Large Hardon Collider

[Mizango]

Mind you, all this future talk is just a can of worms filled with more cans of worms.

Exactly, but ain't it fun!

[Kryssan]

Personally, I think we should fix the aging problem first. Whilst having a short life means that as a general rule of thumb humans tend to be more active when they're able, we lose far too many great minds before they're recognized. Or they're just completely shunned during their time. The sad thing is we could be much further along accomplishing this goal, if it weren't for the massive blockage being shielded by all the sheep.


The resultant population explosion tied in with extending life out to several hundred years or beyond would be a great incentive for us to get off our collective asses and start looking to the stars again. So much of our current technology we take for granted came from the competition of the space race - and yet as I look around today I notice more and more the complacency society as a whole is falling into.


Most importantly, I think, people as a whole have forgotten what questioning was all about. Someone asks their friend a question, receives an answer, and doesn't pursue the idea further. Why the hell not? Would you sincerely only accept one person's opinion, especially if it clashed with your own? Where has the curiosity gone? An example, for instance, this topic's original intent. The LHC... how did the media portray that? Or breaking edge science as a whole. Hell, don't even have to get started on the nuclear trend. Are we really more worried about how some fuzzball got it worked up in his mind that the black hole generator was going to go AWOL, and not about what the LHC could show and develop for the scientific community? We complain about the horrid disasters of STA-099/OV-099 and OV-102, we gasped and cried at the loss - but what have we really done about it? NASA continues to shrink and collapse on itself. Its extremely feasible that at some point in the near future private enterprise will replace it, but not for the grander dream some of us had. No, they'll use it to spread the human society's filth and waste out even further.


Sometimes I really do look back at the human race and compare it to a virus. I hate to slander it so, but really... what choice do I have when people are more willing to discuss the question of the president's birthplace over something, I dunno, like civil improvements and scientific expansion?

[Woozie]

I hate to slander it so, but really... what choice do I have when people are more willing to discuss the question of the president's birthplace over something, I dunno, like civil improvements and scientific expansion?

I was just having a conversation with someone a few days ago about how frustrating it is that people know more about what Paris Hilton did in the last 5 years than what NASA did in the last 10. Human priorities are so misplaced that it's ridiculous. No offense to celebrities and athletes or anything (well, screw celebrities but we need our athletes because football and MMA is awesome), but most of them aren't actually contributing anything to the world at all whatsoever. If they dropped dead today the world wouldn't be a different place tomorrow. I wish the general public was more interested in sciences than they are now.

[Mizango]

Most importantly, I think, people as a whole have forgotten what questioning was all about. Someone asks their friend a question, receives an answer, and doesn't pursue the idea further. Why the hell not? Would you sincerely only accept one person's opinion, especially if it clashed with your own? Where has the curiosity gone?

Exactly what I've asked myself a million times. But I guess if you are told something superstitious for as long as you could remember I guess it would be hard to convince otherwise.

Sort of like how stepping on cracks would break your mothers back. Why that one didn't stick is beyond me lol.

Sometimes I really do look back at the human race and compare it to a virus. I hate to slander it so, but really... what choice do I have when people are more willing to discuss the question of the president's birthplace over something, I dunno, like civil improvements and scientific expansion?

Again you hit it right on the head.

Calling us a virus are a pest isn't a stretch, I mean we are given one planet and just that one and yet we still have an actual debate whether we are fucking it up or if its something unavoidable. I mean really?

Call it what it is, we are just that. Which is why I am afraid to take some of these bat shit crazy people into space. I would be more than content leaving them here waiting for the day they've prophesied about (Wrongly every time might I add) for thousands of years.

I mean to each his own and all but you're right, think of the advancements we would have made and still be making if we all were on the same page.

[Mizango]

I was just having a conversation with someone a few days ago about how frustrating it is that people know more about what Paris Hilton did in the last 5 years than what NASA did in the last 10. Human priorities are so misplaced that it's ridiculous. No offense to celebrities and athletes or anything (well, screw celebrities but we need our athletes because football and MMA is awesome), but most of them aren't actually contributing anything to the world at all whatsoever. If they dropped dead today the world wouldn't be a different place tomorrow. I wish the general public was more interested in sciences than they are now.

You sly devil you. You posted while I was replying lol, sadly you are correct. We can name 10 people that are on VH1 reality shows yet cant name one Physicist, Mathematician or Astronaut.

It's sad really.

