Monday, January 30, 2012
Pakistan’s rush for more bombs — why?
From Pakistan Tribune: Pakistan’s rush for more bombs — why?
On January 24, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon vented his frustration at Pakistan’s determined opposition to a treaty that would limit fissile material production for use in nuclear weapons. For three years, Pakistan has single-handedly — and successfully — blocked the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva from discussing an effort that would reduce nuclear weapons globally. Consequently, within diplomatic circles, Pakistan has acquired the reputation of an outlier that opposes all efforts towards this end.
The opposition comes in the backdrop of news that Pakistan has the world’s fastest-growing nuclear arsenal. This claim — which still reverberates around the world — was first published in a Bulletin of Atomic Scientists report entitled “Pakistan’s nuclear forces — 2011”. The authors, Hans M Kristensen and Robert S Norris, say although the numbers of Pakistani warheads and delivery vehicles is a closely-held secret, yet “we estimate that Pakistan has a nuclear weapons stockpile of 90-110 nuclear warheads, an increase from the estimated 70-90 warheads in 2009”. They reckon that if the expansion continues, Pakistan’s stockpile could reach 150-200 in a few years. By this count, Pakistan’s arsenal may have already exceeded India’s, and will soon rival Britain’s.
The Bulletin report has not been denied by Pakistan. Its stockpile of highly enriched uranium is increased daily by thousands of centrifuges whirring away at the Kahuta Laboratory (and possibly elsewhere). This is augmented by plutonium producing reactors at Khushab; two are already at work and a third is undergoing trials. Google Earth photos show that a fourth one is under construction. The plutonium has no commercial purpose. Instead, the goal is to produce lighter but deadlier bombs to be fitted on to missile tips.
Pakistan’s position is that it needs to produce still more bombs — and hence more bomb materials — because of India. It cites the US-India nuclear deal, along with older issues related to verification problems and existing stocks. Indeed, that infamous deal is Pakistan’s strongest argument and a correct criticism: the US has committed itself to nuclear cooperation with a state that is not a signatory to the NPT and one that made nuclear weapons surreptitiously. Now that the sanctions once imposed are long gone, India can import advanced nuclear reactor technology as well as natural uranium ore from diverse sources — Australia included. Although imported ore cannot be used for bomb-making, India could in principle divert more of its scarce domestic ore towards military reactors. Pakistan also says that “Cold Start” — an operation conceived by the Indian military in response to more Mumbai-type attacks — requires it to prepare tactical nuclear weapons for battlefield use.
But the US-India nuclear deal may actually be a fig leaf. Pakistan’s rush for more bombs has as much to do with its changing relationship with the United States as with Indian military modernisation. This racing reflects a paradigm shift within Pakistan’s military establishment, where feelings against the US have steadily hardened over many years. Post-bin Laden, the change is starkly visible.
In the military’s mind, the Americans are now a threat, equal to or larger than India. They are also considered more of an adversary than even the TTP jihadists who have killed thousands of Pakistani troops and civilians. While the Salala incident was allowed to inflame public opinion, the gory video-taped executions of Pakistani soldiers by the TTP were played down. A further indication is that the LeT/JuD is back in favor (with a mammoth anti-US and anti-India rally scheduled in Karachi next month). Pakistani animosity rises as it sees America tightly embracing India, and standing in the way of a Pakistan-friendly government in Kabul. Once again “strategic defiance” is gaining ground, albeit not through the regional compact suggested by General Mirza Aslam Beg in the early 1990s.
This attitudinal shift has created two strong non-India reasons that favour ramping up bomb production.
First, Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are seen to be threatened by America. This perception has been reinforced by the large amount of attention given to the issue in the US mainstream press, and by war-gaming exercises in US military institutes. Thus, redundancy is considered desirable — an American attempt to seize or destroy all warheads would have smaller chances of success if Pakistan had more.
But such an attack is improbable. It is difficult to imagine any circumstances — except possibly the most extreme — in which the US would risk going to war against another nuclear state. Even if Pakistan had just a handful of weapons, no outside power could accurately know the coordinates of the mobile units on which they are located. It is said that an extensive network of underground tunnels exists within which they can be freely moved. Additionally, overground ones are moved from place to place periodically in unmarked trucks. Mobile dummies and decoys can hugely compound difficulties. Moreover, even if a nuclear location was exactly known, it would surely be heavily guarded. This implies many casualties when intruding troops are engaged, thus making a secret bin-Laden type operation impossible.
The second – and perhaps more important — reason for the accelerated nuclear development is left unstated: nukes act as insurance against things going too far wrong. Like North Korea, Pakistan knows that, no matter what, international financial donors will feel compelled to keep pumping in funds. Else a collapsing system may be unable to prevent some of its hundred-plus Hiroshima-sized nukes from disappearing into the darkness.
This insurance could become increasingly important as Pakistan moves deeper into political isolation and economic difficulties mount. Even today, load-shedding and fuel shortages routinely shut down industries and transport for long stretches, imports far exceed exports, inflation is at the double-digit level, foreign direct investment is negligible because of concerns over physical security, tax collection remains minimal, and corruption remains unchecked. An African country like Somalia or Congo would have sunk under this weight long ago.
To conclude: throwing a spanner in the works at the CD (Geneva) may well be popular as an act of defiance. Indeed, many in Pakistan — like Hamid Gul and Imran Khan — derive delicious satisfaction from spiting the world in such ways. But this is not wise for a state that perpetually hovers at the edge of bankruptcy, and which derives most of its worker remittances and export earnings from the very countries it delights in mocking.
From ML LIve: Western Michigan University physics professor converts 1992 Honda Civic into electric vehicle
KALAMAZOO — A Western Michigan University physics professor explained how his passion for efficiency convinced him to convert his car into an all-electric power car at a lecture on Friday.
Professor Paul Pancella, who specializes in experimental nuclear physics, has been a professor at WMU since 1990. In 2002, he became chair of the physics department.
Pancella recently converted a 1992 Honda Civic hatchback from its original gasoline-powered state into a car completely powered by electricity. The car, which he named "Hondatron," was the topic of the lecture.
"This is not new technology and by no means groundbreaking-type stuff," Pancella said. "But [electric cars] are difficult to get a hold of, and I thought I would try it."
Pancella bought the car slightly used and drove it on gasoline for 15 years. In 2007, when the engine went out in the Honda, Pancella was fed up with trying to fix it. Instead of scrapping the car, he decided to take the engine out and convert the vehicle into an electric car.
"I've been interested in electric vehicles sort of as a subset of my interest in efficiency and transportation in general," he said.
Pancella explained the method to his madness to a lecture hall full of science and math students at WMU.
Batteries in Professor Paul Pancella's 1992 Honda Civic are under the hood and also in the trunk. Pancella held a free public lecture in Rood Hall on Western Michigan University's campus on Friday, Jan. 28 to talk about his work on the vehicle.
"If you're going to use any energy besides your muscles to move you around, efficiency's got to be a value. There's really a huge difference in efficiency between an electric motor and an internal combustion engine," he said.
As he developed the car, Pancella realized how much money and energy he was saving himself. There were already electric cars being made and sold, but the number available to the public is limited.
Pancella received help from some friends who were more experienced with automobiles than he was, but did much of the work on the car himself.
"I'm not a car guy, but I know people," he said.
"I never thought that as a physicist that I would be taking a car apart, but it's a lot easier to take things apart when you don't have to worry about putting them back in," he said.
Most automobile converters up until this point had used lead-acid batteries, but 30-60 pounds of lead-acid are needed for every mile range, so he hoped to find an alternative to power the car.
