Showing posts with label Research. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Research. Show all posts
Friday, May 3, 2013
Blog 22: Final 3-Column Chart
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlCsYHBSZf56dHVlM0ZyNFVpeU1QTzBpbU5SZ3dCSmc#gid=0
Monday, March 25, 2013
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Blog 19: Senior Project and ESLRs
1. What ESLR have you excelled in most in your senior project?
Oy vey, I don't think any of these are really applicable. If I had to choose one I would choose Effective Communicator.
2. Please explain why you think you have excelled in this ESLR.
One of my goals is to help others understand physics. Sure, it's great that I understand it, it comes naturally to me, blah blah blah. Whatever. My knowledge of physics isn't something I want to just keep selfishly to myself. Everyone can understand physics and appreciate it! No one should be made to feel intimidated. I have been helping people out when they need it in Pittman's class (I hope this has been beneficial for people. If not please tell me how I can improve.) I'm really trying to make my presentations accessible and interesting for people, and many people I have asked say that they have learned something after my presentations. I have a degree of artistic talent, so I try to use visual representations that are cute/funny/memorable to teach people. Also I make a lot of jokes (which may or may not be funny...or may be funny and not funny simultaneously until they are observed...I'll show myself out.)
3. Provide evidence from your senior project to support your claim (evidence is a photo of something you are doing, photo of something you made, etc).
I'll post a picture in the morning, but today I drew the little cartoony versions I do of all the Manhattan Project scientists. I drew these for Ogden's first art project but I have no idea where that has gone to (Purther, where are they?) So here are these instead. I'm thinking about making a historical physics comic, since there are many important aspects in this era that are glossed over in school. Here they are thinking about something they like. Oppenheimer likes Hinduism, Teller likes hydrogen, Szilard likes baths, and Fermi likes aliens.
Oy vey, I don't think any of these are really applicable. If I had to choose one I would choose Effective Communicator.
2. Please explain why you think you have excelled in this ESLR.
One of my goals is to help others understand physics. Sure, it's great that I understand it, it comes naturally to me, blah blah blah. Whatever. My knowledge of physics isn't something I want to just keep selfishly to myself. Everyone can understand physics and appreciate it! No one should be made to feel intimidated. I have been helping people out when they need it in Pittman's class (I hope this has been beneficial for people. If not please tell me how I can improve.) I'm really trying to make my presentations accessible and interesting for people, and many people I have asked say that they have learned something after my presentations. I have a degree of artistic talent, so I try to use visual representations that are cute/funny/memorable to teach people. Also I make a lot of jokes (which may or may not be funny...or may be funny and not funny simultaneously until they are observed...I'll show myself out.)
3. Provide evidence from your senior project to support your claim (evidence is a photo of something you are doing, photo of something you made, etc).
I'll post a picture in the morning, but today I drew the little cartoony versions I do of all the Manhattan Project scientists. I drew these for Ogden's first art project but I have no idea where that has gone to (Purther, where are they?) So here are these instead. I'm thinking about making a historical physics comic, since there are many important aspects in this era that are glossed over in school. Here they are thinking about something they like. Oppenheimer likes Hinduism, Teller likes hydrogen, Szilard likes baths, and Fermi likes aliens.
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Blog 18: 2-Hour Meeting Answer #3
Essential Question: Why is finding supersymmetric particles and important task for physicists to undertake?
Answer: The lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP,) if stable, is a very good candidate for Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs) or dark matter.
1. Supersymmetric neutralinos (gravitinos, axinos, singlinos, higgsinos, binos, winos, photinos, etc.) can be thermally produced in the early universe and leave exactly the right relic density to constitute the Cold Dark Matter of the universe.
2. Detecting supersymmetric dark matter may be the best way to find SUSY particles. SUSY particles are expected to be extremely heavy (reaching into the multi-TeV range) and thus are likely out of reach of collider physics. However, dark matter detection experiments (such as Ice Cube in Antarctica) can be specifically calibrated to find neutralinos.
3. There can be multiple possible models of SUSY dark matter, as different SUSY models yield different LSPs. For example, the Next-to-Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model yields an LSP called the singlino, which is a good candidate for dark matter should the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model become too constrained. In addition, it is possible for neutralino dark matter to be non thermally produced, as well as in a "mixed" state such as with axions.
