|
|
Education News >> Subjects >> Physics
Physics News
One of the great endeavors of theoretical physics is the drive to create a single "theory of everything," which would provide a single theory that explains all of the interactions in the universe under one over-arching framework. Right now, physics explains gravity under general relativity, while everything else in the universe falls under the Standard Model of quantum physics. Combining these together into one single (and hopefully concise) theory has been a goal for decades, but no one's succeeded. String theory is definitely the most popular approach, but there are a variety of other theories being proposed (such as loop quantum gravity), all of which require a lot of work before they could be taken as serious contenders by most physicists.
So what sorts of problem would this "theory of everything" have to solve? Well, these are the problems outlined by Lee Smolin as the Five Great Problems in Theoretical Physics. Not all physicists agree that these are really problems (for example, the "foundations" problem is dismissed as irrelevant by many physicists and many think the "tuning" problem is resolved by an appeal to a multiverse), but any "theory of everything" would really need to provide answers to several of these problems.
For now, it's hard enough to disprove any of the theories, and finding evidence that confirms one over the other is nearly as difficult. The strongest evidence is in support of string theory, which has been shown (in some cases) to match the black hole entropy predictions of Stephen Hawking. Until some of the other theories get a prediction that matches established physics as solidly as this, string theory is probably going to remain in the forefront.
Related Articles:
- New Scientist - Knowing the mind of God: Seven theories of everything
- What is String Theory?
- What is Loop Quantum Gravity?
- What is Unified Field Theory?
- What is Quantum Gravity?
- 5 Great Problems in Theoretical Physics
Theories of Everything originally appeared on About.com Physics on Wednesday, March 17th, 2010 at 11:46:21.
This weekend, I had a load of fun watching a new interactive science show that came to a nearby college. More importantly, so did my son. The show, Doktor Kaboom!, is the brainchild of actor and science enthusiast David Epley, who built the entire show around the idiosyncratic, German-accented scientist character that he developed.
David Epley as Doktor Kaboom!
Source: DoktorKaboom.com (used by permission)
And I'm not the only one who's caught on to Doktor Kaboom. In an interview with me before the show, Epley talked about his amazing success with the character he developed just two-and-a-half years ago.
I'm going all over the place. I'm booked solid for this year, already booked solid for next year. We've got a 9-day run at the Kennedy Center for next April. So it's going gangbusters. It's what I'm supposed to be doing, is what I tell people. If that makes sense...
Watching Epley on stage as Doktor Kaboom, it's hard to believe that just three years ago the character didn't exist ... but it's easily believe that he's meant to play the role. From quirky science facts, to goofy demonstrations, to heartfelt appeals to apply science in daily life, Doktor Kaboom! is engaging for kids and adults alike.
And that's Epley's goal with this show, and is one which - again and again - I return to on this blog. Everyone in society should be engaged, at some level, in the activities of science. Maybe not as an active part of their career, but they should at least be aware of how scientific thinking affects their life, instead of feeling disconnected from it. Again, Epley is on the same page:
There's a point where we all love science, as kids. The wow factor of it. Then there's something that happens around middle school where people start to turn away from it and think, "It's not for me. It's too hard. It's for the smart kids." And I want to remind adults that it is for them, it is for everyone. I want to remind them of the time they loved science. And, of course, introducing the kids to that.
Some people think that there's a certain "type of person" who is supposed to be doing science (I know this because some of these people e-mail me letters when I suggest that science education should be encouraged for everyone), and I just don't buy into this narrative. When we're young, we're all scientists. Epley reminds his audiences of this regularly, and it's a great service he's doing.
More on Doktor Kaboom:
- Review of the Doktor Kaboom! Show (or write your own Doktor Kaboom! review)
- Doktor Kaboom! Interview
- Doktor Kaboom! Image Gallery
- Doktor Kaboom! Official Webpage (with video)
Related Articles:
- Communicating Science
- Public Science Engagement
- Book Review: Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future by Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum
- Book Review: Why Science? by James Trefil
Introducing Doktor Kaboom! originally appeared on About.com Physics on Tuesday, March 16th, 2010 at 16:46:45.
Just as I was about to slink off to return to bed in the wee early hours of the morning, I decided to clean out my e-mail inbox so that the junk would be gone and I'd be ready to get some work done when I actually wake up tomorrow morning. One of the e-mails had an announcement which I realized needed posted immediately.
