Physics Discussion Thread

The Technology & Economic Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to Technological and Economic developments in India. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

Thanks for this nice article!

As mentioned in above article Professor Vedika Khemani, (now a associate professor at Stanford University) has been honored with the 2024 Infosys Prize in Physical Sciences.. (as I mentioned in the previous post.) Her work has been pivotal in the theoretical discovery and experimental realization of time crystals—a new phase of matter that seem to 'defy' conventional thermodynamic equilibrium by exhibiting oscillations in time without energy input. Her research sort of bridges the gap between theory and experimentation.. (Theory was proposed by Frank Wilczek in 2012 and around then it was there were some doubts if this will have practical application).

Another recent article is here: Physicists Transformed a Quantum Computer Into a Time Crystal
sanman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4099
Joined: 22 Mar 2023 11:02

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by sanman »

Sabine discusses a paper which claims to have put Schrodinger's Cat into the proper context/framework

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

R Chidambaram, one the most decorated scientists of our era, an outstanding Science administrator and a fine gentleman, we will miss you. Om Shanti.

There are x- posts in <here> and here and here ..
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

Today is the 131st birth anniversary of Satyendra Nath Bose.

Two articles: "In early twentieth century, physics was undergoing its greatest revolution. The top universities of Europe were at the frontiers.

But a physicist far away from the action came up with one of the biggest breakthroughs.

Nirmalya Kajuri's article on hundred years of Bose’s famous discovery of photon statistics.
Image

Sharing:

A scientific biography of Bose, Jagdish Mehra's 40 page excellent bio
Hriday
BRFite
Posts: 483
Joined: 15 Jun 2022 19:59

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Hriday »

I hope it is not off-topic here. The below topic is related to what Graham Hancock and others proposed, i.e. a cataclysmic pole-shift event that destroyed a worldwide advanced civilization about 12,000 years ago.

@EthicalSkeptic in X claims that he had cracked the mystery of Gobekli Tepe inscriptions. Worth a read.

Gobekli Tepe is the most important archaeological discovery in the world in recent times. The discovery challenges the traditional narrative of societal progression, showing that complex social organization and monumental building could occur even before the development of agriculture. The most important point is that it dates back around 11,000 years. Both the above points support Graham Hancock's theory that the survivors re-created the much earlier civilization.

The present mainstream narration is that the cataclysm didn't happen at that time, and what Graham says is a pseudo-science and that basic civilization started roughly around 14K years ago.

Before giving the excerpts from the writings of @EthicalSkeptic, some background information is given below.

In his famous book, The Fingerprints of the God, which sold about 5 million copies worldwide, he thoroughly discusses the battle between the geologists divided into two camps, gradualists and cataclysmists, the plenty of scientific evidence for cataclysm,
plenty of supporting evidence of cataclysm in ancient culture throughout the world, interpretation of the inscription on Gobekli Tepe etc. Can anyone who has read the book provide an interesting summary here? To me, it is a must-read amongst 10 books. I'm too lazy now; I hope I can write a summary here later.

A few interesting info from Graham's book is given below.

1. The book starts with a letter from a USA naval organisation that confirms that the land shown beneath the Antarctic ice cap, as shown in the very ancient Piri Ries map, is accurate. In modern times, it was mapped by ice-penetrating radar. Also, as per mainstream narration, Antarctica was fully covered with several km thick ice for several lakhs of years. Map-making requires very sophisticated knowledge. Also, Graham quotes Vedas, which mentioned a previous land of sages where the sun shone for about 6 months. He also describes the killing of the demon Vritra by Indra, after which ice trapped in the Himalayas began to flow to the Indian plains.

2. The ancient saying, 'Sky fell,' which is a popular expression even today, is most likely an observed phenomenon. When a sudden pole shift happens the moon+star or Sun will appear to fall to the horizon.

3. In his book Fingerprints of the Gods, he quotes the contents of another book, Hamlet's Mill, by Giorgio de Santillana. In that book, they point out that throughout the many ancient societies, there is a story with the same theme in which a structure goes astray from its axial rotation. Graham or Giorgio pointed out that ancient India, too, has such a story. It is the Samudra Manthan. What the story means is that there occur periodic dangerous axial shifts that can cause catastrophic destruction.

https://x.com/EthicalSkeptic/status/188 ... PfYXQ&s=19

Some excerpts given below.
I count myself among those deeply disappointed by the decision of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), in cooperation with the Turkish Government, to effectively halt fundamental, independent, and scientifically motivated excavation efforts at Göbekli Tepe.
....

