But my own PhD thesis is a kind of different tale altogether. For my work there is no CP Violation.
In CP Violation two leptons (electrons and positrons are leptons) are imparted quite good amount of energy and made to collide against each other. Thus just like in CERN lab, there is a much smaller tunnel at the Tsukuba facility, called an accelerator-detector facility. In this facility an electron and positron pairs are given enough energy and made to circle in opposite direction.
When they collide, they are made to do so, right inside the detector. They produce pairs of B-mesons. The B-meson one and two, they are almost at rest when they are produced, in the lab frame of reference. But the matter of fact is the B-mesons are produced from what are called Upsilon (4S) mesons.
These Upsilons are called resonances, and they are highly unstable (all resonances are short lived elementary particles). So they turn into B-mesons as soon as they are created. More…
What happens when some UV falls on biological molecules? (or any kind) some of these molecules like the wooden pole absorb the energy and there still remains energy which they can emit as visible light. So the UV light kicks the molecules and the molecules in turn emit visible light. This implies that the UV wavelength that the molecules absorbed energy at are very small compared to the wavelength at which they emit visible light. This is always the case.
When we say some materials are fluorescent it means they absorbed higher energy and emitted lower energy radiations of colorful light.
But this has a great deal of application apart from its theoretical interest. More…
Define an Hour Circle.
Its a bit tricky to define some astronomical parameters and not run into innocent looking misrepresentations of facts. One needs to cool his amber more times than there are parameters, then one gets a feel where and how to begin and give a good description.
Hour Circle is a GREAT Circle, on a celestial sphere ** that, at the same time, passes through one of the celestial poles. Hence it passes through both of the celestial poles*.
A great circle is a circle that passes on a sphere, so that its radius (or diameter) equals to the radius (or diameter ) of that sphere.
If the great circle goes through one of the poles (– so both poles as an imminent condition of this definition) its also called a meridian and this circles’s angular reference wrt one of all possible meridians is called a longitude angle, or simply longitude. More…
Astrology is the blind belief that stars change our fate — pun; like the blind belief wives change our personality. This is where Physics becomes a paraphernalia of whim, cultivated over the ages, to bring solace in seeking ignorance as a means of existential glory.
I just checked some scientific terms, in regards to how they have been made to work like paraphernalia to produce different astrological system. I was not shocked that Indians have kept advanced strides in one branch of knowledge — or the lack-thereof; Astrology.
Guess what? Hindu Astrology is a Sidereal Astrology, hence much advance than Western Astrology, which is a tropical astrology. This we have often taken boastfully, to mean that Indian science is advanced and far-reaching, even from the times of Vedas, but the simple facts — of my conviction, are; we have been manipulative from a very early time in our civilization’s evolution.
We just took science to produce religion. We also took religion to produce myth, and myth to produce social customs and took social customs to downplay science. Why else is “western” science advanced and we are merely a laggard participant in its various glorification.
— Of-course I don’t have words of solace to those who disagree, if like kids we assign ourselves the fancy of winning every sports, that we do not even take part in, because our parents will succumb to that whimsical demand of ours, it wouldn’t work towards science, here we have to work nonetheless, take part in each and every detail and each and every aspect, its not sufficient or even necessary to just downplay the impact of criticism. More…
The quality of a scientific paper are not ZERO if citation is zero. Perhaps we need to define two parameters, quality and significance of scientific communication. Quality; a well done research in the best traditions and methods available. Significance; the outreach of the paper to bring effect into others work and others understanding toward the subject matter.
While there will always be a downside to both parameters, citation reflects the significance (and quality as much as it correlated to significance) of a paper. More…
A very few particles (out of 1000s) are named after scientists, eg the so called mu meson was called a Yukawa Meson, although it turned out to be a misnomer. Mu-meson was found to be a lepton, rather than a meson, as was thought by Yukawa and others.
Now called Muon it belongs in the same class that an electron belongs to, leptons, which are both Fermions. Hence initially thought to be a Boson (because all mesons would be bosons) the muon is actually a Fermion (all leptons are Fermions).
Should we say; initially muon was named after Bose, then correctly; after Fermi? That would be HOKUM. Right thing would be to say; it was named after Hideki Yukawa (wrongly as a meson or boson) then it has been named as muon which is now a Fermion. But its still named after Yukawa; given to a misnomer-correction. It can be called Yukawa-Lepton MUON (instead of Yukawa Meson Mu).
Nowhere Bose or Fermi have been the scientists after whom this particle has been named. Bose and Fermi are scientists after whom a principle of physics or nature has been named but not a particle. That would clear any mischievous air. More…