Tagged: HEP Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • richardmitnick 4:21 pm on January 24, 2022 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "The Higgs boson could have kept our universe from collapsing", , , , , , HEP, , , ,   

    From Live Science: “The Higgs boson could have kept our universe from collapsing” 

    From Live Science

    1.24.22
    Paul Sutter

    Other patches in the multiverse would have, instead, met their ends.

    1
    Physicists have proposed our universe might be a tiny patch of a much larger cosmos that is constantly and rapidly inflating and popping off new universes. In our corner of this multiverse, the mass of the Higgs boson was low enough that this patch did not collapse like others may have. Image credit: MARK GARLICK/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY via Getty Images.

    The Higgs boson, the mysterious particle that lends other particles their mass, could have kept our universe from collapsing. And its properties might be a clue that we live in a multiverse of parallel worlds, a wild new theory suggests.

    That theory, in which different regions of the universe have different sets of physical laws, would suggest that only worlds in which the Higgs boson is tiny would survive.

    If true, the new model would entail the creation of new particles, which in turn would explain why the strong interaction — which ultimately keeps atoms from collapsing — seems to obey certain symmetries. And along the way, it could help reveal the nature of Dark Matter — the elusive substance that makes up most matter.

    A tale of two Higgs

    In 2012, the Large Hadron Collider achieved a truly monumental feat; this underground particle accelerator along the French-Swiss border detected for the first time the Higgs boson, a particle that had eluded physicists for decades.

    The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN].

    The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH)[CERN] map.

    CERN LHC tube in the tunnel. Credit: Maximilien Brice and Julien Marius Ordan.

    SixTRack CERN LHC particles.

    The Higgs boson is a cornerstone of the Standard Model.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) ATLAS Higgs Event June 18, 2012.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) CMS Higgs Event May 27, 2012.

    This particle gives other particles their mass and creates the distinction between the weak interaction and the electromagnetic interaction.

    But with the good news came some bad. The Higgs had a mass of 125 gigaelectronvolts (GeV), which was orders of magnitude smaller than what physicists had thought it should be.

    To be perfectly clear, the framework physicists use to describe the zoo of subatomic particles, known as the Standard Model, doesn’t actually predict the value of the Higgs mass.

    Standard Model of Particle Physics, Quantum Diaries.

    For that theory to work, the number has to be derived experimentally. But back-of-the-envelope calculations made physicists guess that the Higgs would have an incredibly large mass. So once the champagne was opened and the Nobel prizes were handed out, the question loomed: Why does the Higgs have such a low mass?

    In another, and initially unrelated problem, the strong interaction isn’t exactly behaving as the Standard Model predicts it should. In the mathematics that physicists use to describe high-energy interactions, there are certain symmetries. For example, there is the symmetry of charge (change all the electric charges in an interaction and everything operates the same), the symmetry of time (run a reaction backward and it’s the same), and the symmetry of parity (flip an interaction around to its mirror-image and it’s the same).

    In all experiments performed to date, the strong interaction appears to obey the combined symmetry of both charge reversal and parity reversal. But the mathematics of the strong interaction do not show that same symmetry. No known natural phenomena should enforce that symmetry, and yet nature seems to be obeying it.

    What gives?

    A matter of multiverses

    A pair of theorists, Raffaele Tito D’Agnolo of the French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) and Daniele Teresi of CERN, thought that these two problems might be related. In a paper published in January to the journal Physical Review Letters, they outlined their solution to the twin conundrums.

    Their solution: The universe was just born that way.

    They invoked an idea called the multiverse, which is born out of a theory called inflation. Inflation is the idea that in the earliest days of the Big Bang, our cosmos underwent a period of extremely enhanced expansion, doubling in size every billionth of a second.

    _____________________________________________________________________________________
    Inflation

    4
    Alan Guth, from M.I.T., who first proposed cosmic inflation.

    Lamda Cold Dark Matter Accerated Expansion of The universe http scinotions.com the-cosmic-inflation-suggests-the-existence-of-parallel-universes. Credit: Alex Mittelmann.

    Alan Guth’s notes:
    Alan Guth’s original notes on inflation.
    _____________________________________________________________________________________

    Physicists aren’t exactly sure what powered inflation or how it worked, but one outgrowth of the basic idea is that our universe has never stopped inflating. Instead, what we call “our universe” is just one tiny patch of a much larger cosmos that is constantly and rapidly inflating and constantly popping off new universes, like foamy suds in your bathtub.

    Different regions of this “multiverse” will have different values of the Higgs mass. The researchers found that universes with a large Higgs mass find themselves catastrophically collapsing before they get a chance to grow. Only the regions of the multiverse that have low Higgs masses survive and have stable expansion rates, leading to the development of galaxies, stars, planets and eventually high-energy particle colliders.

    To make a multiverse with varying Higgs masses, the team had to introduce two more particles into the mix. These particles would be new additions to the Standard Model. The interactions of these two new particles set the mass of the Higgs in different regions of the multiverse.

    And those two new particles are also capable of doing other things.

    Time for a test

    The newly proposed particles modify the strong interaction, leading to the charge-parity symmetry that exists in nature. They would act a lot like an axion, another hypothetical particle that has been introduced in an attempt to explain the nature of the strong interaction.

    The new particles don’t have a role limited to the early universe, either. They might still be inhabiting the present-day cosmos. If one of their masses is small enough, it could have evaded detection in our accelerator experiments, but would still be floating around in space.

    In other words, one of these new particles could be responsible for the Dark Matter, the invisible stuff that makes up over 85% of all the matter in the universe.

    It’s a bold suggestion: solving two of the greatest challenges to particle physics and also explaining the nature of Dark Matter.

    Could a solution really be this simple? As elegant as it is, the theory still needs to be tested. The model predicts a certain mass range for the Dark Matter, something that future experiments that are on the hunt for dark matter, like the underground facility the Super Cryogenic Dark Matter Search, could determine. Also, the theory predicts that the neutron should have a small but potentially measurable asymmetry in the electric charges within the neutron, a difference from the predictions of the Standard Model.

    Unfortunately, we’re going to have to wait awhile. Each of these measurements will take years, if not decades, to effectively rule out — or support – the new idea.

    ______________________________________________________
    Dark Matter Background
    Fritz Zwicky discovered Dark Matter in the 1930s when observing the movement of the Coma Cluster., Vera Rubin a Woman in STEM, denied the Nobel, some 30 years later, did most of the work on Dark Matter.

    Fritz Zwicky.
    Coma cluster via NASA/ESA Hubble, the original example of Dark Matter discovered during observations by Fritz Zwicky and confirmed 30 years later by Vera Rubin.
    In modern times, it was astronomer Fritz Zwicky, in the 1930s, who made the first observations of what we now call dark matter. His 1933 observations of the Coma Cluster of galaxies seemed to indicated it has a mass 500 times more than that previously calculated by Edwin Hubble. Furthermore, this extra mass seemed to be completely invisible. Although Zwicky’s observations were initially met with much skepticism, they were later confirmed by other groups of astronomers.

    Thirty years later, astronomer Vera Rubin provided a huge piece of evidence for the existence of dark matter. She discovered that the centers of galaxies rotate at the same speed as their extremities, whereas, of course, they should rotate faster. Think of a vinyl LP on a record deck: its center rotates faster than its edge. That’s what logic dictates we should see in galaxies too. But we do not. The only way to explain this is if the whole galaxy is only the center of some much larger structure, as if it is only the label on the LP so to speak, causing the galaxy to have a consistent rotation speed from center to edge.

    Vera Rubin, following Zwicky, postulated that the missing structure in galaxies is dark matter. Her ideas were met with much resistance from the astronomical community, but her observations have been confirmed and are seen today as pivotal proof of the existence of dark matter.
    Astronomer Vera Rubin at the Lowell Observatory in 1965, worked on Dark Matter (The Carnegie Institution for Science).

    Vera Rubin, with Department of Terrestrial Magnetism (DTM) image tube spectrograph attached to the Kitt Peak 84-inch telescope, 1970.

    Vera Rubin measuring spectra, worked on Dark Matter(Emilio Segre Visual Archives AIP SPL).
    Dark Matter Research

    Super Cryogenic Dark Matter Search from DOE’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (US) at Stanford University (US) at SNOLAB (Vale Inco Mine, Sudbury, Canada).

    LBNL LZ Dark Matter Experiment (US) xenon detector at Sanford Underground Research Facility(US) Credit: Matt Kapust.

    Lamda Cold Dark Matter Accerated Expansion of The universe http scinotions.com the-cosmic-inflation-suggests-the-existence-of-parallel-universes. Credit: Alex Mittelmann.

    DAMA at Gran Sasso uses sodium iodide housed in copper to hunt for dark matter LNGS-INFN.

    Yale HAYSTAC axion dark matter experiment at Yale’s Wright Lab.

    DEAP Dark Matter detector, The DEAP-3600, suspended in the SNOLAB (CA) deep in Sudbury’s Creighton Mine.

    The LBNL LZ Dark Matter Experiment (US) Dark Matter project at SURF, Lead, SD, USA.

    DAMA-LIBRA Dark Matter experiment at the Italian National Institute for Nuclear Physics’ (INFN’s) Gran Sasso National Laboratories (LNGS) located in the Abruzzo region of central Italy.

    DARWIN Dark Matter experiment. A design study for a next-generation, multi-ton dark matter detector in Europe at The University of Zurich [Universität Zürich](CH).

    PandaX II Dark Matter experiment at Jin-ping Underground Laboratory (CJPL) in Sichuan, China.

    Inside the Axion Dark Matter eXperiment U Washington (US) Credit : Mark Stone U. of Washington. Axion Dark Matter Experiment.
    ______________________________________________________

    See the full article here .

    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

     
  • richardmitnick 5:36 pm on January 23, 2022 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Scientists make first detection of exotic “X” particles in quark-gluon plasma", , , HEP, In the next few years scientists want to use the quark-gluon plasma to probe the X particle’s internal structure which could change our view of what kind of material the universe should produce., MIT’s Laboratory for Nuclear Science, , Scientists suspect that X (3872) is either a compact tetraquark or a new kind of molecule made two loosely bound mesons-subatomic particles that themselves are made from two quarks., , The researchers were able to tease out about 100 X particles of a type known as X (3872) named for the particle’s estimated mass., The study’s co-authors are members of the CMS Collaboration., The team used machine-learning techniques to sift through more than 13 billion heavy ion collisions., These findings could redefine the kinds of particles that were abundant in the early universe., X (3872) was first discovered in 2003 by the Belle experiment-a particle collider in Japan that smashes together high-energy electrons and positrons., [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN]   

    From The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US): “Scientists make first detection of exotic “X” particles in quark-gluon plasma” 

    MIT News

    From The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)

    January 21, 2022
    Jennifer Chu

    The findings could redefine the kinds of particles that were abundant in the early universe.

    1
    Physicists have found evidence of rare X particles in the quark-gluon plasma produced in the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN. The findings could redefine the kinds of particles that were abundant in the early universe. Image: iStockphoto.

    In the first millionths of a second after the Big Bang, the universe was a roiling, trillion-degree plasma of quarks and gluons — elementary particles that briefly glommed together in countless combinations before cooling and settling into more stable configurations to make the neutrons and protons of ordinary matter.

    In the chaos before cooling, a fraction of these quarks and gluons collided randomly to form short-lived “X” particles, so named for their mysterious, unknown structures. Today, X particles are extremely rare, though physicists have theorized that they may be created in particle accelerators through quark coalescence, where high-energy collisions can generate similar flashes of quark-gluon plasma.

    Now physicists at MIT’s Laboratory for Nuclear Science and elsewhere have found evidence of X particles in the quark-gluon plasma produced in the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, based near Geneva, Switzerland.

    The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN].

    The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH)[CERN] map.

    CERN LHC tube in the tunnel. Credit: Maximilien Brice and Julien Marius Ordan.

    SixTRack CERN LHC particles.