"Fortunately now, there is a viable alternative available ... lithium iron phosphate (LiFepo4) battery which is rechargeable," Pancella said.
"I'm a lot more efficient using this than the lead-acid battery."
He started taking the old engine out of the car in July of 2008. The LiFepo4 batteries, a battery charger and a new electric motor replaced the old gasoline-powered motor.
"There are economic advantages for the consumer. Often since we're still in the early stages, they look expensive from the long end, but we're still doing research on how to make them cheaper," Pancella said.
The list of required maintenance items for an electric car is much shorter than the list of parts needed for an internal combustion engine.
"So, if you're like me you'll be happy that there's less stuff that can break," Pancella said.
On the front of the car is an electrical source that plugs into a three-prong electrical wall socket.
"I was happy (and surprised) to see that it works," he said.
Pancella said he hopes that soon more cars will be running on electric energy at an affordable cost for the public
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Faculty members use physics to expose art forgery
From The Observer: Faculty members use physics to expose art forgery
The worlds of science and art are headed on a collision course, and master forgers are forewarned: Science will catch them red-handed.
Notre Dame's nuclear astrophysicist professors Michael C.F. Wiescher and Philippe Collon are using proton-induced x-ray emission (PIXE) and Accelerator Mass Spectroscopy (AMS) to analyze various artifacts without destroying any parts of the samples.
The application of such methods involves dating artwork, determining prior locations of artifacts and identifying pigments through particulate analysis. In so doing, art forgeries are more easily identified and more information about the artifacts is gained, according to Wiescher and Collon's January article "Accelerated ion beams in art forensics" in the academic magazine Physics Today.
This new approach is unique in that it comes from the area of physics. Collon said using AMS is akin to pouring a bottle of wine into Lake Michigan and trying to examine the wine particles, saying the process allows researchers to specifically examine from the backgrounds that interfere in the separations. He said the main focus is to look at a few trace atoms in a large matrix.
Collon said he enjoys his focus using the AMS program.
"I have a love for astrophysics and nuclear physics," he said. "I love applying AMS to those areas."
Collon said the accelerators used at Notre Dame are similar to the ones in European art museums, save for the fact that the ones overseas work specifically on art works, forgeries and archeology. He said the majority of research conducted at Notre Dame is related to nuclear astrophysics.
Collon added that although the work in the nuclear labs at Notre Dame remains focused on research and experimentation, the professors are now using applied physics in connection to other studies such as art, archeology and anthropology.
"It really is a sort of melding of these different areas," he said.
Collon said he and Wiescher are continuously developing these applied physics programs. He said the specific focus on art and archaeology took place more recently in the past four to five years.
"This is a program that we're developing. It's something that is growing, that is taking on more and more importance," Collon said. "It's a sort of parallel to our main activity, which is basic nuclear physics."
Additionally, current undergraduate research focuses on AMS in connection with carbon-14 dating, Collon said. These students are given the opportunity to work with these techniques, most often using the 11 million volt tandem accelerator.
Collon said no commercial plans exist for AMS technology. Although the campus science buildings belong to Notre Dame, the National Science Foundation (NSF) pays for the labs. At this time, the NSF would like the lab activity at Notre Dame to continue with its basic research.
He said the NSF recognizes the goal of these particular research labs to serve the science community in the widespread study of physics, not just one area alone.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Nuclear Physics, Holifield, and the End of an Era (or, why I'm at work at 11pm on a Saturday)
Shared just to introduce the Miss Atomic Bomb blog. It's not on the kindle, but you can view it via the computer.
From Miss Atomic Bomb blog: Nuclear Physics, Holifield, and the End of an Era (or, why I'm at work at 11pm on a Saturday)
From Miss Atomic Bomb blog: Nuclear Physics, Holifield, and the End of an Era (or, why I'm at work at 11pm on a Saturday)
You can tell by the large pile of junk food near me that we're camped out.
When we run our nuclear physics experiments, like the one running right now, we utilize every available moment. Weekends. Overnights. We run 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Someone is always here. At least one experimenter, as well as two facility operators and the on-call radiation protection folks. But this is the price of science. Science doesn't stop at 5pm. Science doesn't take weekend breaks.
What's more, this particular experiment is important because it may be one of our last. As you probably know, the Department of Energy - our sole source of funding - made the decision last year to close us down. The Holifield Radioactive Ion Beam Facility, where I now sit, is slated to cease doing science on March 1st. This knowledge adds almost a desperate sense of urgency to the results of this experiment, prompting a concerted effort by the facility staff to keep things running. We don't have much longer, and we know it.
I don't know what I hope to achieve by elaborating upon the fact that I'm sitting at a data acquisition computer at 11pm on a Saturday. Perhaps I felt as though getting the thoughts out would help ease my pain and frustration. Perhaps I feel as though it is a justification, a reason to keep going - look, I am here now, is that not enough?
Officials: No nuclear release
From Jackson Hole Daily: Officials: No nuclear release
An accident at Idaho National Laboratory on Nov. 8 did not release nuclear material into the atmosphere, but through gross oversight it did expose 16 workers to radiation, officials and a new report state.
The “Accident Investigation Report” blames the incident on numerous oversights and errors by personnel at various levels in the chain of command at the Materials and Fuels Complex Zero Power Physics Reactor.
As for the threat that nuclear material was released at the facility 90 miles west of and downwind from Jackson, INL officials said there were “no findings of contamination outside the facility.”
The report — compiled by an independent board for the U.S. Department of Energy — provides a fairly scathing rebuke of the safety systems in place at the reactor, Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free executive director James Powell said. The watchdog group run by Powell is based in Jackson and has opposed projects at the Idaho facility.
The accident occurred when workers were packaging fuel for shipment at the Zero Power Physics Reactor. The workers encountered plastic wrapping and tape around a plutonium fuel plate.
“Two of the fuel storage containers had atypical labels indicating potential abnormalities with the fuel plates located inside,” the report states. “Upon opening one of the storage containers, the workers discovered a [plutonium] fuel plate wrapped in plastic and tape.”
Plutonium fuel plates are typically wrapped in a metal shell, Powell said.
Workers stopped after seeing the suspicious packaging, but a supervisor told them to proceed, according to the report.
“[The] management system did not require the immediate supervisor and the manager to call in other subject matter and facility expertise for consultation prior to approving work to continue,” the report says. “When the workers attempted to remove the wrapping material, an uncontrolled release of radioactive contaminants occurred, resulting in the contamination of 16 workers and the facility.”
The workers had on lab coats, and a few had gloves, but none had respiratory gear or other protective clothing, according to the 123-page report. Workers conducted the work in a fume hood, a partially closed space with a ventilation system that still allows workers to come in physical contact with the material, the report said.
The proper way to work with plutonium fuel plates would have been in a glove box, a sealed device with two gloves that allows workers to manipulate the material without coming in contact with or being exposed to the same air as the contents, the report stated.
Staff were slow to respond, the report says.
“[Plutonium] awareness training has not been effective in giving workers a full appreciation of plutonium hazards,” the report says. “This lack of awareness contributed to the workers delaying their evacuation for nearly four minutes until they heard the radiation alarm.”
The board found that “elements of the emergency management and response program were not fully effective,” the report states. “The absence of a hazards analysis for this accident scenario hampered timely decision-making. An earlier activation of the emergency response organization would have supported a more coordinated and timely response. Not having analyzed this accident scenario also limited the effectiveness of the medical response.”
The board cited two different instances, one in 2009 and the other in 2010, when Materials and Fuels Complex managers were presented with a report on the dangers of plutonium fuel plate handling that “offered recommendations for safer handling practices,” the report said.
