The 2008 Nobel Prize in Physics.

Philosophy Forums Science, Technology, and Math
1

The 2008 Nobel Prize in Physics.

Fermilab and symmetry breaking
Source:
symmetrymagazine.org/breakin … -breaking/

My comment.
Quotations from: Fermilab and symmetry breaking

Yoichiro Nambu, Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa won the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physics for their work on symmetry breaking in the world of elementary particles and forces.
Nambu’s formulation of symmetry breaking allows physicists to explain why there is matter in the universe,
while the work of Kobayashi and Maskawa provides the theoretical tools to explain why the universe contains no antimatter.
When physicists discuss symmetries, they refer to things that appear identical.
Symmetry breaking is a way of explaining why things look different from each other.
=========.
Sadovnik.
How is possible to speak about antimatter if nobody knows what antimatter is?
==========.
From the combination of spontaneous symmetry breaking and electroweak
unification comes an exciting prediction: a new particle called the Higgs boson.
The Higgs is the hammer that breaks the symmetry and gives different particles
different masses.
============ ===.
Sadovnik.
Does “the combination of spontaneous symmetry” describe
Physical or pure Mathematical process?
Does anybody find “ the Higgs boson “?
=========.

Currently, close to a thousand physicists from around the world are searching
for the Higgs boson in collisions produced by the Tevatron accelerator at Fermilab.
Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa formulated a mechanism to explain symmetry breaking between matter and antimatter, typically called CP violation.
============ ===.
Sadovnik.
This mechanism explains symmetry breaking between “matter and antimatter”,
between things which we don’t know.
==========.
In 1963, Nicola Cabibbo made a modification to Enrico Fermi’s theory of the weak interactions to explain the observed decay rates of heavy quarks into light quarks. Cabibbo showed that the strength of the weak force differs for different quarks.
Kobayashi and Maskawa expanded upon these ideas and made further modifications to allow for a difference in the interactions between quarks and those between antiquarks.
The combined picture, the Cabbibo-Kobayashi- Maskawa matrix, describes all the interactions of quarks.
The CKM picture of the universe allows for the difference in the behavior of matter and antimatter that allowed matter to survive after the Big Bang, while antimatter disappeared from the universe.
============ ====.
Sadovnik.
Nobody saw quark.
Comment:
Years ago, I attended a lecture at Caltech by Gell-Mann in which he
explained why he developed the THEORY of the quark. He was looking for
a common denomenator to the atomic zoo – a common denominator of
characteristics. He found some (3) and didn’t know what they really
were so he called them Quarks. Later he found more, so he had 6. From
there the theory grew like topsey and develped colors – BECAUSE THEY
DIDN’T KNOW WHAT THE HELL THEY WERE. Some theory.
(Then there’s “up” “down” — and I’m waiting for “sideways” :slight_smile: )
The quark has never been isolated. So instead of admitting there was no
such thing, it was pronounced that it could not escape the nucleus. How
convenient…
Bill uses as an argument that the rest of humanity believes in the
quark. Humanity believed in Ptolemy’s universe for FOURTEEN CENTURIES.
And more recently, practically all of humanity celebrated New Year 2000
as the beginning of a new milleniuim while the FACT is the new
millenium started with the year 2001.
“Humanity” can be very stupid at times.
A more apropos story for the non-existent quarks is the fable about the
King who wore no clothes. Everybody commented on how COLORFUL his
clothes were (the same colors as have quarks) but, alas, the king was
naked.
If anyone wants to read a theory of the sub-particle structure of the
universe, they can go to wbabin. net (The General Science
Journal) --find the list of authors pull down – click on Vertner
Vergon and read the monograph, “On the Quantum as a Physical Entity”.

VERGON

Is “the Big Bang “ real and complete theory?
============ ====.
Besides helping to explain the absence of antimatter, Kobayashi and Maskawa’s
theories make many other predictions that experimental discoveries
at Fermilab have shown to be true.
The KM mechanism predicted the existence of a third generation of elementary particles.
Of the particles in this third generation, 75 percent have been discovered at Fermilab: the bottom quark, the top quark, and the tau neutrino.
==========.
Sadovnik.
So, we must search new “a third generation of elementary particles. “
My opinion.