    The team used machine-learning techniques to sift through more than 13 billion heavy ion collisions, each of which produced tens of thousands of charged particles. Amid this ultradense, high-energy particle soup, the researchers were able to tease out about 100 X particles of a type known as X (3872) named for the particle’s estimated mass.

    The results, published this week in Physical Review Letters, mark the first time researchers have detected X particles in quark-gluon plasma — an environment that they hope will illuminate the particles’ as-yet unknown structure.

    “This is just the start of the story,” says lead author Yen-Jie Lee, the Class of 1958 Career Development Associate Professor of Physics at MIT. “We’ve shown we can find a signal. In the next few years we want to use the quark-gluon plasma to probe the X particle’s internal structure which could change our view of what kind of material the universe should produce.”

    The study’s co-authors are members of the CMS Collaboration, an international team of scientists that operates and collects data from the Compact Muon Solenoid, one of the LHC’s particle detectors.

    The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH)[CERN] CMS.

    The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH)[CERN] Compact Muon Solenoid Detector.

    X (3872) was first discovered in 2003 by the Belle experiment-a particle collider in Japan that smashes together high-energy electrons and positrons.

    Particles in the plasma

    The basic building blocks of matter are the neutron and the proton, each of which are made from three tightly bound quarks.

    The quark structure of the proton. 16 March 2006 Arpad Horvath.

    The quark structure of the neutron. 15 January 2018 Jacek Rybak.

    “For years we had thought that for some reason, nature had chosen to produce particles made only from two or three quarks,” Lee says.

    Only recently have physicists begun to see signs of exotic “tetraquarks” — particles made from a rare combination of four quarks.

    Tetraquarks-School of Physics and Astronomy – The University of Edinburgh (SCT).

    Scientists suspect that X (3872) is either a compact tetraquark or an entirely new kind of molecule made from not atoms but two loosely bound mesons — subatomic particles that themselves are made from two quarks.

    X (3872) was first discovered in 2003 by the Belle experiment-a particle collider in Japan that smashes together high-energy electrons and positrons.

    KEK Belle II detector, at The High Energy Accelerator Research Organization [高エネルギー加速器研究機構](JP) in Tsukuba, Ibaraki Prefecture, Japan.

    Within this environment, however, the rare particles decayed too quickly for scientists to examine their structure in detail. It has been hypothesized that X (3872) and other exotic particles might be better illuminated in quark-gluon plasma.

    “Theoretically speaking, there are so many quarks and gluons in the plasma that the production of X particles should be enhanced,” Lee says. “But people thought it would be too difficult to search for them because there are so many other particles produced in this quark soup.”

    “Really a signal”

    In their new study, Lee and his colleagues looked for signs of X particles within the quark-gluon plasma generated by heavy-ion collisions in CERN’s Large Hadron Collider. They based their analysis on the LHC’s 2018 dataset, which included more than 13 billion lead-ion collisions, each of which released quarks and gluons that scattered and merged to form more than a quadrillion short-lived particles before cooling and decaying.

    “After the quark-gluon plasma forms and cools down, there are so many particles produced, the background is overwhelming,” Lee says. “So we had to beat down this background so that we could eventually see the X particles in our data.”

    To do this, the team used a machine-learning algorithm which they trained to pick out decay patterns characteristic of X particles. Immediately after particles form in quark-gluon plasma, they quickly break down into “daughter” particles that scatter away. For X particles, this decay pattern, or angular distribution, is distinct from all other particles.

    The researchers, led by MIT postdoc Jing Wang, identified key variables that describe the shape of the X particle decay pattern. They trained a machine-learning algorithm to recognize these variables, then fed the algorithm actual data from the LHC’s collision experiments. The algorithm was able to sift through the extremely dense and noisy dataset to pick out the key variables that were likely a result of decaying X particles.

    “We managed to lower the background by orders of magnitude to see the signal,” says Wang.

    The researchers zoomed in on the signals and observed a peak at a specific mass, indicating the presence of X (3872) particles, about 100 in all.

    “It’s almost unthinkable that we can tease out these 100 particles from this huge dataset,” says Lee, who along with Wang ran multiple checks to verify their observation.

    “Every night I would ask myself, is this really a signal or not?” Wang recalls. “And in the end, the data said yes!”

    In the next year or two, the researchers plan to gather much more data, which should help to elucidate the X particle’s structure. If the particle is a tightly bound tetraquark, it should decay more slowly than if it were a loosely bound molecule. Now that the team has shown X particles can be detected in quark-gluon plasma, they plan to probe this particle with quark-gluon plasma in more detail, to pin down the X particle’s structure.

    “Currently our data is consistent with both because we don’t have a enough statistics yet. In next few years we’ll take much more data so we can separate these two scenarios,” Lee says. “That will broaden our view of the kinds of particles that were produced abundantly in the early universe.”

    This research was supported, in part, by the Department of Energy (US).

    See the full article here .

    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings
    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    MIT Seal

    USPS “Forever” postage stamps celebrating Innovation at MIT.

    MIT Campus

    The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) is a private land-grant research university in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The institute has an urban campus that extends more than a mile (1.6 km) alongside the Charles River. The institute also encompasses a number of major off-campus facilities such as the MIT Lincoln Laboratory (US), the MIT Bates Research and Engineering Center (US), and the Haystack Observatory (US), as well as affiliated laboratories such as the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard(US) and Whitehead Institute (US).

    Massachusettes Institute of Technology-Haystack Observatory(US) Westford, Massachusetts, USA, Altitude 131 m (430 ft).

    Founded in 1861 in response to the increasing industrialization of the United States, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) adopted a European polytechnic university model and stressed laboratory instruction in applied science and engineering. It has since played a key role in the development of many aspects of modern science, engineering, mathematics, and technology, and is widely known for its innovation and academic strength. It is frequently regarded as one of the most prestigious universities in the world.

    As of December 2020, 97 Nobel laureates, 26 Turing Award winners, and 8 Fields Medalists have been affiliated with MIT as alumni, faculty members, or researchers. In addition, 58 National Medal of Science recipients, 29 National Medals of Technology and Innovation recipients, 50 MacArthur Fellows, 80 Marshall Scholars, 3 Mitchell Scholars, 22 Schwarzman Scholars, 41 astronauts, and 16 Chief Scientists of the U.S. Air Force have been affiliated with The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) . The university also has a strong entrepreneurial culture and MIT alumni have founded or co-founded many notable companies. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) is a member of the Association of American Universities (AAU).

    Foundation and vision

    In 1859, a proposal was submitted to the Massachusetts General Court to use newly filled lands in Back Bay, Boston for a “Conservatory of Art and Science”, but the proposal failed. A charter for the incorporation of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, proposed by William Barton Rogers, was signed by John Albion Andrew, the governor of Massachusetts, on April 10, 1861.

    Rogers, a professor from the University of Virginia (US), wanted to establish an institution to address rapid scientific and technological advances. He did not wish to found a professional school, but a combination with elements of both professional and liberal education, proposing that:

    “The true and only practicable object of a polytechnic school is, as I conceive, the teaching, not of the minute details and manipulations of the arts, which can be done only in the workshop, but the inculcation of those scientific principles which form the basis and explanation of them, and along with this, a full and methodical review of all their leading processes and operations in connection with physical laws.”

    The Rogers Plan reflected the German research university model, emphasizing an independent faculty engaged in research, as well as instruction oriented around seminars and laboratories.

    Early developments

    Two days after Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) was chartered, the first battle of the Civil War broke out. After a long delay through the war years, MIT’s first classes were held in the Mercantile Building in Boston in 1865. The new institute was founded as part of the Morrill Land-Grant Colleges Act to fund institutions “to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes” and was a land-grant school. In 1863 under the same act, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts founded the Massachusetts Agricultural College, which developed as the University of Massachusetts Amherst (US)). In 1866, the proceeds from land sales went toward new buildings in the Back Bay.

    Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) was informally called “Boston Tech”. The institute adopted the European polytechnic university model and emphasized laboratory instruction from an early date. Despite chronic financial problems, the institute saw growth in the last two decades of the 19th century under President Francis Amasa Walker. Programs in electrical, chemical, marine, and sanitary engineering were introduced, new buildings were built, and the size of the student body increased to more than one thousand.

    The curriculum drifted to a vocational emphasis, with less focus on theoretical science. The fledgling school still suffered from chronic financial shortages which diverted the attention of the MIT leadership. During these “Boston Tech” years, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) faculty and alumni rebuffed Harvard University (US) president (and former MIT faculty) Charles W. Eliot’s repeated attempts to merge MIT with Harvard College’s Lawrence Scientific School. There would be at least six attempts to absorb MIT into Harvard. In its cramped Back Bay location, MIT could not afford to expand its overcrowded facilities, driving a desperate search for a new campus and funding. Eventually, the MIT Corporation approved a formal agreement to merge with Harvard, over the vehement objections of MIT faculty, students, and alumni. However, a 1917 decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court effectively put an end to the merger scheme.

    In 1916, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) administration and the MIT charter crossed the Charles River on the ceremonial barge Bucentaur built for the occasion, to signify MIT’s move to a spacious new campus largely consisting of filled land on a one-mile-long (1.6 km) tract along the Cambridge side of the Charles River. The neoclassical “New Technology” campus was designed by William W. Bosworth and had been funded largely by anonymous donations from a mysterious “Mr. Smith”, starting in 1912. In January 1920, the donor was revealed to be the industrialist George Eastman of Rochester, New York, who had invented methods of film production and processing, and founded Eastman Kodak. Between 1912 and 1920, Eastman donated $20 million ($236.6 million in 2015 dollars) in cash and Kodak stock to MIT.

    Curricular reforms

    In the 1930s, President Karl Taylor Compton and Vice-President (effectively Provost) Vannevar Bush emphasized the importance of pure sciences like physics and chemistry and reduced the vocational practice required in shops and drafting studios. The Compton reforms “renewed confidence in the ability of the Institute to develop leadership in science as well as in engineering”. Unlike Ivy League schools, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) catered more to middle-class families, and depended more on tuition than on endowments or grants for its funding. The school was elected to the Association of American Universities (US)in 1934.

    Still, as late as 1949, the Lewis Committee lamented in its report on the state of education at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) that “the Institute is widely conceived as basically a vocational school”, a “partly unjustified” perception the committee sought to change. The report comprehensively reviewed the undergraduate curriculum, recommended offering a broader education, and warned against letting engineering and government-sponsored research detract from the sciences and humanities. The School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences and the MIT Sloan School of Management were formed in 1950 to compete with the powerful Schools of Science and Engineering. Previously marginalized faculties in the areas of economics, management, political science, and linguistics emerged into cohesive and assertive departments by attracting respected professors and launching competitive graduate programs. The School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences continued to develop under the successive terms of the more humanistically oriented presidents Howard W. Johnson and Jerome Wiesner between 1966 and 1980.

    Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)‘s involvement in military science surged during World War II. In 1941, Vannevar Bush was appointed head of the federal Office of Scientific Research and Development and directed funding to only a select group of universities, including MIT. Engineers and scientists from across the country gathered at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)’s Radiation Laboratory, established in 1940 to assist the British military in developing microwave radar. The work done there significantly affected both the war and subsequent research in the area. Other defense projects included gyroscope-based and other complex control systems for gunsight, bombsight, and inertial navigation under Charles Stark Draper’s Instrumentation Laboratory; the development of a digital computer for flight simulations under Project Whirlwind; and high-speed and high-altitude photography under Harold Edgerton. By the end of the war, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) became the nation’s largest wartime R&D contractor (attracting some criticism of Bush), employing nearly 4000 in the Radiation Laboratory alone and receiving in excess of $100 million ($1.2 billion in 2015 dollars) before 1946. Work on defense projects continued even after then. Post-war government-sponsored research at MIT included SAGE and guidance systems for ballistic missiles and Project Apollo.

