Onanel

One Last Post For The Year Twenzay-Twelve On “Things Nuclear”

I haven’t blogged much at all this month of December (with the exception of adding a new page to the blog for venture capitalists to gloss over). However, I figured I would close-out this year by re-iterating my stance on “things nuclear”, especially since I’ll be in attendance at ND2013. For those who are concernedContinue reading “One Last Post For The Year Twenzay-Twelve On “Things Nuclear””

The Drift Between Dichotomies And Realities

Metaphysics represents a menagerie of dichotomies. Dichotomies are suspicious beasts because we, as humans, think of reality as being more complex, and therefore, reducing to pairs of alternatives would be a case of oversimplifying. The key to unlocking this door of peculiarity lies in the fact that dichotomies are formed by mutual exclusion. An antithesisContinue reading “The Drift Between Dichotomies And Realities”

The Interpretation of a Theory

**This was originally “tweeted” on August 23rd, 2012** A theory is a formal description of nature (meaning, a mathematical frame set with a link to lab stuff) which can make predictions of observations. Verification of these predictions are made through the trials of experiments and comparing what the theory says about its outcomes and whatContinue reading “The Interpretation of a Theory”

C H A R G E

According to the way Heisenberg did it, in quantum mechanics, both the position and the momentum come out as probabilities whenever you perform a measurement. The math states that these two probability distributions are Fourier Transforms of each other. Oddly enough, there is a theorem of the Fourier Transforms [of each other] that says theContinue reading “C H A R G E”

I Plan On Attending ND2013–March 4th – 8th, 2013 (New York City) Updated February 18th, 2013

I plan on attending the International Conference on Nuclear Data for Science and Technology (ND2013) that will be held at some lousy-ass Sheraton New York Hotel & Towers [“Hey Sheraton! Hey Gerrrrl!!”]. I’ll rest my head elsewhere. This is a conference that is held every three years internationally (this year, New York City will beContinue reading “I Plan On Attending ND2013–March 4th – 8th, 2013 (New York City) *Updated February 18th, 2013*”

I Hope I’m Being Coherent And A Little Less Incoherent About Decoherence

First of all, I would like to point out that both randomness and determinism, in the effect of decoherence, are both attributes of theory that are, as a result, developed. Decoherence irreversibly converts quantum behavior (additive probability amplitudes) to more classical behavior (additive probabilities), however, this requires noticing the role of the physicist in theContinue reading “I Hope I’m Being Coherent And A Little Less Incoherent About Decoherence”

C H A R G E – P A R T I C L E – M E N A G E R I E

According to the Gauss law, physical states must be charge-neutral. The Gauss law must not be interpreted as an operator equation seeing how it would directly violate the operator algebra / commutation relations. Therefore, it is translated into a constraint equation for the physical sector of the theory: Now, you should be able to integrateContinue reading “C H A R G E – P A R T I C L E – M E N A G E R I E”

Thermodynamics: External vs. Internal, Real vs. Ideal

Has anyone ever had any doubt about the relation between internal and external work in regards to thermodynamics? In consideration of irreversible processes, why is the work done measured by the work done against the external pressure and not the work done by the internal pressure? If the forces or pressures are not balanced theContinue reading “Thermodynamics: External vs. Internal, Real vs. Ideal”

M A R S

I, for one, was not all that thrilled about the landing of Curiosity on the Red Planet (of course it’s “red” due to a teensy amount of oxygen) last month nor am I ecstatic about NASA’s plans to send yet another robot to Mars for “drilling” purportedly in 2016. I, especially, object to the ideaContinue reading “M A R S”

Re-examining Scientific “Expertise” and the Purpose of Peer Review

There’s a quote from the book, Rethinking Expertise: “…people who have this kind of expertise share some of the tacit knowledge of the communities of practitioners while still not having the full set of skills that would allow them to make original contributions to the field…” For most practicing scientists [and engineers], they tend toContinue reading “Re-examining Scientific “Expertise” and the Purpose of Peer Review”