In 1906, Rutherford studied internal structure of atoms,
bombarding them with high energy a- particles.
This idea helped him understand the structure of atom.
But the clever Devil interfered and gave advice to physicists
to enlarge the target. Bomb them!
And physicist created huge cannon-accelerators of particles.
And they began to bomb micro particles in the vacuum, in hoping
to understand their inner structure. And they were surprised with
the results of this bombing. Several hundreds of completely new
strange particles appeared. They lived a very little time and do not
relate to our world. Our Earth needs its real constants of nature.
But this was forgotten.
What God carefully created, is destroyed in accelerators.
And they are proud of that. They say: we study the inner structure
of the particles. The clever and artful Devil is glad. He again has deceived man.
Physicist think, that an accelerator - is first of all the presence of huge energy.
And the Devil laughs. He knows, that an accelerator - is first of all the Vacuum.
But this, he has withheld from man.
He has not explained that the Vacuum is infinite and inexhaustible.
And in infinity there is contained an infinite variety of particles.
And by bombing the vacuum, one can find centaurs and sphinxes.
But my God, save us from their presence on Earth.
========= … ========.
Rutherford was right.
His followers are mistaken.
Why?
Imagine, that I want to plant a small apple- tree.
For this purpose I shall dig out a hole of 1 meter width and 1,20 m depth.
It is normal.
But if to plant a small apple- tree, I shall begin to dig
a base for a huge building (skyscraper) ,
or if to begin drill ground with 10 km. depth,
will you call me a normal man?
========== … ============ ===.
Imagine a man who breaks watches on the wall.
And then he tries to understand the mechanism of the watches
by thrown cogwheels, springs and small screws.
Does he have many chances to succeed?
As many as the scientists have who aspire to understand
the inner structure of electron by breaking them into accelerators.
If not take into account the initial conditions of Genesis,
the fantasies of the scientists may be unlimited.
========== . ======== .
The Nature works very economical.
For example, biologists know 100 ( hundred ) kinds of
amino acids. But only 20 ( twenty) kinds of amino acids
are suitable to produce molecules of protein, from which all
different cells created on our planet. What are about another
80 % of amino acids? They are dead end of evolution.
The physicists found many ( 1000 ) new elementary particles in
accelerators. But we need only one ( 1) electron and one (1 )
proton to create first atom, to begin to create the Nature.
All another elementary particles (mesons, muons , bosons, taus,
all their girlfriends - antiparticles, all quarks and antiquarks…etc)
are dead end of evolution.
============ .
What was before - “ the big bang” or the vacuum ?
The physicists created “ Europe ’s Large Hadron Colider “
Please, look at how our physicists made this accelerator.
They made the vacuum and after they generated a big reaction
between two colliding particles in some small imitation of the
“big bang”. They didn’t make this process in the reverse.
So, what was prior in the Universe: “ big bang” or vacuum?
============ ========= ======…
The Universe as whole is Vacuum, first of all.
========.

In 1964, Cronin and Fitch discovered CP violation in K mesons. The KM mechanism, formulated to explain Cronin and Fitch’s discovery, also predicted still further differences in the way matter and antimatter relate to each other. This led to the discovery of a new type of CP violation in kaons at Fermilab and to the discovery of matter-antimatter oscillations in Bs mesons at the Tevatron. Another prediction pointed to a new way to produce heavy particles, a mechanism also discovered at Tevatron experiments through the observation of single top quarks.
As in the case of matter generation, physicists expect to find the Higgs boson at the heart of matter–antimatter asymmetry. With a lot of work and a little luck, the Higgs boson may be the next great discovery at Fermilab to grow out of the work of these latest Nobel laureates and many other great physicists of our times.
============ =======.
Sadovnik.
Now mathematics goes ahead of science and physics follows it.
Mathematicians carry the posters: “Forward to abstraction”,
“Forward to the absurd” and we all follow them.
We march bravely on the dinosaur’s path.
============ ====.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.

