apart as a consequence of the Big Bang, some 13.7 billion years ago. But for it to be speeding up? It meant something else was at work, a force much more mysterious and bizarre than anyone had thought. No one knows what this force is, but after another decade of calculations, physicists know it makes up about 74 percent of the universe. “We call it dark energy to express ignorance,” Perlmutter said in a lecture I attended in 2008. 

The work is exciting by itself, but these physicists are also some of the best young science evangelists you'll meet. Perlmutter, 52, is an animated and enthusiastic speaker, the exact type of person you want explaining phrases like “baryonic oscillation” and the Big Fade. He has continued his dark energy research as a senior scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. He wants a supernova observatory, the Supernova Acceleration Probe (SNAP), to be built like a Works Progress Administration project: “Everybody talks about dark energy, but nobody does anything about it,” he said back then. 

Riess, who is just 41, is an astronomer at the Space Telescope Science Institute and a professor at Johns Hopkins University. He's also the recipient of a MacArthur Foundation genius grant and numerous other honors for his cosmology work. 

Schmidt, who is 44 and works at the Australian National University, conducted some of the calculations that verified Riess' findings. 

I still have Perlmutter's business card on my desk, because that talk is one of the reasons I wanted to write about things like redshift and the cosmological constant. This is fundamental stuff — the everlasting nature and the future of all things, still enigmatic and mysterious but almost, because of Perlmutter, Riess and Schmidt, truly knowable. 

“The findings of the 2011 Nobel Laureates in Physics have helped to unveil a Universe that to a large extent is unknown to science,” the Nobel Assembly wrote. “And everything is possible again.”
by "environment clean generations"

The Future of Cold Fusion Could be Here


Good science is always rooted in good data, but the most entertaining science is the stuff that transcends the need for data by rooting itself fantastical claims and a rejection of the idea that data is even necessary. So naturally it’s a thrill to learn that two Italian scientists claim to have successfully developed a cold fusion reactor that produces 12,400 watts of heat power per 400 watts of input. Not only that, but they’ll be commercially available in just three months. Maybe.


Cold fusion is a tricky business—some say a theoretically implausible business—and exactly zero of the previous claims of successful cold fusion have proven legitimate (remember when North Korea developed cold fusion?). Hypothetically (and broadly) speaking, the process involves fusing two smaller atomic nuclei together into a larger nucleus, a process that releases massive amounts of energy. If harnessed, cold fusion could provide cheap and nearly limitless energy with no radioactive byproduct or massive carbon emissions.

Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi claim to have done exactly that. Their reactor, they claim, fuses atomic nuclei of nickel and hydrogen using about 1,000 watts of electricity which, after a few minutes, is reduced to an input of just 400 watts. This reaction purportedly can turn 292 grams of 68 degree water to turbine-turning steam – a process that would normally require 12,400 watts of electricity, netting them a power gain of about 12,000 watts. They say that commercially-scaled their process could generate eight units of output per unit of input and would cost roughly one penny per kilowatt-hour, drastically cheaper than your average coal plant.

The problem is, they haven’t provided any details on how the process works. After their paper was rejected by several peer reviewed scientific journals, it was published in the Journal of Nuclear Physics—an online journal apparently founded by Rossi and Focardi. Further, they say they can’t account for how the cold fusion is triggered, fostering deep skepticism from others in the scientific community.

Based on this lack of even a theoretical basis for the device’s function, a patent application was rejected. Their credibility isn’t helped by the fact that Rossi apparently has something of a rap sheet, which allegedly includes illegally importing gold and tax fraud.

But the duo does have something going for them in the fact that they’ve demonstrated their device publicly. In a press conference last week they fired up their reactor and, if the video evidence and reports are to be believed, generated some power. Whether or not they achieved cold fusion is unclear, but other physicists present confirmed that electricity was produced.