“[I]ts significance was not recognized and no action was taken,” it said.
The report is pretty damning to the facility and its management, Powell said.
“There’s not anything that was done right here,” he said. “At the operation level, you had a failure of worker training. You had management that were either unaware of appropriate control measures or did not enact any of these procedures. At the senior management level, they accepted this risk knowing that there were deficiencies in the safety basis of this facility.”
Powell said that, in the face of increasing budget cuts, shuttered facilities like the Zero Power Physics Reactor don’t get much funding or attention.
“A lot of the problems that were happening here were kind of put on the back burner,” he said.
Idaho National Laboratory officials don’t anticipate any adverse effects to the 16 people who were contaminated with radiation, Misty Benjamin, a spokeswoman for the national laboratory, said. All 16 people are back to work at the laboratory, though two are currently not working in radiological facilities as health care providers continue to monitor them.
Benjamin couldn’t comment on any personnel changes resulting from the accident.
“Many corrective actions began immediately after the incident,” she said. “We are investigating right now.
“We’re working on decontamination of the facility and health monitoring of our employees,” Benjamin said.
An accident at Idaho National Laboratory on Nov. 8 did not release nuclear material into the atmosphere, but through gross oversight it did expose 16 workers to radiation, officials and a new report state.
The “Accident Investigation Report” blames the incident on numerous oversights and errors by personnel at various levels in the chain of command at the Materials and Fuels Complex Zero Power Physics Reactor.
As for the threat that nuclear material was released at the facility 90 miles west of and downwind from Jackson, INL officials said there were “no findings of contamination outside the facility.”
The report — compiled by an independent board for the U.S. Department of Energy — provides a fairly scathing rebuke of the safety systems in place at the reactor, Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free executive director James Powell said. The watchdog group run by Powell is based in Jackson and has opposed projects at the Idaho facility.
The accident occurred when workers were packaging fuel for shipment at the Zero Power Physics Reactor. The workers encountered plastic wrapping and tape around a plutonium fuel plate.
“Two of the fuel storage containers had atypical labels indicating potential abnormalities with the fuel plates located inside,” the report states. “Upon opening one of the storage containers, the workers discovered a [plutonium] fuel plate wrapped in plastic and tape.”
Plutonium fuel plates are typically wrapped in a metal shell, Powell said.
Workers stopped after seeing the suspicious packaging, but a supervisor told them to proceed, according to the report.
“[The] management system did not require the immediate supervisor and the manager to call in other subject matter and facility expertise for consultation prior to approving work to continue,” the report says. “When the workers attempted to remove the wrapping material, an uncontrolled release of radioactive contaminants occurred, resulting in the contamination of 16 workers and the facility.”
The workers had on lab coats, and a few had gloves, but none had respiratory gear or other protective clothing, according to the 123-page report. Workers conducted the work in a fume hood, a partially closed space with a ventilation system that still allows workers to come in physical contact with the material, the report said.
The proper way to work with plutonium fuel plates would have been in a glove box, a sealed device with two gloves that allows workers to manipulate the material without coming in contact with or being exposed to the same air as the contents, the report stated.
Staff were slow to respond, the report says.
“[Plutonium] awareness training has not been effective in giving workers a full appreciation of plutonium hazards,” the report says. “This lack of awareness contributed to the workers delaying their evacuation for nearly four minutes until they heard the radiation alarm.”
The board found that “elements of the emergency management and response program were not fully effective,” the report states. “The absence of a hazards analysis for this accident scenario hampered timely decision-making. An earlier activation of the emergency response organization would have supported a more coordinated and timely response. Not having analyzed this accident scenario also limited the effectiveness of the medical response.”
The board cited two different instances, one in 2009 and the other in 2010, when Materials and Fuels Complex managers were presented with a report on the dangers of plutonium fuel plate handling that “offered recommendations for safer handling practices,” the report said.
“[I]ts significance was not recognized and no action was taken,” it said.
The report is pretty damning to the facility and its management, Powell said.
“There’s not anything that was done right here,” he said. “At the operation level, you had a failure of worker training. You had management that were either unaware of appropriate control measures or did not enact any of these procedures. At the senior management level, they accepted this risk knowing that there were deficiencies in the safety basis of this facility.”
Powell said that, in the face of increasing budget cuts, shuttered facilities like the Zero Power Physics Reactor don’t get much funding or attention.
“A lot of the problems that were happening here were kind of put on the back burner,” he said.
Idaho National Laboratory officials don’t anticipate any adverse effects to the 16 people who were contaminated with radiation, Misty Benjamin, a spokeswoman for the national laboratory, said. All 16 people are back to work at the laboratory, though two are currently not working in radiological facilities as health care providers continue to monitor them.
Benjamin couldn’t comment on any personnel changes resulting from the accident.
“Many corrective actions began immediately after the incident,” she said. “We are investigating right now.
“We’re working on decontamination of the facility and health monitoring of our employees,” Benjamin said.
Monday, January 23, 2012
My Scrabble Books Took Precedence
Hello, all my faithful readers out there in computer land.
I've missed several days of posting and I apologize for it. I've been working on two Scrabble books (Eve Le QiNu's Flashwords) which help people to learn the 2 and 3 letter Scrabble words.
I won't provide links here since this is an apology not a sales pitch - but if you do like to play Scrabble, go to the Kindle Store (or the Nook Store) and type in Eve Le QiNu and my two books will be brought up. (Eve Le QiNu is an anagram.... see if you can unscramble it. Bear in mind my publishing name is Magic Mirror Press)
Anyway, I finished volume 2 yesterday, and today I'm chilling out...so regular posting resumes tomorrow.
Thanks again for your patience.
I've missed several days of posting and I apologize for it. I've been working on two Scrabble books (Eve Le QiNu's Flashwords) which help people to learn the 2 and 3 letter Scrabble words.
I won't provide links here since this is an apology not a sales pitch - but if you do like to play Scrabble, go to the Kindle Store (or the Nook Store) and type in Eve Le QiNu and my two books will be brought up. (Eve Le QiNu is an anagram.... see if you can unscramble it. Bear in mind my publishing name is Magic Mirror Press)
Anyway, I finished volume 2 yesterday, and today I'm chilling out...so regular posting resumes tomorrow.
Thanks again for your patience.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Cold Fusion: NASA Says Nothing Useful
From Forbes: Cold Fusion: NASA Says Nothing Useful
On NASA’s Glenn Research Center’s Research page the following summary was published last last year:
Tests conducted at NASA Glenn Research Center in 1989 and elsewhere consistently show evidence of anomalous heat during gaseous loading and unloading of deuterium into and out of bulk palladium. At one time called “cold fusion,” now called “low-energy nuclear reactions” (LENR), such effects are now published in peer-reviewed journals and are gaining attention and mainstream respectability. The instrumentation expertise of NASA GRC is applied to improve the diagnostics for investigating the anomalous heat in LENR.
I find it interesting and rather puzzling that the summary states that LENR is the new name for cold fusion (thereby implying that the two terms describe the same process) when many other people and organizations argue that these are quite different phenomena. I’d love to read a simple explanation of the difference between LENR and cold fusion that doesn’t use explanations that themselves require further, and equally complex, explanations.
Anyway, it appears that the NASA recently published something much more interesting about Low Energy Nuclear Reaction or LENR. Last Wednesday, with a minimum of fuss, NASA’s Glenn Research Center released a video on their Web site that discussed the organization’s LENR research.