============ ====.
socratus.com
wbabin.net
wbabin.net/comments/sadovnik.htm
wbabin.net/physics/sadovnik.pdf

2

AND the australian philosopher has shown science ends in meaninglessness ie self contradiction
gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/bo … ience4.pdf

so much for symmetry breaking and their explanations of the universe

3

another incarnation of that ‘legend in his own mind’, eh (lady) Colin?
Hard toppling giants for fame when you’re a pipsqueak, eh?
Pffft!

4

instead of name calling
why not tells us what is wrong with colin leslie deans arguments and examples for the meaninglessness of science

5

Nah. You find meaning and meaningless as you do.

If science is truly meaningless to you, I imagine that you do not go to doctors, do not drive a vehicle of any sort, use no electric appliances, no computers or electronic devices of any sort, etc… etc… If you do, you are disingenuous and a fraud. Your behavior belies your assertion of the ‘meaningless’ of science. You display the ‘meaning’ that you find in your use of the products of science!

I have been on this merry-go-round before, your dishonesty and self-aggrandizement inspires no response. If there is any ‘value’ in that which you are selling, I’m unwilling to dig through all the egoic bullshirt to find it. If you are not dean (and I don’t believe that you are not) then you must be his prostate! Why do you use different names to return to repeat the same old refuted crap? And you want to engage me? I don’t think so. I’m sure that you can scam others into your egoic game, but, for me, that bird don’t fly! Perhaps you can put one over on me in your next ‘incarnation’. I won’t be used like that.

Yes, science has had it’s ‘limitations’ and errors, many until quantum has provided a ‘critical update’, but you are going waaaay off the scale in your ‘response’; baby, bathwater, tub, everything. I guess that if you actually manage to topple a giant or two, then that might elevate your status in the scientific community and your own mind/ego. But your lack of ‘tools’ to do so, so far, gives the impression of a mouse attacking a lion because of envy and poor self-esteem. The peaceful lion doesn’t even know that he is being attacked.
Sorry, but you’ll have to continue your ‘campaign’ without my assistance.
Best of luck on your endeavor!
Perhaps the next Nobel Prize will be awarded to you, inspiring a whole new generation of ‘mice’ at your feet…
Perhaps…
But, I’m not holding my breath…
Peace

6

where is your refutation of

if you cant refut this then colin leslie dean stands victorous

7

Apples banana orange macadamia nuts, and thus a triumvirate of minotaur rule the world.

Refute me or I stand victorious.

8

Ladyjane, do not jack this thread. You have plenty of other threads dedicated to CLD, it isn’t necessary to turn every mention of science into a debate about meaninglessness.

9

Dr. Nambu’s work is very interesting. The following discussion is from the New York Times:

Ever since Galileo, physicists have been guided in their quest for the ultimate laws of nature by the search for symmetries, or properties of nature that appear the same under different circumstances. “It’s the lamppost we search under,” said Michael Turner, an astrophysicist at the University of Chicago.
One example of an obvious symmetry is a snowflake, which looks the same when you rotate it one-sixth of a turn. Another is Einstein’s theory of relativity, which says the laws of physics are the same no matter what speed. However, in the 1960s, Dr. Nambu, inspired by studies of superconductivity, suggested that some symmetries in the laws of elementary particle physics might be hidden, or “broken” in actual practice. “You have to look for symmetries even when you can’t see them,” Dr. Turner said.
The principle of symmetry breaking is now embedded in all of modern particle physics. The $8 billion Large Hadron Collider, a giant particle accelerator soon to go into operation outside Geneva, was designed largely to find a particle known as the Higgs boson, which is theorized to be responsible for breaking the symmetry between electromagnetism and the so-called weak nuclear force, imparting mass to many particles that in theory are massless.
Imagine a pencil balanced on its point on a table — one of physicists’ favorite examples. To the pencil while it is still on its point, all directions along the table are the same. But the standing pencil is unstable and will eventually fall onto the table pointing in only one direction.
Applying this notion to a puzzle in the subatomic realm, Dr. Nambu explained why a particle known as the pion, which carries the strong nuclear force that holds atomic nuclei together, was much lighter than the protons and neutrons inside it. If it were not so light, the strong force would not extend far enough to stick nuclei heavier than hydrogen together, said Daniel Friedan, a physicist at Rutgers.
The fact that the pion is light, he said, explains why there is a variety of atoms in the world. “There is a variety of atoms because there is a variety of nuclei,” Dr. Friedan wrote in an e-mail message.
In 1972, Dr. Kobayashi and Dr. Maskawa, extending work by the Italian physicist Nicola Cabibbo, showed that if there were three generations of the elementary particles called quarks, the constituents of protons and neutrons, the principle of symmetry breaking would explain a puzzling asymmetry known as CP violation.
At the time, only three kinds of quarks were known: the up and down quarks, which make up most ordinary matter, and the strange quark. In 1974, the so-called charmed quarks were discovered. The last pair, the bottom and top quarks, were discovered in 1977 and 1994, completing the three generations of two quarks each predicted by Dr. Kobayashi and Dr. Maskawa.
The CP violation — C and P stand for charge and parity, or “handedness” — was discovered in 1964 by the American physicists James W. Cronin and Val L. Fitch — a discovery that also won a Nobel Prize. Until then, physicists had assumed that exchanging positive for negative and left-handed for right-handed in the equations of elementary particles would result in the same answer.
The fact that nature operates otherwise, physicists hope, is a step toward explaining why the universe is made of matter and not antimatter, one of the questions that the Large Hadron Collider is also designed to explore.

10

From George Johnson and John Horgan on Bloggingheads.com I picked up some ideas about broken symmetry which is also called hidden symmetry. As a metaphor
imagine you pick up a quartz crystal or fool’s gold. It’s very geometric–made up of little cubes or little tetrahedron. Yet the symmetry is flawed. It’s coming out at weird angles. At first it looks like a perfect geometric cube. Then you look closer and there are all these flaws in it like a broken edges. This would be like a macroscopic manifestation of the idea of broken symmetry. Deep down the universe is symmetrical and mathematical. But in coming to fruition this harmony becomes flawed and you have work to recover it from the effects of randomness.

One of the great story-lines in physics over the last 50 or 60 years is that reality is thought to have begun in a perfectly symmetrical state with a single force single/ particle. It was all just one and then somehow it got smashed to smithereens. The universe cooled and it shattered into four different forces. It’s a very gnostic idea. The Kabbalah, a jewish mystical writing, also has this idea of reality being a perfectly symmetrical divine force that somehow goes wrong and shatters. Somehow the demiurge screws things up. It’s like the fall from the garden of Eden.

Broken symmetry can be tied in with that mind-set. All was perfect, symmetrical, mathematical. As things cooled down the different forces split off and they are weirdly different so you have light which is carried by photons with no rest- mass and these massless particles have the highest possible speed of signaling. Then you have the weak nuclear force that causes nuclear decay and that’s mediated by these fat fat versions of the electron that have all this mass-- the w and z bosons. And that’s broken symmetry. But if you could just wind back the clock to the beginning, there would just be these clear beautiful photons and then you have the gluons for the strong force. So it’s the idea that if you look deep enough you can find the hidden harmony

Then there is string theory which appeals to the existence of hypothetical higher dimensions. Imagine us living on earth in a two dimensional world where we don’t see the symmetry. But when we rise into space we can see that the earth is this sphere a perfectly symmetrical object so you rotate the sphere and it basically doesn’t change. By creating higher dimensions it has the same effect. When you rise into the higher dimensions you see these symmetries in the particles. Symmetry is evident in a three dimensional world that you can’t see in a two dimensional world. All these different forces look like facets of the same jewel. It’s a wonderful idea. But it’s so Platonic and spiritual that it makes one suspicious. Are these ideas a product of our infatuation with symmetry? Are these patterns being imposed on reality instead or intrinsic to it? It’s a fascinating basic question.