In Exhibit A below, the reader can observe how the nine iconographs carved into Pillar 43 correspond strikingly well to the nine asterisms I have identified from the sky field map shown below right (produced using Starry Night Pro 8.1.0). The carvings on the stone align precisely with the Sanliurfa night sky as it would have appeared around 14,800 BCE. Four birds, including the Condor, two snakes, a scorpion, a dog, and what may be a headless frog (?) all align exactly with the star formations visible in the heavens at that time.
.....
Our broader hypothesis, which I refer to as the ECDO Earth Cataclysm Theory, accommodates these symbols as representative of the rising and setting of the sun, both before and after the depicted cataclysmic event (a true polar wander). This is reinforced by the employment of the ‘H’ symbol prominently and in suggestion of ‘alignment’ on Pillar 30 (see image to right) on the north side of Enclosure D. This is the same pillar which bears the transverse ‘sighting hole’ for (in its original position) tracking the position of the summer solstice of the rising sun.5 It is clear therefore, that the ‘H’ symbol represents the azimuths of the rising and setting Sun. The vertically oriented snake below the ‘H’ symbol on Pillar 30 represents the seasonal meandering of the Sun’s rising (vertical snake) azimuth.
....

Figure 1 – A rare and robust aurora borealis is interpreted as flames burning in the Sanliurfa, Turkey night sky above Göbekli Tepe. The 11 boxes represent true north, and five points of bearing to either side thereof, constituting the west-to-east (and corresponding 3 tepes) horizon-range over which these flames spread in the Pillar artist’s night sky.
....
This is very similar to how crude bearing points of steerage work at sea.
...
Figure 2 – The ‘handbags’ are postulated to be three Taş Tepeler tepes (west, north, and east per the bearing boxes) or hills which were hollowed out as habitations to withstand a cataclysm. The torrent from that cataclysm is inscribed above the tepes. We postulate that the flat areas on the right of each tepe represents the Edin Plain or valley of Paddan Aram in Figure 3 below. The three animals represent horizon asterisms in the direction of each tepe itself.
...
This event precedes the Holocene Stabilization and set of chaotic events therein (see Figure 4), with the observed aurora borealis and the potential impact of extended circumstances surrounding events such as the Younger Dryas or Meltwater Pulse 1A or 1B possibly being involved in the iconography (annotated as ‘torrent’ in Figure 2).
...
Figure 4 – Postulated timeline of cataclysmic-related events involving the Younger Dryas, MWP 1A, and MWP 1B.10 The reader should note the 6° C jump in global temperatures during the Bølling-Allerød rapid warming onset (12,700 BCE). This naturally caused warming was 7.5 times faster than our current rate of climate warming.
....
Hriday
BRFite
Posts: 483
Joined: 15 Jun 2022 19:59

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Hriday »

^^
Also, Graham quotes Vedas, which mentioned a previous land of sages where the sun shone for about 6 months.
For those who missed, in polar regions, sunlight is available for 6 months. Here, Graham is speculating that Antarctica is possibly a major civilization lost in the cataclysm. Does anyone know of human presence in North India during the ice age 12K years before? Read somewhere that North India was covered in ice at that time.
bala
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by bala »

This is on Black holes, dark matter & dark energy

Yale University astrophysicist Priyamvada Natarajan studies Black holes, dark matter & dark energy. Recently in 2023 James Webb telescope (sensitive to infra-red spectrum) found a formation of black hole as outlined by a paper from Priyamvada. The galaxy in which we are has a massive black hole, much larger than the black holes due to collapse of a star as shown by S. Chandrasekhar sometime ago. Getting a massive black hole is another matter altogether and Priyamvada has shown how that is possible in her paper. She is the first Indian astrophysicist to have won the Dannie Heineman Prize for Astrophysics, in 2025.

youtube.com/watch?v=hZWB-x6bdHs

Just as an aside: Only 4% of universe is the known things like visible matter, planets, stars, etc. Dark matter is the rest. Dark energy is the one that drives the expansion of the universe.

// My take on the Universe is much different than those that physics is trying to prove. It goes back to Brahman and maya, but that is an altogether different subject. I will leave it there.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

^^^ Some may be interested in the fact that Indian-American astrophysicist and Nobel laureate Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar applied hard math to black holes, stellar dynamics, radiative transfer and other fields... .. some posts in this dhaga may be relevant.

So thanks for the post.

Some comments:

It provides an informative overview of Priyamvada Natarajan's work on black holes, dark matter, and dark energy. Eg:

- The text accurately describes Priyamvada Natarajan's research and achievements, including her paper on black hole formation and her award of the Dannie Heineman Prize for Astrophysics.
- The author provides context about the James Webb telescope and its capabilities, which helps readers understand the significance of Natarajan's research.
- The text simplifies complex concepts like dark matter and dark energy, making them accessible to a broader audience.

However, there are some areas that could (IMO) be improved:

- The text abruptly transitions from discussing Natarajan's research to the author's personal take on the universe, which feels disconnected from the rest of the text.
- comment about Brahman and maya is unclear and feels like a non-sequitur. If the author intends to explore this idea further, it would be helpful to provide more context or explanation.
- The text maintains a formal (scientific) tone until the abrupt transition to the author's personal take, which feels more casual and speculative.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

I have written several posts about LIGO (Last one eg <here>).. Several Nobel prizes , India's interests etc ...Very exciting stuff..