The video is titled, rather abstrusely, “Method for Enhancement of Surface Plasmon Polaritons to Initiate & Sustain LENR in MHS (Metal Hydride Systems)” and is pretty disappointing because rather than explaining what the title means or what experiments have been actually been conducted and the results, the video, featuring a NASA scientist, one Dr. Joseph Zawodny, is a rather disappointing hand-waving, “ Jam Tomorrow” exercise. Here’s the transcript:
While the world is drastically dependent on fossil fuel, researchers at NASA Langley Research Center are working on another way of producing energy efficient nuclear power.
“This other form of nuclear power releases energy by adding neutrons. Eventually, they gain a sufficient number of neutrons that they spontaneously decay into something of the same mass but a different element.”
The different element is cleaner than traditional nuclear fuels and can be produced by raw materials such as nickel, carbon and hydrogen.
“It has the demonstrated ability to produce excess amounts of energy cleanly, without ionizing radiation, without producing nasty waste.”
This clean form of energy is also powerful, able to support everything from transportation systems to infrastructure.
“The easiest implementation of this would be for the home. You would have a unit that would replace your water heater and you would have some sort of cycle to derive electrical energy from that, and then it would dump its waste heat into the water, or air handling system for the building, so it would be a dual use thing. It would be sitting there producing heat, then you’d derive electricity from it to run your electronics, power the house, power the building, power light industry, and then the waste heat would be used for environmental control and warm water.”
NASA’s Method for Enhancement of Surface Plasmon Polaritons to Initiate and Sustain LENR in metal hydride systems, a clean nuclear energy for your power operated technology.
Amongst the many staunch LENR boosters and the redoubtable believers in Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat device (which this blog covered last week and in several previous postings), this video has been hailed as somehow irrefutable proof that NASA, as a whole, is admitting to the existence of LENR as a practical technology for energy generation while others see this as a breaching of the misinformation and suppression campaign conducted by Big Physics (specifically the hot plasma researchers) and Big Energy (the oil, natural gas, a nuclear industries). For example, the following comes from a blog called “E-Cat Site” (the highlights are mine):
The video unequivocally states that the NASA Langley Research Center is actively pursuing the development of this technology. While this advocacy can be reasonably assumed by the four slide show presentations from a September 22, 2011 LENR workshop held at the NASA Glenn Research Center, this video is a definitive, public statement regarding NASA’s belief in this technology.
Many of the pathoskeps have been stating for many months that they will not believe NASA’s involvement in this technology until an official press release by NASA stating such. Well, NASA has done them one better by releasing a video with one it’s scientists, not a spokesman or a piece of paper, confirming NASA’s belief and active involvement in developing LENR.
Wow. That makes it sound pretty definitive … but wait! Hold hard! On his own blog, Dr, Zawodny writes (again, the highlights are mine):
There have been many attempts to twist the release of this video into NASA’s support for LENR or as proof that Rossi’s e-cat really works. Many extraordinary claims have been made in 2010. In my scientific opinion, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I find a distinct absence of the latter. So let me be very clear here. While I personally find sufficient demonstration that LENR effects warrant further investigation, I remain skeptical. Furthermore, I am unaware of any clear and convincing demonstrations of any viable commercial device producing useful amounts of net energy.
Well said, Dr. Zawodny! The good doctor continued:
So what does extraordinary evidence look like? As a trained scientist, I have been taught the historical standards for acceptance of experimental results or theories. Experiments and theories go hand-in-hand in what is known as the scientific method. Both must be independently tested, replicated, or verified. As a minimum, experimental results must be replicated by an objective and independent party. The nature of the test or replication needs to adhere to the spirit of the original experiment but, should be under the full design, implementation, and control of the independent tester. So, if a device is claimed to be capable of producing excess heat by nature of its operation (i.e., the consumption of fuel via a nuclear process), it must be operated properly. The way power input and power output are measured should be left up to the independent tester. This is standard scientific practice. What would take this to the next level (extraordinary evidence) would be to have the test be an open public test. The nature of the test and specific approach to executing the test should be made public. The conduct of the test should be open to additional 3rd party experts. And finally, the data should be publicly released. Further peer review of all aspects of the independent test is a must. Community consensus is the ultimate goal. Every attempted demonstration of a LENR device that I am aware of has failed to meet one or more of these criteria.
Bingo! This hits the LENR nail on the head: “Every attempted demonstration of a LENR device that I am aware of has failed to meet one or more of these criteria.”
A reasonable person, that is, one who isn’t experiencing endless spasms of unfounded faith in Andrea Rossi’s claims for the E-Cat, will read that and think “Yep, LENR may well be a real physical phenomena and Rossi may be on to something but I want to see proof that the E-Cat really works.”
So, once again we’re left with no real, solid grounds for believing in Rossi’s E-Cat working as claimed. I don’t know about you but I’m getting pretty annoyed with the silliness surrounding this three ring circus and as much as I admire the candor in his blog posting I’m wondering why Dr. Zawodny, who appears to be a thoughtful, rational, and scientific man, ever got involved with something that so neatly played into the agendas of so many zealots while saying nothing of real substance.
On NASA’s Glenn Research Center’s Research page the following summary was published last last year:
Tests conducted at NASA Glenn Research Center in 1989 and elsewhere consistently show evidence of anomalous heat during gaseous loading and unloading of deuterium into and out of bulk palladium. At one time called “cold fusion,” now called “low-energy nuclear reactions” (LENR), such effects are now published in peer-reviewed journals and are gaining attention and mainstream respectability. The instrumentation expertise of NASA GRC is applied to improve the diagnostics for investigating the anomalous heat in LENR.
I find it interesting and rather puzzling that the summary states that LENR is the new name for cold fusion (thereby implying that the two terms describe the same process) when many other people and organizations argue that these are quite different phenomena. I’d love to read a simple explanation of the difference between LENR and cold fusion that doesn’t use explanations that themselves require further, and equally complex, explanations.
Anyway, it appears that the NASA recently published something much more interesting about Low Energy Nuclear Reaction or LENR. Last Wednesday, with a minimum of fuss, NASA’s Glenn Research Center released a video on their Web site that discussed the organization’s LENR research.
The video is titled, rather abstrusely, “Method for Enhancement of Surface Plasmon Polaritons to Initiate & Sustain LENR in MHS (Metal Hydride Systems)” and is pretty disappointing because rather than explaining what the title means or what experiments have been actually been conducted and the results, the video, featuring a NASA scientist, one Dr. Joseph Zawodny, is a rather disappointing hand-waving, “ Jam Tomorrow” exercise. Here’s the transcript:
While the world is drastically dependent on fossil fuel, researchers at NASA Langley Research Center are working on another way of producing energy efficient nuclear power.
“This other form of nuclear power releases energy by adding neutrons. Eventually, they gain a sufficient number of neutrons that they spontaneously decay into something of the same mass but a different element.”
The different element is cleaner than traditional nuclear fuels and can be produced by raw materials such as nickel, carbon and hydrogen.
“It has the demonstrated ability to produce excess amounts of energy cleanly, without ionizing radiation, without producing nasty waste.”
This clean form of energy is also powerful, able to support everything from transportation systems to infrastructure.
“The easiest implementation of this would be for the home. You would have a unit that would replace your water heater and you would have some sort of cycle to derive electrical energy from that, and then it would dump its waste heat into the water, or air handling system for the building, so it would be a dual use thing. It would be sitting there producing heat, then you’d derive electricity from it to run your electronics, power the house, power the building, power light industry, and then the waste heat would be used for environmental control and warm water.”
NASA’s Method for Enhancement of Surface Plasmon Polaritons to Initiate and Sustain LENR in metal hydride systems, a clean nuclear energy for your power operated technology.
