<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Arunsdixit's Weblog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress.com weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 23:10:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='arunsdixit.wordpress.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/osd.xml" title="Arunsdixit&#039;s Weblog" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/43/</link>
		<comments>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/43/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 23:10:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>arunsdixit</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/43/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Whenever I climb, a dog called Ego follows me!<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=43&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whenever I climb, a dog called Ego follows me!</p>
<br />  <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gocomments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/comments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godelicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/delicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gofacebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/facebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gotwitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/twitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gostumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/stumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godigg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/digg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/goreddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/reddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/43/" /></a> <img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=43&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/43/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/fb6eae1866fc84f972fe3eb5d7a59eae?s=96&#38;d=identicon" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">arunsdixit</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>La HADRON COLLIDER (LHC):SEARCH FOR &#8216;GOD PARTICLE’</title>
		<link>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/la-hadron-collider-lhcsearch-for-god-particle%e2%80%99/</link>
		<comments>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/la-hadron-collider-lhcsearch-for-god-particle%e2%80%99/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 06:47:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>arunsdixit</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Review-Science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/?p=38</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At about 10.28 (local time) in the morning, on Wednesday, 10th September,2008, an exciting experiment took place at the CERN Laboratory, Geneva,  Switzerland. It was a giant experiment, known as LHC – Large Hadron Collider &#8211; experiment, carried out on the world’s largest machine. It is the first of the series of experiments, which are [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=38&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="MsoNormal"><span>At about 10.28 (local time) in the morning, on Wednesday, 10<sup>th</sup> September,2008, an exciting experiment took place at the CERN Laboratory, Geneva,  <span> </span>Switzerland. It was a giant experiment, known as LHC – Large Hadron Collider &#8211; experiment, carried out on the world’s largest machine. It is the first of the series of experiments, which are going to take place in near future. The whole world was anxious to know the outcome of this experiment. The scientists are expecting so many things from this magnificent work. They will be trying to understand how the universe started, what happened shortly after the big bang and also expect to reveal more about the dark matter, dark energy, anti-matter, hidden dimensions of space-matter and the evidence of the hypothetical particles- the Higgs Bosons, to which some people, including some scientists &#8211; Nobel winning physicists Leon Lederman is one of them- refer to as the </span><strong><span>God Particles</span></strong><span>.<span>  </span>The results of LHC experiments will probably change our fundamental knowledge of the universe. Really, very exciting <span> </span><span> </span>expectations!</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>On the other hand, there is a hue and cry against this first and the follow up experiments. People have gone to the court of law to get an injunction to this experiment. There are cases pending against it in the<span>  </span>Honolulu Federal court of the state of Hawaii, US and in the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg, France, pleading that the experiment is going to create black holes on earth, which would grow exponentially and would swallow the whole earth, ending the life on the earth. The human life is at risk, they say. Is it not a very bad situation for every one of us, if the fears of some people come out to be true?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>What is this mysterious gigantic experiment? What is this CERN laboratory? what is LHC? What is the cost of this <span> </span><span> </span>experiment? What is Big Bang and what are these God Particles? Why the people have challenged this experiment in the court of law? In what way,as some fear, it is going to swallow the earth and eliminate the life on this planet. Is it really true that every one of us is going to die if this experiment comes out to be successful? &#8230;&#8230;.these and other several questions, which a layman may ask after reading the news about this experiment. Let us try to address some of them. <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span>What is this CERN? </span></strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>CERN is a short form of a French name of the research laboratory, the English translation of which is </span><strong><span>EUROPEAN ORGANIZATON FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH.</span></strong><strong><span> <span> </span></span></strong><span>Even though this English name is internationally accepted, the original French short form- CERN- is still in use for this research organization. This research organization is situated in Geneva, Switzerland, near the Swiss-French border.<em> <span> </span></em>It is one of the world’s largest and most respected centers for scientific research. Its business is fundamental physics. At CERN, the world’s largest and most complex scientific instruments are used to study the basic constituents of matter &#8212;&#8212; the fundamental particles and the forces acting between them. By studying what happens when these particles collide, physicists try to learn about the Laws of Nature. From these findings, they are trying to find out what the Universe is made of and how it works.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span>At the time, when this institution was founded, pure physics research was concentrated on understanding the inside structure of atom, hence the word <span> </span><span> </span>‘nuclear’. Today, our understanding of matter goes much deeper than the nucleus, and therefore the main area of research here now is <strong>particle physics</strong> — the study of fundamental constituents of matter and the forces acting between them. But the word ‘nuclear’ is still retained. CERN is run by 20 European Member States which have special duties and privileges. They make contribution to the capital and operating costs of CERN’s programs and responsible for all important decisions about the Organization and its activities. Some states, for which membership is not possible, are given Observer Status. India and USA, along with other five states, have this Status. There are other 36 states, which are not the members of any kind, are also involved in the CERN programs. Some 8000 visiting scientists, half of the world’s particle physicists, come to CERN for their research .They represent 580 universities and research institutions and 85 nationalities. It is a global endeavor</span></p>
<p><span><span> </span><strong>There is a statue of dancing Lord Shiva at CERN near the building A40, given by the Department of Atomic Energy, India, as a gift, celebrating CERN’s long association with India, which started in the 1960’s and continues strongly today. </strong>The statue was unveiled on June 18, 2004.</span></p>
<p style="text-align:center;"> </p>
<div class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="width: 210px"><img class="  " title="The Statue of Shiva near A40 Building of CERN" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/CERN_shiva.jpg" alt="The dance of Shiva is symbolic of the dynamic forces of creation and destruction, and the harmonious     balance of opposites. Dance of Shiva is also supposed to be the position of Cosmic forces after splitting." width="200" height="200" /><p class="wp-caption-text">The dance of Shiva is symbolic of the dynamic forces of creation and destruction, and the harmonious     balance of opposites. Dance of Shiva is also supposed to be the position of Cosmic forces after splitting.</p></div>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align:left;"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><span><span>         </span><span>       </span>[ <span> </span><span> </span>During the first half of the 20<sup>th </sup>century, achievements in Europe dominated in physics, from the discovery of the electron to the atomic nucleus and its constituents, from special relativity to quantum mechanics. Sadly, the conflicts of the 1930s and 40s (Second World War) interrupted this, as many scientists had to leave for calmer shores. The return of peace heralded some decisive changes. By the early 50s, the Americans had understood that further progress needed more sophisticated instruments, and that investment in basic science could drive economic and technological development. While scientists in Europe still relied on simple equipments based on radioactivity and cosmic rays, powerful accelerators were being built in the US. Table-top experiments were being overtaken by projects involving large teams of scientists and engineers.</span></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><span>A few far-sighted physicists, such as Rabi, Amaldi, Auger and de Rougemont, perceived that co-operation was the only way forward for front-line research in Europe. Despite fine intellectual traditions and prestigious universities, no European country could cope alone .The creation of a European Laboratory was recommended at a UNESCO meeting in Florence in 1950, and less than three years later, a Convention was signed by 12 countries,and the European Council for Nuclear Research, a provisional body was founded in 1952 with the mandate of establishing a world-class fundamental physics research organization in Europe. When the organization officially came in being in 1954, the Council was dissolved, and the new organization was given the title- European Organization for Nuclear Research, although the name CERN was retained.] </span></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span>CERN has, to its credit, the following achievements –</span></strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span>1.<span>  </span></span></strong><span>Nobel Prize to <span> </span><span> </span>Carlo Rubbia and Simon Van der <span> </span>Meer in physics ( 1984 ) for their discovery of W and Z<span>  </span>field particles which are responsible for Weak Interactions, one of the four<span>  </span>basic interactions. Their experiments at CERN confirmed the unification of weak and electromagnetic interactions (forces ) <strong>, the electroweak</strong> theory of the Standard Model. [ <em>We can recall that in 1979,<span>  </span>Nobel was awarded to <span> </span>Glashow,<span>  </span>Abdus <span> </span>Salam<span>  </span>and Steven Weinberg, who established the unification of weak and electromagnetic interactions into one- electroweak interaction<span>  </span>and proposed the existence of W and Z<span>  </span>field particles ,the actual experimental discovery of which was confirmed at CERN in 1983-4</em> ]</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span>2.<span>  </span></span></strong><span><span> </span>Nobel Prize to George Charpak in physics (1992 ) for the development of a particle detector used for exploring the innermost parts of matter.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span>3. </span></strong><span><span> </span>WWW, the World Wide Web <span> </span><span> </span>was first proposed at CERN in 1989 and further refined in 1990.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span>4.</span></strong><span> The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) – Along with other achievements, CERN has come into limelight <span>on 10th<strong> September, 2008, when</strong></span> the LHC was declared operational. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span>The LHC is a circular particle accelerator. It is, therefore appropriate here to know something about particle accelerator.<strong><span> </span><span> </span><em><span> </span><span> </span><span>  </span></em></strong></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span><span>           </span>Particle Accelerator (atom smasher) is </span></strong><span>an instrument which uses electric field to increase the speed of particles when they passed through it. In the beginning, particles were accelerated in a tube by subjecting it to a high voltage, applied over a gap between a cathode and an anode (the electrodes). This tube is a simple form of an accelerator. It is called as <strong>cathode ray tube (CRT)</strong> and was conceived at the end of the 19<sup>th </sup>century.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><!--[if gte vml 1]&gt;                    &lt;![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]&gt;   &lt;![endif]--><span> <img class="alignnone" title="CATHOD RAY TUBE - simple form of an accelerator  " src="http://lpmpjogja.diknas.go.id/kc/a/atom/projection-tv-crt.gif" alt="" width="416" height="241" /></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span><img src="http://lpmpjogja.diknas.go.id/kc/a/atom/projection-tv-crt-labels.gif" alt="" width="406" height="56" /></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN">The <strong>cathode ray tube (CRT) </strong>is a vacuum tube containing an electron gun,(a source of electrons) and a fluorescent screen, with internal or external means to accelerate and deflect the electron beam, and then smashes them into phosphor molecules on the screen .The collisions result in a lighted spot or <strong>pixel</strong>, on <span> </span>your<span>  </span>TV or computer monitor <span> </span>to form images in the form of light emitted from the fluorescent screen. The image may represent electrical waveforms (oscilloscope), pictures (television, computer monitor ), radar targets and others.</span><strong><span lang="EN"> </span></strong><span lang="EN">.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span lang="EN"><span> </span>A</span></strong><strong><span lang="EN"> particle accelerator</span></strong><span lang="EN"> works in the same way, except that they are much bigger in which <span> </span>the particles move much faster (near the speed of light) and the collision results in more subatomic particles and various types of nuclear radiations.</span><span>.</span><span lang="EN">.</span><strong><span>It is remarkable to note<span>  </span>that the simple accelerators are used in the<span>  </span>discovery of <span> </span>the first subatomic particle, electrons. The further developments in understanding the inner structure of the atom is done with the help of higher form of accelerators .The developments we see in the field of electronics is because of the accelerators only. </span></strong><span>The Accelerators are also most commonly used for external beam radiation treatments for patients with cancer. It can also be used in radio surgery similar to that achieved using the gamma knife on targets within the brain. It delivers a uniform dose of high energy x-ray to the region of patient’s tumer.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span>I</span><span>n advanced form of particle accelerators,<strong> </strong>the speed of the particles is continuously increased by using electric fields and magnets. As the speed of the particle increases, the energy of the particle also increases. The speed of the particle can be increased to such a high level that it nearly reaches the speed of light but not equal to that of light, the limit which is imposed by Einstein’s theory. When particles with such a high speed and with such a high energy collide with each other, they are broken down ( smashed) in to fragments. The study of these fragments gives a wealth of information to the scientists which they can analyze <span> </span>and<span>  </span>use for their research.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span>Accelerators are of two types : <span> </span><span> </span>a) <span>  </span>Linear and (b) <span> </span>Circular </span></strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span><span>(a)<span>     </span></span></span></strong><strong><span>Linear accelerator (linac)</span></strong><span> is the simplest type of accelerator. Fundamentally, it is a long tube<span>  </span>through which charged particles are passed and accelerated. In linac, a great many electrodes are separated by a small gaps. <span> </span>Stanford University has the<span>  </span><strong>largest linear accelerator</strong> ( 50 GeV), named as Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC). It is about <strong>3 Km</strong> in length. The research at SLAC has produced three Nobels in Physics for the discoveries of for<span>  </span>charm quarks(1976), <span> </span>quark structure inside proton and neutron(1990), the tau lepton(1995). <span>  </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span><span>     </span>At the international level, it is planned to build a huge International Linear Accelerator (ILC), which <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>     </span><span> </span>would have an initial capacity of 500GeV (see below * ), which could be steadily increased to 1000GeV<span>  </span><span> </span><span>   </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span><span> </span>( 1TeV). Its length is expected to be between 30 to 40 Km. It was to be built at the Fermi Lab ,Illinois ,US. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span><span>  </span>where <span> </span>the cyclotron,, Tevatron <span> </span>is situated, but because of the inability of the US govt. to provide <span> </span><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span><span> </span><span>  </span>necessary funding to build it in the US, the location of the<span>  </span>proposed accelerator is not fixed, even though its </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span><span>  </span><span> </span>design is finalized in <span> </span>Feb.2007<span>  </span>And hence the execution of this project is pending.<strong> </strong></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span><span> </span><span>  </span><span> </span><em>[* Energy</em></span></strong><em><span> of a particle is measured in terms of an unit – electron volt. It is the smallest unit of energy and <span> </span></span></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><span><span> </span><span>  </span><span> </span>defined ‘as the amount of kinetic energy gained by a single unbound electron when it accelerates through an <span> </span></span></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span>electrostatic potential difference of one volt’ , which has the value as: 1eV = 1.6 <sup>-19 </sup>J.</span></em><em><span> <strong>The masses of </strong></span></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><em><span><span>  </span><span> </span>elementary particles are frequently expressed in term of electron- volts by making use of Einstein's </span></em></strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><em><span><span>  </span><span> </span>famous equation, <span> </span><!--[if gte vml 1]&gt;                    &lt;![endif]&#8211;><img src="/Users/Deepti/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtml1/02/clip_image001.gif" alt="" width="66" height="17" />, where <span>m</span> is the mass of the particle and <span>c</span> is the speed of light.</span></em></strong><em></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><span><span>  </span>The bigger units of energy are as follow:</span></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><span><span>    </span>1 thousand (<strong>Kilo-K</strong>) = 1000 (10<sup>+3</sup>) <strong>;</strong><span>      </span>1 million (<strong>Mega-M</strong>)= 1000 of<span>  </span>a<span>  </span>thousand=10 lakh (10<sup>+6</sup> )<span>  </span><strong>;</strong></span></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><span><span>    </span>1 billion (<strong>Giga-G</strong>) = 1000 of a million =100 crores(10<sup>+9</sup>) <strong>;</strong><span>  </span>1 trillion (<strong>Tera-T</strong>) =1000 of a billion ( 10<sup>+12</sup>)<span>  </span></span></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><span><span>                   </span><span>       </span><span>  </span>10<sup>+3 </sup><span> </span>eV <span>  </span>= 1 KeV<span>    </span><span>                 </span><span>  </span><span> </span>10<sup>+6<span>   </span></sup><span> </span>eV<span>  </span><span> </span>= 1 MeV<span>     </span></span></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><sub><span><span> </span></span></sub></em><em><span><span>   </span><span>                       </span><span> </span>10<sup>+9<span>   </span></sup><span> </span>eV<span>  </span><span> </span>= 1 GeV<span>    </span><span>    </span><span>              </span><span> </span>10 <sup>+12</sup> eV <span>  </span>= 1 TeV.<span>  </span><span>  </span>]<span>    </span></span></em><em></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span><span> </span>(b) Circulaar Acclerators</span></strong><span> are also called as <strong>Cyclotron</strong>, which are circular in shape.</span><span> <span>Circular geometry is preferred for hadron (e.g. protons, neutrons, etc ) collisions. <span> </span>The electrodes are supplied with an</span> alternating current that attract and repel the particles, thus accelerating the particles. This type of accelerator is much easier to make than a few miles of linear accelerator<span>. Large electromagnets are used to keep the accelerated particles in circular motion.<span>  </span>The first cyclotron was conceived by Earnest Lawrence in 1929. Neutrons are neutral in nature and therefore, different <span> </span><span> </span>techniques are used to accelerate <span>  </span>them. </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span><span>     </span>The Tevatron,</span></strong><span> was considered to be the largest <strong>circular accelerator</strong> in the world before the LHC came in to existence. The Tevatron is established by the Fermi lab in Batavia, near Chicago, Illinois,  USA. It has a circumference <span> </span><span> </span>(length)<span>  </span>of <span> </span><strong>6.28 Km</strong>. It is an accelerator capable of colliding proton and an anti-proton at a combined energy of 2 T eV (1TeV each). <span> </span>Tevatron <span> </span>is <span> </span>linear in the beginning which then becomes circular. In 1995, it announced the discovery of the Top Quark. <span> </span>Dr Rajendra Raja, the Indian born US scientist was a leading person in this experiment. The experiment was done by colliding protons and antiprotons traveling <span> </span><span> </span>in opposite direction, at almost the speed of light. The longer the accelerator runs and the more data it accumulates, the better its chances of finding something new. So <span> </span>by the summer of 2009, the Travetron may have several times more total data than its new competitor i.e. the LHS.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span> </span></strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>THE FEATURES OF THE LARGE HADRON COLLIDER ( LHC) :</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>1. The LHC is the biggest accelerator in the world. Its cost is <span> </span>about $ 10 billion ( <span> </span>= $ 1000 crores ) <span> </span><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>2. <span> </span>About 10,000<span>    </span><span> </span>scientific <span> </span><span> </span>workforce is working on this project. Prof. Lyn Evans is the present Director of <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>     </span>LHC <span>    </span>and <span> </span><span> </span>Prof. Robert Aymer <span> </span>is the present director general of the CERN.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>3<strong>. The LHC,</strong> is the longest circular tunnel in the world. Its <strong>circumference is 27 Km</strong> and its diameter is 3.8 <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span><span> </span>Meters. This instrument is situated nearly100 meters below the surface of the earth. <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span><span> </span>It is lined with concrete from outside. The construction was completed <span> </span><span> </span>between <span> </span>1983 to 1988.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>4. <strong>The Biggest refrigerator in the world</strong>. There are total 9300 magnets inside the <span> </span>collider. All the magnets <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>are <span> </span>pre-cooled to a lower temperature <strong>of <span> </span><span> </span>-193.2 </strong>°C<span>   </span><span> </span><span> </span>using 10,000 <span> </span>tonnes of liquid nitrogen. They are </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>further cooled to<strong> -<span>  </span>271.3 </strong>°C by adding 60 tonnes <span> </span>of liquid Helium. Because of this low temperature, the </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>magnets become superconductor and therefore there are almost no losses <span> </span>in conduction. This is the lowest <span>   </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>temperature ever attained. It could hold 150000 fridges full of sausages at a temperature colder than deep </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span><span> </span>outer space.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>5. <strong>The Emptiest space in the system</strong>. The inner tunnel is nearly evacuated, comparable to outer space. The </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>particles travel in an ultra high vacuum, a cavity as empty as the <span> </span><span> </span>interplanetary <span> </span>space. The internal <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>pressure is <span> </span>very <span> </span><span> </span>low and equal to <span> </span>10<sup>-13</sup> atmosphere. Because of this very low pressure, the particles <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>do not collide <span>  </span>with the residual gas molecules.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>6. <strong>Speed of Light. </strong>The particles are continuously accelerated <span> </span><span> </span>by the <span> </span><span> </span>super cooled <span> </span><span> </span>magnets so that the </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>     </span>trillions of <span> </span>protons will race around the accelerator ring 11,245 times a second. The final speed of the </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>     </span>particles is 99.9999% <span>   </span>of the speed of light. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>7<strong>. The maximum energy</strong> of a single proton will be 7 TeV and when the two oppositely moving protons collide <span> </span><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>with each other , the combined collision energy will be 14 TeV.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>8. <span> </span>Atogether some 600 million collisions will take place every second.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>9. <strong>The Hottest spot</strong> in the world. The LHC is a <span> </span><span> </span>machine of extreme hot and cold. When the two beams of <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>protons collide, they will generate <strong>temperatures more than 100 000 times hotter than the heart of the <span> </span></strong></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span><span>   </span><span> </span>Sun, </span></strong><span>concentrated within a minuscule space. So there are two extreme temperatures working in the same </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span><span>  </span>machine. At the points where the high energy protons collide, there is a very high temperature, while the </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span><span>  </span><span> </span>magnets which accelerate the protons are kept at the lowest temperature.<span style="text-decoration:underline;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>10<strong>. Particles <span> </span>used</strong><span>  </span>:<span>  </span>For initial experiments<span>  </span>proton – proton collisions are used but in later stage <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>      </span>experiments, heavy ions like Lead will be used.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>11. When protons arrive in the LHC they are traveling at 0.999997828 times the speed of light. Each proton </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span><span>  </span>goes around <span> </span>the 27Km ring over 11 000 times a second.<span>                                 </span><span>                                                                                                                     </span><span>                                                                                        </span><span> </span><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>12. <strong>How many collisions?<span>  </span></strong><span>  </span>In an accelerator, particles collide with each other. <span> </span>In LHC, two streams of high <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>      </span>energy protons are meeting which are coming from opposite directions. Even though the two streams are </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>      </span>approaching each other, all the protons do not collide with each other. If two bunches of protons meet head </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>     </span><span> </span>on, <span> </span>the number of collisions between protons of one beam and protons from the other beam might be ten, <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span><span>  </span><span> </span>one or <span> </span>even zero. How often are there actual collisions? For a fixed bunch size , this depends on how <span>  </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>      </span>many protons are there in each bunch, and how large each proton bunch is.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span><span>   </span><span> </span><span> </span>Actually a proton can be roughly of as being about 10<sup>-15</sup> meter in radius. If you had bunches 10<sup>-6</sup><span>  </span>meters in <span>  </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span><span> </span><span> </span>radius, and say there are only10 protons in each bunch ,the chance of even one proton-proton collision <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>      </span>when <span> </span>two <span> </span><span> </span>bunches met ,would be extremely small. On the other hand, if each bunch had a billion-billion <span> </span><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>      </span><span> </span>(10<sup>+ 18</sup>) protons so that its entire cross section was just filled with protons, every proton from one bunch <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>      </span>would collide with one from the other,and you would have a billion-billion collisions per bunch crossing.<span>      </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span><span>   </span><span> </span>The LHC situation is in between these two extremes, a few collisions ( up <span> </span>to 20 ) per bunch crossing, </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span><span> </span><span> </span>requires <span> </span>about a billion protons in each bunch. The accelerator can fire 300 bunches of 100 billion protons </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span><span>  </span><span> </span><span> </span>each, with the same number fired in the opposite direction, which will cause up to 40 million collisions at </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span><span> </span><span> </span>each of the four interaction sites.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>13<strong>. The Storage Ring</strong>:<span>   </span>For some applications , it is useful to store beams of high<span>  </span>energy particles for some <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span><span> </span><span> </span>time <span> </span><span> </span>without <span> </span>further acceleration. This is especially true for colliding beam accelerators, in which two<span>  </span><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>beams <span> </span>, moving <span> </span>in opposite directions, are made to collide with each other. They <span> </span>, therefore are stored in <span>   </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span><span> </span>a device <span> </span>called <span> </span>as storage ring.<span>  </span>A storage ring is the same thing as a cyclotron, expect that it is designed <span>   </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>just to keep the particles circulating at a constant energy, for as long as possible, not to increase their <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>energy any further. However, the particles must still pass through at least one accelerating cavity each time </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>they circle the ring, just to compensate for the energy they lose due to radiation.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>14<strong>. Detectores <span> </span>:</strong> To sample and record the results of up to 600 million proton collisions per second, physicists <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>and engineers have built <span> </span>huge and bulky devices that measure particles with micron<span>  </span>precision. The LHC’s <span> </span><span>  </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span><span>   </span>detectors <span> </span>have<span>  </span>sophisticated <span> </span>electronic trigger systems that precisely <span> </span>measures the passage time of a <span>  </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>particle <span> </span>to <span> </span>accuracies in the region of a few billionths of a second. The trigger system also registers the </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>location of the <span> </span>particles to millionth of a meter. This incredibly quick and precise response is essential for <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>    </span>ensuring that the <span> </span>particle recorded in successive layers of a detector is one and the same.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span><span>    </span>Detectors are the tools that particle physicists use to &#8220;see&#8221; the products of a collision</span></strong><span>. Each collision <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span>seen by the detector is called an event. Three basic types of detectors observe the particles in an event: <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span>tracking detectors, Tracking detectors record the path of a particle, calorimetric detectors absorb particles <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span>and measure their energy and particle identification detectors identifies the type of particles . Physicists </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span>assemble these <span> </span>detectors in layers around the collision point.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span>There are four detectors placed at four different places in the LHC ring. Their names are –LHCB, CMS, <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span>ALICE <span> </span>and ATLAS. These four detectors serve different<span>  </span>purposes and detect different particles.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span><span> </span>LHCB <span> </span>&#8212; looks for difference between matter and antimatter. CMS &#8211;<span>  </span>general <span> </span><span> </span>purpose detector</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span>ALICE <span>  </span>&#8212;detects quarks and gluons. <span> </span>ATLAS <span> </span>&#8212; <span> </span><span> </span>general purpose detector like CMS and looks for the <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span>evidence of Higg’s Bosons , extra <span> </span>dimensions <span> </span>and dark matter. ATLAS<span>  </span>is about 45meters long and more <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span>than 25 meters high and weighs about 7000 tons.<span>  </span>The data recorded by each of the big experiments at the </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span>LHC will fill around 100 000 dual layer DVDs <span> </span>every year.To allow the thousands of scientists scattered </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span>around the globe to collaborate on the analysis over <span> </span>the next 15 years ( the estimated life time of the LHC ), </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span>tens of thousands of computers located around the world are <span>    </span>being harnessed in a distributed computing <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span>network called <strong>Grid.</strong>The results of the experiment will be analysed <span> </span>by the LHC Grid – a network of 60,000 </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>  </span>computers .You can think each experiment as a giant digital camera with <span> </span>around 150 millions of pixels taking </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span>snapshots of 600 millions times a second. Data worth 15 petabytes is to be analysed <span> </span>[<em>1 peta bytes </em>≈<em> 1000<sup>+5 </sup>; </em></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><span><span>   </span>google processes<span>  </span>about 20 <span> </span>peta bytes<span>  </span>of<span>  </span>data a day</span></em><span> ] In a <span> </span>gigantic underground race track, tiny particles </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span>speed in a circle, just to crash into each other head-on. The Idea of this<span>  </span>is to simulate nothing less than the <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>   </span>beginning of our universe.Following are some pictures,which give areal view and inside structure of the LHC:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center;"><span><img class="aligncenter" title="white spots - sites of the Detectors" src="http://visits.web.cern.ch/visits/guides/tools/presentation/english/images/aerial-view.jpg" alt="" width="200" height="200" /> </span></p>
<p> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center;"><span><span><img class="aligncenter" title="Areal view of the LHC Accelerator" src="http://lhc-milestones.web.cern.ch/LHC-Milestones/images/photos/ph07-1.jpg" alt="" width="240" height="213" /></span></span></p>
<p style="text-align:left;"> </p>
<p style="text-align:center;"><span><img class="aligncenter" title="Inside view of the LHC Tunnel                                        " src="http://ubpheno.physics.buffalo.edu/~dow/PASI2007/website/lhc_cern.jpg" alt="" width="200" height="200" /></span></p>
<p style="text-align:center;"><img class="aligncenter" title="Inside view of LHC" src="http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/6249/0002of0.jpg" alt="" width="200" height="200" /></p>
<p style="text-align:left;"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>The LHC explores the area of fundamental particles and therefore, it is proper here to know something about them.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span>Fundamental Particles:</span></strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span> </span></span><span><span> </span>We all know that everything around us is made up of matter particles, which are called as atom. <span> </span>By the year 1932, the popular model of an atom was evolved. In this spherical model of an atom, all protons (p) and neutrons(n) are packed in a very tiny space called‘ nucleus’ which is surrounded by electrons(e) at different orbits, at different energies. The radius of the nucleus is around 10<sup>- 15</sup> meter and the radius of the atom is about 10<sup>-10</sup> meter<span>  </span>,<span>  </span>i.e. 10<sup>+5<span>   </span></sup>times longer than that of a nucleus. If we consider the radius of the nucleus as 1 cm, then outer radius<span>  </span>of the atom will be about 1 Km. The space between the nucleus and the outer boundary of the atom is almost empty, in which electrons revolve in definite circles, which are called as orbits.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>The particles, p, n and electron-e are called as the sub – atomic particles and they were supposed to be <span> </span>indivisible. But this assumption was proved to be incorrect. They are not the fundamental particles but they are also composed of still smaller particles which are more fundamental in nature. This was possible because of the accelerators. We have seen that the cathode ray tube, which is a primitive form of an accelerator, was used by J. J. Thomson to discover the first elementary particle, electron. Higher generations of accelerators are used in discoveries of other<span>  </span>elementary particles. The particles can be created , accelerated and made to collide with each other in accelerators. The collisions of such high speed particles, smash them into smaller particles, which are more elementary than their parents. Thus accelerators are used to create and identify more and more elementary particles. More than one hundred particles have been so far identified with the help of accelerators. It is also called as the ‘particle zoo’. <span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Are all these so called ‘elementary particles’ really fundamental in nature ? The answer is, no .</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN">They are also made up of smaller particles. <strong>It is suggested that many<span>  </span>of the particles in the particle zoo are <span> </span>made up of<span>  </span>two basic types of particles, called Quarks and Leptons.</strong> There are six types of quarks and six types of leptons, all of which are called as <strong>‘Fermions’</strong>. They are called Fermions because they obey the Fermi-Dirac statistics. All the ‘Fermions’ have half<span>  </span>integer<span>  </span>spin ( ½ </span><span>). Each fermion has its own distinct antiparticle. All 12 fermions have equal number of anti- particles, making the total of basic particles equal to 24.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>The six Quarks are as follow :<strong> </strong><span>  </span><strong></strong></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span><span>      </span></span></strong><span><span>                                                                                                   </span><span>                                                                                         </span><span>     </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>        </span><strong>Quark<span>   </span><span>  </span><span> </span>:</strong><span>        </span><span>  </span><span>  </span>Up<span>            </span>Down<span>            </span>Charm<span>             </span>Strange<span>           </span>Top<span>            </span>Bottom<span>     </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span><span>       </span>Charge<span>   </span><span> </span>:</span></strong><span><span>    </span><span>      </span><span>  </span>+2/3 <span> </span><span>      </span><span>   </span><span> </span><span> </span>-1/3<span>      </span><span>       </span><span> </span><span>  </span>+2/3<span>                </span><span>  </span>-1/3<span>             </span><span> </span>+2/3<span>            </span><span>  </span>-1/3<span>  </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span>                                                                     </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>On the basis of the charges on the quarks, we can find the charges on the proton and neutron.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>1 Proton<span>   </span>=<span>  </span>2u+1D<span>  </span>= 2 x (+2/3 ) +1x (-1/3)<span>  </span>= +4/3 – 1/3<span>   </span>=<span>  </span>3/3 = + 1 charge.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>1 Neutron =<span>  </span>2d + 1u = 2<span>   </span>(-1/3)<span>   </span>+ 1 ( +2/3)<span>  </span>=<span>  </span>-2/3 + 2/3<span>   </span>=<span>  </span>0 charge.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>FUNDAMENTAL FORCES: </span><span lang="EN"><span>        </span>A <strong>fundamental interaction</strong> or <strong>fundamental force</strong> is a mechanism by which matter <a title="Elementary particle" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particle">particles</a> interact with each other. There are four fundamental forces at work in the Universe :</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN"><span> </span><span>1. The Strong Force, 2. The Weak<span>  </span>Force ,<span>    </span>3. The Electromagnetic<span>    </span>Force,<span>  </span>4. The Gravitational Force.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN">These forces work over different ranges and have different strengths. The weak and strong forces are effective only over a very short range and dominate only at the level of subatomic particles. Gravity is the weakest force but it has an infinite range. The electromagnetic force also has infinite range but it is many times stronger than the gravity ( e.g. cosmic rays). The strong force is the strongest among all the four fundamental forces.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span lang="EN">BOSONS :</span></strong><span lang="EN"> We have seen that the matter particles interact with each other through the fundamental forces. These fundamental forces result from the <strong><span>exchange</span></strong><span> <strong>of force carrier particles</strong></span>. These force carrier particles belong to a group of particles called as <span>Bosons.</span><span> </span><strong>Matter particles transfer discrete amount of energy by exchanging bosons with each other. Each fundamental force has its own corresponding boson particle</strong> , e.g. the strong force is carried by the<span>  </span>boson particle named as ‘ gluon’<span>  </span>and so on, which is clear in the following table. The gluon, photon and W/Z particles are identified but the gravitons are not yet found, they are only postulated. All the bosons have integer spin.</span></p>
<table class="MsoTableGrid" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="693">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="196" valign="top"><strong><span lang="EN"><span>    </span>Interaction( force)</span></strong></td>
<td width="241" valign="top"><strong><span lang="EN"><span>    </span>Mediator( Particle)</span></strong></td>
<td width="155" valign="top"><strong><span lang="EN">Relative   Strength</span></strong></td>
<td width="101" valign="top"><strong><span lang="EN"><span>    </span>Range</span></strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="196" valign="top"><span lang="EN">1. Strong Nuclear force</span></td>
<td width="241" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>   </span><span>    </span><span> </span>gluon</span></td>
<td width="155" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>     </span>10<sup>38</sup></span></td>
<td width="101" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>       </span>10<sup>-15</sup></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="196" valign="top"><span lang="EN">2. Electromagnetic force</span></td>
<td width="241" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>        </span>photon</span></td>
<td width="155" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>     </span>10<sup>36</sup></span></td>
<td width="101" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>    </span>infinite</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="196" valign="top"><span lang="EN">3. Weak nuclear force</span></td>
<td width="241" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>   </span>W ( W<sup>+</sup>, W<sup>-</sup> ) and Z Bosons<span>   </span></span></td>
<td width="155" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>     </span>10<sup>25</sup></span></td>
<td width="101" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>       </span>10<sup>-18</sup></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="196" valign="top"><span lang="EN">4. Gravitational force</span></td>
<td width="241" valign="top"><span lang="EN">Graviton (not yet discovered)</span></td>
<td width="155" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>    </span><span> </span>1</span></td>
<td width="101" valign="top"><span lang="EN"><span>  </span><span>     </span>infinite</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><span lang="EN"><span> </span>Gluon, photons and W,Z<span>  </span>particles are called as Gauge Bosons, which are originated from the Gauge Theory. <strong>Graviton and one more type of bosons &#8211; Higg’s boson, are other two types of bosons, which are<span>   </span>theoretically anticipated but which are<span>  </span>not yet discovered.</strong> </span></p>
<p><strong><span lang="EN"><span> </span>STANDARD MODEL OF PARTICLES AND FORCES :<span>  </span></span></strong><span lang="EN"><span>    </span></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN"><span> </span></span><span>Physicists have developed a theory called <strong>The Standard Model</strong> that explains what the world is and what holds it together. It is a collection of theories that embodies all of our current understanding of fundamental particles and forces. </span><span lang="EN"><span> </span>Developed in the early 1970s, this model has successfully explained experimental<span>  </span>results and precisely predicted a wide variety of phenomena occurring in the Universe.</span><span> It is a simple and comprehensive theory that explains all the hundreds of particles and complex interactions with only:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span>6 quarks</span></strong><span><span>  </span>and their 6 anti- particles,<span>   </span><strong>6 leptons</strong> and their 6 anti- particles, <strong>Force carrier particles</strong><span>  </span>- Photons, gluons, W &amp; Z Bosons.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>The Standard Model falls short of being a complete theory of fundamental interactions, primarily because of <strong>its lack of inclusion of <a title="Gravitation" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitation">gravity</a></strong>, the fourth known fundamental interaction.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span><span> </span>Higg’s Bosons </span></strong><span>: One part of the Standard Model is not yet well established. We do not know what causes the fundamental particles to have masses. The simplest idea is called the <em><span>Higgs mechanism</span></em>. Prof. Peter Higgs, professor at the Edinburgh University, proposed a theory which envisages a new type of particles, in 1964. This mechanism involves one additional particle, called the Higg’s boson, and one additional force type, mediated by exchanges of this boson.Large Hadron Collider at CERN, is intended to search for the Higgs particle ( God Particles). </span></p>
<p><strong><span>UIFICATION MODEL OF FORCES :<span>  </span></span></strong><span>As an extension of the Standard Model, Physicists are trying to find out an unified theory of the forces. It is believed that in the incredibly high energy conditions of the big bang (10<sup>-34 </sup>s after the big bang) there was a single <strong>superforce<span>  </span></strong><span> </span>governing all particle interactions. As the Universe cooled, this force split into the four<span>   </span>‘fundamental’ forces as described earlier. Therefore, at high enough energies the particle<span>  </span>interactions for the different forces should behave the same, and the different<span>  </span>forces are really just low energy manifestations of a single force. It is an ultimate goal of particle<span>  </span>physics to produce a theory of a<span>  </span>superforce which also explains all four forces seen at low energies. Developing this ‘Theory of Everything’ is a challenge before the scientists.</span></p>
<p><strong><span>MAIN <span> </span>GOALS OF THE LHC<span>  </span>:</span></strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Our current understanding of the Universe is incomplete. The Standard Model of particles and forces summarizes our present knowledge of particle physics. The Standard Model has been tested by various experiments and it has proven particularly successful in anticipating the existence of previously undiscovered particles. <strong>However, it leaves many unsolved questions, which the LHC will help to answer.</strong></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>1. The Standard Model does not explain the origin of mass, nor why some particles are very heavy while others have no mass at all. The answer may be the so-called Higgs mechanism. According to the theory of the Higgs mechanism, the whole of space is filled with a ‘Higgs field’, and by interacting with this field, particles acquire their masses. Particles that interact intensely with the Higgs field are heavy, while those that have feeble interactions are light. The Higgs field has at least one new particle associated with it, the Higgs boson<strong>. If such a particle exists, experiments at the LHC will be able to detect it.</strong></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>2.The Standard Model does not offer a unified description of all the fundamental forces, as it remains difficult to construct a theory of gravity similar to those for the other forces. Supersymmetry — a theory that hypothesises the existence of more massive partners of the standard particles we know — could facilitate the unification</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>of fundamental forces<strong>. If supersymmetry is right, then the lightest supersymmetric particles should be found at the</strong></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span>LHC.</span></strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>3. Cosmological and astrophysical observations have shown that all of the visible matter accounts for only 4% of the Universe. The search is open for particles or phenomena responsible for dark matter (23%) and dark energy (73%). A very popular idea is that dark matter is made of neutral — but still undiscovered — supersymmetric particles.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>The LHC will also help us to investigate the mystery of antimatter. Matter and antimatter must have been produced in the same amounts at the time of the Big Bang, but from what we have observed so far, our Universe is made only of matter. Why? The LHC could help to provide an answer.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><em><span>LHC </span></em></strong><em><span>the guide</span></em></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>4. In addition to the studies of proton–proton collisions, heavy ion collisions at the LHC will provide a window onto the state of matter that would have existed in the early Universe, called ‘quark-gluon plasma’. When heavy ions collide at high energies they form for an instant a “fireball” of hot, dense matter that can be studied by the experiments.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>5. Are <a title="Electromagnetism" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetism"><span>electromagnetism</span></a>, the <a title="Strong nuclear force" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_nuclear_force"><span>strong nuclear force</span></a> and the <a title="Weak nuclear force" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_nuclear_force"><span>weak nuclear force</span></a> just different manifestations of a single unified force, as predicted by various <a title="Grand unification theory" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_unification_theory"><span>Grand Unification Theories</span></a>?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>6. Why is <a title="Gravitation" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitation"><span>gravity</span></a> so many orders of magnitude weaker than the other three <a title="Fundamental interaction" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction"><span>fundamental forces</span></a>? See also <a title="Hierarchy problem" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_problem#The_Higgs_mass"><span>Hierarchy problem</span></a>.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>7. Are there <a title="Kaluza–Klein theory" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaluza%E2%80%93Klein_theory"><span>extra dimensions</span></a>, as predicted by various models inspired by <a title="String theory" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory"><span>string theory</span></a>, and can we detect them?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>.[ <a title="Stephen Hawking" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking"><span>Stephen Hawking</span></a> said in a BBC interview that "I think it will be much more exciting if we don't find the Higgs. That will show something is wrong, and we need to think again. I have a bet of one hundred dollars that we won't find the Higgs." <span>  </span>In the same interview Hawking mentions the possibility of finding super partners and adds that "whatever the LHC finds, or fails to find, the results will tell us a lot about the structure of the universe."]</span></p>
<p><strong><span>WORKING OF THE LHC<span>  </span>: </span></strong></p>
<p><span>LHC is the world’s biggest accelerator <span> </span>and the biggest machine ever made. It is an outcome of the collective efforts of the world scientific community and common political will of the governments of <span> </span>majority of the countries of the world. No one country can do such a big adventure individually .The actual working of the accelerator is complicated, it can be explained in simple term as :</span></p>
<p><span>The LHC accelerates two beams of<span> </span><a href="http://www.lhc.ac.uk/about-the-lhc/what-is-the-lhc/atomic-particles.html">atomic particles</a> ( hadrons= proton or lead nuclei)<span> </span>in opposite directions around the 27km<span> </span><a href="http://www.lhc.ac.uk/about-the-lhc/what-is-the-lhc/collider.html">collider</a>. When the two particle beams reach their maximum speed ( near to that of light), the LHC allows them to ‘collide’ head on at 4 points on their circular journey. </span><span lang="EN">When two protons collide, they break apart into even smaller particles. That includes subatomic particles called <strong><span>quarks</span></strong> and a mitigating force called <strong><span>gluon</span></strong>. Quarks are very unstable and will decay in a fraction of a second. </span><span>Thousands<span> of new particles are produced when particles collide and detectors, placed around the collision points, allow scientists to identify these new particles by tracking their behaviour.</span></span><span> </span><span>The detectors are able to follow the millions of collisions and new particles produced every second and identify the distinctive behaviour of interesting new particles from among the many thousands that are of little interest.</span><span lang="EN">The detectors collect information by tracking the path of subatomic particles. Then the detectors send data to a grid of <a href="http://computer.howstuffworks.com/pc.htm"><span>computer</span></a> systems.</span></p>
<p><span>Physicist will use the LHC to <strong>recreate the conditions just after the Big Bang</strong>, by colliding the two beams head-on at very high energy. As the energy produced in the collisions increases, researchers are able to peer deeper into the fundamental structure of the Universe and further back in its history. In these extreme conditions, it is expected, unknown atomic particles may appear.</span></p>
<p style="text-align:center;"> </p>
<br />  <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gocomments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/comments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godelicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/delicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gofacebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/facebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gotwitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/twitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gostumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/stumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godigg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/digg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/goreddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/reddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/38/" /></a> <img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=38&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/la-hadron-collider-lhcsearch-for-god-particle%e2%80%99/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/fb6eae1866fc84f972fe3eb5d7a59eae?s=96&#38;d=identicon" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">arunsdixit</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/CERN_shiva.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">The Statue of Shiva near A40 Building of CERN</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://lpmpjogja.diknas.go.id/kc/a/atom/projection-tv-crt.gif" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">CATHOD RAY TUBE - simple form of an accelerator  </media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://lpmpjogja.diknas.go.id/kc/a/atom/projection-tv-crt-labels.gif" medium="image" />

		<media:content url="/Users/Deepti/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtml1/02/clip_image001.gif" medium="image" />

		<media:content url="http://visits.web.cern.ch/visits/guides/tools/presentation/english/images/aerial-view.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">white spots - sites of the Detectors</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://lhc-milestones.web.cern.ch/LHC-Milestones/images/photos/ph07-1.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Areal view of the LHC Accelerator</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://ubpheno.physics.buffalo.edu/~dow/PASI2007/website/lhc_cern.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Inside view of the LHC Tunnel                                        </media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/6249/0002of0.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Inside view of LHC</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The End Of Science</title>
		<link>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/the-end-of-science/</link>
		<comments>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/the-end-of-science/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 03:51:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>arunsdixit</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Review-Science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/?p=20</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[THE END OF SCIENCE. Facing the Limits of Knowledge in the Twilight of the Scientific Age.   By John Hargon,   A Staff Reporter (Former), Scientific American. Addison &#8211; Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. 1996. Pages : 308     A Book Review. &#8211; By Dr. ARUN DIXIT.   John Horgan is a Science Journalist, who worked with [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=20&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<h1><span style="color:blue;font-size:x-small;">THE END OF SCIENCE.</span></h1>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;">Facing the Limits of Knowledge in the Twilight of the Scientific Age.</span></strong></span></p>
<h2></h2>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<table class="MsoTableGrid" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="379">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="50" valign="top">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;"><br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_b31HoOANi5E/SVvXQ7hRLqI/AAAAAAAAAAY/IIHgGXYGCZE/s1600-h/clip_image001.jpg"><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_b31HoOANi5E/SVvXQ7hRLqI/AAAAAAAAAAY/IIHgGXYGCZE/s320/clip_image001.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />
</span></td>
<td width="336" valign="top">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;font-size:x-small;">By John Hargon,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">A Staff Reporter (Former),</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">Scientific American.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">Addison &#8211; Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">1996.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">Pages : 308</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<h3><span style="color:blue;font-size:x-small;">A Book Review.</span></h3>
<p class="MsoBodyTextFirstIndent2"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong></strong><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;">&#8211;<span> </span>By Dr. ARUN DIXIT.</span></strong></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">John Horgan is a Science Journalist, who worked with the Scientific American. Now he is working as the Director of the Center for Science Writings at the Stevens Institute of Technology, New Jersey. He has written four books: ‘Rational Mysticism’, ‘End of Science’, ‘The Undiscovered Mind’, and ‘Where Was God on Sept 11?’ The End Of Science is his first book which was the US bestseller and was translated into 13 languages. It has been a controversial book.</span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">Hargon contends in this book that <strong>‘science, particularly pure science, is coming to an end.’</strong> This contention seems to be his conviction. He has tried to prove his conviction through this book.This book is in the form of interviews, which Horgan has taken. He takes the reader on the tour of scientists’ homes, laboratories and their conferences including their personal histories and theories. He has interviewed prominent scientists of the 20<sup>th</sup>century from different areas of pure science. Many of them are Nobel laureates. He takes the reader on a tour with him in different areas of science, such as physics, cosmology, neuroscience, evolutionary biology, philosophy,limitology &#8212; in short, nearly every aspect of basic science. All interviews he has taken, have two central questions: Will scientists find The Answer (the ultimate reality)? Has the science come to end?</span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">Was it possible that science could come to an end? Could scientists, in effect, learn everything there is to know? Could they banish mystery from the world? What are the limits of science, if any? Is science infinite or is it as mortal as we are? If the latter, is the end in sight? Why is there something rather than nothing? These were some of the questions he started asking himself. In its effort to find The Answer to The Questions, he thought that the universal mind may discover the ultimate limit of knowledge. He, therefore thought of knowing the views of other scientists on these questions. While focusing on individual scientists and philosophers, the book also represents his own views. Thus, the book is a composite mixture of the views expressed by the scientists and his own views.</span></p>
<h4><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;font-size:x-small;">Summary of the Book:</span></h4>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">While giving the summary, I have tried to give the excerpts of the interviews the author has taken. In addition to that, I have tried to add the views of the author, wherever needed. There are total ten chapters in addition to ‘Introduction’ in the beginning and ‘Epilogue’ at the end. I have not included chapter six (the End of Social Science) and chapter eight (The End of Chaoplexity) in to this summary.</span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;font-size:x-small;">Chapter 1:<span> </span>The End of Progress:</span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">In this chapter, the author gives an account of his interviews with some scientists who had come to attend the symposium in Minnesota, which has the title ‘The End of Science?’</span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Gunther Stent</span></strong></span><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">, is a bacteriophage biologist at the Uni. of California at Berkeley. He has written a<span> </span>book, ‘ The Coming of the Golden Age : A View of the End of Progress,’ in which he contended that science – as well as technology, the arts, and all progressive enterprises- was coming to an end. The dizzy rate at which progress is now proceeding makes it seem very likely that the progress must come to a stop soon, perhaps in our lifetime, perhaps in a generation or two. Certain fields of science like<span> </span>human anatomy, geography are limited simply by the boundedness of their subject matter. According to the Darwinian theory, he explained, science stems not from our desire for truth per se, but from our compulsion to control our environment in order to increase the likelihood that our genes will propagate. When a given field of science begins to yield diminishing practical returns, scientists may have less incentive to pursue their research and society may be less inclined to pay for it. <strong>Bentley Glass</strong>, an eminent biologist argued that not only is science finite, but its end is in sight. <strong>Leo Kadanoff</strong> , a prominent physicist at the Uni. of Chicago, writes that nothing we do is likely to arrest our decline in<span> </span>numbers or support for science.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;font-size:x-small;">Chapter 2:<span> </span>The End of Philosophy:</span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">In this chapter, the author discusses the views of some philosophers on science..</span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Karl Popper:</span></strong></span><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;"> is a British philosopher and most influential philosopher of science of the 20<sup>th</sup> century. Popper believed that science could never answer questions about the meaning and purpose of the universe. The origin of life will forever remain untestable, probably. Even if scientists create life in a laboratory, they can never be sure that life actually began in the same way. According to his theory of ‘ Falsification,’ scientists can never prove a theory<span> </span>is true; they can only falsify it, or prove it is false.<span> </span><strong>Thomas Kuhn, </strong>an <span><span>American</span></span><span> </span><span>intellectual, w<span style="color:black;">rote his best known and most influential work ‘The Structure of Scientific Revolution’. The keynote of his model was the concept of a <em>paradigm, </em>which he defines as a collection of procedures or ideas that instruct scientists, implicitly what to believe and how to work. Mostscientists never question the paradigm. Most scientists yield to a new paradigm reluctantly. In his book, he has called most of the scientists as <strong>‘</strong><em>paradigm addict’</em>. <strong>Paul Feyerabend </strong>is<strong> </strong>an<strong> </strong>A</span><span>ustrian</span>-born</span><span> </span><span><span>philosopher of science</span>. ‘Against Method’ is his influential book, which is translated in 16 languages. The book argues that philosophy cannot provide a methodology or rationale for science<strong>, </strong><em>since there is no rationale to explain.</em> He sought to show that there is no logic to science; scientists create and adhere to scientific theories for what are ultimately subjective and even irrational reasons.He stressed one point that other professionals earn their living, whereas most modern scientists are supported by taxpayers. The public is the patron and should have a say in the matter.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;">Chapter 3:<span> </span>The End of Physics:</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Even though the title of the chapter is regarding physics, the author has concentrated his discussions around particle physics. There are no more dedicated seekers of The Answer than modern particle physicists, the author remarks. They want to show that all the complicated things of the world are really just manifestations of one thing. Einstein was the first great modern seeker of that ‘one thing’. He spent his later years trying to find out a theory that would unify quantum mechanics with his theory of general relativity - <em>Theory Of Everything</em> (TOE). But he also suggested that no theory could be truly final. He once said of his theory of relativity, “ It will have to yield to another one, for reasons which at present we do not yet surmise. I believe that the process of deepening the theory has no limits.”</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">But in 1970s, the dream of unification was revived by several advances. First, physicists showed that just as electricity and magnetism are aspects of a single force, <em>electromagnetism</em>, so electromagnetism and the weak nuclear force are the manifestations of an underlying <strong><em>‘electroweak’</em></strong> force. Researchers<span> </span>also developed a theory for the strong nuclear force, which grips protons and neutrons together in the nuclei of atoms. The theory, called <em>quantum chromodynamics</em>, posits that protons and neutrons are composed of even more elementary particles, called <strong><em>quarks</em>.</strong>Together, the electroweak theory and quantum chromodynamics, constitute the <strong><em>standard model</em></strong> of particle physics. Emboldened by this success, workers forged far beyond the standard model in search of a deeper theory. Their guide was a mathematical property called <strong><em>symmetry</em>.</strong> In constructing the standard model, physicists were able to sweep some problems which they encountered, under the rug. But Einsteinian gravity, with its distortions of space and time, seemed to demand an even more radical approach. In 1980s, many physicists came to believe that <strong><em>superstring theory</em></strong> represented that approach which is an extension of the quantum theory. The theory replaced point like particles with <em>minute loops of energy</em><strong> </strong>that eliminated the absurdities arising in calculations. The theory suffers from several problems, however. There seems to be countless possible versions, and theorists have no way of knowing which one is correct. Moreover, superstrings are thought to inhabit four dimensions in which we live (space-time), but also six extra dimensions. Finally, the strings are as small<span> </span>(<strong><em>Plank’ length = 10<sup>-33</sup> cm</em></strong>) in comparison to a proton as a proton is in comparison to the solar system. To probe the realm of superstrings are thought to inhabit, physicists would have to build a particle accelerator 1,000 light-years around ( the entire solar system is only one light-year around). And not even an accelerator of that size could allow us to<span> </span>see the extra dimensions, where the <em>superstrings dance</em>. With this background of the recent theories in physics, the author interviewed some prominent physicists.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><strong>Sheldon<span> </span>Glashow</strong>, who along with</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Steven Weinberg</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">and</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Abdus Salam</span>, was awarded the 1979 <span>Nobel Prize in Physics</span>. He was once a leader in the quest for a unified theory. But with the advent of superstrings, he became disillusioned with the quest for unification. ‘Those working on superstrings and other unified theories were not doing physics at all any more’, he contended, ‘because their speculations were so far beyond any possible empirical test’. Physics cannot proceed on pure thought alone, in spite what superstring enthusiasts said. “There will be the standard theory and that will be the last chapter in the field of elementary physics story,” he answered. “<em>Physicists would continue to seek some little interesting small thing , but it’s not the same as the quest<span> </span>as I was fortunate enough to know<span> </span>it in my professional life</em>.”Glashow noted that several promising graduate students had just left Harvard for Wall Street.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">John Barrow,</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> the British </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>cosmologist</span>, argued in his book, ‘Theory of Everything’, </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">that Godel’s incompleteness theorem undermines the very notion of a complete theory of nature. Godel established that any moderately complex system of axioms inevitably raises questions that cannot be answered by the axioms. <strong>David Lindley</strong>, a physicists turned journalist, in his book, ‘The End of Physics’, contended that physicists working on superstring theory, were no longer doing physics because their theories could never be validated by experiments. <strong>Steven Weinberg, </strong></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">admits that neither the superconducting supercollider nor any other earthly accelerator could provide direct confirmation of a final theory. He reiterated a comment ‘<em>The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless.’</em></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Hans Bethe ,</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> <span>German</span>-<span>American</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>physicist</span>, and</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Nobel laureate</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">in</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>physics</span>(1967)</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">for his work on the theory of</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>stellar nucleosynthesis</span>,</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> said that there were still many open questions in physics, including ones raised by the standard model<em>. But none of these advances would bring about revolutionary changes in the foundations of physics.</em></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">John Wheeler, </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">an eminent</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>American</span> <span>theoretical physicist</span> who was the later collaborator of</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Albert Einstein</span>,coined the terms</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><em><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>black hole</span></span></em></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">and</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><em><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>wormhole</span></span></em></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">and the phrase <em>“<span>it from bit</span>”.</em> “Never run after a bus or woman or a <em>cosmological theory</em>, because there’ll always he another one in a few minutes,” was his assessment about the scientific theories.He once remarked,” I do take seriously the idea that the world is a figment of the imagination.” Where was the mind when the universe was born? And what sustained the universe for the billions of years before we came to be? Answers to these questions, he offers as, “at the heart of everything is a question, not the answer.”</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">David Bohm, </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">an</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>American</span>-born</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>quantum</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>physicist</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">who made significant contributions in the fields of</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>theoretical physics</span>,</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>philosophy</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">and</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>neuropsychology</span>. </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">As physicist-philosopher, he developed an alternative to the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics. Bohm seemed to intent on making physics even more philosophical, speculative and holistic. He went much further than Wheeler in drawing analogies between quantum mechanics and Eastern religion. He developed a philosophy, called <strong><em>implicate order</em></strong>, that sought to embrace both, mystical and scientific knowledge. Bohm rejected the possibility that scientists could bring their enterprise to an end by reducing all the phenomena of nature to a single phenomenon, such as superstrings. What underlines it all is unknown and cannot be grasped by thought, he remarked. He had been a friend and student of the Indian mystic, Krishnamurthy, who was the first modern Indian sages to try to show westerners how to achieve enlightenment<em>. Bohm was desperate to know, to discover, the secret of everything, either through physics or through meditation, through mystical knowledge. </em><strong>Richard Feynman,</strong> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">an</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>American</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">physicist who was a joint recipient of the</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Nobel Prize in Physics</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">in 1965, together with</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Julian Schwinger</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">and</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Sin-Itiro Tomonaga</span>.</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">He is of the view that after the fundamental laws are discovered, physics will succumb to second rate thinkers, that is, philosophers.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;">Chapter 4: The End of Cosmology:</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Stephen Hawing,</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> a British <span>theoretical physicist</span>. Hawking is the</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Lucasian Professor of Mathematics</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">at the</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>University of Cambridge</span>. His key scientific works include</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>theorems</span> regarding</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>singularities</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">in the framework of</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>general relativity</span>, and</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Hawking radiation</span>s. He is paralyzed physically but have <em>a powerful brain in paralyzed body, still imagining realities with infinite degrees of freedom</em><strong>.</strong> Hawking was the first prominent physicist of his generation to predict that physics might soon achieve a complete, unified theory of nature and thus bring about its own demise. The final theory would exclude God from the universe and with him all mystery. In 1994, Hawking admitted as much when he told an interviewer that physics might never achieve a final theory after all.<strong>David Schramm </strong>of Fermi lab is a strong advocate of the Big Bang Theory. He describes three evidences of this theory as three pillars<span> </span>: <strong><em>1.</em> <em>The Red Shift of galaxies, 2. the microwave background, and 3. the abundance of lighter elements</em>.</strong> He admits “as cosmologists venture further back toward the beginning of time, their theories become more speculative. Cosmology needs a unified theory of particle physics to describe processes in the very early universe, but validating a unified theory may be extremely difficult. Even if somebody comes up with a really beautiful theory, like superstring theory, there’s not any way it can be tested. So you are not really doing the scientific method where you make predictions and then check it. There’s not that experimental check going on. It’s more just mathematical consistency. It is always possible that theoretical explorations of black holes, superstrings, Wheeler’s ‘it from bit’ and other exotica might yield some sort of breakthrough. But until someone comes up with definitive test, we’re not going to have that kind of ‘Eureka’ where you’re really confident you know the answer.”</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Howard Georgi,</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> a particle physicist at Harvard University said,” I think you have to regard cosmology as a historical science, like evolutionary biology. You are trying to look at the present-day<strong> </strong>universe and extrapolate back, which is an interesting but dangerous thing to do, because there may have been accidents that had big effects<strong>. </strong><em>The fate of particle physics and cosmology, are to some extent intertwined. </em>Cosmologists hope that a unified theory will help them understand the universe’s origin more clearly.” He found papers on quantum cosmology, with all their talk of wormholes and time travel and baby universes, ‘quite amusing.’ It’s like reading Genesis, he quipped. <strong>Fred Hoyle,</strong> a British astronomer and physicist<em>, who rejects not only inflation, baby universes and other highly speculative hypothesis, but the big bang theory itself. </em>He has coined the term ‘ big bang’ on a BBC broadcast for the theory in which he does not believe. His fundamental objection to the Big Bang is philosophical. ‘It does not make sense to talk about the creation of the universe unless one already had space and time for the universe to be created in.’ If we accept this theory, then you loose the universality of the laws of physics, he explained, and suggested that space and time must have always exited, even before the big bang. He, Gold and Bondi invented the Steady State Theory, which posits that the universe is infinite both in space and time and constantly generates new matter through some still-unknown mechanism. <em>Since 1970s, he has argued that the universe is pervaded by viruses, bacteria and other organisms. These space-faring microbes supposedly provided the seeds for life on earth and spurred evolution thereafter; natural selection played little or no role in creating the diversity of life.</em></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;">Chapter 5: The End of Evolutionary Biology:</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">The discipline of evolutionary biology can be defined as the study of evolution of the life on the earth to this date. The author, in the beginning, gives a short account of the principles of the evolutionary biology.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Darwin</span></strong></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">based his theory of natural selection, the central component of his vision, on two observations: 1.Plants and animals usually produce more offspring than their environment can sustain, 2. These offspring <strong><em>differ slightly</em></strong> from their parents and from each other. Darwin concluded that each organism, in its struggle to survive long enough to reproduce, compete either directly or indirectly with other of <strong><em>its</em></strong> species. Chance plays a role in the survival of any individual organism, but <strong><em>nature will<span> </span>favor<span> </span>or select those organisms whose variations make them slightly more fit,</em></strong> that is, more likely to survive long enough to reproduce and pass on those adaptive variations to their offspring.<strong>Lamarck ,</strong> French Biologist, proposed that organisms could pass on not only inherited but also<strong> </strong><em>acquired characteristics</em><strong> </strong>to their heirs. But Darwin did not approve Lamarck’s view of self directed adaptation. <strong>Gregor Mendel,</strong>Austrian monk, recognized that natural forms can be subdivided into discrete traits, which are transmitted from one generation to the next by what Mendel termed hereditary<strong> <em>particles</em></strong><em>,</em> which are now called as <strong><em>Genes. </em>Ernst Mayr</strong> of Harvard University and other evolutionary biologists fused Darwin’s ideas with genetics into a powerful restatement of his theory, called the <strong><em>New Synthesis</em></strong>, which affirmed that natural selection is the primary architect of biological form and diversity.<strong>Crick and Waston,</strong> 1953, discovered the structure of DNA, &#8211; which serves as the blueprint, from which all organisms are constructed &#8211; confirmed Darwin’s intuition that all life <em>is related, descended from a common source.</em>Waston and Crick’s finding also revealed the source of both<strong>, </strong><em>continuity and variation that makes natural selection possible.</em> <strong>Richard Dawkins</strong>, a</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>British</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>ethologist</span>(A zoologist who studies the behavior of animals in their natural habitats),</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;"><span>from the University of Oxford. In his 2006 book</span><span> ‘</span><span><em><span>The God Delusion</span>’</em>, Dawkins contends that a supernatural creator almost certainly does not exist and that faith qualifies as a</span><span> </span><span><span>delusion</span>.</span><span> </span><span>He was called as ‘more Darwinian thanDarwin.’ While dismissing the idea of God, he insisted on his views, <em>“All purpose comes ultimately from natural selection.”</em> It is a cosmic principle; wherever life is found, natural selection is at work.”</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Stephen Jay Gould, </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">a prominent American</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>paleontologist</span>. Gould’s greatest contribution to science was his theory of</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><em><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>punctuated equilibrium</span></span></em></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">which he developed with</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Niles Eldredge</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">in 1972</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;"> which is an alternative to <em>Darwin</em><em>’s gradualism</em> that might someday supersede it. He called it an extension or complement to Darwin’s basic model.<a name="summary"></a>. When he was asked if he thought biology could ever achieve a final theory, he twisted and said Darwin’s theory is only a beginning, it has just started. Gould proposed that the evolution of life on this planet may turn out to be a very small part of the phenomenon of life. Life elsewhere may very well not conform to Darwinian principles. By considering the immensity of the universe and the improbability of absolute uniqueness of any part of it, leads to the immense probability that there is some kind of life all over.<strong></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Lynn Margulis, </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">an</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>American</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>biologist</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">, </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">best known for her theory on the origin of</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>eukaryotic</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>organelles</span>, and her contributions to the</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>endosymbiotic theory</span>—which is now generally accepted for how certain</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>organelles</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">were formed. She has challenged the Darwinian orthodoxy. She proposed the concept of symbiosis, which was most successful.Darwin emphasized the role of competition between individuals and species in evolution. But she proposed that symbiosis had been an equally important factor – and perhaps more important- in the evolution of life. One of the greatest mysteries in evolutionary biology concerns the evolution of <strong><em>prokaryotes,</em></strong> cells that lack a nucleus and are the simplest of all organisms, into <strong><em>eukaryotes</em></strong><em>,</em> cells that have nuclei. All multicellular organisms, including we humans, consist of eukaryotic cells. She proposed that eukaryotes may have emerged when one prokaryote absorbed another, smaller one, which became the nucleus.<span> </span>She suggested that such cells should be considered not as individual organisms but as composite.<strong> </strong>Margulis supported the idea of <strong><em>Gaia</em></strong> (Gaia was the Greek goddess of the earth) which means that the biota ( all the life), the sum of all life on earth, is locked in a symbiotic relationship with the environment, which includes the atmosphere, the seas, and other aspects of the earth’s surface. The biota chemically regulates the environment in such a way as to promote its own survival (<em>Gaia Hypothesis</em>). She rejected the idea that the earth is in some sense a living organism. (this notion is often associated with Gaia). <strong>Stuart Kauffman</strong></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">is an American theoretical</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>biologist</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">who argues that the complexity of biological systems and organisms might result as much from</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>self-organization</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">and far-from-equilibrium dynamics as from Darwinian</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>natural selection</span>. He challenged the Darwin’s theory. He even challenged the central tenet of biology: natural selection. He feels that accident alone cannot have created life; <em>our cosmos must harbor some fundamental order- generating tendency. </em>He called his theory as anti-chaos theory. <strong>Stanley Miller, </strong>a professor of Biochemistry, tried to create life in the laboratory in 1953<strong>. </strong>He mixed ammonia, methane, and hydrogen and some water and sparked the mix with electric spark. After the analysis, he found that it contained some amino acids, the building blocks proteins, the basic stuff of life. He had made a prediction that within 25 years, scientists would ‘surely’ know how life began. Millar told that solving the riddle of the origin of life had turned out to be more difficult than he or anyone else had envisioned. He acknowledged that scientists may never know precisely where and when life emerged. <strong>Francis crick</strong>, the inventor of DNA, in his book, ‘Life Itself’, wrote that “the origin of life appears to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have to be satisfied to get it going.” He proposed that aliens visiting the earth in a spacecraft billions of years ago may have deliberately seeded it with microbes. Society seems increasingly reluctant to underwrite such investigations. In 1993, American congress hut down NASA’s SETI program (search for extraterrestrial intelligence).</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;">Chapter 7: End of Neuroscience:</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Mind, not space, is science’s final frontier. Most of the scientists consider the mind, a potentially endless source of questions. Modern neurologists are interested less in how and why our mind evolved, than in how they are <em>structured and work right now</em>. The distinction is similar to the one that can be made between cosmology – which speaks to explain the origin and subsequent evolution of matter &#8212; and particle physics &#8212; which addresses the structure of matter as we find it here, in the present. Consciousness, our subjective sense of awareness, has always seemed to be a different sort of puzzle, not physical but metaphysical. <strong>Francis Crick ,</strong> an English <span>molecular biologist</span>,</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>physicist</span>, and</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>neuroscientist</span>, was awarded the 1962</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine</span> for DNA structure. Finally he turned his attention to the most elusive and inescapable of all phenomena: ‘Consciousness’.He along with Christopher Koch insisted that it was time to make consciousness a subject of empirical investigation. Only by examining neurons and the interactions between them could scientists accumulate the kind of knowledge needed to create truly scientific models of consciousness. <strong>Gerald Edelman, </strong>an American</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>biologist</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">who won the 1972 Nobel</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">for his work on the</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>immune system</span>.</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">He has a grand project of creating a Theory of Mind</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;"> <span>to his credit. The gist of the theory is that ‘just as environmental stresses select the fittest members of a species, so inputs to the brain select groups of neurons<span> </span>- corresponding to useful memories, for example – by strengthening the connections between them.’ He realized that a theory of the human mind would represent the ultimate closure for science for then science could account for its own origin. The mind, he sounded, can only be understood from a biological standpoint, not through physics or computer science or other approaches that ignore the structure of the brain. He saw it curious that people who worked in neuroscience always talked about <em>brains as if they were identical. Even identical twins, show great differences in the organization of their neurons.</em><strong></strong></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Quantum Dualism</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> : There is one issue on which Crick, Edelman and indeed almost all neuroscientists agree, that the properties of the mind do<span> </span>not depend<span> </span>in any crucial way on quantum mechanics. Physicists and philosophers have speculated about links between quantum mechanics and consciousness since at least the 1930s. Such efforts have ulterior philosophical or even religious motives.<span> </span>Christopher Koch summed up the <strong><em>quantum – consciousness</em></strong>thesis in syllogism (deductive reasoning in which conclusion is derived from two premises):<strong> </strong><em>Quantum mechanics is mysterious and consciousness is mysterious and therefore, quantum mechanics and consciousness must be related</em>.<strong>John Eccles,</strong> an</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Australian</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>neurophysiologist</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">who won the 1963</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>Nobel Prize in Medicine</span> for his work on the</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>synapse</span>. He was the most prominent modern scientist to follow quantum mechanical dualism, which holds that <em>the mind exists independently of its physical substrate.</em> He was a religious person who rejected “cheap Materialism.” He thought it’s a divine creation. <strong>Roger Penrose, </strong>a British Physicist from Oxford is a well known mathematician and profound advocate of the dualism. In his book “The Emperor’s New Mind,” he refutes the claim of artificial intelligence proponents that computers could replicate all the attributes of humans, including consciousness. The Key to his argument is Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem. According to Penrose, the theorem implies that no<span> </span>‘ ‘computable’ model – that is neither classical physics, computer science, nor neuroscience, as presently construed—can replicate the mind’s creative or rather intuitive power. He was very confident on his theory of “,<strong> <em>Quasi – Quantum Consciousness</em></strong>.”<span> </span>In his above book, he argues against the assumption that the mystery of consciousness, or of reality in general could be explained by the current laws of physics. A new theory has to be devised which would eliminate the paradoxes of quantum mechanics and its disconcerting subjectivism. Neither superstring theory – which is after all a quantum theory – nor any other current candidate for a unified theory has the qualities that he feels, are necessary. In his next book, ‘The Shadows Of Mind,’ that he conjectured(To believe especially on uncertain or tentative grounds) that microtubules<span> </span>&#8211;<span> </span>the minute tunnels of protein that serve as a kind of skeleton for most cells, including neurons – perform nondeterministic, quasi-quantum computations that somehow give rise to consciousness. Each neuron is thus not a simple switch, but a complex computer in its own right. Penrose’s microtubule theory was ridiculed by many. Some critics have accused him of being a vitalist, who secretly hopes that the mystery of the mind will not yield to science<em>. The author observes that Penrose is a true scientist; he wants to know. He sincerely believes that our present understanding of reality is incomplete, logically flawed and well, mysterious</em><strong>. </strong>He is looking for a key, an insight, some clever quasi- quantum trick that will make everything suddenly clear. He is looking for The Answer.</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Thomas Nagel,</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> an</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>American</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>philosopher</span> who assumed <em>that subjective experience is a fundamental attribute of human and many higher – level animals, such as bats</em><strong>.</strong> He feels that philosophy and or science might one day reveal a natural way to bridge the gap between our materialistic theories and subjective experiences. He, therefore is called as a weak mysterian. <strong>Colin Mc Ginn,</strong> is a <span>British</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>philosopher</span></span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">currently working at the</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>University of Miami</span>. He is best known for his work in the</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span>philosophy of mind</span>. He believes that most major philosophical questions are unsolvable because they are beyond our cognitive abilities. We cannot solve our mind-body problem. <strong>David Chalmer</strong>, a famous Australian philosopher, echoing the above view differed in one aspect that although science could not solve the mind- body problem, philosophy still might<em>. Matter and energy were present at the dawn of creation, but life was not , as far as we know.</em><strong></strong></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;">Chapter 9:<span> </span>The End of Limitology:</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">The author, in this chapter, describes the discussions took place in a workshop, “The Limits of Scientific Knowledge”,held in 1994. Scientists from different fields discussed ‘whether there were limits to science, and if so, whether science could know them.’ <strong>John Casti</strong>, a mathematician ,opened the meeting by asking a question –‘Is the real world too complex for us to understand?’ He implied that Godel’s theorem of incompleteness tells that some mathematical descriptions would always be incomplete; some aspects of the world would always resist description. Alen Turing, similarly, showed that many mathematical propositions are ‘undecidable.’ <strong>Joseph Traub</strong>, a theoretical computer scientist from Columbia Univ. tried to rephrase Casti’s proposal, “can we prove there are limits to science, in the same way that Godel and Turing proved there are limits to mathematics and computation?” </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Gregory Chaitin</span></strong></span><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">, an<span>Argentine</span>-<span>American</span><span> </span><span>mathematician</span><span> </span>and<span> </span><span>computer scientist</span> <span>said, “ Now incompleteness seems so natural, you can ask<span> </span>how we mathematicians can do anything.” He has also established that just as nature seems to harbor fundamental uncertainty and randomness, so does mathematics. He proposed that mathematics was dead. In the future, mathematics would be able to solve problems only with enormous computer calculations that would be too complex for anyone to understand. Many accused Chaitin for his pessimistic exaggeration. But he said he was not a pessimist. He could not have pursued his work on the limits of mathematics if he was not an optimist. <strong>Piet Hut</strong>, a Dutch astrophysicist, added that astronomers face other limits that seem insurmountable. <em>They have only one universe to study, so they cannot do controlled experiments on it. Cosmologists can only trace the history of the universe so far back and they can never know what preceded the big bang or what exists beyond the borders of our universe. Moreover, particle physicists may have a hard time testing theories ( such as superstring) that combine gravity and all the other forces of nature, because the effects only become apparent at distance scales and energies that are beyond the range of any conceivable accelerator.</em><strong> Otto Rossler</strong>, t</span><span>heoretical biochemist from Germany. (Contributed to chaos theory – Rossler’s attracter). He has written a book ‘ Endophysics’, which describes the physics, by considering observer inside the system. It is an outgrowth of chaos theory.( Exophysics- when observer is outside the system.) He said “if we could stand outside the universe, we would know the limits to our knowledge, but we are trapped inside the universe and hence our knowledge of our own limits must remain incomplete. There exist situations where you are unable to find out about the truth from the inside”. He was asked, in that workshop, whether the intelligent computers might transcend the limits of human science. He said “No, that is not possible.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;">Chapter 10:<span> </span>The End of Machine Science</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">:</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Humanity, Nietzsche told us, is just a stepping stone, a bridge leading to the Superman. If he were alive today, he would definitely have entertained the notion that the Superman might be made, not of a flesh and blood, but of silicon.Only machines can overcome our physical and cognitive weaknesses and our indifference.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">Hans Moravec, </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">a robotic engineering said that Science desperately needed new goals. Most of the things that have been accomplished in this century were nineteenth century ideas. It’s time for fresh ideas now. Intelligent machines are capable of feats, we cannot even imagine. He convinced that future belongs to machines. By next century, robots will be as intelligent as humans and will essentially take over the economy. Machines will generate so much wealth that humans might not have to work, machines will eliminate poverty. “Will machines pursue science for its own sake?” He replied “Absolutely. That is the core of my fantasy: that our non-biological descendants, without most of our limitations, who could redesign themselves, could pursue basic knowledge of things. In fact, science will be the only motive worthy of intelligent machines.” Along with Moravec, <strong>Marvin Minskky</strong> also proposed the notion that machines might merge into one <strong><em>metamind</em></strong>. It is always possible that super intelligent machines will be infected by some sort of religion that makes them abandon their individuality and merge into a single<strong> </strong>meta mind. <strong>Freeman Dyason</strong>, suggested that we cannot solve all our problems, we cannot create heaven, we cannot find the Answer. Life is an eternal struggle. But he did not suggest that organic intelligence would soon will give away to artificial intelligence. He said that he does not make any distinction between mind and God. God is what mind becomes when it has passed beyond the scale of our comprehension.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><em><span style="font-family:Arial;">Omega Point</span></em></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;"> :<span> </span>Frank Tipler</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">, a physicist at Tulane University has proposed a theory called the ‘Omega Point,’ in which the entire universe is transformed into a single, all powerful, all knowing computers. He stated that Omega Point created the universe, even though the <em>omega point has not itself been created yet.</em> He assumed that the end of the universe, the Omega Point, is also, in a sense, its beginning. But it is pure teleology ( a doctrine explaining phenomenon<span> </span>by their ends )</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;">Epilogue<span> </span>(Terror of God):</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Paul Davis, the theoretical physicist, in his book – The Mind of God &#8211; pondered whether we human could attain absolute knowledge – The Answer – through science. He concluded that such an outcome was unlikely, given the limits imposed on rational knowledge by 1. Quantum mechanics.<span> </span>2. Godel’s theorem. 3. Chaos theory and likes. Mystical experience might provide the only avenue to absolute truth.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">It is considered bad form to imagine being God, but one can imagine being an immensely powerful computer that pervades the entire universe. As the Omega point approaches the final collapse of time and space and being itself, it will undergo a mystical experience. It will realize that there is no creator, no god, other than itself. The Omega point must also realize that its lust for final knowledge and unification has brought it to the brink of eternal nothingness and that if it dies, everything dies; being itself will vanish.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">At the heart of reality lies not an answer, but a question: why is there something rather than nothing? The Answer is that, there is no answer, only a question. Wheeler’s suspicion that the world is nothing but “a fragment of imagination” was also well &#8211; founded. The world is a riddle that God has created in order to shield himself from his terrible solitude and fear of death.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Freeman Dyson gave the author one possible lead. He proposed that God is not omniscient, not omnipotent but grows and learns as we humans grow and learn. Socinians (Italian theologician, who argued against trinity- god, Jesus and the holy sprit) believed that God changed, learned and evolved through time, just as we humans do. The general idea is that super intelligent machines created by humans spread throughout the entire universe …… similar something to Omega Point.<span> </span>Therefore, Omega point </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">≡ God</span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">The views of the prominent scientists can be summarized as :</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">For <em>Crick or Dawkins</em> - who harbor a profound ambivalence (mixed feelings or emotions) concerning the notion of absolute truth.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">For <em>Roger Penrose</em> - who could not decide whether his belief in a final theory was optimistic or pessimistic.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">For Steven Weinberg -<span> </span>who equated comprehensibility with pointlessness.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">For <em>Edward Wilson</em> - who lusted after a final theory human nature and was chilled by the thought that it might be attained.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">For <em>David Bohm</em> -<span> </span>who was compelled both to clarify reality and to obscure ( to make it less visible or unclear ) it.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">For<em> Marvin Minsky</em> - who was so aghast (stuck with fear) at the thought of single mindedness,</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">For<em> Freeman Dyson</em> - who insisted that anxiety and doubt are essential to existence.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">The ambivalence of these truth seekers toward final knowledge reflects the ambivalence of God – or the Omega Point, if you will &#8211; toward absolute knowledge of his own predicament.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;">My comments :</span></strong></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong></strong></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;">1. </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">In Sept. 2008,<span> </span>the scientific community around the world was very much enthusiastic and thrilled about the launching of the experiment of Large Hadron<span> </span>Collider, at the CERN Laboratory ( European Organization for Nuclear Research ), near Geneva, Switzerland. They were<span> </span>expecting the evidence for the fundamental particle- Higg’s Bosons, which are also called as the God’s Particles, through this experiment. The scientists were expecting a major breakthrough in the understanding of the universe. On the background of this gigantic revolutionary experiment, I e-mailed John Horgan, asking whether he still held his views regarding the end of science. He replied promptly and send me a link of his article which he had published in EDGE ( 15.6.97).In this article, he reiterated his earlier views and pleaded them vehemently.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">In the issue of ‘ Discovery,’ Sept. 2006, after the decade of publication of his book, Horgan wrote an article in which also, he has reiterated his views that “</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">A broader view of history suggests that the modern era of explosive progress( in science) is an anomaly—the product of a unique convergence of social, economic, and political factors—that must eventually end. </span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Science itself tells us that there are limits to knowledge.</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"> </span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Scientists&#8217; attempts to solve these mysteries often take the form of what I call ironic science—unconfirmable speculations more akin to philosophy or literature than genuine science.”</span></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">The author seems to be very firm on his convictions.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">2. </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Because of his strong conviction about the future of science, he has asked<span> </span>‘leading questions’ to scientists, and in many cases, he got the answers which were near to his views. In some interviews, I felt, the interviewee was ‘forced’ to give the desired answer.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">3.</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span> </span>In spite of some of the ‘ drawbacks’, the book is interesting. The author takes the reader on a long tour in vast area of science, from particle physics to cosmology. Even though the book refers to many scientific theories, the author has avoided the mathematical equations and other complicated details. He has made the things simpler.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">4.</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span> </span>The reader gets acquainted with many latest theories and inventions in different fields of science through<span> </span>this book.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">5. </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Since<span> </span>chapter 3, deals with only one area of physics i.e. particle physics, the heading ‘End of</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Physics’ seems to be misnomer. This chapter gives a brief account of different theories from particle physics.<span> </span>Particle physicists want to show that all the complicated things of the world are really just manifestations of one thing. Protons and neutrons are composed of even more elementary particles, called quarks. The basic forces governing the universe are electromagnetic, weak and strong nuclear forces.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">The modern theories suggest that all the three forces must be of the same nature. The scientists have proved that the electromagnetic and weak forces are same aspects of the single force, ‘electroweak’ force. They are struggling to show that the electroweak and strong force to be the aspects of the ‘one unified’ force. The scientist<span> </span>are proposing that the matter particles and the forces are the manifestations of the same reality. This model is called as the “ Standard Model.” The fourth force, gravity, is not explored to that extent. Einstein has spent his life in trying to find a theory which would unify quantum mechanics and his general theory of gravity. But he could not prove it and it has not been proved convincingly yet. The superstring theory goes one step further and suggests that<span> </span>all the particles and forces are the manifestations of only one reality – Superstring – which is<span> </span>ten dimensional minute<span> </span>loop of energy and have a very very small length, of the order of Plank’s length </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:x-small;">≈ <span><span style="color:black;">10<sup>-33 </sup>cm.</span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">These latest theories from particle physics posit to show the unification of all forces and matter – Theory of Everything (TOE). But they are not near the success. There are only theories and ideas which seem to be far away from the theory of ultimate reality which can <strong>be testes empirically</strong>. To probe the realm of superstrings, physicists would have to build a particle accelerator of 1000 light years, which seems to be beyond the reach of scientists, since we know the tremendous efforts scientists took to build up a CERN accelerator of 54 km length. No one country could do it and therefore it came into existence because of the collective efforts of majority of the countries of the world.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">6. </span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">The interview of the author with David Bohm, who developed an alternative to the Copenhagen Interpretation of the quantum mechanics – spells out Bohm’s view that Unified Theory is not possible. He was desperate in discovering the ultimate reality either through physics or through meditation.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">After reading the views of the leading scientists and the logic behind them, the reader may tempt to agree to certain extent, with the author’s premise that Standard Model is the limit beyond which Physics can not proceed.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">7.<span> </span></span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Cosmology is another area where the limits of scientific progress can be imagined. Majority of the scientists agree that the Big Bang model of the origin of the universe is the only possible model which is evidenced by practical observations like, red shift of galaxies, microwave background radiations and the abundance of lighter elements. But this model is challenged by some basic questions<span> </span>: What was there before big bang? What exists beyond the borders of our universe? If there was no space before the big bang, then in to what the universe is expanding?<span> </span>Scientists are unable to answer these questions, rather some of them feel that these are not the questions in real sense. The concepts of wormhole, which is a theoretical tunnel which joins one end of the universe to the other end or<span> </span>which<span> </span>joins one universe to the other, also seems to be a fiction. One can agree with David Schramm, who says that as cosmologists go further back towards the beginning of time, their theories become more speculative. Fred Hoyle rejects the idea of the big bang and expanding universe. After considering all these observations, the reader can inclined to think that the cosmological theories would be speculative or theoretical rather than empirical.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">8.<span> </span></span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Origin of life has been an area of interest for the human being since centuries. Evolutionary biology gives us an account of how life has evolved on this planet. Darwin’s theory of natural selection has been at the centre of this branch of biology. But this theory is also challenged by many scientists. Gould’s Punctuated Equilibrium, Margulis’s idea of Gaia hypothesis, and others have proposed alternative theories, as they found that Darwin’s theory is insufficient to explain the observed behaviour of the living organisms.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">The basic question in Biology is how life has originated on the earth. Millar and Uray in 1950s did an experiment in which they showed that<span> </span>by a spark of electricity in a mixture of ammonia, methane and hydrogen in water ,amino acids , which are the building blocks of proteins, the basic stuff of life, were produced. Millar told the author that he expected that within 25 years, life could be created in the Labs. But he was disappointed that no progress was done in next 50 years and he admitted to the author that the riddle of life had turned to be more difficult than any one has envisioned. He acknowledged to the author that scientists may never know precisely where and when life emerged.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">There are many scientists including the cosmologist Fred Hoyle, who believe that life must have originated form outer universe. Francis Crick, the inventor of DNA, has proposed that aliens visiting the earth in a spacecraft billions of years ago may have deliberately seeded it with microbes.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">All these discussions show that when it comes to the basics of the fundamental questions regarding life,</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">the things are not clear rather it appears that instead of converging to a common answer, we get a blurred view of the reality.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">9.<span> </span></span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Neuroscience is an area which is still under mystery. Modern neurologists are interested less in how and why our minds<span> </span>evolved than in how they are structured and work right now. Consciousness is another area related to mind, the development of which is still in its childhood. ‘Neurons must be the basis for any model of the mind’, Crick told the author.<span> </span>Eccles a British Neurologist, a Nobel Laureate, holds the view that mind exists independently of its physical substrate. Roger Penrsoe tells the author that the present theories of quantum mechanics are insufficient to explain the phenomenon of consciousness. A new set of laws have to be investigated to explain the phenomenon of consciousness.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><strong><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">10.</span></strong></span><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span> </span>After reading the views of the scientists and the arguments of the author, the reader comes in a confused state. He has been witnessing many advances taking place in all the areas of science today and till the inference from the book is that the science is facing its end, which confuses him.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">The author has the premise that the fundamentals science is coming to an end. He has explained in his article in ‘Edge’ what he meant by the term ‘ fundamental’. He explains that ‘a fact or theory is fundamental in proportion to how broadly it applies both in space and in time. Both quantum mechanics and the theory of general relativity apply, as far as we know, throughout the entire universe at all times since its birth’. That makes these theories truly fundamental. Technically , all biological theories are less fundamental than the cornerstone theories of physics, because the biological theories apply only to particular arrangements of matter that have existed on our little planet for the past 3.5 billion years.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">The author, in his article from Edge, explains that all the other scientific developments are included in<span> </span>‘normal science,’ which solves puzzles that are posed by the prevailing paradigm<span> </span>but does not challenge the paradigm’s basic tenets. In a way, all biology since Darwin has been normal science. Even Watson and Crick’s discovery of the double helix, although it has had enormous practical consequences, merely revealed how heredity works on a molecular level; no significant revision of the new synthesis was required.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">The author surmises that science has reached or reaching its limits and no fundamental discoveries are expected to be taking place. For most part of the science, the scientists have only one option that is to<span> </span>pursue science in a speculative, non- empirical mode that the author calls as “ Ironic Science’, which offers points of views, opinions, which are, at best, interesting which provoke further comment. But it does not converge on the truth.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">The author tells us that there will not be any ‘great’ discovery in future, in the field of science. The correctness of this premise is hidden in the future. In spite of the limitations spelt out by Horgan, we will have to pursue the science with a hope that we may cross the present paradigm and establish new paradigms which might reveal the true nature of the reality.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:x-small;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Please Post Your Comment.</span></span></p>
</div>
<br />  <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gocomments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/comments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godelicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/delicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gofacebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/facebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gotwitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/twitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gostumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/stumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godigg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/digg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/goreddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/reddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/20/" /></a> <img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=20&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/the-end-of-science/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/fb6eae1866fc84f972fe3eb5d7a59eae?s=96&#38;d=identicon" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">arunsdixit</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_b31HoOANi5E/SVvXQ7hRLqI/AAAAAAAAAAY/IIHgGXYGCZE/s320/clip_image001.jpg" medium="image" />
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Our existence</title>
		<link>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2008/08/06/our-existence/</link>
		<comments>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2008/08/06/our-existence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 18:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>arunsdixit</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/?p=6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ We are a programmed creature,programmed since millions of years.During the evolution from unicellular state to the present state of  human being,we are being programmed continuously.The single cell is being evolved and moulded by the changes in environment.These changes are automatically recorded in the inner structure of the cell i.e. the DNA.The DNA is programmed and the new [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=6&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> We are a programmed creature,programmed since millions of years.During the evolution from unicellular state to the present state of  human being,we are being programmed continuously.The single cell is being evolved and moulded by the changes in environment.These changes are automatically recorded in the inner structure of the cell i.e. the DNA.The DNA is programmed and the new state comes in to existence.The cell division is also programmed and a multicellular organism comes in to existence.The evolution is the need of the environmental changes.Thus our existence is the outcome of the evolution, initiated and moulded continuously by the environment.There seems to be no other force which brought us to the present state.</p>
<br /><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/categories/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/" /> <img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/tags/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/" /> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gocomments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/comments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godelicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/delicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gofacebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/facebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gotwitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/twitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gostumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/stumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godigg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/digg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/goreddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/reddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/6/" /></a> <img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=6&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2008/08/06/our-existence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/fb6eae1866fc84f972fe3eb5d7a59eae?s=96&#38;d=identicon" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">arunsdixit</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>meditation</title>
		<link>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/meditation/</link>
		<comments>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/meditation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 06:28:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>arunsdixit</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/?p=3</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What is Meditation ? It is one of the most discussed subject. Every religion has discussed it and developed a methology for it.But very rarely  anotomy of the concept is discussed.It is a general concept that during meditation, one goes beyond consciousness.No thought is entertained during meditation.Rather it is considered to be a thoughtless process. It [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=3&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>What is Meditation ?</strong></p>
<p>It is one of the most discussed subject. Every religion has discussed it and developed a methology for it.But very rarely  anotomy of the concept is discussed.It is a general concept that during meditation, one goes beyond consciousness.No thought is entertained during meditation.Rather it is considered to be a thoughtless process. It is also called as a pathless journey.</p>
<p>My proposition is &#8211; it is a biological phenomenon.Something happens at the subtle biological level. Every living being is programmed one, programmed at the cell level.Meditation works at a level which is beyond this programmed state.Let us discussed this concept in the light of recent developments in the area of genetics,cell biology and quantum mechanics.Let us start thinking and discussing.</p>
<br /><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/categories/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/" /> <img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/tags/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/" /> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gocomments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/comments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godelicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/delicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gofacebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/facebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gotwitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/twitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gostumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/stumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godigg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/digg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/goreddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/reddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/3/" /></a> <img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=3&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/meditation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/fb6eae1866fc84f972fe3eb5d7a59eae?s=96&#38;d=identicon" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">arunsdixit</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hello world!</title>
		<link>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/hello-world/</link>
		<comments>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/hello-world/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 03:37:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>arunsdixit</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=1&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Welcome to <a href="http://wordpress.com/">WordPress.com</a>. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!</p>
<br /><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/categories/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/" /> <img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/tags/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/" /> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gocomments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/comments/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godelicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/delicious/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gofacebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/facebook/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gotwitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/twitter/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/gostumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/stumble/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/godigg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/digg/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/" /></a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/goreddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://feeds.wordpress.com/1.0/reddit/arunsdixit.wordpress.com/1/" /></a> <img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=arunsdixit.wordpress.com&amp;blog=4418668&amp;post=1&amp;subd=arunsdixit&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://arunsdixit.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/hello-world/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/fb6eae1866fc84f972fe3eb5d7a59eae?s=96&#38;d=identicon" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">arunsdixit</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