    These activities affected Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) profoundly. A 1949 report noted the lack of “any great slackening in the pace of life at the Institute” to match the return to peacetime, remembering the “academic tranquility of the prewar years”, though acknowledging the significant contributions of military research to the increased emphasis on graduate education and rapid growth of personnel and facilities. The faculty doubled and the graduate student body quintupled during the terms of Karl Taylor Compton, president of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) between 1930 and 1948; James Rhyne Killian, president from 1948 to 1957; and Julius Adams Stratton, chancellor from 1952 to 1957, whose institution-building strategies shaped the expanding university. By the 1950s, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) no longer simply benefited the industries with which it had worked for three decades, and it had developed closer working relationships with new patrons, philanthropic foundations and the federal government.

    In late 1960s and early 1970s, student and faculty activists protested against the Vietnam War and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)’s defense research. In this period Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)’s various departments were researching helicopters, smart bombs and counterinsurgency techniques for the war in Vietnam as well as guidance systems for nuclear missiles. The Union of Concerned Scientists was founded on March 4, 1969 during a meeting of faculty members and students seeking to shift the emphasis on military research toward environmental and social problems. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) ultimately divested itself from the Instrumentation Laboratory and moved all classified research off-campus to the MIT (US) Lincoln Laboratory facility in 1973 in response to the protests. The student body, faculty, and administration remained comparatively unpolarized during what was a tumultuous time for many other universities. Johnson was seen to be highly successful in leading his institution to “greater strength and unity” after these times of turmoil. However six Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) students were sentenced to prison terms at this time and some former student leaders, such as Michael Albert and George Katsiaficas, are still indignant about MIT’s role in military research and its suppression of these protests. (Richard Leacock’s film, November Actions, records some of these tumultuous events.)

    In the 1980s, there was more controversy at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) over its involvement in SDI (space weaponry) and CBW (chemical and biological warfare) research. More recently, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)’s research for the military has included work on robots, drones and ‘battle suits’.

    Recent history

    Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) has kept pace with and helped to advance the digital age. In addition to developing the predecessors to modern computing and networking technologies, students, staff, and faculty members at Project MAC, the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, and the Tech Model Railroad Club wrote some of the earliest interactive computer video games like Spacewar! and created much of modern hacker slang and culture. Several major computer-related organizations have originated at MIT since the 1980s: Richard Stallman’s GNU Project and the subsequent Free Software Foundation were founded in the mid-1980s at the AI Lab; the MIT Media Lab was founded in 1985 by Nicholas Negroponte and Jerome Wiesner to promote research into novel uses of computer technology; the World Wide Web Consortium standards organization was founded at the Laboratory for Computer Science in 1994 by Tim Berners-Lee; the MIT OpenCourseWare project has made course materials for over 2,000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) classes available online free of charge since 2002; and the One Laptop per Child initiative to expand computer education and connectivity to children worldwide was launched in 2005.

    Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) was named a sea-grant college in 1976 to support its programs in oceanography and marine sciences and was named a space-grant college in 1989 to support its aeronautics and astronautics programs. Despite diminishing government financial support over the past quarter century, MIT launched several successful development campaigns to significantly expand the campus: new dormitories and athletics buildings on west campus; the Tang Center for Management Education; several buildings in the northeast corner of campus supporting research into biology, brain and cognitive sciences, genomics, biotechnology, and cancer research; and a number of new “backlot” buildings on Vassar Street including the Stata Center. Construction on campus in the 2000s included expansions of the Media Lab, the Sloan School’s eastern campus, and graduate residences in the northwest. In 2006, President Hockfield launched the MIT Energy Research Council to investigate the interdisciplinary challenges posed by increasing global energy consumption.

    In 2001, inspired by the open source and open access movements, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) launched OpenCourseWare to make the lecture notes, problem sets, syllabi, exams, and lectures from the great majority of its courses available online for no charge, though without any formal accreditation for coursework completed. While the cost of supporting and hosting the project is high, OCW expanded in 2005 to include other universities as a part of the OpenCourseWare Consortium, which currently includes more than 250 academic institutions with content available in at least six languages. In 2011, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) announced it would offer formal certification (but not credits or degrees) to online participants completing coursework in its “MITx” program, for a modest fee. The “edX” online platform supporting MITx was initially developed in partnership with Harvard and its analogous “Harvardx” initiative. The courseware platform is open source, and other universities have already joined and added their own course content. In March 2009 the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) faculty adopted an open-access policy to make its scholarship publicly accessible online.

    Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) has its own police force. Three days after the Boston Marathon bombing of April 2013, MIT Police patrol officer Sean Collier was fatally shot by the suspects Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, setting off a violent manhunt that shut down the campus and much of the Boston metropolitan area for a day. One week later, Collier’s memorial service was attended by more than 10,000 people, in a ceremony hosted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) community with thousands of police officers from the New England region and Canada. On November 25, 2013, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) announced the creation of the Collier Medal, to be awarded annually to “an individual or group that embodies the character and qualities that Officer Collier exhibited as a member of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) community and in all aspects of his life”. The announcement further stated that “Future recipients of the award will include those whose contributions exceed the boundaries of their profession, those who have contributed to building bridges across the community, and those who consistently and selflessly perform acts of kindness”.

    In September 2017, the school announced the creation of an artificial intelligence research lab called the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab. IBM will spend $240 million over the next decade, and the lab will be staffed by MIT and IBM scientists. In October 2018 MIT announced that it would open a new Schwarzman College of Computing dedicated to the study of artificial intelligence, named after lead donor and The Blackstone Group CEO Stephen Schwarzman. The focus of the new college is to study not just AI, but interdisciplinary AI education, and how AI can be used in fields as diverse as history and biology. The cost of buildings and new faculty for the new college is expected to be $1 billion upon completion.

    The Caltech/MIT Advanced aLIGO (US) was designed and constructed by a team of scientists from California Institute of Technology (US), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US), and industrial contractors, and funded by the National Science Foundation (US) .

    Caltech /MIT Advanced aLigo

    It was designed to open the field of gravitational-wave astronomy through the detection of gravitational waves predicted by general relativity. Gravitational waves were detected for the first time by the LIGO detector in 2015. For contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves, two Caltech physicists, Kip Thorne and Barry Barish, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) physicist Rainer Weiss won the Nobel Prize in physics in 2017. Weiss, who is also an Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) graduate, designed the laser interferometric technique, which served as the essential blueprint for the LIGO.

    The mission of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the twenty-first century. We seek to develop in each member of The Massachusetts Institute of Technology community the ability and passion to work wisely, creatively, and effectively for the betterment of humankind.

     
  • richardmitnick 4:07 pm on January 20, 2022 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Going beyond the exascale", , , Classical computers have been central to physics research for decades., , , , Fermilab has used classical computing to simulate lattice quantum chromodynamics., HEP, , , Planning for a future that is still decades out., Quantum computers could enable physicists to tackle questions even the most powerful computers cannot handle., , Quantum computing is here—sort of., , Solving equations on a quantum computer requires completely new ways of thinking about programming and algorithms., , , The biggest place where quantum simulators will have an impact is in discovery science.   

    From Symmetry: “Going beyond the exascale” 

    Symmetry Mag

    From Symmetry

    01/20/22
    Emily Ayshford

    1
    Illustration by Sandbox Studio, Chicago with Ana Kova.

    Quantum computers could enable physicists to tackle questions even the most powerful computers cannot handle.

    After years of speculation, quantum computing is here—sort of.

    Physicists are beginning to consider how quantum computing could provide answers to the deepest questions in the field. But most aren’t getting caught up in the hype. Instead, they are taking what for them is a familiar tack—planning for a future that is still decades out, while making room for pivots, turns and potential breakthroughs along the way.

    “When we’re working on building a new particle collider, that sort of project can take 40 years,” says Hank Lamm, an associate scientist at The DOE’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (US). “This is on the same timeline. I hope to start seeing quantum computing provide big answers for particle physics before I die. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t interesting physics to do along the way.”

    Equations that overpower even supercomputers.

    Classical computers have been central to physics research for decades, and simulations that run on classical computers have guided many breakthroughs. Fermilab, for example, has used classical computing to simulate lattice quantum chromodynamics. Lattice QCD is a set of equations that describe the interactions of quarks and gluons via the strong force.

    Theorists developed lattice QCD in the 1970s. But applying its equations proved extremely difficult. “Even back in the 1980s, many people said that even if they had an exascale computer [a computer that can perform a billion billion calculations per second], they still couldn’t calculate lattice QCD,” Lamm says.

    Depiction of ANL ALCF Cray Intel SC18 Shasta Aurora exascale supercomputer, to be built at DOE’s Argonne National Laboratory (US).

    Depiction of ORNL Cray Frontier Shasta based Exascale supercomputer with Slingshot interconnect featuring high-performance AMD EPYC CPU and AMD Radeon Instinct GPU technology , being built at DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory (US).

    But that turned out not to be true.

    Within the past 10 to 15 years, researchers have discovered the algorithms needed to make their calculations more manageable, while learning to understand theoretical errors and how to ameliorate them. These advances have allowed them to use a lattice simulation, a simulation that uses a volume of a specified grid of points in space and time as a substitute for the continuous vastness of reality.

    Lattice simulations have allowed physicists to calculate the mass of the proton—a particle made up of quarks and gluons all interacting via the strong force—and find that the theoretical prediction lines up well with the experimental result. The simulations have also allowed them to accurately predict the temperature at which quarks should detach from one another in a quark-gluon plasma.

    Quark-Gluon Plasma from BNL Relative Heavy Ion Collider (US).

    DOE’s Brookhaven National Laboratory(US) RHIC Campus

    The limit of these calculations? Along with being approximate, or based on a confined, hypothetical area of space, only certain properties can be computed efficiently. Try to look at more than that, and even the biggest high-performance computer cannot handle all of the possibilities.

    Enter quantum computers.

    Quantum computers are all about possibilities. Classical computers don’t have the memory to compute the many possible outcomes of lattice QCD problems, but quantum computers take advantage of quantum mechanics to calculate differently.

    Quantum computing isn’t an easy answer, though. Solving equations on a quantum computer requires completely new ways of thinking about programming and algorithms.

    Using a classical computer, when you program code, you can look at its state at all times. You can check a classical computer’s work before it’s done and trouble-shoot if things go wrong. But under the laws of quantum mechanics, you cannot observe any intermediate step of a quantum computation without corrupting the computation; you can observe only the final state.

    That means you can’t store any information in an intermediate state and bring it back later, and you cannot clone information from one set of qubits into another, making error correction difficult.

    “It can be a nightmare designing an algorithm for quantum computation,” says Lamm, who spends his days trying to figure out how to do quantum simulations for high-energy physics. “Everything has to be redesigned from the ground up. We are right at the beginning of understanding how to do this.”

    Just getting started

    Quantum computers have already proved useful in basic research. Condensed matter physicists—whose research relates to phases of matter—have spent much more time than particle physicists thinking about how quantum computers and simulators can help them. They have used quantum simulators to explore quantum spin liquid states [Science] and to observe a previously unobserved phase of matter called a prethermal time crystal [Science].

    “The biggest place where quantum simulators will have an impact is in discovery science, in discovering new phenomena like this that exist in nature,” says Norman Yao, an assistant professor at The University of California-Berkeley (US) and co-author on the time crystal paper.

    Quantum computers are showing promise in particle physics and astrophysics. Many physics and astrophysics researchers are using quantum computers to simulate “toy problems”—small, simple versions of much more complicated problems. They have, for example, used quantum computing to test parts of theories of quantum gravity [npj Quantum Information] or create proof-of-principle models, like models of the parton showers that emit from particle colliders [Physical Review Letters] such as the Large Hadron Collider.

    The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN].

    The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear][Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH)[CERN] map.

    CERN LHC tube in the tunnel. Credit: Maximilien Brice and Julien Marius Ordan.

    SixTRack CERN LHC particles.

    “Physicists are taking on the small problems, ones that they can solve with other ways, to try to understand how quantum computing can have an advantage,” says Roni Harnik, a scientist at Fermilab. “Learning from this, they can build a ladder of simulations, through trial and error, to more difficult problems.”

    But just which approaches will succeed, and which will lead to dead ends, remains to be seen. Estimates of how many qubits will be needed to simulate big enough problems in physics to get breakthroughs range from thousands to (more likely) millions. Many in the field expect this to be possible in the 2030s or 2040s.

    “In high-energy physics, problems like these are clearly a regime in which quantum computers will have an advantage,” says Ning Bao, associate computational scientist at DOE’s Brookhaven National Laboratory (US). “The problem is that quantum computers are still too limited in what they can do.”

    Starting with physics

    Some physicists are coming at things from a different perspective: They’re looking to physics to better understand quantum computing.

    John Preskill is a physics professor at The California Institute of Technology (US) and an early leader in the field of quantum computing. A few years ago, he and Patrick Hayden, professor of physics at Stanford University (US), showed that if you entangled two photons and threw one into a black hole, decoding the information that eventually came back out via Hawking radiation would be significantly easier than if you had used non-entangled particles. Physicists Beni Yoshida and Alexei Kitaev then came up with an explicit protocol for such decoding, and Yao went a step further, showing that protocol could also be a powerful tool in characterizing quantum computers.

    “We took something that was thought about in terms of high-energy physics and quantum information science, then thought of it as a tool that could be used in quantum computing,” Yao says.

    That sort of cross-disciplinary thinking will be key to moving the field forward, physicists say.

    “Everyone is coming into this field with different expertise,” Bao says. “From computing, or physics, or quantum information theory—everyone gets together to bring different perspectives and figure out problems. There are probably many ways of using quantum computing to study physics that we can’t predict right now, and it will just be a matter of getting the right two people in a room together.”

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.


    Stem Education Coalition

    Symmetry is a joint Fermilab/SLAC publication.


     
  • richardmitnick 11:47 am on January 16, 2022 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Multiverse Explanation for Small Higgs Mass", , , , HEP, , ,   

    From Physics : “Multiverse Explanation for Small Higgs Mass” 

    About Physics

    From Physics

    January 12, 2022
    Katherine Wright

    1
    sakkmesterke/stock.adobe.com.

    A new model that assumes that a multitude of universes existed when our Universe first formed may explain why the Higgs mass is smaller than traditional models predict.

    The standard model of particle physics has been inordinately successful, providing experimental predictions that accurately describe most of our Universe’s forces and fundamental particles.

    Standard Model of Particle Physics, Quantum Diaries.

    But the model has some glaring holes. It contains no viable Dark Matter particle, it lacks an explanation for the Universe’s accelerating expansion, and it predicts a Higgs boson mass that is at least triple that measured in experiments.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) ATLAS Higgs Event June 18, 2012.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) CMS Higgs Event May 27, 2012.

    Now, Raffaele Tito D’Agnolo of The University of Paris-Saclay (FR) and Daniele Teresi of The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire](CH) have developed a model that provides an explanation for the lightness of the Higgs.

    Science paper:
    Physical Review Letters

    The duo says that their model, which invokes multiverses, could also explain other conundrums, such as the observed similarity in how matter and antimatter experience strong interactions.

    As a starting point for their model, the researchers assume that at very early times in our Universe’s history there existed a multitude of universes. Each universe contained Higgs bosons with inhomogeneous masses: some regions of each universe contained a heavy Higgs boson, while others contained a very light version.

    By watching how this so-called multiverse evolved over time, the researchers found that regions having a large Higgs were unstable and collapsed in times as short as 10^−5s. That collapse, also known as crunching, destroyed those multiverse components. The only remaining universe—ours—contained a very light Higgs boson. D’Agnolo and Teresi also found another factor in their model that prevented this universe from being crunched: a symmetric strong interaction—a fundamental force of nature that occurs between subatomic particles—for matter and antimatter. This symmetry is another hole of the standard model. The team says that their model should be testable in future dark matter and hadronic experiments.

    See the full article here .

    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Physicists are drowning in a flood of research papers in their own fields and coping with an even larger deluge in other areas of physics. How can an active researcher stay informed about the most important developments in physics? Physics highlights a selection of papers from the Physical Review journals. In consultation with expert scientists, the editors choose these papers for their importance and/or intrinsic interest. To highlight these papers, Physics features three kinds of articles: Viewpoints are commentaries written by active researchers, who are asked to explain the results to physicists in other subfields. Focus stories are written by professional science writers in a journalistic style and are intended to be accessible to students and non-experts. Synopses are brief editor-written summaries. Physics provides a much-needed guide to the best in physics, and we welcome your comments.

     
  • richardmitnick 10:15 am on January 6, 2022 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ALICE’s inner Gas Electron Multiplier (GEM) TPC chambers, , , HEP, , , , RHIG: Relativistic Heavy Ion Group,   

    From Wright Laboratory at Yale University (US) : “ALICE first collision data demonstrates success of Wright Lab detector upgrade” 

    1

    From Wright Laboratory

    At

    Yale University (US)

    November 12, 2021 {Just today in social media.]

    Wright Lab’s Relativistic Heavy Ion Group (RHIG), led by professor of physics Helen Caines and D. Allan Bromley Professor Emeritus of Physics John Harris, has been taking advantage of the extended 3-year shutdown of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC)–the world’s largest and most powerful particle accelerator located at the Center for European Nuclear Research (CERN) in Geneva, Switzerland–to contribute to the upgrade of one of the LHC’s detectors, called A Large Ion Collider Experiment (ALICE).

    1
    Image courtesy of Yale RHIG/ALICE Collaboration.

    Iconic view of the European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN] ALICE Detector.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN].

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire (CH) map.

    CERN LHC tunnel and tube.

    SixTRack CERN LHC particles.

    ALICE uses collisions of heavy nuclei, as well as proton-proton and proton-nucleus collisions, to study the physics of strongly interacting matter at the highest energy densities reached so far in the laboratory. The primary goal of the experiment is to re-create the quark-gluon plasma (QGP) state of matter, which is predicted by the Standard Model of particle physics to have existed ten millionths of a second after the Big Bang.

    After several years of construction and then installation during the LHC shutdown, the upgraded LHC started delivering stable beams in collision for detectors on October 27, 2021. ALICE immediately started taking data to test its new detector systems—including a completely new silicon inner tracking system (10 m2 of active silicon area and nearly 13 billion pixels) and new Time Projection Chamber (TPC) endcap readout–as well as its online and offline software.

    Wright Lab research scientist Nikolai Smirnov and the late Richard Majka, also a research scientist in Wright Lab’s RHIG, were in charge of the assembly and testing of ALICE’s inner Gas Electron Multiplier (GEM) TPC chambers in Wright Lab. Majka also served as the U.S. Project Leader for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) supported GEM-TPC construction project effort. Graduate students from RHIG also played an important role in the R&D for this new type of TPC readout prior to its construction.

    The GEM-TPC (cylindrical tracking detector 5 meters in diameter, 5 meters long) and its new readout electronics feature a continuous readout mode that allows ALICE to record the thousands of tracks produced in Pb-Pb collisions at event rates of 50 kHz leading to a staggering data rate of 3.5 TB/s.

    Seen in the online display (see snapshot pictured, above) is the real-time sequence of the continuous TPC data stream in 11 millisecond slices. Tracks from individual proton-proton collision events can be seen as they curve through the magnetic field along the cylindrical axis. Given the continuously streaming, real-time data readout and the new detector systems, ALICE expects to accumulate 50 times more heavy-ion collision data in the upcoming LHC Run 3 than in Runs 1 and 2 combined.

    In addition to leading construction of the inner sectors of the ALICE TPC upgrade, RHIG at Yale has been engaged with the ALICE Collaboration since its beginning. The Wright Lab group has contributed significantly to ALICE analyses and papers, as well as the original design of the detector. The Wright Lab group assembled, tested, calibrated, and installed the electromagnetic calorimeter (EMCal) in ALICE. Harris is a past chair of the ALICE Collaboration Board. Furthermore, the group engages in simulations, R&D, design and prototyping of future detectors.

    See the full article here .

    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Wright Lab is advancing the frontiers of fundamental physics through a broad research program in nuclear, particle, and astrophysics that includes precision studies of neutrinos; searches for dark matter; investigations of the building blocks and interactions of matter; exploration of quantum science and its applications for fundamental physics experiments; and observations of the early Universe. The laboratory’s unique combination of on-site state-of-the-art research facilities, technical infrastructure, and interaction spaces supports innovative instrumentation development, hands-on research, and training the next generation of scientists. Wright Lab is a part of the Yale Department of Physics and houses several Yale University core facilities that serve researchers across Yale’s Science Hill and beyond.

    Mission

    The mission of Yale Wright Laboratory is to advance understanding of the physical world, from the smallest particles to the evolution of the Universe, by engaging in fundamental research, developing novel applications, training future leaders in research and development, educating scholars, and enabling discovery.

    Wright Lab supports a diverse community of scientists, staff, and students who advance our mission and fosters cross-disciplinary collaborations across Yale University and worldwide.

    Climate Statement

    The Yale Wright Laboratory is committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion among all students, staff, and faculty. The goal of our lab community is to provide a safe and supportive environment for research, teaching, and mentoring. Diversity, equity, and inclusion are core principles of our work place and part of the excellence we aim for.

    Resources

    Wright Lab, the Yale Department of Physics, and Yale University offer a number of resources on topics of climate, diversity, equity, and inclusion. In addition, the Committee on Climate and Diversity in the Physics Department is a point of contact for all questions and concerns. Please visit the following links for more information and a list of resources.

    Collaboration

    With its on-site core facilities and research program, Wright Lab fosters cross-disciplinary research collaborations across Yale University and worldwide. Wright Lab works with the Yale Center for Research Computing (YCRC) on novel solutions to the research computing challenges in nuclear, particle and astrophysics, and collaborates with the Yale Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics (YCAA) on understanding dark matter in the Universe. Quantum sensors and techniques jointly developed with the Yale Quantum Institute (YQI) are used for axion searches at Wright Lab.

    Wright Lab also has strong, interdisciplinary partnerships with the Yale Center for Collaborative Arts and Media, the Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History, and Yale Pathways to Science.

    Funding

    Wright Laboratory gratefully acknowledges support from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation; the Department of Energy, Office of Science, High Energy Physics and Nuclear Physics; the Heising-Simons Foundation; the Krell Institute; the National Science Foundation; and Yale University.

    Yale University (US) is a private Ivy League research university in New Haven, Connecticut. Founded in 1701 as the Collegiate School, it is the third-oldest institution of higher education in the United States and one of the nine Colonial Colleges chartered before the American Revolution. The Collegiate School was renamed Yale College in 1718 to honor the school’s largest private benefactor for the first century of its existence, Elihu Yale. Yale University is consistently ranked as one of the top universities and is considered one of the most prestigious in the nation.

    Chartered by Connecticut Colony, the Collegiate School was established in 1701 by clergy to educate Congregational ministers before moving to New Haven in 1716. Originally restricted to theology and sacred languages, the curriculum began to incorporate humanities and sciences by the time of the American Revolution. In the 19th century, the college expanded into graduate and professional instruction, awarding the first PhD in the United States in 1861 and organizing as a university in 1887. Yale’s faculty and student populations grew after 1890 with rapid expansion of the physical campus and scientific research.

    Yale is organized into fourteen constituent schools: the original undergraduate college, the Yale Graduate School of Arts and Sciences and twelve professional schools. While the university is governed by the Yale Corporation, each school’s faculty oversees its curriculum and degree programs. In addition to a central campus in downtown New Haven, the university owns athletic facilities in western New Haven, a campus in West Haven, Connecticut, and forests and nature preserves throughout New England. As of June 2020, the university’s endowment was valued at $31.1 billion, the second largest of any educational institution. The Yale University Library, serving all constituent schools, holds more than 15 million volumes and is the third-largest academic library in the United States. Students compete in intercollegiate sports as the Yale Bulldogs in the NCAA Division I – Ivy League.

    As of October 2020, 65 Nobel laureates, five Fields Medalists, four Abel Prize laureates, and three Turing award winners have been affiliated with Yale University. In addition, Yale has graduated many notable alumni, including five U.S. Presidents, 19 U.S. Supreme Court Justices, 31 living billionaires, and many heads of state. Hundreds of members of Congress and many U.S. diplomats, 78 MacArthur Fellows, 252 Rhodes Scholars, 123 Marshall Scholars, and nine Mitchell Scholars have been affiliated with the university.