Amongst the many staunch LENR boosters and the redoubtable believers in Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat device (which this blog covered last week and in several previous postings), this video has been hailed as somehow irrefutable proof that NASA, as a whole, is admitting to the existence of LENR as a practical technology for energy generation while others see this as a breaching of the misinformation and suppression campaign conducted by Big Physics (specifically the hot plasma researchers) and Big Energy (the oil, natural gas, a nuclear industries). For example, the following comes from a blog called “E-Cat Site” (the highlights are mine):
The video unequivocally states that the NASA Langley Research Center is actively pursuing the development of this technology. While this advocacy can be reasonably assumed by the four slide show presentations from a September 22, 2011 LENR workshop held at the NASA Glenn Research Center, this video is a definitive, public statement regarding NASA’s belief in this technology.
Many of the pathoskeps have been stating for many months that they will not believe NASA’s involvement in this technology until an official press release by NASA stating such. Well, NASA has done them one better by releasing a video with one it’s scientists, not a spokesman or a piece of paper, confirming NASA’s belief and active involvement in developing LENR.
Wow. That makes it sound pretty definitive … but wait! Hold hard! On his own blog, Dr, Zawodny writes (again, the highlights are mine):
There have been many attempts to twist the release of this video into NASA’s support for LENR or as proof that Rossi’s e-cat really works. Many extraordinary claims have been made in 2010. In my scientific opinion, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I find a distinct absence of the latter. So let me be very clear here. While I personally find sufficient demonstration that LENR effects warrant further investigation, I remain skeptical. Furthermore, I am unaware of any clear and convincing demonstrations of any viable commercial device producing useful amounts of net energy.
Well said, Dr. Zawodny! The good doctor continued:
So what does extraordinary evidence look like? As a trained scientist, I have been taught the historical standards for acceptance of experimental results or theories. Experiments and theories go hand-in-hand in what is known as the scientific method. Both must be independently tested, replicated, or verified. As a minimum, experimental results must be replicated by an objective and independent party. The nature of the test or replication needs to adhere to the spirit of the original experiment but, should be under the full design, implementation, and control of the independent tester. So, if a device is claimed to be capable of producing excess heat by nature of its operation (i.e., the consumption of fuel via a nuclear process), it must be operated properly. The way power input and power output are measured should be left up to the independent tester. This is standard scientific practice. What would take this to the next level (extraordinary evidence) would be to have the test be an open public test. The nature of the test and specific approach to executing the test should be made public. The conduct of the test should be open to additional 3rd party experts. And finally, the data should be publicly released. Further peer review of all aspects of the independent test is a must. Community consensus is the ultimate goal. Every attempted demonstration of a LENR device that I am aware of has failed to meet one or more of these criteria.
Bingo! This hits the LENR nail on the head: “Every attempted demonstration of a LENR device that I am aware of has failed to meet one or more of these criteria.”
A reasonable person, that is, one who isn’t experiencing endless spasms of unfounded faith in Andrea Rossi’s claims for the E-Cat, will read that and think “Yep, LENR may well be a real physical phenomena and Rossi may be on to something but I want to see proof that the E-Cat really works.”
So, once again we’re left with no real, solid grounds for believing in Rossi’s E-Cat working as claimed. I don’t know about you but I’m getting pretty annoyed with the silliness surrounding this three ring circus and as much as I admire the candor in his blog posting I’m wondering why Dr. Zawodny, who appears to be a thoughtful, rational, and scientific man, ever got involved with something that so neatly played into the agendas of so many zealots while saying nothing of real substance.
Panel Challenges Japan’s Account of Nuclear Disaster
From the New York Times: Panel Challenges Japan’s Account of Nuclear Disaster
TOKYO — A powerful and independent panel of specialists appointed by Japan’s Parliament is challenging the government’s account of the accident at a Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, and will start its own investigation into the disaster — including an inquiry into how much the March earthquake may have damaged the plant’s reactors even before the tsunami.
Amit Bhargava/Bloomberg News
Kiyoshi Kurokawa, who leads the inquiry, vowed that it would have no sacred cows.
The bipartisan panel with powers of subpoena is part of Japan’s efforts to investigate the nuclear calamity, which has displaced more than 100,000 people, rendered wide swaths of land unusable for decades and spurred public criticism that the government has been more interested in protecting vested industry interests than in discovering how three reactors were allowed to melt down and release huge amounts of radiation.
Several investigations — including inquiries by the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power, and the government — have blamed the scale of the tsunami that struck Japan’s northeastern coast in March, knocking out vital cooling systems at the plant.
But critics in Japan and overseas have called for a fuller accounting of whether Tokyo Electric Power, or Tepco, sufficiently considered historically documented tsunami risks, and whether it could have done more to minimize the damage once waves hit the plant.
Questions also linger as to the extent of damage to the plant caused by the earthquake even before the tsunami hit. Any evidence of serious quake damage at the plant would cast new doubt on the safety of other reactors in quake-prone Japan. Tsunamis are far less frequent.
In his first interview since the panel was appointed last month, Kiyoshi Kurokawa, chairman of the new Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission, said his investigation would have no sacred cows.
Mr. Kurokawa, a former leader of Tokyo University’s medical department and a professor at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, has lined up a prominent team, including the Nobel laureate Koichi Tanaka. The committee will have its first full meeting on Monday.
“For Japan to regain global credibility, we need an investigation into the disaster that is completely independent,” Mr. Kurokawa said. He said he was aware of questions raised about quake damage to the plant, and that the committee “would investigate that issue vigorously.”
“The lessons Japan can learn are globally relevant, because such a disaster can happen again,” he said.
Mr. Kurokawa’s committee has garnered attention because some members have been openly critical of Japan’s nuclear policy, including Katsuhiko Ishibashi, a seismologist who has long warned of the risks Japan’s volatile geology poses to its 54 nuclear reactors.
The panel includes Mitsuhiko Tanaka, a former nuclear engineer at Babcock Hitachi who has argued that the quake was likely to have damaged reactors at the plant to the extent that meltdowns would have occurred without the tsunami. Tepco disputes that view. Mr. Tanaka worked on the design of the reactors.
The panel is also the first such group of outside specialists to be named by Japan’s Parliament, supported by members of the ruling Democratic Party and its main opposition, the Liberal Democratic Party.
“If the panel can truly distance itself from political pressure, then it could be a powerful exercise,” said Yoichi Tao, a visiting professor in physics at Kogakuin University who has been working with Fukushima residents to clean up the radioactive fallout.
TOKYO — A powerful and independent panel of specialists appointed by Japan’s Parliament is challenging the government’s account of the accident at a Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, and will start its own investigation into the disaster — including an inquiry into how much the March earthquake may have damaged the plant’s reactors even before the tsunami.
Amit Bhargava/Bloomberg News
Kiyoshi Kurokawa, who leads the inquiry, vowed that it would have no sacred cows.
The bipartisan panel with powers of subpoena is part of Japan’s efforts to investigate the nuclear calamity, which has displaced more than 100,000 people, rendered wide swaths of land unusable for decades and spurred public criticism that the government has been more interested in protecting vested industry interests than in discovering how three reactors were allowed to melt down and release huge amounts of radiation.
Several investigations — including inquiries by the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power, and the government — have blamed the scale of the tsunami that struck Japan’s northeastern coast in March, knocking out vital cooling systems at the plant.
But critics in Japan and overseas have called for a fuller accounting of whether Tokyo Electric Power, or Tepco, sufficiently considered historically documented tsunami risks, and whether it could have done more to minimize the damage once waves hit the plant.
Questions also linger as to the extent of damage to the plant caused by the earthquake even before the tsunami hit. Any evidence of serious quake damage at the plant would cast new doubt on the safety of other reactors in quake-prone Japan. Tsunamis are far less frequent.
