Electrons keep on surprising physicists


One of the most surprising things about electrons is that it still keeps on surprising physicist. After all, it has been announced long before as a fundamental particle. Since it is a fundamental particle already, then what else can get out of a main building block? What has a dead end has to offer anyway?

          Permit me to go back in time to look at how electrons came about. Electrons first came into scientific existence when it showed itself as a cathode ray when a German physicist Johann Hittorf tried studying the electrical properties of gases in near vacuum state. That was in 1869. It is even called a beta ray. Its existence as a form of radiation later changed into particle when its mass was discovered by J.J. Thomson in 1896 and its charge was clearly measured with finality with Robert Millikan's oil-drop experiment in 1909. Since then Quantum Mechanics observed its wave-like characteristics. It is wave-like especially in highly confined state like the atom but remains as a particle as a free particle. Louis de Broglie's prediction of its wave property in 1924 gave us a slightly probabilistic attribute as shown by Erwin Schroedinger in 1926. His equations gave the electron 3 quantum numbers in its confined state in the atom abd Paul Dirac discovered its Spin after incorporating Einstein's special relativistic into Quantum Mechanics.

          Consequently, efforts to smash the electron into smaller parts were not successful enough. Its been classified as 1st generation LEPTON, then to differentiate it further from quarks, its also classified as FERMION as opposed from BOSON. For all its properties, it is probably the particle with a wide range of application - X-rays, electron microscope, electron lithography and of course the cathode ray tube (except for photon of course)

         A recent study (http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/173372-smoother-than-expected-electrons-could-mean-rethinking-particle-physics) now tells us that the electron is almost perfectly spherical particle due to its inabiity to "deform" as observed from dipole moment from its interactiuon with its supersymmetric partner. However, this property of electron deformation wasn't the intended observation anyway but for scientists looking for its super-partner. If these partners exist, they would have deformed the electron and that deformation must be observed from its variation of its electric dipole moment. It could be another blow to the search for the supersymmetric partcles. Personally though, I do not believe supersymmetry exists. It is an elegant mathematical solution but the universe in its smallest sense is at best not so elegant at all.

Dark Energy and the Cosmological Constant

Einstein;s biggest blunder (as he puts it himself) is the main priority of Astronomy today. Save for exo-planets, it is this enigmatic idea of the energy that;s stretching the universe thin and into nothingness. Why such a fuss on such a thing?

Nothing maybe.except that it constitutes 70 percent or more of what we don't see in the Universe,. But why is that? When Einstein first formulated the General Theory of Relativity, he first assumed that the universe is stable in itself. It doesn't grow nor shrink. It is just right. However when Lemaitre pointed out that the mathematics of Einstein's formula shows it is expanding, he immediately reformulated it by adding another term in the original formula (Rmn - gmn/2 R = 8pi G Tmn/c4) - Ricci Tensor-half of Metric Tensor x Scalar Curvature = Stress-Energy-Momentum Tensor  See this video.

By adding another Term called the Cosmological Constant, the function then causes the entire expression to balance out again. Forcing the entire expression to become stable. Later Edwin Hubble experimentally verified that the universe is constant, which led to Einstein's dropping the Cosmological Constant once more and called it his greatest blunder. However, latest measurements of Universal expansion show that the Universe is expanding faster than even Edwin Hubble imagined. Now Scientists have reinserted the Cosmological Constant once more but this time its sign is opposite. They then attribute this rapid acceleration as the Dark Energy and the Cosmological Constant now stands as the mathematical representation of th Dark Energy.

This article then tells us what could be Einstein's greatest insight rather than blunder.

Dr. Physics lectures on Advanced Physics

I found this wonderful YouTube Channel on Advance Physics Topics, which I myself "enjoyed: watching and learning really great topics. Pardon a bit his thick British Accent but it is very easy to understand

https://www.youtube.com/user/DrPhysicsA?feature=watch

Learn Physics from this.

