MAP

Monday, 16 February 2015

DON’T LOOK AT BLACK HOLES TOO CLOSELY, THEY MIGHT DISAPPEAR by VANESSA JANEK on FEBRUARY 6, 2015

2ND OPINION [by “theory of everything - on the basis of Dark Atom & Dark Energy”] ON  http://www.universetoday.com/118794/do-time-and-space-exist-at-the-smallest-scales/


“Now, a new interpretation …. space and time simply do not exist.”

2ND OPINION: Please refer my comment [dated 24th,Jan’2015] on  “space – time”
“it is imaginary thing for mathematical approach & application. The basic thing is DE & its derivatives from which the universe is made. They form an structure called …… from which whole universe is made up of.”


“Let’s start with something that is not in question.”

2ND OPINION: but DOUBTFUL

“according to the laws of physics, …. It cannot just disappear.”

2ND OPINION: fully AGREED according to “theory of everything-on the basis of DA & DE”

Why all of these bizarre paradoxes?... the elusive theory of everything.

2ND OPINION: since april’2013 all my comment in my blog & other places like international science blogs/periodical/magazine etc are on the basis of “theory of everything on the basis of DA & DE”

Dated 24th, Jan’15
Dated 20th, June’13
Dated 15th, Feb.’14
Dated 21st , June’13
Dated 15th, June’13


We’ve come a long way in 13.8 billion years; but despite our impressively extensive understanding of the Universe, there are still a few strings left untied. For one, there is the oft-cited disconnect between general relativity, the physics of the very large, and quantum mechanics, the physics of the very small. Then there is problematic fate of a particle’s intrinsic information after it falls into a black hole. Now, a new interpretation of fundamental physics attempts to solve both of these conundrums by making a daring claim: at certain scales, space and time simply do not exist.
Let’s start with something that is not in question. Thanks to Einstein’s theory of special relativity, we can all agree that the speed of light is constant for all observers. We can also agree that, if you’re not a photon, approaching light speed comes with some pretty funky rules – namely, anyone watching you will see your length compress and your watch slow down.
But the slowing of time also occurs near gravitationally potent objects, which are described by general relativity. So if you happen to be sight-seeing in the center of the Milky Way and you make the regrettable decision to get too close to our supermassive black hole’s event horizon (more sinisterly known as its point-of-no-return), anyone observing you will also see your watch slow down. In fact, he or she will witness your motion toward the event horizon slow dramatically over an infiniteamount of time; that is, from your now-traumatized friend’s perspective, you never actually cross the event horizon. You, however, will feel no difference in the progression of time as you fall past this invisible barrier, soon to be spaghettified by the black hole’s immense gravity.
So, who is “correct”? Relativity dictates that each observer’s point of view is equally valid; but in this situation, you can’t both be right. Do you face your demise in the heart of a black hole, or don’t you? (Note: This isn’t strictly a paradox, but intuitively, it feels a little sticky.)
And there is an additional, bigger problem. A black hole’s event horizon is thought to give rise to Hawking radiation, a kind of escaping energy that will eventually lead to both the evaporation of the black hole and the destruction of all of the matter and energy that was once held inside of it. This concept has black hole physicists scratching their heads. Because according to the laws of physics, all of the intrinsic information about a particle or system (namely, the quantum wavefunction) must be conserved. It cannot just disappear.
Why all of these bizarre paradoxes? Because black holes exist in the nebulous space where a singularity meets general relativity – fertile, yet untapped ground for the elusive theory of everything.
Enter two interesting, yet controversial concepts: doubly special relativity and gravity’s rainbow.
Just as the speed of light is a universally agreed-upon constant in special relativity, so is the Planck energy in doubly special relativity (DSR). In DSR, this value (1.22 x 1019 GeV) is the maximum energy (and thus, the maximum mass) that a particle can have in our Universe.
Two important consequences of DSR’s maximum energy value are minimum units of time and space. That is, regardless of whether you are moving or stationary, in empty space or near a black hole, you will agree that classical space breaks down at distances shorter than the Planck length (1.6 x 10-35 m) and classical time breaks down at moments briefer than the Planck time (5.4 x 10-44 sec).
In other words, spacetime is discrete. It exists in indivisible (albeit vanishingly small) units. Quantum below, classical above. Add general relativity into the picture, and you get the theory of gravity’s rainbow.
Physicists Ahmed Farag Ali, Mir Faizal, and Barun Majumder believe that these theories can be used to explain away the aforementioned black hole conundrums – both your controversial spaghettification and the information paradox. How? According to DSR and gravity’s rainbow, in regions smaller than 1.6 x 10-35 m and at times shorter than 5.4 x 10-44 sec… the Universe as we know it simply does not exist.
“In gravity’s rainbow, space does not exist below a certain minimum length, and time does not exist below a certain minimum time interval,” explained Ali, who, along with Faizal and Majumder, authored a paper on this topic that was published last month. “So, all objects existing in space and occurring at a time do not exist below that length and time interval [which are associated with the Planck scale].”
Luckily for us, every particle we know of, and thus every particle we are made of, is much larger than the Planck length and endures for much longer than the Planck time. So – phew! – you and I and everything we see and know can go on existing. (Just don’t probe too deeply.)
The event horizon of a black hole, however, is a different story. After all, the event horizon isn’t made of particles. It is pure spacetime. And according to Ali and his colleagues, if you could observe it on extremely short time or distance scales, it would cease to have meaning. It wouldn’t be a point-of-no-return at all. In their view, the paradox only arises when you treat spacetime as continuous – without minimum units of length and time.
“As the information paradox depends on the existence of the event horizon, and an event horizon like all objects does not exist below a certain length and time interval, then there is no absolute information paradox in gravity’s rainbow. The absence of an effective horizon means that there is nothing absolutely stopping information from going out of the black hole,” concluded Ali.
No absolute event horizon, no information paradox.
And what of your spaghettification within the black hole? Again, it depends on the scale at which you choose to analyze your situation. In gravity’s rainbow, spacetime is discrete; therefore, the mathematics reveal that both you (the doomed in-faller) and your observer will witness your demise within a finite length of time. But in the current formulation of general relativity, where spacetime is described as continuous, the paradox arises. The in-faller, well, falls in; meanwhile, the observer never sees the in-faller pass the event horizon.
“The most important lesson from this paper is that space and time exist only beyond a certain scale,” said Ali. “There is no space and time below that scale. Hence, it is meaningless to define particles, matter, or any object, including black holes, that exist in space and time below that scale. Thus, as long as we keep ourselves confined to the scales at which both space and time exist, we get sensible physical answers. However, when we try to ask questions at length and time intervals that are below the scales at which space and time exist, we end up getting paradoxes and problems.”