It’s anyone’s guess what’s really going on with this bizarre story, but should it turn out Rossi and Focardi have achieved true cold fusion you’ll hear more about it here—and everywhere else.
You can catch a glimpse of their setup in the video below, though a lack of English subtitles makes the full nature of the press conference difficult to parse. If you speak italian and can lend some insight, please do so in the comments.


by "environment clean generations"

What if i Would Fire a Gun on a Train Moving as Fast as a Bullet?


This is a good question because it involves the concept of reference frames. The quick answer is that relative to you, the bullet will always travel at the same speed. In other reference frames, however, unexpected things can happen!

 
You may have heard of Newton's first law:
"Every body persists in its state of rest or of uniform motion in a straight line unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed on it."
We could rephrase this a little and say that a body in motion tends to stay in motion and a body at rest tends to stay at rest unless acted on by an external force.

Imagine you are on a perfectly smooth speeding train, moving at a uniform speed (not accelerating or turning), in a car with no windows. You would have no way of knowing how fast you are going (or if you were moving at all). If you throw a ball straight up in the air, it will come straight back down whether the train is sitting still or going 1,000 mph. Since you and the ball are already moving at the same speed as the train, the only forces acting on the ball are your hand and gravity. So the ball behaves exactly as it would if you were standing on the ground and not moving.

So what does this mean for our gun? If the gun shoots bullets at 1,000 mph, then the bullet will always move away from the gun at 1,000 mph. If you go to the front of a train that is moving at 1,000 mph and shoot the gun forward, the bullet will move away from you and the train at 1,000 mph, just as it would if the train were stopped. But, relative to the ground, the bullet will travel at 2,000 mph, the speed of the bullet plus the speed of the train. So if the bullet hits something on the ground, it will hit it going 2,000 mph.

If you shoot the bullet off the back of the train, the bullet will still be moving away from you and the gun at 1,000 mph, but now the speed of the train will subtract from the speed of the bullet. Relative to the ground, the bullet will not be moving at all, and it will drop straight to the ground.

 
What's true for bullets, however, is not true of some other things that you might "shoot" from the front of the train. A great example is sound waves. If you turn on the stereo in your living room, sound waves "shoot out" of the speaker at the speed of sound -- something like 700 mph. 

The waves propogate through the air at that fixed speed, and they can go no faster. So if you put a speaker at the front of the 1,000 mph train, the sound waves will not depart the train at 1,700 mph. They cannot go faster than the speed of sound. This is the reason why planes traveling faster than the speed of sound create sonic booms.
  by "environment clean generations"

A Sonic Boom Is Caused By?


 You can learn a lot about sonic booms by looking at the wakes boats leave in the water.


If you toss a pebble in a pond, little waves will form in concentric circles and propagate away from the point of impact. If a boat travels through the pond at 3 to 5 miles per hour, little waves will propagate in the same way both ahead of and behind the boat, and the boat will travel through them.

If a boat travels faster than the waves can propagate through water, then the waves "can't get out of the way" of the boat fast enough, and they form a wake. A wake is a larger single wave. It is formed out of all the little waves that would have propagated ahead of the boat but could not.


When an airplane travels through the air, it produces sound waves. If the plane is traveling slower than the speed of sound (the speed of sound varies, but 700 mph is typical through air), then sound waves can propagate ahead of the plane.

If the plane breaks the sound barrier and flies faster than the speed of sound, it produces a sonic boom when it flies past. The boom is the "wake" of the plane's sound waves.



All of the sound waves that would have normally propagated ahead of the plane are combined together so at first you hear nothing, and then you hear the boom they create.


It is just like being on the shore of a smooth lake when a boat speeds past. There is no disturbance in the water as the boat comes by, but eventually a large wave from the wake rolls onto shore. When a plane flies past at supersonic speeds the exact same thing happens, but instead of the large wake wave, you get a sonic boom.







by "environment clean generations"

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Search

Custom Search

 
Design by Wordpress Theme | Bloggerized by Free Blogger Templates | coupon codes