News is They have reached 200 candidates in O4!!

The fourth observing run (O4) of our detector network has had the best performance so far, with more candidates than ever before! They are currently busy analysing all these wonderful data and look forward to sharing results..

See https://observing.docs.ligo.org/plan/

Here's a breakdown of what's happening:
- Continues until April 1, 2025, at 15:00 UTC.
- From April 1 to June 4, 2025, to repair a faulty beam tube gate valve at LIGO Livingston and perform other maintenance tasks.
- Observation will restart on June 4, 2025, with a possible engineering period of around a week.
- Scheduled for October 7, 2025, at 15:00 UTC.
- After O4, final characterization and equipment installation will prepare for the O5 configuration, planned to start in late 2027.
The detectors are currently performing well, with:
- LIGO Livingston: Observing with a BNS range of around 170 Mpc and a 67% duty cycle.
- LIGO Hanford: Observing at around 160 Mpc with a 60% duty cycle.
- Virgo: Observing in O4c with a 75-80% duty cycle and a 50-55 Mpc BNS range.
- KAGRA: Continues noise hunting and cooling, aiming to rejoin the observing run
---
LIGO India is a planned gravitational-wave observatory to be located in Hingoli, Maharashtra, India. It's a collaborative project between the LIGO Laboratory (operated by Caltech and MIT) and the Indian Initiative in Gravitational-wave Observations (IndIGO).

The project is currently in the planning and construction phase. Modi / Indian government has allocated funds for the project, and the site in Hingoli has been selected and acquired. The construction of the observatory is expected to begin soon.

By adding a third LIGO detector in India, scientists will be able to better triangulate the sources of gravitational waves and improve the accuracy of their observations.
bala
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by bala »

If you are interested in supermassive black holes then this discussion with Priyamvada Natarajan is a good one, Brian Greene moderates.

youtube.com/watch?v=WmhUay6A8Dc

Furthermore for those interested in India's Vedic thought and its pramana to understand the "Why" universe was created. Basically space and time are creation of Maya which is chhaya (shadow) of Brahman. Removing space and time will collapse the entire cosmos. I believe the peacock feather depicts a Blackhole visually.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

Sharing ; I liked this physics Professor Ramamurti Shankar (an IIT Alum :) ) discloses the full insight of Quantum Mechanics in 60 seconds at Yale University in his Physics 201 lecture.
(Professor Ramamurti Shankar is the second Indian after S. Chandrasekhar to be a member of Harvard Society of Fellows)
So this is a very exciting day for me, because today, we're going to start quantum mechanics and that's all we'll do till the end of the term. Now I've got bad news and good news. The bad news is that it's a subject that's kind of hard to follow intuitively, and the good news is that nobody can follow it intuitively.
See <1 min video>

BTW, his lectures are available , including those on quantum mechanics, on Yale's Open Yale Courses platform -- there are excellent open course lectures on IIT or MIT platforms also)
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

bala wrote: 20 Mar 2025 20:55 <snip>

Furthermore for those interested in India's Vedic thought and its pramana to understand the "Why" universe was created. Basically space and time are creation of Maya which is chhaya (shadow) of Brahman. Removing space and time will collapse the entire cosmos. I believe the peacock feather depicts a Blackhole visually.
I understand that you're enthusiastic about exploring the connections between Vedic thought and cosmology. However, I must emphasize that this line of discussion has veered far from the scientific method and the principles of physics - the subject of this thread .

As Carl Sagan once said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." While your ideas might be intriguing, they remain unsubstantiated by empirical evidence and experimental verification.

In science, we rely on the rigorous testing of hypotheses through experimentation and observation. As Richard Feynman aptly put it,
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong
."
I'm afraid that invoking Maya, Brahman, and peacock feathers as explanations for black holes doesn't meet these scientific standards.

To maintain the integrity of this physics discussion thread, I respectfully request that we table these topics and focus on scientifically grounded explorations. If you'd like to continue exploring the intersections of Vedic thought and cosmology, I AGAIN suggest creating a separate thread (or move these discussion) in a more appropriate forum.

Let's prioritize the scientific method and empirical evidence in our discussions, ensuring that our explorations remain grounded in the principles of physics.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13495
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Vayutuvan »

Amber G. wrote: 21 Mar 2025 00:04 I liked this physics Professor Ramamurti Shankar (an IIT Alum :) ) discloses the full insight of Quantum Mechanics in 60 seconds at Yale University in his Physics 201 lecture.
I recently purchased three of his books after getting a recommendation from a friend's son who turned a Harvard PhD fellowship to do startup.