It turns out that Sean Carroll - CalTech theoretical cosmologist, blogger at Discover Magazine's Cosmic Variance blog, and author of From Eternity to Here: The Quest for the Ultimate Theory of Time - will be on one of my favorite television shows, Stephen Colbert's The Colbert Report on Comedy Central, this evening - Wednesday, March 10, at 11:30 pm - promoting his book (which, I swear, Sean, I will finish reading and review. I have been a bit busy lately giving all my money away).
For those who miss the show because of early bedtimes or lack of Comedy Central (I suffer from both myself), The Colbert Report offers their entire show online through their website ColbertNation.com (though, sadly, no longer through Hulu.com), so you can check out the March 10 episode there to see what Sean has to say about the nature of time itself! Check back here tomorrow morning for an update on what was covered and a link to the interview!
Update 3/11/10: The video of the interview is available through Colbert Nation at this link. It's a very interesting discussion, focusing on the ephemeral nature of time. Carroll discusses how time is really sort of like taking cake batter and baking it into a cake, by adding complexity and structure to the more uniform starting position. His explanation for this specific set of low-entropy initial condition of the universe is the common response from cosmologists - we live within a multiverse, and happen to be in a sub-section of the multiverse where there initial conditions had an incredibly low entropy. Time is therefore a by-product of the universe "winding down" from low entropy to high entropy. But he explains it much better, so check out the video.
Physicist Sean Carroll on Colbert Report! originally appeared on About.com Physics on Wednesday, March 10th, 2010 at 03:41:45.
In a recent speech about new investments in energy efficient homes (check out the speech itself on Hulu), President Obama mentioned a desire to seek out all options to solve our energy problems. He gets a triple bang out of these sorts of energy efficiency initiatives, of course, because (1) the work is performed by laborers in the United States (2) using mostly materials manufactured in the United States (because, as he points out, it's hard to bring an energy-efficient window over from China), and (3) saves money on the subsequent energy bills. Plus there are secondary benefits, such as less power demand, less need for coal, less environmental pollution, and so on.
(Whether all of these benefits warrant the investment of these rebates is something I'll leave to the more argumentative policy wonks. I bought some energy efficient windows last fall and, to be honest, now that spring is coming I'm feeling more concern about paying off the financing than the euphoria I felt when I eliminated a mid-November draft from my bedroom. But I still think that, overall, it was probably worth the expense.)
Barack Obama, April 2009
Source: Dennis Brack-Pool/Getty Images
During the speech, however, President Obama also mentioned the recent announcement of a new nuclear power plant in Burke, Georgia - the first nuclear power plant to be built on U.S. soil in three decades. (Again, this helps not only with power production, but gives jobs to skilled constructors, manufacturers, and other workers.)
The problem with nuclear power is that it's based on nuclear fission (although Europe continues to experiment with the more efficient nuclear fusion), which leaves behind a substantial amount of nuclear waste. So far, there is no definitive way to get rid of this highly toxic material (although I'm still holding out for microbes that devour the spent rods), so they get buried in thick bunkers underground, so they won't seep radioactive toxins into the surrounding environment, especially the water supply.
Despite this, President Obama notes that there are strong environmental reasons to turn toward nuclear power.
... nuclear energy remains our largest source of fuel that produces no carbon emissions. To meet our growing energy needs and prevent the worst consequences of climate change, we'll need to increase our supply of nuclear power. It's that simple. This one plant, for example, will cut carbon pollution by 16 million tons each year when compared to a similar coal plant. That's like taking 3.5 million cars off the road. (Source: Obama Pushes for More Nuclear Energy)
In a segment critical of the idea, Keith Olbermann tries to drum up some unnecessary drama with a segment highlighting all the worst possible scenarios involving nuclear power, including those based on the cartoon The Simpsons. (Way to go with the hard-hitting journalism.) Most telling is the following excerpt:
Nearly 31 years ago now a partial meltdown at the Pennsylvania plant released 43,000 curies of krypton radiation into the air. I don't really know what that measures and it scares the crap out of me. (Source: Back to the Nuclear Basics)
Maybe, before you go on air to discuss something in front of a few million viewers (assuming MSNBC has that many viewers) you might want to learn what it means. Or you can spread a panic about something which you, admittedly, don't really understand.
Of course, Olbermann did have an expert on the show, but the expert didn't point out that even the two most serious disasters in nuclear power - Three Mile Island (which Olbermann is discussing above) and Chernobyl - have resulted in virtually no long-term environmental break-down. Life comes back in these areas pretty quickly following any sort of nuclear disaster (even Hiroshima & Nagasaki have very little environmental damage at this point), so it's not an environmental question, but one of self-preservation, and a 2002 study even shows that Three Mile Island hasn't had significant impact on cancer deaths over a 20-year follow-up period (No significant rise in cancer deaths in 3-Mile Island residents over 20 years, says Pitt, 2002).
