Åäèíñòâåííî î ÷¸ì "çàáûëè" óïîìÿíóòü ÷òî âñ¸ ýòî áðåä, â êîíöå ñòàòüè ýòî ñôîðìóëèðîâàë â íåñêîëüêèõ ñëîâàõ Max Tegmark èç MIT:
"Krauss’s claim is controversial. Max Tegmark of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology maintains that the quantum Zeno effect does not require humans to make observations of light. “Galaxies have ‘observed’ the dark energy long before we evolved,” he says, as they were affected by it and were encoding information about it. “When we humans in turn observe the light from these galaxies, it changes nothing except our own knowledge.”
Îòêðûòèå òåìíîé ýíåðãèè ìîæåò èçìåíèòü è òî, ÷òî ìû íàçûâàåì, ïðîïîðöèåé ýëåìåíòîâ âî Âñåëåííîé, ïîñêîëüêó ìÿãêèå ðåíòãåíîâñêèå ëó÷è äåëàþò íåçàìåòíûì ðåíòãåíîâñêîå èçëó÷åíèå æåëåçà è äðóãèõ ìåòàëëîâ, êîòîðîå ñëóæèò èíäèêàòîðîì äëÿ îïðåäåëåíèÿ ýòîé ïðîïîðöèè. "Ýòî òàêæå ãîâîðèò î òîì, ÷òî â ìèðå ñóùåñòâóåò íåñêîëüêî áîëüøå æåëåçà è äðóãèõ ìåòàëëîâ, ÷åì ñ÷èòàëîñü ðàíåå, – ãîâîðèò Áîíàìåíòå. – Ìàññà ìåíüøå, à ìåòàëëîâ áîëüøå".
Ðåçóëüòàòû èññëåäîâàíèé Áîíàìåíòå, Þêêè Íåâàëàéíåíà èç ôèíñêîé Õåëüñèíêñêîé îáñåðâàòîðèè è ïðîôåññîðà Ëüå îïóáëèêîâàíû â Astrophysical Journal.
Ðàñ÷åòíàÿ ìàññà Âñåëåííîé ñîñòàâëÿåò îò 10 â 53-é ñòåïåíè äî 10 â 60-é ñòåïåíè êèëîãðàììîâ, ïðè÷åì îöåíêà îñëîæíÿåòñÿ ñóùåñòâîâàíèåì íåâèäèìîé ìàòåðèè, êîòîðóþ íàçûâàþò "òåìíîé". _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Òîëüêî íå íàäî ïóòàòü äîêàçàòåëüñòâî ñóùåñòâîâàíèÿ Á-ãà ñ âåðîé â íåãî è âëèÿíèåì âåðû íà ïñèõîëîãèþ ÷åëîâåêà è îáùåñòâà. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
À ÷òî, åñëè â íîâûõ ýêñïåðèìåíòàõ îêàæåòñÿ, ÷òî ýíåðãèè õâàòèò? Âïðî÷åì, îá ýòîì óæå íå óçíàåò íèêòî. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
By Adrian Cho
ScienceNOW Daily News
22 January 2010
You've heard the controversy. Particle physicists predict the world's new highest-energy atom smasher, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) near Geneva, Switzerland, might create tiny black holes, which they say would be a fantastic discovery. Some doomsayers fear those black holes might gobble up Earth--physicist say that's impossible--and have petitioned the United Nations to stop the $5.5 billion LHC. Curiously, though, nobody had ever shown that the prevailing theory of gravity, Einstein's theory of general relativity, actually predicts that a black hole can be made this way. Now a computer model shows conclusively for the first time that a particle collision really can make a black hole.
"I would have been surprised if it had come out the other way," says Joseph Lykken, a physicist at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois. "But it is important to have the people who know how black holes form look at this in detail."
The key to forming a black hole is cramming enough mass or energy into a small enough volume, as happens when a massive star collapses. According to Einstein's theory of general relativity, mass and energy warp space and time, or spacetime, to create the effect we perceive as gravity. If a large enough mass or energy is crammed into a small enough space, that warping becomes so severe that nothing, not even light, can escape. The object thus becomes a black hole. And two particles can make a miniscule black hole in just this way if they collide with an energy above a fundamental limit called the Planck energy.
Or so physicists have assumed. Researchers have based that prediction on the so-called hoop conjecture, a rule of thumb that indicates how much an object of a given mass has to be compressed to make a black hole, says Matthew Choptuik of the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada. A calculation from the 1970s also suggested a particle collision could make a black hole, Choptuik notes, but it modeled the particles themselves as black holes and thus may have been skewed to produce the desired result.