They are Fundamentals of Physics Vols I and II and Basic Training in Mathematics. The last one is an excellent book for a quick review of Mathematics for those who are entering UG in STEM.
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4890
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by gakakkad »

^ any book recs on differential geometry ? I am thinking of taking a crack at general relativity as I am too bored . I have intermediate mathematical maturity . Great at calc.3 and diffeq and linear algebra .Reasonably good at complex analysis . Went through a decent amount of real analysis text though not papa rudin . Was able to glide through Griffiths electrodynamics without any issues. and read a bunch of QM though can't say I fully process much of QM . Also if there are recommendations on a topology text that would be nice .
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13495
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Vayutuvan »

Computational Topology
by Herbert Edelsbrunner (Author), John L. Harer (Author)

Herbert's book on Computational Geometry is a classic which replaced the older classic by Preparata and Shamos. I did take a graduate level course from him. He is an extraordinary researcher, well known, and is a fantastic teacher. I haven't read this book but I suppose it would be as good as his Computational Geometry book.

But if you are not interested in computational aspects, this may not the book for you.
bala
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by bala »

Talking about actual observed stuff vs theory, the James Webb Telescope has found numerous galaxies which defy the wonderbar theory of big bang (which happens to anchor physics understanding of our galaxy). Astronomers are staring at a galaxy that could be one of the oldest ever. Dubbed Gz9p3, this galaxy is at a redshift of z=9.3, which means we are seeing it as it was only 510 million years after the Big Bang. Dr. Michio Kaku, Prof of Theoretical Physics believes that the big bang is wrong and there is a need for a new theory.

youtube.com/watch?v=UmYE87AOqL8

The continuous discovery of James Webb Telescope is upsetting many foundational physics paradigms.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

gakakkad wrote: 21 Mar 2025 17:57 ^ any book recs on differential geometry ? I am thinking of taking a crack at general relativity as I am too bored . I have intermediate mathematical maturity . Great at calc.3 and diffeq and linear algebra .Reasonably good at complex analysis . Went through a decent amount of real analysis text though not papa rudin . Was able to glide through Griffiths electrodynamics without any issues. and read a bunch of QM though can't say I fully process much of QM . Also if there are recommendations on a topology text that would be nice .
FWIW:

The fascinating world of general relativity! I'm glad to share my thoughts on this subject, drawing from my personal experience and some of favorite resources.

I was fortunate enough to attend a two-semester graduate course on general relativity taught by the renowned Nobel laureate, C.N. Yang, in the 1970s. His exceptional teaching skills and ability to convey complex concepts in a clear, concise manner made the subject truly enjoyable. I also took Yang's course on group theory which was equally enlightening, demonstrating the importance of a solid mathematical foundation in grasping physics.

In my opinion, a good understanding of mathematics is essential to appreciating general relativity. While self-study can be beneficial, I firmly believe that a skilled teacher can make a significant difference in one's learning experience. This is why attending a reputable university with experienced instructors can be incredibly valuable. There are many online courses (from IIT, MIT etc) which you may like to check (I can give some recos)

For those interested in exploring general relativity, I recommend the following (well known - classic) resources:

"Gravitation" by Charles W. Misner, Kip S. Thorne, and John A. Wheeler: A comprehensive, graduate-level text that provides a thorough understanding of general relativity.

"General Relativity" by Robert M. Wald: Another graduate-level text that offers a clear and accessible introduction to general relativity.

Robert Lillie's book on general relativity: A resource I fondly remember from my studies.
For popular reading and introductory resources. (I got when I was young - math is there but little less complex - don't know if the book is still there)

For popular/UG etc:

George Gamow's "One Two Three Infinity": A classic, accessible book that explores various mathematical and scientific concepts, including relativity - both special and general. It explains curved surfaces and non Euclidean Geometry. (My favorite)

Feynman's online lectures: An excellent resource for introducing basic concepts in physics, including relativity.
-You can find the relevant chapters on the Caltech website, which hosts the online version of the FLP:
Chapter 42: General Relativity (Volume I): This chapter introduces the basic concepts of General Relativity, including the equivalence principle, curvature, and the role of gravity.
Chapter 43: Gravity and the Principle of Equivalence (Volume I): Feynman explores the equivalence principle in more detail, discussing its implications for our understanding of gravity.
Chapter 17: The Principle of Least Action (Volume II): While not exclusively focused on General Relativity, this chapter discusses the principle of least action, which is crucial for understanding the Einstein field equations.

L.D. Landau's book on special relativity: An elementary yet excellent text that provides a solid foundation in special relativity. On general relativity: Landau's series of textbooks are highly recommended for various subjects in physics.

Remember, general relativity is a complex, fascinating subject that requires patience, dedication, and a strong mathematical foundation.

I hope you find these recommendations helpful. If you have any specific questions or need further guidance, feel free to ask!
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

bala wrote: 24 Mar 2025 10:06 Talking about actual observed stuff vs theory, the James Webb Telescope has found numerous galaxies which defy the wonderbar theory of big bang (which happens to anchor physics understanding of our galaxy). Astronomers are staring at a galaxy that could be one of the oldest ever. Dubbed Gz9p3, this galaxy is at a redshift of z=9.3, which means we are seeing it as it was only 510 million years after the Big Bang. Dr. Michio Kaku, Prof of Theoretical Physics believes that the big bang is wrong and there is a need for a new theory.

youtube.com/watch?v=UmYE87AOqL8

The continuous discovery of James Webb Telescope is upsetting many foundational physics paradigms.
The James Webb Telescope's discoveries are indeed shedding new light on the universe, but let's separate fact from fiction and scrutinize the claims made.