I plan on taking my science project on neutralino dark matter to the science fair. I am interested in hearing feedback on it as well as what others think the most likely neutralino dark matter model is.
Jedamzik, Karsten and Maxim Pospelov. "Big Bang Nucleosynthesis and Particle Dark Matter." Cornell University Library, 11 Jun. 2009. Web. 21 Feb. 2013.
Answer: The lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP,) if stable, is a very good candidate for Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs) or dark matter.
1. Supersymmetric neutralinos (gravitinos, axinos, singlinos, higgsinos, binos, winos, photinos, etc.) can be thermally produced in the early universe and leave exactly the right relic density to constitute the Cold Dark Matter of the universe.
2. Detecting supersymmetric dark matter may be the best way to find SUSY particles. SUSY particles are expected to be extremely heavy (reaching into the multi-TeV range) and thus are likely out of reach of collider physics. However, dark matter detection experiments (such as Ice Cube in Antarctica) can be specifically calibrated to find neutralinos.
3. There can be multiple possible models of SUSY dark matter, as different SUSY models yield different LSPs. For example, the Next-to-Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model yields an LSP called the singlino, which is a good candidate for dark matter should the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model become too constrained. In addition, it is possible for neutralino dark matter to be non thermally produced, as well as in a "mixed" state such as with axions.
I plan on taking my science project on neutralino dark matter to the science fair. I am interested in hearing feedback on it as well as what others think the most likely neutralino dark matter model is.
Jedamzik, Karsten and Maxim Pospelov. "Big Bang Nucleosynthesis and Particle Dark Matter." Cornell University Library, 11 Jun. 2009. Web. 21 Feb. 2013.
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
Blog 16: 2-Hour Meeting Answer #2
Essential Question: Why is finding supersymmetric particles an important task for physicists to undertake?
Answer 2: Supersymmetry is the one of the only theories that can completely solve the hierarchy problem of the Standard Model.
1. The hierarchy problem is one of the biggest inconsistencies of the Standard Model. We have observed the mass of the Higgs Boson to be ~125 GeV. The trouble is that the mass should be much greater than that due to a phenomenon called "quantum corrections." Without some very tight fine-tuning between the quantum corrections and the regular mass, this seems impossible. However, physicists don't like unexplained fine-tunings.
2. The Higgs Boson will couple to the most massive particles in the Standard Model, thus most of the quantum corrections to its mass will come from those particles, such as the top quark, which is the heaviest Standard Model particle. Supersymmetry predicts the existence of a stop squark partner for the top quark. As it turns out, the corrections from the stop squark should cancel with those from the top quark, leaving just enough left over to give us the Higgs mass we see in nature.
![\Delta m_{H}^{2} = 2* \frac{\lambda_{S}}{16\pi^2} [\Lambda_{UV}^2+ ...].](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/0/a/2/0a2ccd5c4998ac5ee33bb920fd4fc0fe.png)
(Contributions from both-assume one negative and one positive contribution, where UV is the Planck scale.)
3. There isn't a theory that explains the hierarchy problem so cleanly and accurately. If supersymmetry doesn't exist, it is important that physicists begin work on another theory so we do not have any unexplained fine-tunings. Therefore it is important that we continue the search for supersymmetric particles, just in case we have to start work on another theory.
Source: Warped Passages by Lisa Randall. I could never really wrap my head around the hierarchy problem but she made it very clear and understandable, and she explains why supersymmetry is such a good solution for it.
I plan to bulk up on my knowledge of Quantum Field Theory, and on Richard Feynman's work. I never cared for Feynman as a person, but as Einstein would say, "There is no emotion in science!*" I want to be able to create my own Feynman diagrams so I can better understand them.
*Einstein didn't really say this.
Answer 2: Supersymmetry is the one of the only theories that can completely solve the hierarchy problem of the Standard Model.
1. The hierarchy problem is one of the biggest inconsistencies of the Standard Model. We have observed the mass of the Higgs Boson to be ~125 GeV. The trouble is that the mass should be much greater than that due to a phenomenon called "quantum corrections." Without some very tight fine-tuning between the quantum corrections and the regular mass, this seems impossible. However, physicists don't like unexplained fine-tunings.
2. The Higgs Boson will couple to the most massive particles in the Standard Model, thus most of the quantum corrections to its mass will come from those particles, such as the top quark, which is the heaviest Standard Model particle. Supersymmetry predicts the existence of a stop squark partner for the top quark. As it turns out, the corrections from the stop squark should cancel with those from the top quark, leaving just enough left over to give us the Higgs mass we see in nature.
(Contributions from both-assume one negative and one positive contribution, where UV is the Planck scale.)3. There isn't a theory that explains the hierarchy problem so cleanly and accurately. If supersymmetry doesn't exist, it is important that physicists begin work on another theory so we do not have any unexplained fine-tunings. Therefore it is important that we continue the search for supersymmetric particles, just in case we have to start work on another theory.
Source: Warped Passages by Lisa Randall. I could never really wrap my head around the hierarchy problem but she made it very clear and understandable, and she explains why supersymmetry is such a good solution for it.
I plan to bulk up on my knowledge of Quantum Field Theory, and on Richard Feynman's work. I never cared for Feynman as a person, but as Einstein would say, "There is no emotion in science!*" I want to be able to create my own Feynman diagrams so I can better understand them.
*Einstein didn't really say this.
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Blog 10: Senior Project Update
Independent Component: I will be taking my final for Physics 132 on Thursday. In addition, I am starting to build a Cloud Chamber as extra credit. Professor Sean Carroll at Caltech gave me the idea.
Research: I read this article a couple of weeks ago. Apparently, the LHC has observed particles called B mesons decaying into two particles called muons. These are ordinary particles, nothing special, but this decay hasn't been observed before. If supersymmetric particles are supposed to exist, this decay should happen way, way more often (so far, for every billion times they see a B meson decay, they only see it happen this way three times.) Ah, woe for my supersymmetric heart! But fear not, Professor Clifford Cheung of Caltech says this is not the end and does not rule out supersymmetry. I shall not abandon my science project because of this news.
(One of the Professors quoted in the article said the discovery was "really putting our supersymmetry colleagues in a spin." Heh. It's funny because particles have spin...sparticles have 1/2 spin...that's what makes them sparticles...I'm going to stop now.)
Proof: Well, shoot. Here is a picture of me watching "How the Universe Works" for more research.
Good on you, David Spergel.
The Cosmic Microwave Background. This is part of radio and television static. When you hear static you are listening to something that is ~14 billion years old!
Research: I read this article a couple of weeks ago. Apparently, the LHC has observed particles called B mesons decaying into two particles called muons. These are ordinary particles, nothing special, but this decay hasn't been observed before. If supersymmetric particles are supposed to exist, this decay should happen way, way more often (so far, for every billion times they see a B meson decay, they only see it happen this way three times.) Ah, woe for my supersymmetric heart! But fear not, Professor Clifford Cheung of Caltech says this is not the end and does not rule out supersymmetry. I shall not abandon my science project because of this news.
(One of the Professors quoted in the article said the discovery was "really putting our supersymmetry colleagues in a spin." Heh. It's funny because particles have spin...sparticles have 1/2 spin...that's what makes them sparticles...I'm going to stop now.)
Proof: Well, shoot. Here is a picture of me watching "How the Universe Works" for more research.
Good on you, David Spergel.
The Cosmic Microwave Background. This is part of radio and television static. When you hear static you are listening to something that is ~14 billion years old!
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Blog 9: Working EQ and Possible Answers
(Well, it's late. Oh joy.)
My working EQ during the presentation was "What is the most important unsolved problem between quantum and relativistic physics?"
This is way, way, way too general. All the answers I've found could have essential questions of their own. Now, my topic is technically particle physics, so I'm narrowing down the scope of my EQ considerably, likely to just the Standard Model and just one problem. For instance, if I were to pick quantum gravity, I would have an EQ such as this-"What experiment could most likely uncover the graviton and how?" Or something. I don't know yet. I think it will likely be something about my science project.
So far, I've found quantum gravity, vacuum energy, and the lack of a GUT (Grand Unified Theory) or a TOE (Theory of Everything) to be the best possible answers. So currently physics has no toes or guts. (Bad pun is bad.)