    Research

    Yale is a member of the Association of American Universities (AAU) (US) and is classified among “R1: Doctoral Universities – Very high research activity”. According to the National Science Foundation (US), Yale spent $990 million on research and development in 2018, ranking it 15th in the nation.

    Yale’s faculty include 61 members of the National Academy of Sciences (US), 7 members of the National Academy of Engineering (US) and 49 members of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (US). The college is, after normalization for institution size, the tenth-largest baccalaureate source of doctoral degree recipients in the United States, and the largest such source within the Ivy League.

    Yale’s English and Comparative Literature departments were part of the New Criticism movement. Of the New Critics, Robert Penn Warren, W.K. Wimsatt, and Cleanth Brooks were all Yale faculty. Later, the Yale Comparative literature department became a center of American deconstruction. Jacques Derrida, the father of deconstruction, taught at the Department of Comparative Literature from the late seventies to mid-1980s. Several other Yale faculty members were also associated with deconstruction, forming the so-called “Yale School”. These included Paul de Man who taught in the Departments of Comparative Literature and French, J. Hillis Miller, Geoffrey Hartman (both taught in the Departments of English and Comparative Literature), and Harold Bloom (English), whose theoretical position was always somewhat specific, and who ultimately took a very different path from the rest of this group. Yale’s history department has also originated important intellectual trends. Historians C. Vann Woodward and David Brion Davis are credited with beginning in the 1960s and 1970s an important stream of southern historians; likewise, David Montgomery, a labor historian, advised many of the current generation of labor historians in the country. Yale’s Music School and Department fostered the growth of Music Theory in the latter half of the 20th century. The Journal of Music Theory was founded there in 1957; Allen Forte and David Lewin were influential teachers and scholars.

    In addition to eminent faculty members, Yale research relies heavily on the presence of roughly 1200 Postdocs from various national and international origin working in the multiple laboratories in the sciences, social sciences, humanities, and professional schools of the university. The university progressively recognized this working force with the recent creation of the Office for Postdoctoral Affairs and the Yale Postdoctoral Association.

    Notable alumni

    Over its history, Yale has produced many distinguished alumni in a variety of fields, ranging from the public to private sector. According to 2020 data, around 71% of undergraduates join the workforce, while the next largest majority of 16.6% go on to attend graduate or professional schools. Yale graduates have been recipients of 252 Rhodes Scholarships, 123 Marshall Scholarships, 67 Truman Scholarships, 21 Churchill Scholarships, and 9 Mitchell Scholarships. The university is also the second largest producer of Fulbright Scholars, with a total of 1,199 in its history and has produced 89 MacArthur Fellows. The U.S. Department of State Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs ranked Yale fifth among research institutions producing the most 2020–2021 Fulbright Scholars. Additionally, 31 living billionaires are Yale alumni.

    At Yale, one of the most popular undergraduate majors among Juniors and Seniors is political science, with many students going on to serve careers in government and politics. Former presidents who attended Yale for undergrad include William Howard Taft, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush while former presidents Gerald Ford and Bill Clinton attended Yale Law School. Former vice-president and influential antebellum era politician John C. Calhoun also graduated from Yale. Former world leaders include Italian prime minister Mario Monti, Turkish prime minister Tansu Çiller, Mexican president Ernesto Zedillo, German president Karl Carstens, Philippine president José Paciano Laurel, Latvian president Valdis Zatlers, Taiwanese premier Jiang Yi-huah, and Malawian president Peter Mutharika, among others. Prominent royals who graduated are Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden, and Olympia Bonaparte, Princess Napoléon.

    Yale alumni have had considerable presence in U.S. government in all three branches. On the U.S. Supreme Court, 19 justices have been Yale alumni, including current Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh. Numerous Yale alumni have been U.S. Senators, including current Senators Michael Bennet, Richard Blumenthal, Cory Booker, Sherrod Brown, Chris Coons, Amy Klobuchar, Ben Sasse, and Sheldon Whitehouse. Current and former cabinet members include Secretaries of State John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Cyrus Vance, and Dean Acheson; U.S. Secretaries of the Treasury Oliver Wolcott, Robert Rubin, Nicholas F. Brady, Steven Mnuchin, and Janet Yellen; U.S. Attorneys General Nicholas Katzenbach, John Ashcroft, and Edward H. Levi; and many others. Peace Corps founder and American diplomat Sargent Shriver and public official and urban planner Robert Moses are Yale alumni.

    Yale has produced numerous award-winning authors and influential writers, like Nobel Prize in Literature laureate Sinclair Lewis and Pulitzer Prize winners Stephen Vincent Benét, Thornton Wilder, Doug Wright, and David McCullough. Academy Award winning actors, actresses, and directors include Jodie Foster, Paul Newman, Meryl Streep, Elia Kazan, George Roy Hill, Lupita Nyong’o, Oliver Stone, and Frances McDormand. Alumni from Yale have also made notable contributions to both music and the arts. Leading American composer from the 20th century Charles Ives, Broadway composer Cole Porter, Grammy award winner David Lang, and award-winning jazz pianist and composer Vijay Iyer all hail from Yale. Hugo Boss Prize winner Matthew Barney, famed American sculptor Richard Serra, President Barack Obama presidential portrait painter Kehinde Wiley, MacArthur Fellow and contemporary artist Sarah Sze, Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist Garry Trudeau, and National Medal of Arts photorealist painter Chuck Close all graduated from Yale. Additional alumni include architect and Presidential Medal of Freedom winner Maya Lin, Pritzker Prize winner Norman Foster, and Gateway Arch designer Eero Saarinen. Journalists and pundits include Dick Cavett, Chris Cuomo, Anderson Cooper, William F. Buckley, Jr., and Fareed Zakaria.

    In business, Yale has had numerous alumni and former students go on to become founders of influential business, like William Boeing (Boeing, United Airlines), Briton Hadden and Henry Luce (Time Magazine), Stephen A. Schwarzman (Blackstone Group), Frederick W. Smith (FedEx), Juan Trippe (Pan Am), Harold Stanley (Morgan Stanley), Bing Gordon (Electronic Arts), and Ben Silbermann (Pinterest). Other business people from Yale include former chairman and CEO of Sears Holdings Edward Lampert, former Time Warner president Jeffrey Bewkes, former PepsiCo chairperson and CEO Indra Nooyi, sports agent Donald Dell, and investor/philanthropist Sir John Templeton,

    Yale alumni distinguished in academia include literary critic and historian Henry Louis Gates, economists Irving Fischer, Mahbub ul Haq, and Nobel Prize laureate Paul Krugman; Nobel Prize in Physics laureates Ernest Lawrence and Murray Gell-Mann; Fields Medalist John G. Thompson; Human Genome Project leader and National Institutes of Health (US) director Francis S. Collins; brain surgery pioneer Harvey Cushing; pioneering computer scientist Grace Hopper; influential mathematician and chemist Josiah Willard Gibbs; National Women’s Hall of Fame inductee and biochemist Florence B. Seibert; Turing Award recipient Ron Rivest; inventors Samuel F.B. Morse and Eli Whitney; Nobel Prize in Chemistry laureate John B. Goodenough; lexicographer Noah Webster; and theologians Jonathan Edwards and Reinhold Niebuhr.

    In the sporting arena, Yale alumni include baseball players Ron Darling and Craig Breslow and baseball executives Theo Epstein and George Weiss; football players Calvin Hill, Gary Fenick, Amos Alonzo Stagg, and “the Father of American Football” Walter Camp; ice hockey players Chris Higgins and Olympian Helen Resor; Olympic figure skaters Sarah Hughes and Nathan Chen; nine-time U.S. Squash men’s champion Julian Illingworth; Olympic swimmer Don Schollander; Olympic rowers Josh West and Rusty Wailes; Olympic sailor Stuart McNay; Olympic runner Frank Shorter; and others.

     
  • richardmitnick 11:01 pm on January 5, 2022 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Matter and antimatter seem to respond equally to gravity", , , , European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] BASE: Baryon Antibaryon Symmetry Experiment., HEP, , , , RIKEN[理](JP)   

    From RIKEN[理](JP) via phys.org : “Matter and antimatter seem to respond equally to gravity” 

    RIKEN bloc

    From RIKEN[理](JP)

    via

    phys.org

    1
    Credit: CC0 Public Domain

    As part of an experiment to measure—to an extremely precise degree—the charge-to-mass ratios of protons and antiprotons, the RIKEN-led BASE collaboration at CERN, Geneva, Switzerland, has found that, within the uncertainty of the experiment, matter and antimatter respond to gravity in the same way.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] BASE: Baryon Antibaryon Symmetry Experiment.

    CERN BASE experiment

    Matter and antimatter create some of the most interesting problems in physics today. They are essentially equivalent, except that where a particle has a positive charge its antiparticle has a negative one. In other respects they seem equivalent. However, one of the great mysteries of physics today, known as “baryon asymmetry,” is that, despite the fact that they seem equivalent, the universe seems made up entirely of matter, with very little antimatter. Naturally, scientists around the world are trying hard to find something different between the two, which could explain why we exist.

    As part of this quest, scientists have explored whether matter and antimatter interact similarly with gravity, or whether antimatter would experience gravity in a different way than matter, which would violate Einstein’s weak equivalence principle. Now, the BASE collaboration has shown, within strict boundaries, that antimatter does in fact respond to gravity in the same way as matter.

    The finding, published in Nature, actually came from a different experiment, which was examining the charge-to-mass ratios of protons and antiprotons, one of the other important measurements that could determine the key difference between the two.

    This work involved 18 months of work at CERN’s antimatter factory. To make the measurements, the team confined antiprotons and negatively charged hydrogen ions, which they used as a proxy for protons, in a Penning trap. In this device, a particle follows a cyclical trajectory with a frequency, close to the cyclotron frequency, that scales with the trap’s magnetic-field strength and the particle’s charge-to-mass ratio. By feeding antiprotons and negatively charged hydrogen ions into the trap, one at a time, they were able to measure, under identical conditions, the cyclotron frequencies of the two particle types, comparing their charge-to-mass ratios. According to Stefan Ulmer, the leader of the project, “By doing this, we were able to obtain a result that they are essentially equivalent, to a degree four times more precise than previous measures. To this level of CPT invariance, causality and locality hold in the relativistic quantum field theories of the Standard Model.”

    Interestingly, the group used the measurements to test a fundamental physics law known as the weak equivalence principle. According to this principle, different bodies in the same gravitational field should undergo the same acceleration in the absence of frictional forces. Because the BASE experiment was placed on the surface of the Earth, the proton and antiproton cyclotron-frequency measurements were made in the gravitational field on the Earth’s surface, and any difference between the gravitational interaction of protons and antiprotons would result in a difference between the cyclotron frequencies.

    By sampling the gravitational field of the Earth as the planet orbited the Sun, the scientists found that matter and antimatter responded to gravity in the same way up to a degree of three parts in 100, which means that the gravitational acceleration of matter and antimatter are identical within 97% of the experienced acceleration.

    Ulmer adds that these measurements could lead to new physics. He says, “The 3% accuracy of the gravitational interaction obtained in this study is comparable to the accuracy goal of the gravitational interaction between antimatter and matter that other research groups plan to measure using free-falling anti-hydrogen atoms. If the results of our study differ from those of the other groups, it could lead to the dawn of a completely new physics.”

    See the full article here .

    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    RIKEN campus

    RIKEN [理研](JP) is Japan’s largest comprehensive research institution renowned for high-quality research in a diverse range of scientific disciplines. Founded in 1917 as a private research foundation in Tokyo, RIKEN has grown rapidly in size and scope, today encompassing a network of world-class research centers and institutes across Japan. Founded in 1917, it now has about 3,000 scientists on seven campuses across Japan, including the main site at Wakō, Saitama Prefecture, just outside Tokyo. Riken is a Designated National Research and Development Institute, and was formerly an Independent Administrative Institution.
    Riken conducts research in many areas of science including physics; chemistry; biology; genomics; medical science; engineering; high-performance computing and computational science and ranging from basic research to practical applications with 485 partners worldwide. It is almost entirely funded by the Japanese government, and its annual budget is about ¥88 billion (US$790 million).