To recap: if spacetime continues on arbitrarily small scales, the paradoxes remain. If, however, gravity’s rainbow is correct and the Planck length and the Planck time are the smallest unit of space and time that fundamentally exist, we’re in the clear… at least, mathematically speaking. Unfortunately, the Planck scales are far too tiny for our measly modern particle colliders to probe. So, at least for now, this work provides yet another purely theoretical result.

HOW IRON FEELS THE HEAT Feb 13, 2015 by Jessica Stoller-Conrad

2ND OPINION [by “theory of everything - on the basis of Dark Atom & Dark Energy”] ON  http://phys.org/news/2015-02-iron.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=splt-item&utm_campaign=daily-nwletter

"As you heat up a piece of iron, the arrangement of the iron atoms changes several times before melting.”

2ND OPINION: AGREED, but not only IRON. Depends on the Heating process.

“But the details of just how and why iron takes on so many different forms have remained a mystery. Recent work at Caltech in the Division of Engineering and Applied Science, however, provides evidence for how iron's magnetism plays a role in this curious property—an understanding that could help researchers develop better and stronger steel..“

2ND OPINION: It is not a mystery, because how & why can be easily explained by the “theory of everything – on the basis of Dark energy & dark matter”
Magnetism is not the primary reason of this property.
Not only good iron but  an alloy for super high speed experiment & spacecraft can be formed.


"Humans have been working with regular old iron for thousands of years, but this is a piece about its thermodynamics that no one has ever really understood," says Brent Fultz, the Barbara and Stanley R. Rawn, Jr., Professor of Materials Science and Applied Physics.“

“At room temperature, the iron atoms are in an unusual loosely packed open arrangement; as iron is heated past 912 degrees Celsius, the atoms become more closely packed before loosening again at 1,394 degrees Celsius and ultimately melting at 1,538 degrees Celsius”

2ND OPINION: Interaction of dark atom, white atom, energy cover & dark energy can explain this curious property.

“By studying how these vibrations change as the temperature goes up and magnetism is lost, the researchers hoped to learn more about what is driving these structural rearrangements.”

2ND OPINION: basically DE is responsible


As you heat up a piece of iron, the arrangement of the iron atoms changes several times before melting. This unusual behavior is one reason why steel, in which iron plays a starring role, is so sturdy and ubiquitous in everything from teapots to skyscrapers. But the details of just how and why iron takes on so many different forms have remained a mystery. Recent work at Caltech in the Division of Engineering and Applied Science, however, provides evidence for how iron's magnetism plays a role in this curious property—an understanding that could help researchers develop better and stronger steel.