[Woozie]

You sly devil you. You posted while I was replying lol, sadly you are correct. We can name 10 people that are on VH1 reality shows yet cant name one Physicist, Mathematician or Astronaut.

It's sad really.

Are you on YIM? I just messaged you but no reply. I'm not going to be on my computer for long, so I'll try to catch up with you tomorrow if you're online.

[Mizango]

I will be in just a second lol, I left it on at work.

[Woozie]

I'm about to head to my sister's house and I probably wont be back on for an hour or so

[Kryssan]

I mean to each his own and all but you're right, think of the advancements we would have made and still be making if we all were on the same page.

I don't need to think about it. Just dreaming about half a dozen scientific communitities off the top of my head receiving a sizeable fraction of the bailout bill that will instead find its way into someone's pockets to pay for their need of items with more than two commas in the price tag.


But really, the question thing bothers me the most. I know if I ask someone a question, I'm going to get one answer, and then I'm going to ask at least 20 other people the same question. And then I'll go back and ask the first person the same question again a week later to see if the answer I get is still the same. I'm probably also going to delve into whatever library is closest at the time and find some books on the subject to have something to compare and contrast against; take the opinions and bias of several people and informational resources as well as my own personal thoughts and bias, and apply them in as many ways as I can to the same question until I'm satisfied with the outcome.



And then I'll ask someone else in passing one day or overhear someone talking about it and just have my concrete little idea shattered, sending me thorugh the whole process again. I miss that so much. Rarely do I get to engage in that nowadays, and when I do its like each time is a treasure to hoard. People nowadays are more interested in the answer right now, instead of the right answer (and what's the "right" answer anyway?). I think Cronkite had that down at least: "Its better to be right than to be first."

[Enygma55]

You know what they say, Necessity is the mother of all inventions. Deriving from that, Society will not focus on "the greater good" of humanity until it is forced to.

Agreed the focus of society is all screwed up but that focus wont ever change unless something drastic changes.

I've always had this one discussion with my cousin that I wish that we would be hit with something so disastrous that society has to change as a whole or we perish.

Its sort of happening right now. Global Economy going haywire, Oil Reserves depleting forcing an evolutionary change in cars and the focus on green technology in general.

But what I envision would be of the apocalyptic type
- Major Earthquake ripping the US apart
- Giant Meteor hits
- WW3 the nuclear war / Judgement day
- Micro black holes ripping our spacetime and destroying the Universe
- Alien Invasion ( my personal fav as it would straight up 1-shot religious nutjobs and force us into space since we know, publically, we are no longer alone in the universe )

[Mizango]

I'm about to head to my sister's house and I probably wont be back on for an hour or so

Oh ok cool. Ill be on tomorrow if you get home and crash out, its no biggie at all brother.

You know what they say, Necessity is the mother of all inventions. Deriving from that, Society will not focus on "the greater good" of humanity until it is forced to.

Agreed the focus of society is all screwed up but that focus wont ever change unless something drastic changes.

Agreed. It would take something Earth shattering and to wipe out a good 50% of humanity for the blind to pull their head from their asses and see what is going on around them. We are the ultimate procrastinators and exam crammers.

This "Ill cross that bridge when I get to it" mentality is too often relegated to being famous last words.

[Scythiroth]

I have spent way too much time reading this topic, but it is all so interesting and over my head that I must keep reading. Definitely makes me want to learn more about all of the subjects being discussed here.

[Mizango]

I have spent way too much time reading this topic, but it is all so interesting and over my head that I must keep reading. Definitely makes me want to learn more about all of the subjects being discussed here.

If there is anything in particular you want to know about today or in the future ask away, with the people we have here we pretty much have all based covered in one form or another.

[Woozie]

Anyone who wasn't watching the history channel for the last hour just missed something awesome about astrophysics. Sorry I couldn't post this earlier to warn you all in time about this.

Edit: Something else about astrophysics is on. Both of these will be on again later tonight if you're all still awake.

Edit2: The episode on now is just about the milkyway, but the one that just went off was about black holes, micro black holes, neutrinos, dark matter, dark energy, and half the other stuff that was discussed in this topic.

[Eliseos]

So I'm looking to get a few of the more advanced science books to read, preferably heavy on the math. Reading NDT, Greene, Hawking, etc is awesome, but I think I'm reaching the point where I need a bit more heavy math to be able to understand the concepts better. I have up to vector calc and differential equations in my college career, but it's been so long that I've forgotten most of it.