Projectile Motion

The projectile motion concept is one of the more difficult concepts for students to comprehend. Also, it is also one of the more difficult concepts to teach. The teacher who teaches projectile need to learn the following ideas about this motion and its equations before tackling it otherwise the teacher falls into the trap of thinking that some equations involving it has "no solution,"

1. Equations for projectile motion are idealized setup and maybe difficult to perform and even verify in an outside set-up with a high degree of precision and accuracy.
2. To make the experiment less erroneous otherwise it might develop misconceptions to students is that the projectile in the projectile motion is also idealized (Actually a point-mass). The closest thing to a point mass in this experiment are the following - a marble, a metal ball or a small piece of stone. 
3. A plane or winged projectile follows a path not described by the kinematical equations. More so a rocket. A rocket loses mass as it it propelled and therefore does not follow a path described by the kinematical equations.  The more aerodynamically sound the device is, the less it follows the kinematical equations. Aerodynamical system is affected by air pressure. 
1. For example, a pingpong ball approximately follows the kinematical equations. However when a player applies strong SPIN to the ball, the ball either bounces higher or lower. In flight the ball curves its path either to the right, left, or drops fast or drops slower than usual,. The spin gave it aerodynamical effects.
2. The same idea works for BADMINTON bird. The :"ball" drops fast since the ball is dragged by the air so as it reaches its peak it drops almost vertically
4. The solutions for kinematical .equations sometimes need trigonometric identityes and property

The complete K+12 Competencies

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B52LsZdeqWiFRGhEWFl2aTBzV0k/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B52LsZdeqWiFSW1CMTBQVzk1Zkk/edit?usp=sharing

Spend time reading and understanding these links. Download them if you must.

Ever wondered how Tony Starks created his new element in IRON MAN 2?

Watching Iron Man 2 and seeing Tony Starks create a new element from his home laboratory is probably a great fiction to everyone. In the movie, Thor the scientist told Thor's future girlfriend Jane that it is fairy tale, Jane answered back "a precursor to science fact." I was bemused by the idea that THor said to Jane later that "In our world, what you consider as magic, is science to us."

I suppose that the writers of these science fantasy stories were reading science fiction or SF stories. Because a number of times, a science fiction invents an idea, science seem to follow suit.

Take for example, this article
http://phys.org/news/2013-06-particle-tabletop-chapter-science.html 

After reading it is now easier to imagine what Tony Starks did in Iron Man 2. Although he did invent an ultra heavy highly radiating metal, the concept is not anymore out of reach.

http://phys.org/news/2013-06-particle-tabletop-chapter-science.html

The last of the PSSLC's of 2003.

Next school year 2014-2015, we'll be witnessing the last batch of RBEC students graduating from the old Curriculum. The curriculas before it, as far as my memory can carry me were SEDP, NSEC, RBEC, BEC as well as SEC and the latest was ASEC. Now its K+12. The last two batches were warned that failing in this two year period would result to spiraling down to the K+12 and would entail additional years just to reach college. Then again, the students said if they enter Grades 11 and 12, they can already find jobs after it and are not in a hurry to enter college years. One can always outreason what others state as warnings (or heralds-depending on who is listening). 

The last batch of Physics curriculum had remained the same since it was introduced last 2003. The PSSLCs of the past 10 years, was itself an experimental set of LCs. If one were to study the Modules created for K+12 and the Prototype Lesson Plans of the 2003 PSSLCs, one can actually feel the the K+12 modules were "rehashed" versions of the 2003 Prototype Lessons. The Prototype Lesson Plans themselves show hallmarks of an amateur mind, with lots of ENCARTA, scanned comics and copied but uncited books that were more done haphazardly than products of longer research or studies. What does that tell me of the K+12? It feels like more of the same.

Why did I say that the 2003 PSSLC's were experimental? The lesson topics covered the REVERSED (Optics to Mechanics) topics of standard Physics textbook treatment (Mechanics to Optics). There was never an explanation as to why the reversal was done. It never served its purpose since College entrance tests always follow the Physics standard treatment of topics. When it was first shoved down to us, all Physics major teachers were in an uproar until we were told to Tow the line. Of course we never towed the line and opted to follow how college treat Physics since that would be the Physics that our students will eventually face.

THIS IS THE "DYING" PSSLCs of PHYSICS

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B52LsZdeqWiFSWZiVDR3Y3R6Y28/edit?usp=sharing

Happy to share this to all of you.