My working EQ during the presentation was "What is the most important unsolved problem between quantum and relativistic physics?"
This is way, way, way too general. All the answers I've found could have essential questions of their own. Now, my topic is technically particle physics, so I'm narrowing down the scope of my EQ considerably, likely to just the Standard Model and just one problem. For instance, if I were to pick quantum gravity, I would have an EQ such as this-"What experiment could most likely uncover the graviton and how?" Or something. I don't know yet. I think it will likely be something about my science project.
So far, I've found quantum gravity, vacuum energy, and the lack of a GUT (Grand Unified Theory) or a TOE (Theory of Everything) to be the best possible answers. So currently physics has no toes or guts. (Bad pun is bad.)
Thursday, September 6, 2012
Blog 2: Topic Choice
The late, great discoverer of quantum theory Max Planck once told a renowned physics professor that he wished to pursue the subject to "understand." Is this not true of all of us? We all desire understanding. It is, in part, what makes us human. It has allowed us to improve ourselves as we further our knowledge. I, like all people, am interested in understanding. I am also driven to contibute my own knowledge to that pool. This is why I have such an interest in theoretical physics and is why I have chosen it as my senior project.
People have often seemed to have a problem with my interest in and knowledge of the hard sciences. I attribute this to the fact that there are precious few women in physics, and that being an intelligent woman is often not considered (by girls and boys) to be an attractive quality. With my senior project, I plan on improving as an iPoly "citizen" by improving the iPoly community and the attitude toward science (especially amongst girls) as a whole. I would like that to be my footprint, since right now I'm just the girl who argues with the teachers.
Unfortunately, physics is often extremely difficult for laypeople to understand, and very difficult for physicists to explain it in a way that is not intimidating and does not involve a lot of seemingly arbitrary math. I think I intimidate people sometimes because I use big words and talk about a lot of broad subjects. I used to think it was funny that people were intimidated by me, but now I don't think it's so funny. With my senior project I aim to learn a way to truly help people understand. We need more laypeople who are scientifically literate (especially if they choose to go into politics or law) and I believe I could then apply the technique to helping people learn about a variety of topics I consider important.
I need to learn too though. Science is an excellent vehicle to bulk up confidence in variety of subjects, especially math, which I am not too confident in because I never had a really good teacher. My project is something I am interested but I feel will also allow me to gain more confidence in my math abilities going into college.
Finally, while my interest is in theoretical physics, not experimental physics (people are almost always exclusively one or the other) I do plan on using this as a vehicle to help me understand the technological side of physics, such as in early-Universe computer simulations or large particle detectors. I think with a respectable knowledge in experimental physics I will become a much better theorist and a more practical one.
People have often seemed to have a problem with my interest in and knowledge of the hard sciences. I attribute this to the fact that there are precious few women in physics, and that being an intelligent woman is often not considered (by girls and boys) to be an attractive quality. With my senior project, I plan on improving as an iPoly "citizen" by improving the iPoly community and the attitude toward science (especially amongst girls) as a whole. I would like that to be my footprint, since right now I'm just the girl who argues with the teachers.
Unfortunately, physics is often extremely difficult for laypeople to understand, and very difficult for physicists to explain it in a way that is not intimidating and does not involve a lot of seemingly arbitrary math. I think I intimidate people sometimes because I use big words and talk about a lot of broad subjects. I used to think it was funny that people were intimidated by me, but now I don't think it's so funny. With my senior project I aim to learn a way to truly help people understand. We need more laypeople who are scientifically literate (especially if they choose to go into politics or law) and I believe I could then apply the technique to helping people learn about a variety of topics I consider important.
I need to learn too though. Science is an excellent vehicle to bulk up confidence in variety of subjects, especially math, which I am not too confident in because I never had a really good teacher. My project is something I am interested but I feel will also allow me to gain more confidence in my math abilities going into college.
Finally, while my interest is in theoretical physics, not experimental physics (people are almost always exclusively one or the other) I do plan on using this as a vehicle to help me understand the technological side of physics, such as in early-Universe computer simulations or large particle detectors. I think with a respectable knowledge in experimental physics I will become a much better theorist and a more practical one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)