    Organizational structure:

    The main divisions of Riken are listed here. Purely administrative divisions are omitted.

    Headquarters (mostly in Wako)
    Wako Branch
    Center for Emergent Matter Science (research on new materials for reduced power consumption)
    Center for Sustainable Resource Science (research toward a sustainable society)
    Nishina Center for Accelerator-Based Science (site of the Radioactive Isotope Beam Factory, a heavy-ion accelerator complex)
    Center for Brain Science
    Center for Advanced Photonics (research on photonics including terahertz radiation)
    Research Cluster for Innovation
    Cluster for Pioneering Research (chief scientists)
    Interdisciplinary Theoretical and Mathematical Sciences Program
    Tokyo Branch
    Center for Advanced Intelligence Project (research on artificial intelligence)
    Tsukuba Branch
    BioResource Research Center
    Harima Institute
    Riken SPring-8 Center (site of the SPring-8 synchrotron and the SACLA x-ray free electron laser)

    Riken SPring-8 synchrotron, located in Hyōgo Prefecture, Japan.

    RIKEN/HARIMA (JP) X-ray Free Electron Laser
    Yokohama Branch (site of the Yokohama Nuclear magnetic resonance facility)
    Center for Sustainable Resource Science
    Center for Integrative Medical Sciences (research toward personalized medicine)
    Center for Biosystems Dynamics Research (also based in Kobe and Osaka) [6]
    Program for Drug Discovery and Medical Technology Platform
    Structural Biology Laboratory
    Sugiyama Laboratory
    Kobe Branch
    Center for Biosystems Dynamics Research (developmental biology and nuclear medicine medical imaging techniques)
    Center for Computational Science (R-CCS, home of the K computer and The post-K (Fugaku) computer development plan)

    Riken Fujitsu K supercomputer manufactured by Fujitsu, installed at the Riken Advanced Institute for Computational Science campus in Kobe, Hyōgo Prefecture, Japan.

    Fugaku is a claimed exascale supercomputer (while only at petascale for mainstream benchmark), at the RIKEN Center for Computational Science in Kobe, Japan. It started development in 2014 as the successor to the K computer, and is officially scheduled to start operating in 2021. Fugaku made its debut in 2020, and became the fastest supercomputer in the world in the June 2020 TOP500 list, the first ever supercomputer that achieved 1 exaFLOPS. As of April 2021, Fugaku is currently the fastest supercomputer in the world.

     
  • richardmitnick 12:35 pm on January 5, 2022 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , HEP, , , , , The BASE: Baryon Antibaryon Symmetry Experiment, The collaboration has made the most precise comparison yet between protons and antiprotons and tested whether or not they behave in the same way under the influence of gravity.,   

    From The BASE: Baryon Antibaryon Symmetry Experiment at The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN] via Interactions.org : “BASE breaks new ground in matter-antimatter comparisons” 

    The European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] BASE: Baryon Antibaryon Symmetry Experiment.

    at

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN]
    Cern New Bloc

    Cern New Particle Event

    From European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN]

    via

    Interactions.org

    2
    View of the BASE experiment.

    The collaboration has made the most precise comparison yet between protons and antiprotons and tested whether or not they behave in the same way under the influence of gravity.

    In a paper published today in the journal Nature, the BASE collaboration at CERN reports the most precise comparison yet between protons and antiprotons, the antimatter counterparts of protons.

    Analysing proton and antiproton measurements taken over a year and a half at CERN’s antimatter factory, a unique facility for antimatter production and analyses, the BASE team measured the electric charge-to-mass ratios of the proton and the antiproton with record precision. The results found these are identical to within an experimental uncertainty of 16 parts per trillion.

    “This result represents the most precise direct test of a fundamental symmetry between matter and antimatter, performed with particles made of three quarks, known as baryons, and their antiparticles,” says BASE spokesperson Stefan Ulmer.

    According to the Standard Model, which represents physicists’ current best theory of particles and their interactions, matter and antimatter particles can differ, for example in the way they transform into other particles, but most of their properties, including their masses, should be identical.

    Standard Model of Particle Physics, Quantum Diaries.

    Finding any slight difference between the masses of protons and antiprotons, or between the ratios of their electric charge and mass, would break a fundamental symmetry of the Standard Model, called CPT symmetry, and point to new physics phenomena beyond the Model.

    Such a difference could also shed light on why the universe is made up almost entirely of matter, even though equal amounts of antimatter should have been created in the Big Bang. The differences between matter and antimatter particles that are consistent with the Standard Model are smaller by orders of magnitude to be able to explain this observed cosmic imbalance.

    To make their proton and antiproton measurements, the BASE team confined antiprotons and negatively charged hydrogen ions[1], which are negatively charged proxies for protons, in a state-of-the-art particle trap called a Penning trap. In this device, a particle follows a cyclical trajectory with a frequency, close to the cyclotron frequency, that scales with the trap’s magnetic-field strength and the particle’s charge-to-mass ratio.

    [1] A hydrogen atom that has captured an extra electron.

    Alternately feeding antiprotons and negatively charged hydrogen ions one at a time into the trap, the BASE team measured, under the same conditions, the cyclotron frequencies of these two kinds of particle, allowing their charge-to-mass ratios to be compared.

    Performed over four campaigns between December 2017 and May 2019, these measurements resulted in more than 24000 cyclotron-frequency comparisons, each lasting 260 seconds, between the charge-to-mass ratios of antiprotons and negatively charged hydrogen ions. From these comparisons, and after accounting for the difference between a proton and a negatively charged hydrogen ion, the BASE researchers found that the charge-to-mass ratios of protons and antiprotons are equal to within 16 parts per trillion.

    “This result is four times more precise than the previous best comparison between these ratios, and the charge-to-mass ratio is now the most precisely measured property of the antiproton.” says Stefan Ulmer. “To reach this precision, we made considerable upgrades to the experiment and carried out the measurements when the antimatter factory was closed down, using our reservoir of antiprotons, which can store antiprotons for years.” Making cyclotron-frequency measurements when the antimatter factory is not in operation is ideal, because the measurements are not affected by disturbances to the experiment’s magnetic field.

    In addition to comparing protons and antiprotons with an unprecedented precision, the BASE team used their measurements to place stringent limits on models beyond the Standard Model that violate CPT symmetry, as well as to test a fundamental physics law known as the weak equivalence principle.

    According to this principle, different bodies in the same gravitational field undergo the same acceleration in the absence of friction forces. Because the BASE experiment is placed on the surface of the Earth, its proton and antiproton cyclotron-frequency measurements were made in the gravitational field on the Earth’s surface. Any difference between the gravitational interaction of protons and antiprotons would result in a difference between the proton and antiproton cyclotron frequencies.

    Sampling the varying gravitational field of the Earth as the planet orbits around the Sun, the BASE scientists found no such difference and set a maximum value on this differential measurement of three parts in 100.
    “This limit is comparable to the initial precision goals of experiments that aim to drop antihydrogen in the Earth’s gravitational field,” says Ulmer. “BASE did not directly drop antimatter in the Earth’s gravitational field, but our measurement of the influence of gravity on a baryonic antimatter particle is conceptually very similar, indicating no anomalous interaction between antimatter and gravity at the achieved level of uncertainty.”

    See the full article here.


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings
    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    BASE AT CERN

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] BASE: Baryon Antibaryon Symmetry Experiment.

    The BASE Project was approved by the CERN Research Board in June 2013. The BASE group at CERN constructed a new Penning trap apparatus which has been commissioned in CERN’s antiproton run 2014 at the Antiproton Decelerator (AD). A specialty of BASE is a reservoir trap for antiprotons, which allows us to trap a cloud of antiprotons, decouple from the accelerator and to dispense single antiprotons into the precision Penning trap cycle. Due to the 10-19 mbar vacuum in our trap can we can store antiprotons for months and even bridge the AD winter shutdown. The working principle is demonstrated on the figure below, the upper graph shows the content of the reservoir. The second plot shows the content of one of our precision traps and the third graph the content of our magnetic bottle trap. At 57h, a single particle was extracted from the reservoir and shuttled to the precision trap. At 125h, we applied the same principle, performed measurements on this particle and eventually shuttled it at 155h to the magnetic bottle trap. At 163h, the measurements were turned off due to a power cut of 10h. After 178h, the traps were switched-on again.

    Meet CERN in a variety of places:

    Quantum Diaries
    QuantumDiaries

    Cern Courier


    THE FOUR MAJOR PROJECT COLLABORATIONS

    ATLAS
    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire](CH) ATLAS.

    ALICE
    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire](CH) ALICE .

    CMS
    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) CMS.

    LHCb
    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) LHCb.

    LHC

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire(CH) map.

    CERN LHC underground tunnel and tube.

    CERN SixTrack LHC particles.

    OTHER PROJECTS AT CERN

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU)[CERN] AEGIS.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN]ALPHA Antimatter Factory.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] ALPHA-g Detector.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] AMS.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] ASACUSA.

    CERN ATRAP.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] Antiproton Decelerator.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] AWAKE.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] BASE: Baryon Antibaryon Symmetry Experiment.

    CERN BASE experiment

    </a European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] CAST Axion Solar Telescope.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] CLOUD.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] COMPASS.

    CERN CRIS experiment

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN]DIRAC.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] FASER experiment schematic.
    CERN FASER is designed to study the interactions of high-energy neutrinos and search for new as-yet-undiscovered light and weakly interacting particles. Such particles are dominantly produced along the beam collision axis and may be long-lived particles, travelling hundreds of metres before decaying. The existence of such new particles is predicted by many models beyond the Standard Model that attempt to solve some of the biggest puzzles in physics, such as the nature of dark matter and the origin of neutrino masses.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] GBAR.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN]ISOLDE Looking down into the ISOLDE experimental hall..

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] LHCf.

    CERN-The MoEDAL experiment- a new light on the high-energy frontier.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] NA62.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] NA64..

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] NTOF.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN]TOTEM.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] UA9.

    CERN The SPS’s new RF system. Image: CERN

    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) [CERN] Proto Dune.

    HiRadMat -High Radiation to Materials at CERN

     
  • richardmitnick 10:25 am on December 26, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , HEP, , , , , , , , , , "2021 A year physicists asked 'What lies beyond the Standard Model?'", Neutrinos [tau;muon;electron] represent three of the 17 fundamental particles in the Standard Model.   

    From The Conversation (AU) via phys.org : “2021 A year physicists asked ‘What lies beyond the Standard Model?'” 

    From The Conversation (AU)

    via

    phys.org

    December 23, 2021
    Aaron McGowan, The Conversation

    1
    Experiments at the Large Hadron Collider in Europe, like the ATLAS calorimeter seen here, are providing more accurate measurements of fundamental particles. Credit: Maximilien Brice, CC BY-NC.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN].

    “If you ask a physicist like me to explain how the world works, my lazy answer might be: ‘It follows the Standard Model.’

    Standard Model of Particle Physics, Quantum Diaries

    The Standard Model explains the fundamental physics of how the universe works. It has endured over 50 trips around the Sun despite experimental physicists constantly probing for cracks in the model’s foundations.

    With few exceptions, it has stood up to this scrutiny, passing experimental test after experimental test with flying colors. But this wildly successful model has conceptual gaps that suggest there is a bit more to be learned about how the universe works.

    I am a neutrino physicist. Neutrinos represent three of the 17 fundamental particles in the Standard Model. They zip through every person on Earth at all times of day. I study the properties of interactions between neutrinos and normal matter particles.

    In 2021, physicists around the world ran a number of experiments that probed the Standard Model. Teams measured basic parameters of the model more precisely than ever before. Others investigated the fringes of knowledge where the best experimental measurements don’t quite match the predictions made by the Standard Model. And finally, groups built more powerful technologies designed to push the model to its limits and potentially discover new particles and fields. If these efforts pan out, they could lead to a more complete theory of the universe in the future.