So far I've found these books:
I think this is the calc book I had in my college classes.
Amazon.com: Calculus (With Analytic Geometry)(8th edition) (9780618502981): Ron Larson, Robert P. Hostetler, Bruce H. Edwards: Books

I've seen lots of recommendations for this book about vector calculus
Amazon.com: Div, Grad, Curl, and All That: An Informal Text on Vector Calculus, Fourth Edition (9780393925166): H. M. Schey: Books

This book seems pricey, but it seems pretty loaded with content, ranging from relativity to nuclear processes to stellar structures.
Amazon.com: Relativity, Astrophysics and Cosmology (9783527407644): Radoje Belusevic: Books

This has a lot of positive feedback on amazon
Amazon.com: A First Course in General Relativity (9780521887052): Bernard Schutz: Books

Anyone have any experience with these, or recommendations in their place?

[Woozie]

So I'm looking to get a few of the more advanced science books to read, preferably heavy on the math. Reading NDT, Greene, Hawking, etc is awesome, but I think I'm reaching the point where I need a bit more heavy math to be able to understand the concepts better. I have up to vector calc and differential equations in my college career, but it's been so long that I've forgotten most of it.

So far I've found these books:
I think this is the calc book I had in my college classes.
Amazon.com: Calculus (With Analytic Geometry)(8th edition) (9780618502981): Ron Larson, Robert P. Hostetler, Bruce H. Edwards: Books

I've seen lots of recommendations for this book about vector calculus
Amazon.com: Div, Grad, Curl, and All That: An Informal Text on Vector Calculus, Fourth Edition (9780393925166): H. M. Schey: Books

This book seems pricey, but it seems pretty loaded with content, ranging from relativity to nuclear processes to stellar structures.
Amazon.com: Relativity, Astrophysics and Cosmology (9783527407644): Radoje Belusevic: Books

This has a lot of positive feedback on amazon
Amazon.com: A First Course in General Relativity (9780521887052): Bernard Schutz: Books

Anyone have any experience with these, or recommendations in their place?

For Calculus, I don't have experience with that particular book, but here's the one I'd recommend:

Amazon.com: Calculus (9780534393397): James Stewart: Books

There's a 6th edition out now.

If you get a calculus book that has all three basic levels of calc, you wont need a book on divergence, gradients, and curl. Calc 3 = vector calculus.

Before going into astrophysics and relativity, I'd recommend having studied linear algebra, and at least some experience with topology and differential geometry. Max and Neo would be better able to help you in the GR direction than I could.

[Woozie]

Also, you're going to need to study some classical physics before going into GR. I don't know where you are in terms of physics, so I'll list from the beginning.

You're going to start with calc-based physics. The most basic level will have books that cover wide ranges of physics. They'll go from Newtonian physics -> thermal Physics -> electricity and magnetism -> optics.

If you haven't studied physics on this level, this is the book I'd recommend:

Amazon.com: Physics for Scientists and Engineers: Extended Version (9780716743897): Paul A. Tipler, Gene Mosca: Books

Also, the Giancolli book gets high praise from students and professors everywhere.

Then you'll go to modern physics, though in my opinion it's skippable because you're going to actually study all that stuff in later courses.

Then you'll need classical physics. This is about junior college level stuff. You'll also need Electricity and Magnetism (E&M). These both will assume you've taken everything up to and including calc3 (vector calc) and ordinary differential equations.

Next up is quantum theory, which you may be able to skip if you're especially interested in General Relativity (though you'll eventually need it at some point if you love physics). An undergrad level QM book shouldn't be attempted until you've studied linear algebra. Even if the book goes over linear algebra, it's still much easier if you're already very good at it.

After QM, you'll be done with the entire undergrad physics curriculum (well, at least the very skeleton of it. If you actually went to a school they'd require solid state physics or labs or optics or thermal physics or some other stuff). I'd recommend also some familiarity of statistical physics as well.

If you do skip modern physics, make sure you're getting an intro to special relativity somewhere. Sometimes classical physics books don't have it. Sometimes E&M does. If your Classical Physics and your E&M book both omit special relativity, then you will need to find a modern physics book.

[Woozie]

Here are some posts I made earlier in the thread, in case you missed them.

If you're serious about getting a deep understanding of this, then you need to go the all the way with it. By that, I mean you need to study formal texts on the math and physics involved. I don't know where you are now mathematically, but you'll need lots of calculus, algebra, and geometry to understand relativity. Some websites and books will try to give a few equations on black holes and such in a simplified algebraic manner, but that wont really expand your understanding of the subject. You need to go a library and read actual textbooks.