Firstly, the discovery of galaxy GNz9p3 at a redshift of z=9.3 is an exciting find, but it doesn't defy the Big Bang theory. The Big Bang theory predicts that the universe was once extremely hot and dense, and as it expanded, it cooled, leading to the formation of galaxies. The observation of GNz9p3 is consistent with this framework.

Regarding Dr. Michio Kaku's statement, I must say that, as a physicist, I'm underwhelmed by his sensational claims. While it's true that the Big Bang theory might require refinements or even a new paradigm, Kaku's assertions as often [/b]lack concrete, testable evidence.

Some easy examples of inaccuracies or exaggerations in the post:

Misleading statement : - "The James Webb Telescope has found numerous galaxies which defy the wonderful theory of big bang." This is false - the telescope has observed galaxies that challenge our current understanding, but they don't "defy" the Big Bang theory. (In physics one need *only* one in solid experimental proof to invalidate a theory)

Lack of context: The post fails to mention that the Big Bang theory is supported by a vast amount of observational evidence from many fields of astronomy. While these new discoveries might refine our understanding, they don't invalidate the entire theory.
Sensationalism: Dr. Kaku's statement, as quoted, is more sensational than scientific. As physicists, we should rely on empirical evidence and testable predictions rather than relying on provocative claims.

In conclusion, while the James Webb Telescope's discoveries are groundbreaking, we should approach claims with a critical and nuanced perspective, separating fact from fiction and avoiding sensationalism.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13495
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Vayutuvan »

Amber G. wrote: 25 Mar 2025 00:23
Sensationalism: Dr. Kaku's statement, as quoted, is more sensational than scientific. As physicists, we should rely on empirical evidence and testable predictions rather than relying on provocative claims.
I agree with you sir about Kaku. He is quite sensational. Some times Neil deGrasse Tyson also is sensational but not as much as Michio Kaku.
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6345
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Cyrano »

Somehow I can't shake the feeling that Neil deGrasse Tyson is a pompous charlatan every time I hear him speak in podcasts or interviews on YouTube. Maybe I'm wrong, but does anyone else feel this way? What are his stellar achievements?

Haven't listened to Kaku much.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13495
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Vayutuvan »

Cyrano wrote: 26 Mar 2025 16:20 Somehow I can't shake the feeling that Neil deGrasse Tyson is a pompous charlatan every time I hear him speak in podcasts or interviews on YouTube. Maybe I'm wrong, but does anyone else feel this way? What are his stellar achievements?

Haven't listened to Kaku much.
I avoid science popularizers as much as possible. In fact, I have great aversion to popular science/math writers and books. Broca's Brain by Gould, FLT by Simon Singh, Chaos By Gleick, and even one small book on math by Timothy Gowers, Emperor's New Mind by Roger Penrose.

They scratch the surface details only. You would come away with a feeling of understanding but you really do not understand.

My views come from the following:

1. There are two types of scientists - theory builders and problem solvers

2. There are only a couple of areas where you can start problem solving without years of formal study. Examples include playing Chess, Go, elementary proofs of problems/conjectures in Number Theoretic. They are useful to find prodigies early on and train them formally to do great things. Erdos, many Fields medal winners are of this type who later in their life might become theory builders as well. Ramanujan was a probelm solver who under the tutelage of Hardy and Littlewood became somewhat of a theory builder too. Had he lived longer, what else he would have have done we will never know.

3. Theory builders start new areas of research in addition to showing the equivalence of problems from diverse areas and design general methods to solve problems those problems in the abstract. For example Grothendieck is one such. Einstein, Kolmogorov, Turing, Church, Hilbert, Shannon, Dirac, and a lot of nobel prize winners.

Then there are people who can do it all, John von Neumann for example.

Neither Tyson nor Kaku are up in the league of those people. They serve a purpose. The purpose is to get aam janata get excited about STEM who do not object to govt spending their tax dollars on pure science research.

So I applaud them for what they do for science but I am not in awe of them.

FWIW.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13495
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Vayutuvan »

People mistake research managers for researchers, mission operations which is more managerial for technological advances and so on.

For example, in the case of the invention of transistor, a working transistor was built by Bardeen and Brattain in a lab which was part of Bell Labs. Shockley was the research manager with budgeting authority but got a part of the Nobel Prize.
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4890
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by gakakkad »

Wasn't Shockley the racist guy?