In his first interview since the panel was appointed last month, Kiyoshi Kurokawa, chairman of the new Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission, said his investigation would have no sacred cows.
Mr. Kurokawa, a former leader of Tokyo University’s medical department and a professor at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, has lined up a prominent team, including the Nobel laureate Koichi Tanaka. The committee will have its first full meeting on Monday.
“For Japan to regain global credibility, we need an investigation into the disaster that is completely independent,” Mr. Kurokawa said. He said he was aware of questions raised about quake damage to the plant, and that the committee “would investigate that issue vigorously.”
“The lessons Japan can learn are globally relevant, because such a disaster can happen again,” he said.
Mr. Kurokawa’s committee has garnered attention because some members have been openly critical of Japan’s nuclear policy, including Katsuhiko Ishibashi, a seismologist who has long warned of the risks Japan’s volatile geology poses to its 54 nuclear reactors.
The panel includes Mitsuhiko Tanaka, a former nuclear engineer at Babcock Hitachi who has argued that the quake was likely to have damaged reactors at the plant to the extent that meltdowns would have occurred without the tsunami. Tepco disputes that view. Mr. Tanaka worked on the design of the reactors.
The panel is also the first such group of outside specialists to be named by Japan’s Parliament, supported by members of the ruling Democratic Party and its main opposition, the Liberal Democratic Party.
“If the panel can truly distance itself from political pressure, then it could be a powerful exercise,” said Yoichi Tao, a visiting professor in physics at Kogakuin University who has been working with Fukushima residents to clean up the radioactive fallout.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
U.S. condemns car bomb attack on Iran nuclear scientist
Where is the real Impossible Missions force when you need them? (I'm talking about the show starring Peter Graves, Martin Landau and Barbara Bain, Peter Lupus and Greg Morris.
You don't kill people like this, and give a country's government the excuse to incite hatred against you in this manner. You make the guy have a heart attack, or suffer an accident where his brakes fail or something. You don't just blow up his car! (Better still of course, you bribe him to defect and disappear - not murder him - or her.)
From Yahoo News: U.S. condemns car bomb attack on Iran nuclear scientist
The United States on Wednesday forcefully condemned a car bomb attack that killed an Iranian nuclear expert in Tehran--while just as firmly repudiating any suggestion that U.S. operatives might have taken part in the assassination.
"I want to categorically deny any United States involvement in any kind of act of violence inside Iran," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told journalists at the State Department Wednesday ahead of a meeting with her Qatari counterpart.
"The United States strongly condemns this act of violence and categorically denies any involvement in the killing," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said in a press statement.
Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan, 32, was killed in a blast from a magnetic bomb, that two men on a motorcycle attached to his Peugot 405 in north Tehran during Wednesday morning rush hour, the BBC's Frank Gardner reported.
Iran's Fars News Agency identified Ahmadi-Roshan as a chemical engineer and university lecturer. He had also served as deputy director and assistant to the head of procurement at Iran's Natanz uranium-enrichment facility, the Washington Post's Thomas Erdbrink reported.
"Whoever was targeting [Ahmadi-Roshan] clearly knew his route, his car and his timings," the BBC's Gardner noted. "The small, professionally made device was designed to kill its victim but cause only limited damage to the surroundings."
Site of car bomb blast that killed Iran nuclear scientist Jan. 12 2012. (Mehr News Agency)
No one has taken responsibility for the blast, but Iranian leaders blamed Israel's intelligence service the Mossad for the assassination.
Iran Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi "blamed the attack on 'Zionists' and 'those who claim they are against terrorism,' " Erdbrink wrote, citing the Fars News Agency.
Ahmadi-Roshan was the fourth suspected Iranian scientist to be killed over the past two years in a seemingly sophisticated assassination program targeting Iran's nuclear scientists. Past attacks also commonly targeted nuclear researchers as they were driving to work in Tehran.
On November 29, 2009, a car bomb killed an Iranian nuclear scientist and lecturer at Iran's Shahid Beheshti University, Majid Shahriyari, while he was driving in Tehran with his wife, who was wounded in the blast, Reuters reported. Another blast the same day in Tehran wounded Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani, a physics professor at Iran's Imam Hossein University, who now serves as the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Agency.
On Jan. 12, 2010, a remote-controlled bomb killed Massoud Ali-Mohammadi, a Tehran University lecturer on particle physics. But analysts have disputed whether Ali-Mohammadi was connected to Iran's nuclear program; they've suggested that he might have been targeted for other reasons, stemming from his professed sympathies for a dissident Iranian reformist political leader.
You don't kill people like this, and give a country's government the excuse to incite hatred against you in this manner. You make the guy have a heart attack, or suffer an accident where his brakes fail or something. You don't just blow up his car! (Better still of course, you bribe him to defect and disappear - not murder him - or her.)
From Yahoo News: U.S. condemns car bomb attack on Iran nuclear scientist
The United States on Wednesday forcefully condemned a car bomb attack that killed an Iranian nuclear expert in Tehran--while just as firmly repudiating any suggestion that U.S. operatives might have taken part in the assassination.
"I want to categorically deny any United States involvement in any kind of act of violence inside Iran," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told journalists at the State Department Wednesday ahead of a meeting with her Qatari counterpart.
"The United States strongly condemns this act of violence and categorically denies any involvement in the killing," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said in a press statement.
Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan, 32, was killed in a blast from a magnetic bomb, that two men on a motorcycle attached to his Peugot 405 in north Tehran during Wednesday morning rush hour, the BBC's Frank Gardner reported.
Iran's Fars News Agency identified Ahmadi-Roshan as a chemical engineer and university lecturer. He had also served as deputy director and assistant to the head of procurement at Iran's Natanz uranium-enrichment facility, the Washington Post's Thomas Erdbrink reported.
"Whoever was targeting [Ahmadi-Roshan] clearly knew his route, his car and his timings," the BBC's Gardner noted. "The small, professionally made device was designed to kill its victim but cause only limited damage to the surroundings."
Site of car bomb blast that killed Iran nuclear scientist Jan. 12 2012. (Mehr News Agency)
No one has taken responsibility for the blast, but Iranian leaders blamed Israel's intelligence service the Mossad for the assassination.
Iran Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi "blamed the attack on 'Zionists' and 'those who claim they are against terrorism,' " Erdbrink wrote, citing the Fars News Agency.
Ahmadi-Roshan was the fourth suspected Iranian scientist to be killed over the past two years in a seemingly sophisticated assassination program targeting Iran's nuclear scientists. Past attacks also commonly targeted nuclear researchers as they were driving to work in Tehran.
On November 29, 2009, a car bomb killed an Iranian nuclear scientist and lecturer at Iran's Shahid Beheshti University, Majid Shahriyari, while he was driving in Tehran with his wife, who was wounded in the blast, Reuters reported. Another blast the same day in Tehran wounded Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani, a physics professor at Iran's Imam Hossein University, who now serves as the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Agency.
On Jan. 12, 2010, a remote-controlled bomb killed Massoud Ali-Mohammadi, a Tehran University lecturer on particle physics. But analysts have disputed whether Ali-Mohammadi was connected to Iran's nuclear program; they've suggested that he might have been targeted for other reasons, stemming from his professed sympathies for a dissident Iranian reformist political leader.
Physicist writes how universe evolved from nothing
From SFGate: Physicist writes how universe evolved from nothing
"A Universe From Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing" (Free Press), by Lawrence M. Krauss: In fall 2009, the theoretical physicist Lawrence M. Krauss gave a talk about recent discoveries in cosmology that he engagingly titled, "A Universe From Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing."