"Humans have been working with regular old iron for thousands of years, but this is a piece about its thermodynamics that no one has ever really understood," says Brent Fultz, the Barbara and Stanley R.
Rawn, Jr., Professor of Materials Science and Applied Physics.
The laws of thermodynamics govern the natural behavior of materials, such as the temperature at which water boils and the timing of chemical reactions. These same principles also determine how atoms in solids are arranged, and in the case of iron, nature changes its mind several times at high temperatures. At room temperature, the iron atoms are in an unusual loosely packed open arrangement; as iron is heated past 912 degrees Celsius, the atoms become more closely packed before loosening again at 1,394 degrees Celsius and ultimately melting at 1,538 degrees Celsius.
Iron is magnetic at room temperature, and previous work predicted that iron's magnetism favors its open structure at low temperatures, but at 770 degrees Celsius iron loses its magnetism. However, iron maintains its open structure for more than a hundred degrees beyond this magnetic transition. This led the researchers to believe that there must be something else contributing to iron's unusual thermodynamic properties.
For this missing link, graduate student Lisa Mauger and her colleagues needed to turn up the heat. Solids store heat as small atomic vibrations—vibrations that create disorder, or entropy. At high temperatures, entropy dominates thermodynamics, and atomic vibrations are the largest source of entropy in iron. By studying how these vibrations change as the temperature goes up and magnetism is lost, the researchers hoped to learn more about what is driving these structural rearrangements.
To do this, the team took its samples of iron to the High Pressure Collaborative Access Team beamline of the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory in Argonne, Illinois. This synchrotron facility produces intense flashes of x-rays that can be tuned to detect the quantum particles of atomic vibration—called phonon excitations—in iron.
When coupling these vibrational measurements with previously known data about the magnetic behavior of iron at these temperatures, the researchers found that iron's vibrational entropy was much larger than originally suspected. In fact, the excess was similar to the entropy contribution from magnetism—suggesting that magnetism and atomic vibrations interact synergistically at moderate temperatures. This excess entropy increases the stability of the iron's open structure even as the sample is heated past the magnetic transition.
The technique allowed the researchers to conclude, experimentally and for the first time, that magnons—the quantum particles of electron spin (magnetism)—and phonons interact to increase iron's stability at high temperatures.
Because the Caltech group's measurements matched up with the theoretical calculations that were simultaneously being developed by collaborators in the laboratory of Jörg Neugebauer at the Max-Planck-Institut für Eisenforschung GmbH (MPIE), Mauger's results also contributed to the validation of a new computational model.
"It has long been speculated that the structural stability of iron is strongly related to an inherent coupling between magnetism and atomic motion," says Fritz Körmann, postdoctoral fellow at MPIE and the first author on the computational paper. "Actually finding this coupling, and that the data of our experimental colleagues and our own computational results are in such an excellent agreement, was indeed an exciting moment."
"Only by combining methods and expertise from various scientific fields such as quantum mechanics, statistical mechanics, and thermodynamics, and by using incredibly powerful supercomputers, it became possible to describe the complex dynamic phenomena taking place inside one of the technologically most used structural materials," says Neugebauer. "The newly gained insight of how thermodynamic stability is realized in iron will help to make the design of new steels more systematic."
For thousands of years, metallurgists have been working to make stronger steels in much the same way that you'd try to develop a recipe for the world's best cookie: guess and check. Steel begins with a base of standard ingredients—iron and carbon—much like a basic cookie batter begins with flour and butter. And just as you'd customize a cookie recipe by varying the amounts of other ingredients like spices and nuts, the properties of steel can be tuned by adding varying amounts of other elements, such as chromium and nickel.
With a better computational model for the thermodynamics of iron at different temperatures—one that takes into account the effects of both magnetism and atomic vibrations—metallurgists will now be able to more accurately predict the thermodynamic properties of iron alloys as they alter their recipes.
The experimental work was published in a paper titled "Nonharmonic Phonons in α-Iron at High Temperatures," in the journal Physical Review B. In addition to Fultz and first author Mauger, other Caltech coauthors include Jorge Alberto Muñoz (PhD '13) and graduate student Sally June Tracy. The computational paper, "Temperature Dependent Magnon-Phonon Coupling in bcc Fe from Theory and Experiment," was coauthored by Fultz and Mauger, led by researchers at the Max Planck Institute, and published in the journal Physical Review Letters.

SCIENTISTS GET FIRST GLIMPSE OF A CHEMICAL BOND BEING BORN FEB 12, 2015

2ND OPINION [by “theory of everything - on the basis of Dark Atom & Dark Energy”] ON  http://phys.org/news/2015-02-scientists-glimpse-chemical-bond-born.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=weekly-nwletter

"This is the very core of all chemistry. It's what we consider a Holy Grail, because it controls chemical reactivity," said Anders Nilsson,

2ND OPINION: FULLY AGREED

"But because so few molecules inhabit this transition state at any given moment, no one thought we'd ever be able to see it.“

2ND OPINION: All atoms, molecules, compound & matter shows such a attraction.
It may be true that very few molecules inhabit this transition in this experiment but it can be enhanced by suitable condition.
It can be explained on the basis of dark energy & dark atom. Our space time model is not a universal model because it is not only unable to explain the quantum level phenomenon but also fail in case of black hole. Whole universe is a 4 D network of DA, WA & DE.