There are several examples of people winning nobels without much contribution.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13495
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Vayutuvan »

Yes, Shockley was. He was a eugenicist, IIRC. Bardeen is good but Bardeen's student Nick Holonyak (who invented LED but cut out from the Nobel Prize) was also supposed to be somewhat of a eugenicist or so I heard.
Last edited by Vayutuvan on 28 Mar 2025 02:11, edited 1 time in total.
bala
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by bala »

Gordon Moore (of Moore law fame) and Robert Noyce (planar tech for semiconductor) of Intel were 2 PhD employees for Shockley semiconductors in Palo Alto, CA. There were around 10 PhD employees who all left Shockley to found their own famous companies in Silicon Valley, CA. Clearly Shockley was left by himself due to eugenics.

On accreditation of actual contributors, there are many instances where Nobel Prize was given to the wrong people, e.g. Glauber of Harvard stole George Sudarshan ideas after criticising it. I have cited others.
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4890
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by gakakkad »

I have cited others.
can you send me link of your paper that you refer to? I d love to read it.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

@Gakakkad - I hope my suggestions on resources about general relativity were helpful.

Regarding George Sudarshan:

This physics thread here contains around 50 messages about him, with approximately 30 posts from me (: alone). Some of these posts provide detailed information.

In 2005, when Roy Glauber was awarded the Nobel Prize for the "Sudarshan representation" in Physics, I wrote about Sudarshan's contributions. Some of us wrote articles published in Indian newspapers, and links were shared on BRF. (I was furious when I heard the news about the Nobel Prize, Glauber's name, and quoted work, and saw it was wrongly named... and had a post in BRF almost immediately.)

At that time, Sudarshan's work was not widely known outside the physics community. (In BRF, apparently, few people knew or wrote about him until recently.)
In 2009, when Sudarshan received the Padma Vibhushan award, I and others wrote about his achievements once again, with some details. Those links are quite helpful and informational. (See below)
I knew ECG very well, as a close family friend – I knew him (and many in the quantum optics group) since Rochester days.

Here are a few links: (will add shortly):

A post from me in 2009
Amber G. wrote: 02 May 2009 01:31 ... WRT Glauber and Sudershan BRF had quite a few posts (including the letter you quote, a few articles from TOI, NYtimes and comments from other well known physicists) when Glauber's Noble prize was announced.
(I almost went ballistic when I heard the news about Noble prize, Glauber's name and quoted work and saw it was wrongly named.. and had a post in BRF almost right away :)

Some one reported (I think correctly) that George Sudarshan currently holds the record of the "most nominated Nobel Prize candidate alive who has yet to receive any Nobel Prize"

There was a letter signed by several prestigious physicist and sent to Noble committee. (I think they - Noble committee - later realized that they goofed badly but did not do anything as they were more interested in saving their H&D - Not to mention, Glauber fellow is politically powerful - from Harvard and all that - and is not a nice fellow. (He has shown enmity to EGC, and other Indian (and others too) physicists)


This is IMO - of course, I may be a little biased as I did not liked the Glauber fellow (had a professor who worked with him and really hated this guy) .
.
EGC, on the other hand is a close friend of family , a very generous fellow, modest to a fault and a guru in a true sense .. etc. (In fact it took quite a bit of prodding on his (EGC’s) friends part for him to speak out)

Ironic is that ECG also missed the noble prize for V-A theory of weak interaction because he did not attend the APS meeting (lack of funds) and his prof who delivered the paper but the paper did not appear in ‘official proceedings’ .. (Richard Feynman, Murray Gell-Mann work was somewhat independent but it was published later, but some how they got the sole credit in the West (although Feynman always gave credit to Sudershan..) …

Not to mention that 1979 prize given to Weinberg, Glashow and Abdus Salam was based on Sudarshan’s work and he should have been included.

