Large Hardon Collider

[Mizango]

lol Woozie, great idea!

Here's his line he had me call (edit: Do you have his permission to post his number publicly?), It's funny because he does answer it if he is there lol. If not, listen to his voicemail and be astounded!

I can't prank call him, he gave me free gear. Ill SS the email he sent me when I get home, tis awesome.

[Woozie]

If you really could get him to make an account on BG it would be soooooooooooo awesome.

[bigrougabagel]

looks like i need to hit my local library. Tho i think ive got just about as much chance to find a living breathing flying spaghetti monster as i do finding literature on physics, even basic stuff. Ky is a silly place. I have a direction to go tho, i appreciate that. It is looking like keeping all of my college textbooks might help (yep, was lazy, partied, dorped out). A good review of basic calculus will help my brain get up to speed again.

[Woozie]

You can find a lot of online texts for free, or you can torrent textbooks if you can't find what you need at your library. Also:

Amazon.com: Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences, 2nd Edition: Mary L. Boas: Books

Sort of a shortcut. You could start this book right after finishing calc 1. It's less than 1000 pages and it actually covers every single one of the basics listed in my previous post. If I had been thinking, I would have simply suggested this book in the first place instead of all of the other math. It doesn't have to be this exact book. Any book with a similar title written for a similar class will suffice. After you finish, you'll be easily ready for any undergraduate level physics - all the way through (and including undergrad level QM).

In normal math books are written for math majors, so much of the math in those books will be things you wont necessarily need if you're only goal is physics. I'm a math major, so I went with the regular textbooks, but for your purpose, it would make a lot more sense to just use one of these. I actually have this book, and I've read it. I highly recommend it. Same goes for this book as well:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/047...5AG1AX8F434WMA

This book is actually the one we use for the graduate level math class for physics majors. It's nearly identical to the second edition (posted above) and probably more expensive, so just get the second edition. I don't understand why my school uses this for grad students. All the math in here is stuff you should know before graduating. I studied it before I graduated from high school, yet the other graduate students seemed to struggle with it.

Edit: Here's another all-in-one comprehensive book for any undergrad physics:

http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Engin...6668749&sr=1-1

I have the fifth edition to this book and again, I highly recommend it. I personally like this more than Boas' book. Even though it's called "Engineering Mathematics" it has almost exactly the same material as the other two books, and it's much more comprehensive and has much more examples, problems, and solutions. The material is very well explained, and it's presentation of Partial Differential Equations is MUCH better than Boas.

Edit: Now that I think about it, I don't remember if Boas' book goes over complex analysis. O'neil's book does. However, O'neil's doesn't go over probability, whereas Boas does. There's another book I have that goes over abstract algebra a little bit, which is nice if you ever decide to go towards quantum field theory.

Edit: O'neil doesn't go over calculus of variations, but Boas does. Caclulus of Variations is important in Classical Mechanics, but most classical mechanics books will have a chapter dedicated to it anyways, so it's not a big deal I guess.

Edit: Sorry for all the edits. I just remembered I have a classical physics text and Griffiths Quantum Mechanics text as a PDF file on a flash drive. PM me if you want it. I think I have the solution manuals on here too. You're probably at least a few months away from being able to study Classical Mechanics though. It depends on how fast you get through Calc 2/3, Differential Equations, Basic Calc-based physics, and modern physics. You can actually skip modern physics all together if you want. It's just a dummied down version of Quantum Theory.

However, your first exposure to special relativity will either be in a basic calculus-based physics book or a modern physics text. This first exposure is important, so if your calc-based physics book doesn't have it, you'll need a modern physics book (all of which do have it). Sometimes Classical Mechanics or even Classical Electromagnetism books have it as well.

You can torrent many textbooks through demonoid/isohunt/etc or search some website that has pdf ebook downloads. You can probably get everything you need without even going to the library, now that I think about it.

Sorry for all of the edits. I think I'm done now.

Edit: If you're serious about learning this, PM me or something. I can probably help you find PDF books.

[Mizango]

Yes, his number is listed publicly via the Hayden Planeterium lol. Go to the homepage if you wish and look in the directory, he hides it from no one.

I'm 100% legit brother.

Also, I got you guys pms but I am posting this via my iPhone and it gets tedious. Will answer you all tomorrow.

[Mizango]

Ding! Found link with all of his contact info. Again, nothing to hide he actually is the director there and does indeed answer calls.

Contact | Neil deGrasse Tyson

[Mizango]

Bump. I got an email from Neil deGrasse Tyson this morning since you wanted him to join in some BG Astrophysics discussion...

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y15...onbirthday.jpg

Ignore the first part of it, it was in regards to getting my daughter her birthday schwag and emailing me his phone number. I just got back from a meeting and saw I had a message from him haha. Blurred out my home address, Phone number etc.. because obviously I don't trust some of you..

Alleya I thought you were going to add me to AOL for some NDT fun!?

[Mizango]

Also, lol @ Facebook trolling me.

Texas and Christianity in the same ad! Wrrrrryyyyyyyyyy.