My personal hope is that we won't need nuclear fission reactors, because programs like Europe's ITER project will succeed in developing usable fusion reactors, which leave behind virtually no radioactive waste. But then, I choose to be optimistic.
Find out more about ways of producing energy in our article Sources of Power Production.
Energy Policy Sparks Nuclear Options and Jobs originally appeared on About.com Physics on Monday, March 8th, 2010 at 20:00:27.
In an amazing move, the entire 137-year archive of the magazine Popular Science has been placed online (with the help of Google) for access free of charge. The archives are searchable, zoomable screen captures from the actual magazines, including period advertisements. Popular Science has plans to add more search and browsing functionality in the future, but for now there's just a straight search option which brings up the relevant pages from these archives. Check it out!
More Popular Science Than You Can Shake a Stick At! originally appeared on About.com Physics on Monday, March 8th, 2010 at 05:00:17.
Though I spend a decent chunk of my time trying to trnaslate physics discoveries clearly into words, the fact is that many physics concepts are best understood if students can visually witness what is happening as well. Numerous studies have shown that when information is presented in various ways - visually, textually, and orally, for example - it is retained better. (The best way to retain information is to write it, though, so take notes!)
This list of 100 Amazing Videos for Teaching and Studying Physics can help educators (or self-educators) to delve deeply into scientific concepts, often in engaging and innovative ways. (Can anyone say Large Hadron Rap?) Explore these videos and find ways to incorporate them, together with features on this site and elsewhere, into your educational plan.
Other Online Video Lists:
- Top Science Lectures Available Online
- Best Free Scientific Documentaries
- Study Physics at Top Universities ... For Free!
Videos for Teaching and Studying Physics originally appeared on About.com Physics on Sunday, March 7th, 2010 at 22:53:29.
Great minds think alike, because just I was presenting my own foray into a talking about how Twitter can be used for communicating physics ideas, Brian Clegg over at physicsworld.com also explored how new media helps science communicate in ways that traditional media hasn't always been successful. One of the major reasons for this, according to Clegg, is that "The best thing for readers of science blogs and followers of science Tweets is that they get their information from those who really understand it, rather than through the filter of an arts-graduate news editor."
And speaking of arts graduates ... actor Alan Alda (best known to many as Hawkeye on television's M*A*S*H, but also known to a whole new generation as the Republican presidential candidate Arnold Vinick on The West Wing) is now part of a program helping to teach science students how to better communicate science, by taking part in theatrical improvisational. In fact, Alda is largely responsible for the creation of the Center for Communicating Science at Stony Brook University. The program, which is supported also by nearby Brookhaven National Laboratory, hopes to make the science students more comfortable at communicating spontaneously ... as dramatically shown in a video on the Center's website.
Alda came up with the idea for this sort of training as he was the host of the science PBS television series Scientific American Frontiers, which ran for over a decade. He began to realize that when he could get the scientists to loosen up a bit, and become a bit more casual in their communication skills - entering into a give and take with him, or with the audience - they became much more watchable.
Consider the flawless way that media-savvy scientists, such as Michio Kaku, are able to present even the most complex scientific concepts. There's an artistry to it ... and it's this artistry that Alda is trying to communicate to others.
All of this is rooted in the fundamental need to enhance public understanding of science in America, a topic which I've addressed numerous times on this blog (see some examples below). Alan Alda has long been a public face of this sort of engagement - a quintessential American media icon who gets truly geeked over cool scientific concepts. Scientists need the support of guys like Alan Alda, because society only has so many scientists in it. That's why scientists must reach out to others and get them engaged, on some level, with the enterprise of science. It's great to see that Alda is helping to train a generation of scientists who will be able to communicate science in ways that will connect with guys (and gals) like him.
Related Articles:
- Public Science Engagement
- Superheroes and Science Education
- Book Review - Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future by Chris Mooney & Sheril Kirshenbaum
Communicating Physics originally appeared on About.com Physics on Friday, March 5th, 2010 at 22:42:24.
In Japan, an experiment known as the T2K (Tokai-to-Kamioka) experiment has started up, trying to explore the nature of the neutrino a bit more fully. A joint venture of British & Japanese researchers, T2K involves creating neutrinos at Tokai and sending them the 185 miles to the Super Kamiokande neutrino detector in Kamioka. The goal of the experiment is to try to find out some details about how the neutrinos and how they oscillate between their three flavors: electron, muon, and tau.