Here is relevant part from wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Priz ... exclusions
George Sudarshan and Robert Marshak drawn up the successful V-A (vector minus axial vector, or left-handed) theory for weak interactions first in 1957. It is essentially the same theory as that somewhat-worked-upon-later 'mathematical physics' paper, without any raw experimental data backing, on the structure of the weak interaction by Richard Feynman and Murray Gell-Mann; both briefed on the former group's results before via informal sharings earlier on[18] amongst themselves, without giving in their subsequent joint paper any formal credits due the theory's originators, except for informal allusions. Now it is popularly known in the west as the Feynman-Gell-Mann theory only.[19] The V-A theory for weak interactions was in actuality a new Law of Nature discovered. It was conceived in the face of a string of apparently contradictory experimental results, including several of Chien-Shiung Wu's, though also helped along by a sprinkling of other evidences too, e.g. the muon (discovered in 1936, it had a colorful history[20][21]itself—and would lead on again to a new revolution[22] in the 21st Century).[23] Therefore, that this breakthrough achievement was given a miss of a Nobel Award was all the more surprising . The V-A theory would later lay the foundation for the electroweak interaction theory. George Sudarshan himself regarded the V-A theory as his finest work to date. Later, it was subsumed under the electroweak interaction unification theory by Sheldon Glashow, Abdus Salam and Steven Weinberg that would go on to clinch the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics for the 'triumvirate'. The Sudarshan-Marshak (or V-A theory) was to meet with another coda of curious fate and dubious honour later on again of being assessed, preferably and favourably—after the strangely tortuous, and, at times, 'funny' pedantic imbroglios, and it goes on and on—as "beautiful" by J. Robert Oppenheimer;[18] and, suffering a complete reversal, like a last apparent 'twist', again, as it were, was given an exactly opposite assessment as "less complete", "inelegant" by John Gribbin.[24]
Also from the same source:
The 2005 Nobel Prize In Physics controversy involved George Sudarshan's relevant work in quantum optics (1960), which was considered by many to have been slighted in this award. Roy J. Glauber—who initially derided the former theory representations and later produced the same P-representation under a different name, viz., Sudarshan-Glauber representation or Sudarshan diagonal representation—was the winner instead
And ..
For the first time, Sudarshan himself has broken his silence over the Nobel controversy. Speaking to the Hindustan Times, he expressed frustration at the way he was ignored for top science honours, saying "The 2005 Nobel prize for Physics was awarded for my work, but I wasn’t the one to get it. Each one of the discoveries that the Nobel was given for were based on my research."[3]
About having been denied the Nobel in 1979 as well, Sudarshan said, "Steven Weinberg, Sheldon Glashow and Abdus Salam built on work I had done as a 26-year-old student. If you give a prize for a building, shouldn’t the fellow who built the first floor be given the prize before those who built the second floor?"

IIRC, there was a nice write up in TOI by Prof Mehta (IITD quantum optics guy who has worked with EGC Sudershan , Marshak etc with technical details about how the credit given to Glauber was unmerited while Sudershan was left out – not something Noble committee should be proud of.
Frome my post in 2009 article in FrontLine - Elusive recognition

Many good links and material in BRF just do a search (or see the link given before) with detail information.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

Amusing - did a google search to find a link for article for Sudarshan .. found this in search..
Bharat Rakshak Forum
Physics Discussion Thread - Page 70.. ...
https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com ....
.... a former quantum optics physicist from IIT Delhi who had worked with Sudarshan on the detailed aspects of the Equivalence ...
Relation between Quantum and Semiclassical Description of ...
:)
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

The Physics Orientation-cum-Selection Camp is underway at HBCSE-TIFR (April 21–May 4, 2025)! Top 5 students will be selected to represent India at the International Physics Olympiad in France this July.
sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6557
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by sanjaykumar »

Shockley was certainly a racist and eugenicist. New Scientist had a cartoon awarding him a Nobel prize in masturbation.
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4890
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by gakakkad »

^ I have memories of the physics selection camp in hbcse from over 2 decades ago. I didn't make it to the top 5 but almost did. Still in touch with some people there . I am the only Hakeem from the 30-40 odd people who made it to the camp that year . Sadly very few actually took fizzicks and most of them became iv-vity munnas.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

^^^hat's really interesting! I was involved in mentorship for programs like that, so it's really nice to hear about your experience. It’s always special to stay connected with people from those early journeys..
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

Richard L. Garwin, a renowned physicist and key contributor to the development of the hydrogen bomb, has died at 97. Born in Cleveland in 1928, Garwin showed exceptional intelligence and technical ability from an early age. He designed the world's first fusion bomb, code-named Ivy Mike, at just 23, although others, like Edward Teller and Stanislaw Ulam, developed the underlying theories.
Garwin's work extended far beyond the hydrogen bomb. He advised 12 U.S. presidents on defense policies, contributed to advancements in computers, communications, and medicine, and championed verifiable nuclear arms control agreements. Some notable contributions include:

-Developing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
-Creating high-speed laser printers
-Designing touch-screen monitors
-Advocating for gravitational wave research, which led to a breakthrough detection in 2015

Throughout his career, Garwin was known for his maverick approach and critiques of Pentagon decisions. He supported strategic nuclear balance with the Soviet Union and opposed policies that could destabilize this balance. Garwin received numerous honors, including the National Medal of Science and the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Despite his significant contributions to nuclear weapons, he advocated for nuclear arms control and cautioned against the unchecked use of nuclear power.
HT: NY Times
Richard L. Garwin, a Creator of the Hydrogen Bomb, Dies at 97

Excerpts: (Needs subscription)
Richard L. Garwin, an architect of America’s hydrogen bomb, who shaped defense policies for postwar governments and laid the groundwork for insights into the structure of the universe as well as for computer marvels like touch-screen monitors, died on Tuesday at his home in Scarsdale, N.Y. He was 97.

His death was confirmed by his son Thomas.

A polymathic physicist and geopolitical thinker, Dr. Garwin was only 23 when he built the world’s first fusion bomb. He later became a science adviser to many presidents, designed Pentagon weapons and satellite reconnaissance systems, argued for a Soviet-American balance of nuclear terror as the best bet for surviving the Cold War, and championed verifiable nuclear arms control agreements.