The popularity of the video, viewed nearly a million times on YouTube, prompted Krauss to develop the ideas in the talk into this short, elegant account of the origins of our universe and its likely demise trillions of years from now.
The best-selling author of "The Physics of Star Trek," Krauss possesses a rare talent for making the hardest ideas in astrophysics accessible to the layman, due in part to his sly humor. In another universe, Krauss could have been a stand-up comedian.
Indeed, the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, who contributes an afterword to the book, dubs his friend the "Woody Allen of cosmology." One favorite joke involves Edwin Hubble, whose life story, Krauss deadpans, bolsters his faith in humanity "because he started out as a lawyer and then became an astronomer."
In just under 200 pages, Krauss walks us through a hundred years of mind-bending breakthroughs in astrophysics, which have led scientists to the inescapable conclusion that our universe sprang out of nothing — "without design, intent or purpose" — and is destined to return to that bleak, cold, dark space.
A professor at Arizona State University, Krauss clearly relishes his iconoclastic role, gleefully demolishing all theories of creation that require a creator — that is, most religions. In the early 2000s, when he was teaching physics at Case Western Reserve University, he very publicly took on creationists in a fight over the science curriculum in Ohio public schools.
But one has to hope that this book won't appeal only to the partisans of the culture wars — it's just too good and interesting for that. Krauss is genuinely in awe of the "wondrously strange" nature of our physical world, and his enthusiasm is infectious.
Here he is explaining how every atom in our bodies was forged billions of years ago in the nuclear furnaces of exploding stars: "We are all, literally, star children, and our bodies made of stardust." The book bursts with such poetic conceits.
For Krauss, the prospect of a godless universe is "invigorating," not scary. "It motivates us to draw meaning from our own actions," he writes, "and to make the most of our brief existence in the sun."
"A Universe From Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing" (Free Press), by Lawrence M. Krauss: In fall 2009, the theoretical physicist Lawrence M. Krauss gave a talk about recent discoveries in cosmology that he engagingly titled, "A Universe From Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing."
The popularity of the video, viewed nearly a million times on YouTube, prompted Krauss to develop the ideas in the talk into this short, elegant account of the origins of our universe and its likely demise trillions of years from now.
The best-selling author of "The Physics of Star Trek," Krauss possesses a rare talent for making the hardest ideas in astrophysics accessible to the layman, due in part to his sly humor. In another universe, Krauss could have been a stand-up comedian.
Indeed, the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, who contributes an afterword to the book, dubs his friend the "Woody Allen of cosmology." One favorite joke involves Edwin Hubble, whose life story, Krauss deadpans, bolsters his faith in humanity "because he started out as a lawyer and then became an astronomer."
In just under 200 pages, Krauss walks us through a hundred years of mind-bending breakthroughs in astrophysics, which have led scientists to the inescapable conclusion that our universe sprang out of nothing — "without design, intent or purpose" — and is destined to return to that bleak, cold, dark space.
A professor at Arizona State University, Krauss clearly relishes his iconoclastic role, gleefully demolishing all theories of creation that require a creator — that is, most religions. In the early 2000s, when he was teaching physics at Case Western Reserve University, he very publicly took on creationists in a fight over the science curriculum in Ohio public schools.
But one has to hope that this book won't appeal only to the partisans of the culture wars — it's just too good and interesting for that. Krauss is genuinely in awe of the "wondrously strange" nature of our physical world, and his enthusiasm is infectious.
Here he is explaining how every atom in our bodies was forged billions of years ago in the nuclear furnaces of exploding stars: "We are all, literally, star children, and our bodies made of stardust." The book bursts with such poetic conceits.
For Krauss, the prospect of a godless universe is "invigorating," not scary. "It motivates us to draw meaning from our own actions," he writes, "and to make the most of our brief existence in the sun."
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
CERN ties up with NTU to launch physics course
From AsiaOne: CERN ties up with NTU to launch physics course
Students from Singapore and the region are now able to learn about scientific breakthroughs in physics from the renowned European Organization for Nuclear Research (Cern) based in Geneva, Switzerland, right on their doorstep.
This is thanks to a link-up between Nanyang Technological University's Institute of Advanced Studies and Cern. They launched their first "winter school", which focuses on particle physics and cosmology, here yesterday.
The first long-term programme tie-up between Cern and an educational institution in Asia will make it more accessible for academics in the region to keep abreast of scientific knowledge. The three-week programme will be held every two years.
Some 120 graduate students, academics and researchers have been selected for the pioneer programme this year. They will have the chance to help with data analysis of the Higgs Boson particle, an ultra-small particle believed to give all matter its mass
Students from Singapore and the region are now able to learn about scientific breakthroughs in physics from the renowned European Organization for Nuclear Research (Cern) based in Geneva, Switzerland, right on their doorstep.
This is thanks to a link-up between Nanyang Technological University's Institute of Advanced Studies and Cern. They launched their first "winter school", which focuses on particle physics and cosmology, here yesterday.
The first long-term programme tie-up between Cern and an educational institution in Asia will make it more accessible for academics in the region to keep abreast of scientific knowledge. The three-week programme will be held every two years.
Some 120 graduate students, academics and researchers have been selected for the pioneer programme this year. They will have the chance to help with data analysis of the Higgs Boson particle, an ultra-small particle believed to give all matter its mass
Thursday, January 5, 2012
ECOS 2012: Advances and challenges in nuclear physics with high intensity stable beams
From the BLog Nuclear Matters: ECOS 2012: Advances and challenges in nuclear physics with high intensity stable beams
Dear Colleagues,
We are pleased to announce that the workshop: ECOS 2012: Advances and challenges in nuclear physics with high intensity stable beams will take place in Villa Vigoni, Como lake, Italy on June 18-21, 2012 (http://www.villavigoni.eu).
The focus of the workshop will be on the perspectives of low energy nuclear physics with stable beams as well as on the status and perspectives of present and future European Nuclear Physics stable ion beam facilities.
Detailed information about the meeting will soon be available on the workshop website: http://ecos2012.lnl.infn.it/ and on the announcement pdf – ECOS2012 announcement
Dear Colleagues,
We are pleased to announce that the workshop: ECOS 2012: Advances and challenges in nuclear physics with high intensity stable beams will take place in Villa Vigoni, Como lake, Italy on June 18-21, 2012 (http://www.villavigoni.eu).
The focus of the workshop will be on the perspectives of low energy nuclear physics with stable beams as well as on the status and perspectives of present and future European Nuclear Physics stable ion beam facilities.
Detailed information about the meeting will soon be available on the workshop website: http://ecos2012.lnl.infn.it/ and on the announcement pdf – ECOS2012 announcement
Monday, January 2, 2012
"God Particle" Higgs Boson Mystery Could Be Solved Soon
From The Cutting Edge: "God Particle" Higgs Boson Mystery Could Be Solved Soon
A definitive answer on whether or not the so-called “God Particle” exists could come in 2012, according to a scientist involved in solving the mystery.
The search for the subatomic particle called the Higgs boson went into overdrive in 2008, when the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), in Switzerland, switched on its Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Results of two CERN experiments, known as ATLAS (A Toroidal LHC ApparatuS) and CMS (Compact Muon Solenoid), were announced recently at a seminar Rumor was that the Higgs boson had finally been found. Instead, the teams revealed they’d found tantalizing hints of where the Higgs boson may be found, if it exists at all.
Dr. Pierre Savard, associate professor of physics at the University of Toronto, is currently involved in the ATLAS experiments to track down the elusive particle. He says that before each experimental team revealed its findings, neither knew the other’s results.