The hope is that the understanding of matter gleaned from this experiment will help to explain why, when the universe was created, there was more matter in the universe than anti-matter (an imbalance sometimes called baryon asymmetry). In theory, the big bang should have created equal amounts of matter and anti-matter, which would then have annihilated each other. To explain why this didn't happen, physicists have conjectured a minor violation of CP symmetry which means that one type of weak interaction is slightly more common than the other type. By studying neutrinos in greater detail, physicist are hoping to get experimental confirmation (or refutation) of this conjecture.
Related Articles:
- New Scientist - World's most sensitive neutrino experiment begins
- Discover Magazine/80beats blog - Physicists Shoot Neutrinos Across Japan to an Experiment in an Abandoned Mine
- Los Angeles Times - Physicists looking to shed more light on dark matter
Neutrino Experiment Starts Up originally appeared on About.com Physics on Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010 at 08:23:38.
I have a confession to make. Though I spend substantial portions of my day online, and spend way more time on Facebook than I probably should, I just don't get Twitter. Don't get me wrong, I have a Twitter account, and I Tweet (when I remember to) as a way to promote this blog, and when I actually pay attention to the Tweet feed I get some interesting links ... but overall, it just doesn't engross me that much. It's just a little too "busy."
On reflection, though, I think that Twitter may be a bit more "new school" than I am. I haven't yet made the switch, as the younger generation has, to using my cellphone as my primary means of online communication. I still go online using my trusty (or not so trusty, as I need to get a new one) laptop, and Twitter seems to be embraced most strongly by those who are tapping away on their smartphones.
Well, according to this account over at the Symmetry Breaking blog, I'm not the only science Geek who hasn't jumped on the Twitter bandwagon. The class described in the blog has leveraged Twitter as a tool in their exploration of science topics. While touring the Argonne National Laboratory and FermiLab, the students had to provide 16 Tweets on physics-related topics as a means of "journaling" their experience. However, the theoretical astrophysicist who gave the final talk of their day didn't even know they were tweeting and said, "To be honest, I'm not really sure what that means." This proves, according to the blog, that "to even the most brilliant minds, Twitter can be an enigma on par with the deepest mysteries of the cosmos."
On the rare occasion when I do keep up on Twitter, here are some of the physics feeds that I find most useful:
- Physics News
- Physics World
- Physics Today
- Science Friday
- Wired Science
- NY Times Science
- National Science Foundation
- Reuters Science
- Science Channel
- Smithsonian Science
- Sean Carroll
- Professor Brian Cox
- Michio Kaku
Do you have any tweet feeds that you find are particularly useful in learning about physics news? Share them with us by leaving a comment.
Tweeting Physics originally appeared on About.com Physics on Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010 at 07:37:27.
One way that experimental evidence is accumulated in science is through a process of elimination. You conduct experiments, ruling out certain types of behavior, and then look at what's left. Well, this process looks like it may be playing out in the search for dark matter.
Analyzing data from NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope, astrophysicists have found evidence that pokes holes in one of the most supported candidates for dark matter: weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs). Their findings indicate that the previous range of 1 to 200 GeV masses has a hole from 5 to 15 GeV. This alone isn't a big problem, but apparently there are also some issues with the overall WIMP scenario in the first place. According to University of Maryland particle cosmology Kevork Abazijian, who made his announcement at the February meeting (officially the "April meeting") of the American Physical Society. More details are provided in this article from ScienceNow.
The WIMP scenario certainly isn't completely dead, but it looks like this work may begin ruling out certain theoretical models that had previously been allowed. If the entire WIMP model gets ruled out, though, many physicists may have to begin trying to find a new explanation for what could be causing the strange gravitational effects of dark matter.
Oddly, just a day before the ScienceNow article, ScienceDaily.com reported that "Particle May Be Leading Candidate for Mysterious Dark Matter" (or, as Mother Nature News dramatically & optimistically put it, "Researchers find elusive dark matter"), discussing the potential discovery of WIMPs in a Minnesota mine which houses detectors for just this purpose (see our January coverage, "Dark Matter in 2010?" ... nothing much has really changed since then).
So, as usual, we still really don't know anything new about dark matter ... but it is sure fun watching everybody try to figure it all out!
Bad News for Dark Matter originally appeared on About.com Physics on Thursday, February 25th, 2010 at 06:00:27.
| ||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||