While his mentor, the Nobel laureate Enrico Fermi, called him “the only true genius I have ever met,” Dr. Garwin was not the father of the hydrogen bomb. The Hungarian-born physicist Edward Teller and the Polish mathematician Stanislaw Ulam, who developed theories for a bomb, may have greater claims to that sobriquet.

In 1951-52, however, Dr. Garwin, at the time an instructor at the University of Chicago and just a summer consultant at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, designed the actual bomb, using the Teller-Ulam ideas. An experimental device code-named Ivy Mike, it was shipped to the Western Pacific and tested on an atoll in the Marshall Islands.

Intended only to prove the fusion concept, the device did not even resemble a bomb. It weighed 82 tons, was undeliverable by airplane and looked like a gigantic thermos bottle. Soviet scientists, who did not test a comparable device until 1955, derisively called it a thermonuclear installation.

But at the Enewetak Atoll on Nov. 1, 1952, it spoke: An all-but-unimaginable fusion of atoms set off a vast, instant flash of blinding light, soundless to distant observers, and a fireball two miles wide with a force 700 times greater than the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima in 1945. Its mushroom cloud soared 25 miles and expanded to 100 miles across.


The first test of a hydrogen bomb, nicknamed Ivy Mike, on Nov. 1, 1952, on the tiny island of Elugelab in the Enewatak Atoll of the Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean.Credit...Reuters
Because secrecy shrouded the development of America’s thermonuclear weapons programs, Dr. Garwin’s role in creating the first hydrogen bomb was virtually unknown for decades outside a small circle of government defense and intelligence officials. It was Dr. Teller, whose name had long been associated with the bomb, who first publicly credited him.

“The shot was fired almost precisely according to Garwin’s design,” Dr. Teller said in a 1981 statement that acknowledged the crucial role of the young prodigy. Still, that belated recognition got little notice, and Dr. Garwin long remained unknown publicly.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

xpost:
Om Shanti - Professor Narlikar who showed what science in service of society really looks like!

-- sharing
Indian physicists Satyendra Nath Bose and Jayant Narlikar; the former known for his work with Einstein on what came to be called Bose-Einstein statistics, and the latter known for his collaboration with Fred Hoyle on the steady state theory of the universe's origins.

Image
Source: S.N.Bose-Archive
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

Sharing:

Indian Researchers Celebrate 2025 Breakthrough Prize in Fundamental Physics

Indian physicists, part of key CERN experiments, have jointly won the prestigious 2025 Breakthrough Prize in Fundamental Physics. The $3 million prize was awarded to four major collaborations at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider—ATLAS, CMS, ALICE, and LHCb—for discoveries made during Run-2 (2015–2024).

Their research deepened understanding of:

The Higgs boson

Quark-gluon plasma

Matter-antimatter asymmetry

Physics beyond the Standard Model

India’s contributions were part of these large international teams (e.g., 1,869 in ALICE alone). The award will fund doctoral student training, giving Indian students hands-on research experience at CERN, with the goal of building future scientific expertise back home.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

Just for fun sharing an article from MIT News:
(Many of us (or our children) took part in 'Egg Drop Contest - so this may be interesting) :)

MIT engineering students crack egg dilemma, finding sideways is stronger |


MIT students just busted a classic science myth: turns out eggs are tougher when dropped on their sides, not their tips. Everyone’s heard eggshells are strongest at the ends — it’s in classrooms, pop-science videos, and even how egg cartons are designed. But when these engineers ran compression and drop tests, they found sideways eggs absorb more energy and resist cracking better.

The tip-down eggs are stiffer, but stiffer = more brittle. Sideways, the shell bends more like a shock absorber. Basically, being a little "softer" makes it stronger in real-life impacts. It’s a reminder that even “settled” science deserves a second look.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10916
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Physics Discussion Thread

Post by Amber G. »

Just something I found interesting ( practical application of some theoretical work I did/studied)

MIT discovers new “p-wave” magnetism—electrically switchable spin state could revolutionize ultra-efficient memory

MIT physicists have discovered a novel type of magnetism—p-wave magnetism—in a two-dimensional material, nickel iodide (NiI₂). This magnetic state uniquely blends features of ferromagnetism (aligned spins) and antiferromagnetism (alternating spins that cancel out), but with a spiral spin configuration that is mirror-symmetric, like left and right hands.

Crucially, this spin pattern can be switched electrically—a breakthrough for spintronics, a next-generation data storage technology that uses electron spin instead of electric charge. Using small electric fields, researchers were able to flip the spiral orientation of the spins, controlling the flow of spin-polarized currents without generating heat.

This could lead to ultrafast, compact, energy-efficient memory devices. However, the effect was observed only at ultracold temperatures (~60 K). The next challenge is to discover similar behavior at room temperature for real-world applications.

Published in Nature on May 28 :
..Electrical switching of a p-wave magnet
Post Reply