Start with the basics: Calculus, differential equations (ordinary and partial [and differential equations study should include Fourier analysis as well as general sturm-liouville equations]), complex analysis, and linear algebra. The basics are way easier than they sound. I finished all of those before I even graduated freakin high school. These subjects are the foundation of all physics study.

After the basics, where you'll go depends highly upon what you want to study. For me, going the quantum mechanics/particle physics route, I went for Abstract Algebra, Group Theory, Functional Analysis, etc. But to study black holes, you'd need a route that includes differential geometry. Neo and Max can probably comment more on that. I've done only a small amount of study in this area.

As soon as you finish calculus, you can start with a calculus-based physics book. Most would recommend Douglass Giancoli as the best author on the subject. I personally recommend paul Tipler ( here's a review I've written on it. Scroll all the way down)

From there, you'll go to modern physics, to Classical Mechanics (the same level as the Analytical Mechanics in my review, but don't use that exact same book. I used one by goldberg or goldstein, whatever; one by Marion and Thornton, and one by Landau and Lifshitz [that last one is graduate level study]), to Classical Electricity and Magnetism, to QM. Make sure you don't start QM until after you finish linear algebra. It will make your life much easier. For E&M and QM, Griffiths is the most recommend author, especially for QM. I skilled undergrad level QM and went straight to Shankar and the one by that Schabl guy. The graduate level QM requires functional analysis, but if you're mainly interested in black holes, you don't need graduate QM (yet).



Great, he's finally gone. Let's post our Grand Unification Theories and erase them before he gets back!

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:

Amazon.com: Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences (9780471198260): Mary L. Boas: Books

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:

Amazon.com: Advanced Engineering Mathematics (9780534552084): Peter V. O'Neil: Books

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.

I bolded part above because that sentence is important. Textbooks are way overpriced. Even college professors seem to hate the way the textbook industry works.

[Eliseos]

Ah, yeah, I forgot to mention that I'm in second semester calculus physics right now (E&M, Optics). We're actually using that text you recommended, though my bookstore only offered it in the separate volumes for the separate classes. Thanks for the response.

Question about the differences between the intro physics classes and E&M. Is the major difference between the two in the symmetries? With physics two, most of the problems we've done involve some sort of symmetry, like a charge sphere, cylinder, etc. Is this no longer the case with E&M? Also, is this where the differential form of Maxwell's equations comes in? We've only done the integral form so far.

Really excited to get into this further, I just wish I had more time lol. I'll only have about 3 weeks off once the summer semester is over and fall begins. Again, thanks for the information.

EDIT: Didn't see the third post when I was posting, I'll look into torrenting them, and check out the other books in those posts.

[Woozie]

Ah, yeah, I forgot to mention that I'm in second semester calculus physics right now (E&M, Optics). We're actually using that text you recommended, though my bookstore only offered it in the separate volumes for the separate classes. Thanks for the response.

Question about the differences between the intro physics classes and E&M. Is the major difference between the two in the symmetries? With physics two, most of the problems we've done involve some sort of symmetry, like a charge sphere, cylinder, etc. Is this no longer the case with E&M? Also, is this where the differential form of Maxwell's equations comes in? We've only done the integral form so far.

Really excited to get into this further, I just wish I had more time lol. I'll only have about 3 weeks off once the summer semester is over and fall begins. Again, thanks for the information.

EDIT: Didn't see the third post when I was posting, I'll look into torrenting them, and check out the other books in those posts.

The other level of E&M also has a chapter that uses symmetries a lot. The major difference is that it will also have a lot of problems that will require the use of Calculus 3 to solve, whereas the intro class assumes no calc 3 (when you exploit symmetries you avoid the use of calc 3). The differential forms of maxwells equations can be derived from the integral form by using the identities you learned in calc 3 (i.e. divergence theorem, stokes theorem, green's theorem). So yes, that is where the differential form comes from. So as you can see, calc 3 is incredibly important for E&M, and it's incorporation is the major difference between intro level and the other level.

The higher undergrad level of E&M also uses math you'll only learn in partial differential equations (laplace's equation), but the book will go over that for you, so don't worry about your PDE skills yet. There will also be more detailed studies of electromagnetic radiation than you get from the intro level. Also, there will be equations related to antennae and wave transmition. Depending on the book, there may also be a chapter on special relativity and it's relationship to maxwell's equations. The sections on alternating current will assume knowledge of ordinary differential equations.