"First the oxygen atoms get activated, and a little later the carbon monoxide gets activated," Nilsson said. "They start to vibrate, move around a little bit. Then, after about a trillionth of a second, they start to collide and form these transition states.“

2ND OPINION: There is a reason of activation of oxygen before CO. They vibrate because there is a changed in the … of immediate surrounding.

“The researchers were surprised to see so many of the reactants enter the transition state - and equally surprised to discover that only a small fraction of them go on to form stable carbon dioxide. The rest break apart again.”


2ND OPINION: It depends on the many factors likes the size & orientation of the atoms, molecules, compounds or matter. It also depend on the direction of impact/collision and other parameters.


Scientists have used an X-ray laser at the Department of Energy's SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory to get the first glimpse of the transition state where two atoms begin to form a weak bond on the way to becoming a molecule.
This fundamental advance, reported Feb. 12 in Science Express and long thought impossible, will have a profound impact on the understanding of how chemical reactions take place and on efforts to design reactions that generate energy, create new products and fertilize crops more efficiently.
"This is the very core of all chemistry. It's what we consider a Holy Grail, because it controls chemical reactivity," said Anders Nilsson, a professor at the SLAC/Stanford SUNCAT Center for Interface Science and Catalysis and at Stockholm University who led the research. "But because so few molecules inhabit this transition state at any given moment, no one thought we'd ever be able to see it."
Bright, Fast Laser Pulses Achieve the Impossible
The experiments took place at SLAC's Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS), a DOE Office of Science User Facility. Its brilliant, strobe-like X-ray laser pulses are short enough to illuminate atoms and molecules and fast enough to watch chemical reactions unfold in a way never possible before.
Researchers used LCLS to study the same reaction that neutralizes carbon monoxide (CO) from car exhaust in a catalytic converter. The reaction takes place on the surface of a catalyst, which grabs CO and oxygen atoms and holds them next to each other so they pair up more easily to form carbon dioxide.
In the SLAC experiments, researchers attached CO and oxygen atoms to the surface of a ruthenium catalyst and got reactions going with a pulse from an optical laser. The pulse heated the catalyst to 2,000 kelvins - more than 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit - and set the attached chemicals vibrating, greatly increasing the chance that they would knock into each other and connect.
The team was able to observe this process with X-ray laser pulses from LCLS, which detected changes in the arrangement of the atoms' electrons - subtle signs of bond formation - that occurred in mere femtoseconds, or quadrillionths of a second.

 "First the 
oxygen atoms get activated, and a little later the carbon monoxide gets activated," Nilsson said. "They start to vibrate, move around a little bit. Then, after about a trillionth of a second, they start to collide and form these transition states."
'Rolling Marbles Uphill'
The researchers were surprised to see so many of the reactants enter the transition state - and equally surprised to discover that only a small fraction of them go on to form stable carbon dioxide. The rest break apart again.
"It's as if you are rolling marbles up a hill, and most of the marbles that make it to the top roll back down again," Nilsson said. "What we are seeing is that many attempts are made, but very few reactions continue to the final product. We have a lot to do to understand in detail what we have seen here."
Theory played a key role in the experiments, allowing the team to predict what would happen and get a good idea of what to look for. "This is a super-interesting avenue for theoretical chemists. It's going to open up a completely new field," said report co-author Frank Abild-Pedersen of SLAC and SUNCAT.
A team led by Associate Professor Henrik Öström at Stockholm University did initial studies of how to trigger the reactions with the optical laser. Theoretical spectra were computed under the leadership of Stockholm Professor Lars G.M. Pettersson, a longtime collaborator with Nilsson.
Preliminary experiments at SLAC's Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource (SSRL), another DOE Office of Science User Facility, also proved crucial. Led by SSRL's Hirohito Ogasawara and SUNCAT's Jerry LaRue, they measured the characteristics of the chemical reactants with an intense X-ray beam so researchers would be sure to identify everything correctly at the LCLS, where beam time is much more scarce. "Without SSRL this would not have worked," Nilsson said.
The team is already starting to measure transition states in other catalytic reactions that generate chemicals important to industry.
"This is extremely important, as it provides insight into the scientific basis for rules that allow us to design new catalysts," said SUNCAT Director and co-author Jens N&ostroke;rskov.
More information: "Probing the Transition State Region in Catalytic CO Oxidation on Ru," H. Öström et al., Science, 12 February 2015 DOI: 10.1126/science.1261747
Journal reference: Science   Science Express