[Woozie]

Holy crap please please post here please!

[Dimmauk]

Also, lol @ Facebook trolling me.

Texas and Christianity in the same ad! Wrrrrryyyyyyyyyy.

LOL Ownd.

[Mizango]

To AoE and everyone else wondering and asked us to post something visual you can check out, here is something that really explains what we have been discussing and explains some of the theories that have been brought up in this thread.

I have this on DVD at home and love his work but since I cant copy that format I luckily found it online in the entire series. This is João Magueijo and many of you have seen me reference him the most when these types of threads pop up. He is one of my favorite Scientists on the entire Planet, dude is cool as hell and really explains things in a simple manner without getting confusingly technical.

He has a few interesting "theories" on VSL towards the end which is his claim to fame, but he really give you a window into what we have been talking about. This originally aired on The Science Channel about a year or so ago?

Enjoy!

Link to the Big Bang! series channel: YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[Max™]

You told him that joke about the position and momentum of a particle yet?

I'm sure he'll enjoy it.

Incidentally, ever wondered why there's a fundamental limit to the ability to observe and measure things?

In QM it is due to changing the potential states of the observable, you take the wave function and model it in this crazy sounding thing called a Hilbert Space, as I recall you use one with what is known as infinite degree's of freedom.

When you measure certain quantities, as finely as you narrow down that aspect, you widen the other possible states which it could be in... but that still doesn't make much sense to people who can't see what the math is saying.

Imagine the only way to measure something about a soccer ball is using your foot, you can step on it and say where it is, but you lose information about where it was going, how fast, etc.

You can kick it and say how fast it is going, but not exactly where it is.

It isn't exactly like that, because in this case, when you measure how fast it is going, you no longer have any idea where it could be, if you say where it is, then it could zip off at an incredible velocity after you measure it.

You interfere with things by measuring them, by observing them. For the most part they behave as if they have some additional information which you're not privy too, and react accordingly.

This comes up in talks as non-local interaction, or some iteration of the term, like the double slit experiment.

If you measure which slit the particle goes through, it responds in a certain way, if you don't measure, then while it should obviously have gone through just the one, it appears to know there were other possible paths it could have taken.

Usually you get descriptions of things like probability clouds and waves and such, Richard Feynman noticed you could also simply take all of those possible paths on their own, sum over them, perform some neat mathematical processes on it, and determine the path the particle would most likely take.

Not sure where I was initially rambling with this, and my noodles are done, so I will eat and reread it so see what comes to mind.

[zoobernut]

That totally reminds me of an episode of Futurama where they were at the race tracks and the Professor is watching the race. At the end of the race in the booth they are looking at the video of the race and they announce the winner by a Quantum finish. The professor then yells out "No fair you changed the results by observing them!"

It made me laugh.

Also Max your post is essentially tied into the Heisenberg principle isn't it? It is one of the reasons why we have such a hard time defining exactly the properties of many sub-atomic particles. The act of observing something effects what you actually observe.

[Mizango]

lol I remember that episode.

[Max™]

Well, it isn't just that you change things by observing them. It's that you alter the possible ways they could have behaved, limiting the properties you're observing to certain values directly increases the possible values of the other related properties in a very non-classical way.

[zoobernut]

But your alteration of their possible behaviors is not permanent it is limited to the moment of observation. Or I guess if you think of it on a quantum level it is limited to the moment before your actual observation because there is time between when you intend to observe the object and when you actually observe it and the information created that you are going to be observing has to have already been created or in existence.

I think that this is effected by what type of information you are observing. How are you measuring the object? Take your soccer ball example instead of just being able to observe it with your foot what if you could observe it with all your senses. With your foot you can observe position or velocity via tactile observations meaning the molecules that make up your foot interact with the molecules that make up the soccer ball, you can observe it by sight meaning photons have interacted with the ball and then transfer the information to your eyes which your brain interprets, or you could observe it by sound in which case the air molecules interact with the ball and transfer the information to your ears.

Or maybe I am just being too literal about what you are saying.

[Seraph]

Mizango, was this guy you keep talking about the same dude who was on Colbert the other night? He seems like a pretty cool guy, and I was impressed that he can almost constantly out-talk Steven.

This might be my most productive topic ever. :-þ

[Mizango]

Yes, Neil deGrasse Tyson is the best guest on Colbert report ever. Iirc he's also been on there more times than any guest as well. Whodathunkit, an Astrophysicist raping the mainstream and spreading the cosmological gospel!

He was also recently on Conan and has been on Jon Stewart's show as well as with Jay Leno, there's a reason we swoon over NGT. Alleya and I have been going on all morning on AIM about our favorite NGT moments, appearances, conferences, summits etc...

Tis glorious.

[Neosutra]

We need NGT porn. Not that I agree with everything he says, but I support most people that work hard to spread science and the pursuit of knowledge to the mainstream.

[Woozie]

Mizango, was this guy you keep talking about the same dude who was on Colbert the other night?

He's always on Colbert. He's been there so many times (8ish?).