Once those results were revealed, it became clear both the ATLAS and CMS experiments pointed to “a certain excess of events at a certain mass, and that the two sets of results were consistent with each other.”
One reason scientists hope to find the Higgs boson is because of the critical role it’s believed to play in physics: as a building block of the universe.
The Standard Model of particle physics provides an explanation for sub-nuclear physics, and some aspects of cosmology in the earliest moments of the universe. In the standard model, it’s the Higgs boson that gives mass to all particles.
Despite the recent CERN findings, there are those who believe that while the Higgs boson may exist, it will never be found, while others doubt its existence at all.
“The evidence is quite interesting, but it’s not completely convincing, so the conclusive evidence will come in 2012 if there is a Higgs boson,” Dr. Savard says. “But it’s possible that what we saw was just a big statistical fluctuation and it’s not really there.”
If the Higgs boson is not found, researchers would have to go back to the drawing board. In effect, Dr. Savard says, no Higgs boson, no mass, no universe. “So if the electron didn’t have a mass, for instance, we wouldn’t have hydrogen, wouldn’t have atoms, and we wouldn’t be around.”
If the Higgs boson does not exist, the current explanation within the Standard Model of how particles acquire mass is wrong. On the other hand, Dr. Savard says, if the mysterious sub-atomic particle is found in the course of the ongoing experiments and the teams are able to confirm that it behaves like the Standard Model hypothesized, then the mechanism for giving particles mass would also be probably found.
Dr. Savard believes scientists are closing in on determining whether the Higgs boson is real.
“We’re quite close. The Large Hadron Collider is working very well, and right now it’s in a shut-down period for three months and we’ll start taking data in March.” According to Dr. Savard, the important thing to emerge from the recent findings is that both the ATLAS and CMS experiments have the sensitivity to make a conclusive determination of whether the Higgs boson is there or not, and that within six or nine months after the LHC goes back online, the experiments should yield a definite answer.
Sunday, January 1, 2012
Rockland physicist's predicted new nuclear matter discovered
From lohud.com: Rockland physicist's predicted new nuclear matter discovered
SUFFERN — Twenty-five years after Rockland resident Quamrul Haider, a physicist, predicted the existence of a new form of nuclear matter, the discovery has been confirmed by others in the international physics community.
For Haider, the discoveries are bringing him recognition after a lifetime of work in the highly technical field. He is a professor of physics at Fordham University and also helps with a science training program in the Yonkers school system.
“It’s the final seal of approval of the work I’ve been doing for the last 25 years,” said Haider, who has lived in Suffern for eight years.
The theoretical work Haider and colleagues did years ago predicted a new form of nuclear matter.
The matter is composed of an eta meson trapped inside a nucleus, which they termed an eta-mesic nucleus. It is 100,000 times smaller than previously discovered mesic atoms.
The discovery led to a new sub-field in nuclear physics called mesic nuclear physics.
Haider said the discovery extends the understanding of nuclear physics. It’s not yet clear what the practical application will be.
“You can’t put a price tag on this,” he said.
Haider hopes to share his love of physics with other students.
He plans to visit Suffern High School, where his daughter is a student, to talk about physics. He also has a son in college. His wife works for the Ramapo Central School District.
Through his work at Fordham University, Haider has become involved in a program that trains teachers in the Yonkers school district.
Haider, a native of Bangladesh, hopes that American schools can improve the level of science education they provide students.
“Unfortunately, science is not up to par in our schools,” he said. “The level is too low. For our students to succeed, the curriculum has to be changed.”
SUFFERN — Twenty-five years after Rockland resident Quamrul Haider, a physicist, predicted the existence of a new form of nuclear matter, the discovery has been confirmed by others in the international physics community.
For Haider, the discoveries are bringing him recognition after a lifetime of work in the highly technical field. He is a professor of physics at Fordham University and also helps with a science training program in the Yonkers school system.
“It’s the final seal of approval of the work I’ve been doing for the last 25 years,” said Haider, who has lived in Suffern for eight years.
The theoretical work Haider and colleagues did years ago predicted a new form of nuclear matter.
The matter is composed of an eta meson trapped inside a nucleus, which they termed an eta-mesic nucleus. It is 100,000 times smaller than previously discovered mesic atoms.
The discovery led to a new sub-field in nuclear physics called mesic nuclear physics.
Haider said the discovery extends the understanding of nuclear physics. It’s not yet clear what the practical application will be.
“You can’t put a price tag on this,” he said.
Haider hopes to share his love of physics with other students.
He plans to visit Suffern High School, where his daughter is a student, to talk about physics. He also has a son in college. His wife works for the Ramapo Central School District.
Through his work at Fordham University, Haider has become involved in a program that trains teachers in the Yonkers school district.
Haider, a native of Bangladesh, hopes that American schools can improve the level of science education they provide students.
“Unfortunately, science is not up to par in our schools,” he said. “The level is too low. For our students to succeed, the curriculum has to be changed.”
Searching for what God is made of, nuclear physicist finds the color of quarks
From Chicago Business: Searching for what God is made of, nuclear physicist finds the color of quarks
If there exists a point where religion and science intersect, Kawtar Hafidi may have found it.
Raised a devout Muslim in Morocco's capital, Rabat, Ms. Hafidi showed an early curiosity of the theoretical. “When I was little,” she says, “I used to tell my dad, ‘I want to learn what God is made of. I believe in him, but I don't see him.' “
Now a nuclear physicist at Argonne National Laboratory, Ms. Hafidi, 39, is getting closer to her goal. For the last 11 years, she has worked to advance the study of quantum chromodynamics, which describes how quarks—the most fundamental pieces of the universe—form protons, neutrons and other particles.
Her research, which earned her the 2011 Innovator Award from the Assn. for Women in Science, addresses the “color” of quarks, which essentially indicates how they are “charged.” She and her team of postdoctoral students use data derived from a particle accelerator at the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Lab in Newport News, Va., which costs an estimated $9,500 an hour to operate.
Specifically, Ms. Hafidi seeks to capture the moment when quarks become free, or transparent. Adjusting the accelerator's speed and intensity, her team found conclusive evidence of an exotic, short-lived state in which quarks are so small they become invisible to other matter, enabling them to pass through a nuclear medium without interaction.
Nuclear physicist Kawtar Hafidi "We should never forget that the origin of human thinking is curiosity," says Kawtar Hafidi. Photo: Erik Unger
It seems worlds away from the practical advances in nuclear physics that have led to technologies like smoke detectors, MRI scans and radiation therapy, but it helps answer the basic question of how we came to be.
“We should never forget that the origin of human thinking is curiosity,” she says. “We have brains; we can invent. I'm sure we can even surprise God sometimes.”
Ms. Hafidi negotiated an obstacle-laden path to get this far. Her father, a middle-class bureaucrat in the Moroccan government, didn't have the money to send her to college. Luckily, her grandmother and aunts—the youngest of whom is a physician—came up with the funds, in some cases by selling jewelry. “They would say, ‘We cannot let you waste your talent here,' “ she says.
After earning an undergraduate degree, she left Rabat to pursue a doctorate in physics at France's University Paris-Sud before joining Argonne as a postdoctoral appointee in 2000.
Ms. Hafidi dramatically disrupts stereotypes about Muslim women outside science, too. Her husband, Brahim, also an Argonne physicist, is the primary caregiver of their 6-year-old son, Omar. She was a member of the original Moroccan national women's soccer team, in 1992, and has a brown belt in mixed martial-arts fighting.
“There's a common misconception about scientists being these old white men in lab coats,” says Joy Ramos, president of the Chicago chapter of AWIS. “She epitomizes the Renaissance woman.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)