interesting physics (2023 Update)

On a sunny day (Mon, 09 Aug 2021 08:00:51 -0700) it happened snipped-for-privacy@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

This link actually worked:

Its EM radiation (M for magnetic) so why not...)

If I see photons (EM radiation) as groups of Le Sage particles that have some property changed (making it EM radiation) than it is all matter.

Not for me. But this link from Brookhaven did work:

.

You would need a somewhat stronger magnet than available to kids. Think Magnetar:

.

They can, but the cross-section isn't large.

Joe Gwinn

I get it you are no longer against building large accelerators then? :-)

Nice experiment indeed.

Seems like a colossal waste of money and resources for no tangible social or economic gain!

Right. A million lives could have been saved in Africa for what CERN cost.

And a few thousand physicists could have done something useful.

And they want to build a bigger one.

None that John Larkin can understand. Fundamental science has a way of paying off.

It is worth recalling the physicist Michael Faraday's reply in the 1850s to William Gladstone, then British chancellor of the exchequer. Questioned about the practical value of electricity, Faraday answered: “One day, sir, you may tax it.”

But nobody seems to be motivated to spend that kind of money that way, in part because most attempts to spend that kind of money in Africa end up making the local politician richer without saving all that many lives.

The one's that work at CERN seem to be able to design good electronics. If they weren't working at CERN they might otherwise have stolen some of your business.

As one would.

On a sunny day (Mon, 9 Aug 2021 18:02:07 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Anthony William Sloman snipped-for-privacy@ieee.org wrote in snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

More of those bomb shelter tunnels will perhaps give some protection in the coming nuculer war

But there are better ways for that, what was it? 'Hide under the kitchen table?'

In makes no sense, said it many times: "If you cannot do it with those tiny particles on the desktop then you cannot do it in a machine the size of the universe."

Long ago the first radio transmitters were large multi pole generators to create the carrier (of a few kHz).. Now you need microscope to find the GHz oscillator on the chip.

I like to read

first thing in the morning to see what's new. CERN does not have much presence there...

In some materials, there are interactions; it's called nonlinear optics. The easiest observable effect is in photochromic glass.

Oh, it makes sense. There's scaling laws. CERN needs a big ring because magnet fields for a small ring are unachievable at the energies of interest.

So you *are* an activist repeating propaganda cliches. Obviously you *know* what nonsense you are saying yet you keep on spreading it. What a shame.

On a sunny day (Tue, 10 Aug 2021 02:30:52 -0700 (PDT)) it happened whit3rd snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote in snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

If we assume (I know, that makes one an ..) for a moment things are more complex than a simple ball, Then are you claiming that shooting a Ferrari and a Mercedes at near light speed at each other will give you in depth knowledge of its engine and electronics? Sure you see parts, and parts of parts flying all over the place...

This whole CERN bowling ball game makes little sense to me. Put the statistics on top of that and nothing needs to be what they think it is. But it is job creation (for a.o. the electronics industry) and the politicians have done something with science and the construction workers have many years of work tunneling the Einstein echoers have a job and nothing will ever come of it

Very much the same as all those space projects, I remember the men walking on the moon, that fascinated the whole world, now they creep under the ground in tunnels... :-)

'theory of everything' said the ant creeping on the wall Few neurons making up our neural nets, no way 'everything'. But then again we do not even know in depth how those work, I reasoned (strange thing to some) that 'if I was a memory cell I would use DNA to store data' (years, many years ago, is ons Usenet, now guess what they found, in brain cells RNA is transported... The current neural net jive cannot explain the full memory we have.

Not at all. There's OTHER ways to dissasemble a Ferrari or a Mercedes, and those are suitable for doing on a desktop...

Except for high energy collisions, the particles of interest are inseparable.

I form my own opinions. And I sell to CERN.

Do you have anything useful to add to the discussion?

Cutting over to lame insults usually means you don't.

Sure. I was wondering about photon interactions in free space.

snipped-for-privacy@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Declaring that you do not know what you are saying is not an insult. Declaring that you know full well what you are saying and that such behavior is shameful is not one either.

snipped-for-privacy@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Gravitational waves work better than magnetic for that. :-)

Pop psychology doesn't say a lot about particle accelerators.

Big Physics is mostly pork without any bacon. Imagine how much real, useful science could be done for the cost of a 100 km accelerator.

Sabine rocks.

I designed the wire chamber electronics for a p-p experiment at CERN. It used a concept I called "progressive enrichment" to move through layers of track finding, starting with pure ECL hardware, then FPGAs, to reduce the insane data rates to something that could be recorded for analysis. I don't think it discovered any good physics.

The principal investigator gave up physics and got into music theory.

No such thing. A photon is a quantized interaction between matter and electromagnetic radiation. Without matter, no photons.

Jeroen Belleman

I was about to write something like this but you were faster, thanks.