    Filling holes in Standard Model

    In 1897, J.J. Thomson discovered the first fundamental particle, the electron, using nothing more than glass vacuum tubes and wires. More than 100 years later, physicists are still discovering new pieces of the Standard Model.

    2
    The Standard Model of physics allows scientists to make incredibly accurate predictions about how the world works, but it doesn’t explain everything. Credit: CERN, CC BY-NC.

    The Standard Model is a predictive framework that does two things. First, it explains what the basic particles of matter are. These are things like electrons and the quarks that make up protons and neutrons. Second, it predicts how these matter particles interact with each other using “messenger particles.” These are called bosons—they include photons and the famous Higgs boson—and they communicate the basic forces of nature. The Higgs boson wasn’t discovered until 2012 after decades of work at The European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire](CH), the huge particle collider in Europe.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) CMS Higgs Event May 27, 2012.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) ATLAS Higgs Event June 18, 2012.

    Peter Higgs – University of Edinburgh [Oilthigh Dhùn Èideann] (SCT).

    The Standard Model is incredibly good at predicting many aspects of how the world works, but it does have some holes.

    Notably, it does not include any description of gravity. While Albert Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity describes how gravity works, physicists have not yet discovered a particle that conveys the force of gravity [Quantum Mechanics’ ‘graviton’]. A proper “Theory of Everything” would do everything the Standard Model can, but also include the messenger particles that communicate how gravity interacts with other particles.

    Another thing the Standard Model can’t do is explain why any particle has a certain mass—physicists must measure the mass of particles directly using experiments. Only after experiments give physicists these exact masses can they be used for predictions. The better the measurements, the better the predictions that can be made.

    Recently, physicists on a team at CERN measured how strongly the Higgs boson feels itself.

    4
    Twice the Higgs, twice the challenge
    ATLAS searches for pairs of Higgs bosons in the rare bbɣɣ decay channel, 29 March 2021.

    Another CERN team also measured the Higgs boson’s mass more precisely than ever before.

    4
    A new result by the CMS Collaboration narrows down the mass of the Higgs boson to a precision of 0.1%.

    And finally, there was also progress on measuring the mass of neutrinos.

    KATRIN experiment aims to measure the mass of the neutrino using a huge device called a spectrometer (interior shown)KIT Karlsruhe Institute of Technology [Karlsruher Institut für Technologie] (DE).

    Physicists know neutrinos have more than zero mass but less than the amount currently detectable. A team in Germany has continued to refine the techniques that could allow them to directly measure the mass of neutrinos.

    Hints of new forces or particles

    In April 2021, members of the Muon g-2 experiment at Fermilab announced their first measurement of the magnetic moment of the muon.

    DOE’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory(US) Muon g-2 studio. As muons race around a ring at the Muon g-2 studio, their spin axes twirl, reflecting the influence of unseen particles.

    The muon is one of the fundamental particles in the Standard Model, and this measurement of one of its properties is the most accurate to date. The reason this experiment was important was because the measurement didn’t perfectly match the Standard Model prediction of the magnetic moment. Basically, muons don’t behave as they should. This finding could point to undiscovered particles that interact with muons.

    But simultaneously, in April 2021, physicist Zoltan Fodor and his colleagues showed how they used a mathematical method called Lattice QCD to precisely calculate the muon’s magnetic moment. Their theoretical prediction is different from old predictions, still works within the Standard Model and, importantly, matches experimental measurements of the muon.

    The disagreement between the previously accepted predictions, this new result and the new prediction must be reconciled before physicists will know if the experimental result is truly beyond the Standard Model.

    Upgrading the tools of physics

    Physicists must swing between crafting the mind-bending ideas about reality that make up theories and advancing technologies to the point where new experiments can test those theories. 2021 was a big year for advancing the experimental tools of physics.

    First, the world’s largest particle accelerator, the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, was shut down and underwent some substantial upgrades. Physicists just restarted the facility in October, and they plan to begin the next data collection run in May 2022. The upgrades have boosted the power of the collider so that it can produce collisions at 14 TeV, up from the previous limit of 13 TeV. This means the batches of tiny protons that travel in beams around the circular accelerator together carry the same amount of energy as an 800,000-pound (360,000-kilogram) passenger train traveling at 100 mph (160 kph). At these incredible energies, physicists may discover new particles that were too heavy to see at lower energies.

    SixTRack CERN LHC particles.

    Some other technological advancements were made to help the search for dark matter. Many astrophysicists believe that dark matter particles, which don’t currently fit into the Standard Model, could answer some outstanding questions regarding the way gravity bends around stars—called gravitational lensing—as well as the speed at which stars rotate in spiral galaxies. Projects like the Cryogenic Dark Matter Search have yet to find dark matter particles, but the teams are developing larger and more sensitive detectors to be deployed in the near future.

    Gravitational Lensing Gravitational Lensing National Aeronautics Space Agency (US) and European Space Agency [Agence spatiale européenne][Europäische Weltraumorganisation](EU).


    Super Cryogenic Dark Matter Search at DOE’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (US) at Stanford University (US) at SNOLAB (Vale Inco Mine, Sudbury, Canada).

    Particularly relevant to my work with neutrinos is the development of immense new detectors like Hyper-Kamiokande and DUNE.

    Hyper-Kamiokande [(神岡宇宙素粒子研究施設](JP) a neutrino physics laboratory to be located underground in the Mozumi Mine of the Kamioka Mining and Smelting Co. near the Kamioka section of the city of Hida in Gifu Prefecture, Japan.

    DOE’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory(US) DUNE LBNF (US) from FNAL to Sanford Underground Research Facility, Lead, South Dakota, USA.

    DOE’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory(US) DUNE LBNF (US) Caverns at Sanford Underground Research Facility.

    Using these detectors, scientists will hopefully be able to answer questions about a fundamental asymmetry in how neutrinos oscillate. They will also be used to watch for proton decay, a proposed phenomenon that certain theories predict should occur.

    2021 highlighted some of the ways the Standard Model fails to explain every mystery of the universe. But new measurements and new technology are helping physicists move forward in the search for the Theory of Everything.”

    See the full article here .

    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    The Conversation (AU) launched as a pilot project in October 2014. It is an independent source of news and views from the academic and research community, delivered direct to the public.
    Our team of professional editors work with university and research institute experts to unlock their knowledge for use by the wider public.
    Access to independent, high quality, authenticated, explanatory journalism underpins a functioning democracy. Our aim is to promote better understanding of current affairs and complex issues. And hopefully allow for a better quality of public discourse and conversation.

     
  • richardmitnick 5:18 pm on December 18, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , HEP, , , , , Triggers   

    From Symmetry: “Blink and it’s gone” 

    Symmetry Mag

    From Symmetry

    07/13/21 [Found in a year-end round up]
    Eoin O’Carroll

    Fast electronics and artificial intelligence are helping physicists capture data and decide what to keep and what to throw away.

    1
    Illustration by Sandbox Studio, Chicago with Ana Kova.

    The nucleus of the atom was discovered a century ago thanks to scientists who didn’t blink.

    Working in pitch darkness at The University of Manchester (UK) between 1909 and 1913, research assistants Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden peered through microscopes to count flashes of alpha particles on a fluorescent screen. The task demanded total concentration, and the scientists could count accurately for only about a minute before fatigue set in. The physicist and science historian Siegmund Brandt wrote that Geiger and Marsden maintained their focus by ingesting strong coffee and “a pinch of strychnine.”

    Modern particle detectors use sensitive electronics instead of microscopes and rat poison to observe particle collisions, but now there’s a new challenge. Instead of worrying about blinking and missing interesting particle interactions, physicists worry about accidentally throwing them away.

    The Large Hadron Collider at CERN produces collisions at a rate of 40 million per second, producing enough data to fill more than 140,000 one-terabyte storage drives every hour.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN].

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire (CH) map.

    CERN LHC tunnel and tube.

    SixTRack CERN LHC particles.

    Capturing all those events is impossible, so the electronics have to make some tough choices.

    To decide which collisions to retain for analysis and which ones to discard, physicists use specialized systems called trigger systems. The trigger is the only component to observe every collision. In about half the time it takes a human to blink, the CMS experiment’s triggers have processed and discarded 99.9975% of the data.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire(CH) CMS
    European Organization for Nuclear Research (Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire)(EU) CMS Detector

    Iconic view of the European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) [CERN] ATLAS detector.

    Depending on how a trigger is programmed, it could be the first to capture evidence of new phenomena—or to lose it.

    “Once we lose the data, we lose it forever,” says Georgia Karagiorgi, a professor of physics at Columbia University (US) and the US project manager for the data acquisition system for the Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment. “We need to be constantly looking. We can’t close our eyes.”

    The challenge of deciding in a split second which data to keep, some scientists say, could be met with artificial intelligence.

    A numbers game

    Discovering new subatomic phenomena often requires amassing a colossal dataset, most of it uninteresting.

    Geiger and Marsden learned this the hard way. Working under the direction of Ernest Rutherford, the two scientists sought to reveal the structures of atoms by sending streams of alpha particles through sheets of gold foil and observing how the particles scattered. They found that for about every 8000 particles that passed straight through the foil, one particle would bounce away as though it had collided with something solid. That was the atom’s nucleus, and its discovery sent physics itself on a new trajectory.

    By today’s physics’ standards, Geiger and Marsden’s 1-in-8000 odds look like a safe bet. The Higgs boson is thought to appear in only one out of every 5 billion collisions in the LHC.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) CMS Higgs Event May 27, 2012.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) ATLAS Higgs Event

    The triggers will soon need to get even faster. In the LHC’s Run 3, set to begin in March 2022, the total number of collisions will equal that of the two previous runs combined. The collision rate will increase dramatically during the LHC’s High-Luminosity era, which is scheduled to begin in 2027 and continue through the 2030s. That’s when the collider’s luminosity, a measure of how tightly the crossing beams are packed with particles, is set to increase tenfold over its original design value.

    Collecting this data is important because in the coming decade, scientists will intensify their searches for phenomena that are just as mysterious to today’s physicists as atomic nuclei were to Geiger and Marsden.

    And scientists have only a small window of time in which to catch them.

    “At CMS we have a massive amount of data,” says Princeton University (US) physicist Isobel Ojalvo, who has been heavily involved in upgrading the CMS trigger system. “We’re only able to store that data for about three and a half [millionths of a second] before we make decisions about keeping it or throwing it away.”

    A new physics

    In 2012, the Higgs boson became the last confirmed elementary particle of the Standard Model, the equation that succinctly describes all known forms of matter and predicts with astonishing accuracy how they interact.

    Standard Model of Particle Physics, Quantum Diaries

    But there are strong signs that the Standard Model, which has guided physics for nearly 50 years, won’t have the last word. In April, for instance, preliminary results from the Muon g-2 experiment at The DOE’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (US) offered tantalizing hints that the muon may be interacting with a force or particle the Standard Model doesn’t include.

    DOE’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory(US) Muon g-2 studio. As muons race around a ring at the Muon g-2 studio, their spin axes twirl, reflecting the influence of unseen particles.

    Identifying these phenomena and many others may require a new understanding.

    “Given that we have not seen [beyond the Standard Model] physics yet, we need to revolutionize how we collect our data to enable processing data rates at least an order of magnitude higher than achieved thus far,” says The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) physicist Mike Williams, who is a member of the Institute for Research and Innovation in Software for High-Energy Physics, IRIS-HEP, funded by the National Science Foundation.

    Physicists agree that future triggers will need to be faster, but there’s less consensus on how they should be programmed.

    “How do we make discoveries when we don’t know what to look for?” asks Peter Elmer, executive director and principal investigator for IRIS-HEP. “We don’t want to throw anything away that might hint at new physics.”

    There are two different schools of thought, Ojalvo says.

    The more conservative approach is to search for signatures that match theoretical predictions. “Another way,” she says, “is to look for things that are different from everything else.”