Now Choptuik and Frans Pretorius of Princeton University have simulated such collisions, including all the extremely complex mathematical details from general relativity. For simplicity and to make the simulations generic, they modeled the two particles as hypothetical objects known as boson stars, which are similar to models that describe stars as spheres of fluid. Using hundreds of computers, Choptuik and Pretorius calculated the gravitational interactions between the colliding particles and found that a black hole does form if the two particles collide with a total energy of about one-third of the Planck energy, slightly lower than the energy predicted by hoop conjecture, as they report in a paper in press at Physical Review Letters.
Does that mean the LHC will make black holes? Not necessarily, Choptuik says. The Planck energy is a quintillion times higher than the LHC's maximum. So the only way the LHC might make black holes is if, instead of being three dimensional, space actually has more dimensions that are curled into little loops too small to be detected except in a high-energy particle collision. Predicted by certain theories, those extra dimensions might effectively lower the Planck energy by a huge factor. "I would be extremely surprised if there were a positive detection of black-hole formation at the accelerator," Choptuik says. Physicists say that such black hole would harmlessly decay into ordinary particles.
"It's a real tribute to their skill that they were able to do this through a computer simulation," says Steve Giddings, a gravitational theorist at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Such simulations could be important to study particle collisions and black hole formation in greater detail, he says. Indeed, they may be the only way to study the phenomenon if space does not have extra dimensions and the Planck energy remains hopelessly out of reach. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Particle collisions can form black holes, but only under very specific conditions
Enlarge picture
Over the last few years, numerous controversies have sprung up around massive particle accelerators such as the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Most often, critics fear that these giant machines will produce particle collisions that are so energetic that they could give birth to very small black holes. Physicists say that this is entirely probable, and that creating artificial black holes would be a major scientific achievement. But many fear that the structures would get out of hand, and gobble up the entire planet, and they have even petitioned the United Nations to put an end to the LHC.
Now, for the first time, a computer simulation shows that the scenario in which tiny black holes are produced under Einstein's famous theory of general relativity is entirely possible, and even likely. The respected physicist Albert Einstein said on several occasions that such an event is possible, but this is the first time this has been experimentally proven to be true. “I would have been surprised if it had come out the other way. But it is important to have the people who know how black holes form look at this in detail,” says physicist Joseph Lykken, who is based at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab), in Batavia, Illinois.
In a study published in the respected scientific journal Physical Review Letters, experts say that the computer model used in the new investigations took into account the forces of gravity that occur between two colliding particles, as well as advanced mathematical calculations referring to the general theory of relativity. ScienceNow reports that black holes can only form when particles collide at one-third of the fundamental limit known as the Planck energy. This data alone should put LHC critics at rest. The Planck energy is a quintillion (10^1 times higher than the particle accelerator's maximum energy output, which peaks at 7 Tev per beam, or 14 Tev combined.
“I would be extremely surprised if there were a positive detection of black-hole formation at the accelerator,” says expert Matthew Choptuik, from the University of British Columbia, in Vancouver, Canada. Together with Princeton University colleague Frans Pretorius, he created the computer model that was used for these investigations. “It's a real tribute to their skill that they were able to do this through a computer simulation,” adds University of California in Santa Barbara (UCSB) gravitational theorist Steve Giddings. The bottom line is that, for now, we can rest assured that the possibility of black holes being created at the LHC is extremely small. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Loanka
: 06.04.2006 : 3745 : Paris
: , 11 2010, 21:24:48 :
Zabougornov ():
Òîëüêî íå íàäî ïóòàòü äîêàçàòåëüñòâî ñóùåñòâîâàíèÿ Á-ãà ñ âåðîé â íåãî è âëèÿíèåì âåðû íà ïñèõîëîãèþ ÷åëîâåêà è îáùåñòâà.
The theories of Professor Michael Heller do not so much offer proof of the existence of God as introduce doubt about the material existence of the world around us
Image :1 of 2
Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent
A Polish priest and mathematician who was a friend of the late Pope John Paul II has won the world’s richest academic prize for work that shows how maths can offer circumstantial evidence of God’s existence.
Professor Michael Heller, 72, a pioneering cosmologist and philosopher specialising in mathematics and metaphysics, received the £820,000 prize yesterday in New York.
His theories do not so much offer proof of the existence of God as introduce doubt about the material existence of the world around us. He specialises in complex formulae that make it possible to explain everything, even chance, through mathematical calculation.
According to the Templeton Foundation, which has awarded its prize for Progress toward Research or Discoveries about Spiritual Realities for 35 years, Professor Heller’s research has “pushed at the metaphysical horizons of science”. The prize money is adjusted every year so that it remains greater than the amount given by the Nobel Foundation, which awards the Nobel prizes.
Professor Heller was nominated for the award by Professor Karol Musiol, Rector of the Jagiellonian University in Cracow, who said: “His unique position as a creatively working scientist and reflective man of religion has brought to science a sense of transcendent mystery and to religion a view of the universe through the broadly open eyes of science.
“He has introduced a significant notion of theology of science. He has succeeded in showing that religion isolating itself from scientific insights is lame, and science failing to acknowledge other ways of understanding is blind.”
In a statement yesterday, Professor Heller, a professor in the philosophy faculty at the Pontifical Academy of Theology in Cracow, said: “If we ask about the cause of the universe we should ask about the cause of mathematical laws. By doing so we are back in the great blueprint of God’s thinking about the universe, the question on ultimate causality: why is there something rather than nothing?
“When asking this question, we are not asking about a cause like all other causes. We are asking about the root of all possible causes.
“Science is but a collective effort of the human mind to read the mind of God from question marks out of which we and the world around us seem to be made.”
When he was a boy, Professor Heller’s family were sent to Siberia. His father had built new factories in Poland and joined a group that sabotaged a chemical plant in the south when the Nazis invaded at the start of the Second World War.
The family feld to Lvov and were sent from there to Siberia by the Russians, where Professor Heller went to primary school. By the time he entered secondary school, the war had ended and he and his family returned to Poland. His father was persecuted again when his son decided to enter a seminary.
In spite of the suppression of religion in Poland during much of his adult life, he went on to reach the top of his field academically, doing research in universities around the world including Oxford and Liège.
He worked with Pope John Paul II, when he was Archbishop of Cracow and was one of a number of academics and scientists invited each summer to Castel Gandolfo, the Pope’s summer residence, to debate the latest research in their respective fields.
His greatest scientific influence has been the philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who once wrote: “When God calculates and thinks things through, the world is made.”
John Templeton, chair of the John Templeton Foundation and son of Sir John Templeton, who established the prize in 1973, said: “Michael Heller’s quest for deeper understanding has led to pioneering breakthroughs in religious concepts and knowledge as well as expanding the horizons of science.”
Professor Heller, who also worked with John Paul II when he was Archbishop of Cracow, said yesterday that he would donate his prize money to the development of the new Copernicus Centre in Cracow, an academy for research into science and theology.
The end of time?
— The work of Professor Heller, above, revolves around the search for a fundamental theory of creation. His research ranges beyond Einstein and into quantum mechanics, cosmology, physics and pure mathematics, including his own version of the Heisenberg equation, below. Although his theories do not prove the existence of God, they may provide circumstantial evidence that He exists
— So long as the Universe had a beginning, we can suppose it had a creator, he says. But if the Universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end: it would simply be. What place, then, for a creator?
— Professor Heller argues against the Newtonian concept of creation, that is, against the idea of an absolute space and an absolute time and of God creating energy and matter at certain times
— He suggests modern theologians should go back to the traditional doctrine that the creation of the Universe was an act that occurred outside space and time _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
His theories do not so much offer proof of the existence of God as introduce doubt about the material existence of the world around us. He specialises in complex formulae that make it possible to explain everything, even chance, through mathematical calculation.
“If we ask about the cause of the universe we should ask about the cause of mathematical laws. By doing so we are back in the great blueprint of God’s thinking about the universe, the question on ultimate causality: why is there something rather than nothing?
Òîåñòü, ìîæåò êîíå÷íî è ñîìíåâàåòñÿ, íî ôîðìóëèðóåò êðóòî: À êàêîâà, ãîâîðèò, ïðè÷èíà ìàòåìàòè÷åñêèõ çàêîíîâ?
È ïî÷åìó âîîáùå ÷òî-òî åñòü, êîãäà âðîäå áû íè÷åãî íå äîëæíî áûòü? Ýòî îí î ñâîåé ïðåìèè ÷òî-ëè?
Ïðîñòî òàêè ñòàâèò â òóïèê ñâîèìè âîïðîñàìè... Íàéòè áû òîãî êòî áû åãî ïîñòàâèë â òóïèê ñâîèìè îòâåòàìè.... _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Ñîâåðøåííî âåðíî! Ïðè÷¸ì ìîæåò ãëîáàëüíîå ïîòåïëåíèå è åñòü, ñêàçàòü îá ýòîì ñ óâåðåííîñòüþ î÷åíü íåïðîñòî, íî äàííûå ïîäòàñîâûâàëèñü, ìîäåëè ïîäãîíÿëè ïîä æåëàåìûé ðåçóëüòàò, òîåñòü áûë îáìàí. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà