Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Submission + - Particles seen emerging from empty space for first time (newscientist.com)

fahrbot-bot writes: A pair of rare particles produced in high-energy proton collisions may be the clearest evidence yet that mass can emerge from empty space. The finding could shed light on one of the biggest puzzles in physics: how particles acquire their mass.

According to quantum chromodynamics (QCD) – widely considered to be our best theory for describing the strong force, which binds quarks inside protons and neutrons – even a perfect vacuum isn’t truly empty. Instead, it is filled with short-lived disturbances in the underlying energy of space that flicker in and out of existence, known as virtual particles. Among them are quark-antiquark pairs.

Under normal conditions, these fleeting pairs vanish almost as soon as they appear. But if enough energy is injected into a vacuum, QCD predicts they can be promoted into real, detectable particles with measurable mass.

Now, the STAR collaboration – an international team of physicists working at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider in Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York state – has observed this process for the first time.

The team smashed together high-energy protons in a vacuum, producing a spray of particles. Some of these particles should be quark-antiquark pairs pulled directly from the vacuum itself, but quarks can never exist alone and immediately combine into composite particles. Quarks and antiquarks are born with their spins correlated — a shared quantum alignment inherited from the vacuum.

The researchers found that this link persists even after the quarks and antiquarks become part of larger particles called hyperons, which decay in less than a tenth of a billionth of a second. Spotting these spin-aligned hyperons in the aftermath of the proton collisions allowed the researchers to confirm that the quarks within them came from the vacuum.

“This is the first time we’ve seen the entire process,” says Zhoudunming Tu, a member of the STAR collaboration.

Comment Re:Pyrrhic Victory (Score 1) 162

So let me get this straight (pun intended) -- we spent billions of dollars bombing Iran. They still are able to block the Strait and are now charging a tax that didn't exist before, to pay to repair things we bombed. Trump says there's "Complete and Total regime change," but the leader of Iran is still named the Ayatollah Khamenei. I'm not sure how any measure shows the US campaign was a success. On the contrary, it is likely a pyrrhic Victory that will embolden Iran, strengthen their Islamist regime and defiance, and fracture US alliances like NATO. What exactly was accomplished here? The end result seems like we're now giving Iran money and allowing them to dominate the Strait officially.

Don't forget that Iran still has their stockpile of uranium and enriched uranium, and some unknown quantity of drones and ballistic missiles (and can build more). And Trump suspended sanctions on Iranian (and Russian) oil sales, to soften U.S. fuel prices. I get the feeling that, despite all his talk, Trump doesn't really understand the word, "winning". But, hey, the U.S. blew up a *bunch* of stuff and used/wasted a large portion of our super expensive Tomahawk missiles and other ordinances, burned through a ton of fuel and lost pretty expensive F-15, A-10 and E-3 AWACS planes and a couple of other aircraft in the rescue for the downed F-15 pilot - not to mention got 3 U.S. service people killed and hundreds wounded, as well as kill thousands of Iranians.

Comment Re:Trump likes that idea... for himself (Score 1) 162

Asked on Monday whether he would accept a deal that would allow Iran to take fees from ships to traverse the strait, the US president said: “What about us charging tolls? I’d rather do that than let them have them. Why shouldn’t we? We’re the winner. We won.”

and with echoes of the Mexico border wall:

The White House said last week that Trump is considering asking Arab countries to pay for Washington’s expenses in its war on Iran.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news...

So... Trump muses about the U.S. imposing passage fees/tolls on a foreign body of water, totally unconnected to the U.S., and Arab countries reimbursing the U.S. for a war he started on a whim (apparently talked into it by Benjamin Netanyahu, who's had a 47-year hard-on for this). Also, continues to misunderstand "winning". Classic Trump.

Comment pretty much nothing the US is doing successfully (Score 1) 227

Out of curiosity, What exactly is the proper modern approach to warfare?

1. Propagandize on teh intarwebs to get the useful idiots baying in the wrong direction. Including demonizing the wrong 1%.
2. Collect kompromat to control politicians. If none is available, have a program to create some. (RELEASE THE EPSTIEN FILES.)
3. Assymetric warfare, use swarms of cheap drones s while the enemy uses 1 million dollar missiles to try to stop them.
4. sabotage, particularly cyber and ecoonomic .
5. Don't be a blundering loudmouth. Diplomacy has a much greater ROI. Needing to blow things up is a failure.
0. Make sure you've got people on the inside working in your interests instead of those of their own nation.

Comment just like the last war (Score 3, Interesting) 227

Looks like the ADE 651 got a quantum upgrade.


Kind of like how in WWII the allies promoted the idea that carrots help with your night vision to obfuscate the fact that they had RADAR to explain away how their night fighters kept shooting down German planes. Even Bugs Bunny played his patriotic part for the war effort.

Comment In future "for entertainment only" news (Score 1) 66

Copilot becomes an evening contributor on a self-proclaimed "for entertainment purposes only" network, bringing "fair and balanced" news, opinions and information ...

"It can make mistakes, and it may not work as intended. Don't rely on Copilot for important advice. Use Copilot at your own risk."

... or, whatever.

Comment Tap or click to view article (Score 1) 43

No video (or animated image) should ever load/autoplay unless the user interacts with that element, indicating he/she wants to play it.

How granular would the permission be? If web browsers start blocking all animation and post-load layout shifting by default, including CSS transitions and animations, this would encourage website operators to structure the page to coerce permission to animate in each document. For example, a website operator could make each page load blank other than a notice to the effect "Tap or click to view 'Title of Article' on Name of Site."

Slashdot Top Deals

Take everything in stride. Trample anyone who gets in your way.

Working...