    This second option, known as anomaly detection, would scan not for specific signatures, but for anything that deviates from the Standard Model, something that artificial intelligence could help with.

    “In the past, we guessed the model and used the trigger system to pick those signatures up,” Ojalvo says.

    But “now we’re not finding the new physics that we believe is out there,” Ojalvo says. “It may be that we cannot create those interactions in present-day colliders, but we also need to ask ourselves if we’ve turned over every stone.”

    Instead of searching one-by-one for signals predicted by each theory, physicists could deploy to a collider’s trigger system an unsupervised machine-learning algorithm, Ojalvo says. They could train the algorithm only on the collisions it observes, without reference to any other dataset. Over time, the algorithm would learn to distinguish common collision events from rare ones. The approach would not require knowing any details in advance about what new signals might be, and it would avoid bias toward one theory or another.

    MIT physicist Philip Harris says that recent advances in artificial intelligence are fueling a growing interest in this approach—but that advocates of “theoryless searches” remain a minority in the physics community.

    More generally, says Harris, using AI for triggers can create opportunities for more innovative ways to acquire data. “The algorithm will be able to recognize the beam conditions and adapt their choices,” he says. “Effectively, it can change itself.”

    Programming triggers calls for tradeoffs between efficiency, breadth, accuracy and feasibility. “All of this is wonderful in theory,” says Karagiorgi. “It’s all about hardware resource constraints, power resource constraints, and, of course, cost.”

    “Thankfully,” she adds, “we don’t need strychnine.”
    Follow

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.


    Stem Education Coalition

    Symmetry is a joint Fermilab/SLAC publication.


     
  • richardmitnick 2:47 pm on December 15, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "What’s next at the Large Hadron Collider? UB physicists are prepping for its new run", , , , HEP, , , ,   

    From The University at Buffalo-SUNY (US): “What’s next at the Large Hadron Collider? UB physicists are prepping for its new run” 

    SUNY Buffalo

    From The University at Buffalo-SUNY (US)

    December 14, 2021
    Charlotte Hsu
    News Content Manager
    Sciences, Economic Development
    Tel: 716-645-4655
    chsu22@buffalo.edu

    1
    Photo illustration: Left to right: University at Buffalo physicists Avto Kharchilava, Ia Iashvili and Salvatore Rappoccio. Credit: Douglas Levere / University at Buffalo / European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire](CH).

    University at Buffalo physicists have received $1.65 million from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) to support their work with the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which is scheduled to come back online in 2022 after a planned shutdown period devoted to upgrades and maintenance.

    “It is exciting, because it allows us to continue research that helps to answer these basic questions: What is the universe made of, and how do the most fundamental particles interact with each other?” says Ia Iashvili, PhD, professor of physics in the UB College of Arts and Sciences.

    Iashvili is principal investigator on the new NSF grant. Her colleagues in the physics department, Professor Avto Kharchilava, PhD, and Associate Professor Salvatore Rappoccio, PhD, are co-principal investigators.

    Probing the fundamental nature of the universe.

    The LHC is the world’s most powerful particle accelerator, consisting of “a 27-kilometer ring of superconducting magnets with a number of accelerating structures to boost the energy of the particles along the way,” according to the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), where the collider is located.

    Thousands of scientists work together on LHC experiments, smashing beams of protons into one another at near-light speeds to produce various subatomic particles (including, perhaps most famously, the Higgs boson).

    UB physicists have been part of this international collaboration for a long time, as Kharchilava outlined in a magazine article in The Innovation Platform earlier this year. Years ago, Iashvili and Kharchilava helped to build the Compact Muon Solenoid (CMS), one of the particle detectors that researchers use to observe the results of proton-proton collisions at the LHC.

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire(CH) CMS

    European Organization for Nuclear Research [Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire] [Europäische Organisation für Kernforschung](CH) (EU) [CERN] CMS Detector

    The new NSF grant supports UB’s continuing contributions to CMS activities. This encompasses research that will occur during the LHC run beginning in 2022, as well as work that will help prepare the CMS to handle conditions at the High-Luminosity LHC, an anticipated substantial upgrade of the collider.

    Experimental goals include conducting more precise measurements of known particles and forces, and performing searches for yet undiscovered particles.

    As Iashvili explains, “These are particles predicted by theories beyond the Standard Model. The Standard Model is basically our working theory in particle physics, and it has been very successful, because it describes interactions between particles, and their properties, but we know it’s not complete. For example, it doesn’t explain matter-anti-matter asymmetry. It doesn’t tell us, ‘Why do we have dark matter or dark energy?’ There are other open questions. The Standard Model of particle physics is a beautiful theory, but it is understood to be only a low-energy approximation of a more complete theory.”

    Engaging the next generation of scientists

    Students will play an active role in the research — a chance to work at the frontier of high-energy physics.

    One team member, AC Williams, a UB PhD candidate in physics, is stationed at CERN as the LHC gears up for its next run. Williams, whose research interests include the hunt for dark matter, is the recipient of a fellowship through the NSF Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate program, which seeks to improve access to STEM education for underrepresented minorities.

    UB physicists will also partner with UB’s Women in Science and Engineering initiative and engage high school teachers and students in hands-on science through the QuarkNet and Science Olympiad programs.

    “We have master classes where high school students are brought into contact with the type of research we do,” Iashvili says. “They learn about high-energy research and analyze some CMS data, and they get pretty excited about this, because the fundamental nature of this research is very appealing to them. It’s exciting to try to answer this question: What is the universe made of?”

    “Education of the younger generation is one of the most important responsibilities of scientists,” Rappoccio says. “We have a responsibility to ensure more equitable access to scientific endeavors for people from all backgrounds, especially those from underrepresented groups who have traditionally been excluded from academia.”

    See the full article here .

    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    SUNY Buffalo Campus

    The State University of New York at Buffalo is a public research university with campuses in Buffalo and Amherst, New York, United States. The university was founded in 1846 as a private medical college and merged with the State University of New York system in 1962. It is one of four university centers in the system, in addition to The University at Albany-SUNY (US), The University at Binghampton-SUNY (US), and The University at Stony Brook-SUNY (US) . As of fall 2020, the university enrolls 32,347 students in 13 colleges, making it the largest public university in the state of New York.

    Since its founding by a group which included future United States President Millard Fillmore, the university has evolved from a small medical school to a large research university. Today, in addition to the College of Arts and Sciences, the university houses the largest state-operated medical school, dental school, education school, business school, engineering school, and pharmacy school, and is also home to SUNY’s only law school. The University at Binghampton has the largest enrollment, largest endowment, and most research funding among the universities in the SUNY system. The university offers bachelor’s degrees in over 100 areas of study, as well as 205 master’s degrees, 84 doctoral degrees, and 10 professional degrees. The University at Buffalo and The University of Virginia (US) are the only colleges founded by United States Presidents.

    The University at Buffalo is classified as an R1 University, meaning that it engages in a very high level of research activity. In 1989, UB was elected to The Association of American Universities (US), a selective group of major research universities in North America. University at Buffalo’s alumni and faculty have included five Nobel laureates, five Pulitzer Prize winners, one head of government, two astronauts, three billionaires, one Academy Award winner, one Emmy Award winner, and Fulbright Scholars.

    The University at Buffalo intercollegiate athletic teams are the Bulls. They compete in Division I of the NCAA, and are members of the Mid-American Conference.

    The University at Buffalo is organized into 13 academic schools and colleges.

    The School of Architecture and Planning is the only combined architecture and urban planning school in the State University of New York system, offers the only accredited professional master’s degree in architecture, and is one of two SUNY schools that offer an accredited professional master’s degree in urban planning. In addition, the Buffalo School of Architecture and Planning also awards the original undergraduate four year pre-professional degrees in architecture and environmental design in the SUNY system. Other degree programs offered by the Buffalo School of Architecture and Planning include a research-oriented Master of Science in architecture with specializations in historic preservation/urban design, inclusive design, and computing and media technologies; a PhD in urban and regional planning; and, an advanced graduate certificate in historic preservation.
    The College of Arts and Sciences was founded in 1915 and is the largest and most comprehensive academic unit at University at Buffalo with 29 degree-granting departments, 16 academic programs, and 23 centers and institutes across the humanities, arts, and sciences.
    The School of Dental Medicine was founded in 1892 and offers accredited programs in DDS, oral surgery, and other oral sciences.
    The Graduate School of Education was founded in 1931 and is one of the largest graduate schools at University at Buffalo. The school has four academic departments: counseling and educational psychology, educational leadership and policy, learning and instruction, and library and information science. In academic year 2008–2009, the Graduate School of Education awarded 472 master’s degrees and 52 doctoral degrees.
    The School of Engineering and Applied Sciences was founded in 1946 and offers undergraduate and graduate degrees in six departments. It is the largest public school of engineering in the state of New York. University at Buffalo is the only public school in New York State to offer a degree in Aerospace Engineering
    The School of Law was founded in 1887 and is the only law school in the SUNY system. The school awarded 265 JD degrees in the 2009–2010 academic year.
    The School of Management was founded in 1923 and offers AACSB-accredited undergraduate, MBA, and doctoral degrees.
    The School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences is the founding faculty of the University at Buffalo and began in 1846. It offers undergraduate and graduate degrees in the biomedical and biotechnical sciences as well as an MD program and residencies.
    The School of Nursing was founded in 1936 and offers bachelors, masters, and doctoral degrees in nursing practice and patient care.
    The School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences was founded in 1886, making it the second-oldest faculty at University at Buffalo and one of only two pharmacy schools in the SUNY system.
    The School of Public Health and Health Professions was founded in 2003 from the merger of the Department of Social and Preventive Medicine and the University at Buffalo School of Health Related Professions. The school offers a bachelor’s degree in exercise science as well as professional, master’s and PhD degrees.
    The School of Social Work offers graduate MSW and doctoral degrees in social work.
    The Roswell Park Graduate Division is an affiliated academic unit within the Graduate School of UB, in partnership with Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, an independent NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. The Roswell Park Graduate Division offers five PhD programs and two MS programs in basic and translational biomedical research related to cancer. Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center was founded in 1898 by Dr. Roswell Park and was the world’s first cancer research institute.

    The University at Buffalo houses two New York State Centers of Excellence (out of the total 11): Center of Excellence in Bioinformatics and Life Sciences (CBLS) and Center of Excellence in Materials Informatics (CMI). Emphasis has been placed on developing a community of research scientists centered around an economic initiative to promote Buffalo and create the Center of Excellence for Bioinformatics and Life Sciences as well as other advanced biomedical and engineering disciplines.

    Total research expenditures for the fiscal year of 2017 were $401 million, ranking 59th nationally.

    SUNY – The State University of New York (US) is a system of public colleges and universities in New York State. It is the largest comprehensive system of universities, colleges, and community colleges in the United States, with a total enrollment of 424,051 students, plus 2,195,082 adult education students, spanning 64 campuses across the state. The SUNY system has some 7,660 degree and certificate programs overall and a $13.08 billion budget.

    The SUNY system has four “university centers”: The University at Albany- SUNY (US) (1844), The University at Binghampton-(SUNY)(US) (1946), The University at Buffalo-SUNY (US) (1846), and The University at Stony Brook-SUNY (US) (1957). SUNY’s administrative offices are in Albany, the state’s capital, with satellite offices in Manhattan and Washington, D.C. With 25,000 acres of land, SUNY’s largest campus is The SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry (US), which neighbors the State University of New York Upstate Medical University – the largest employer in the SUNY system with over 10,959 employees. While the SUNY system doesn’t officially recognize a flagship university, the University at Buffalo and Stony Brook University are sometimes treated as unofficial flagships.

    The State University of New York was established in 1948 by Governor Thomas E. Dewey, through legislative implementation of recommendations made by the Temporary Commission on the Need for a State University (1946–1948). The commission was chaired by Owen D. Young, who was at the time Chairman of General Electric. The system was greatly expanded during the administration of Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller, who took a personal interest in design and construction of new SUNY facilities across the state.

    Apart from units of the unrelated City University of New York (CUNY)(US), SUNY comprises all state-supported institutions of higher education.

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: