Muster Mark's Quarksspartans.jpg

A NEW AGE DAWNS

By: Raider-Hannah

In 1911 a British scientist C.T. R. Wilson was in the process of studying types of cloud formations. He constructed a device that acted like an artificial cloud chamber. In this chamber he could change the temperature, for example he could moisten and cool the air creating a "reasonable" cloud in lab conditions. The chamber had an unexpected help in the discovery of the subatomic particle. Since the chamber left behind very visible trails, this gave him evidence that some type of subatomic particle does exist. In time, two other Cavendish scientist had invented more powerful proton-beam device. Meanwhile at Berkeley, Ernest Lawrence created a cyclotron, or atom smasher.

A research company named CERN, boasted a string of magnets that weighed more than the Eiffel Tower and an under ground tunnel over sixteen miles around. "Breaking up atoms is easy" said James Trefil. You do it every time you turn on a fluorescent light. But breaking up an atomic nuclei takes alot of money and a generous supply of electricity. Getting to the level of quarks requires trillions of volts of electricity and a budget of a small Central American nation. The Hadron Collider purpose was to let scientist probe "the ultimate nature of matter", the whole plan was to shoot particles through a tunnel fifty-two miles long, achieving ninety-nine trillion volts of energy.


770557316_164a25f8ca_m.jpg

Quarks

by: Raider Erika Congress spent $2 billion on the Supercollider project, but canceled it in 1993 after fourteen miles of the tunnel had been dug. Since then physicists have set their sights slightly lower; however small projects can still be extremely expensive.
Particle physics is a very expensive enterprise, but it is a very productive one. As of right now the particle count is over 150, but it is extremely hard to understand the relationships of all these particles and their connections with each other. Some think that there are particles called tachyons, which travel faster than the speed of light. Carl Sagan in Cosmos hypothesized that if you traveled far enough downward into an electron, there might be a universe of its own. Then in 1960, Murray Gell-Mann invented to a new class of particles. His theory was that all hadrons were made up of still smaller, more fundamental particles. Richard Feynman, his colleague, wanted to call these new basic particles partons. Instead they became known as quarks.
Quarks are musch too small to have color or taste or any other characteristics. They were put into six catagories-up, down, strange, charm, top, and bottom.

Out of this came the Standard Model wich consists of six quarks, six leptons, five bosons, and a postulated sixth, plus three of the four physical forces. They are held together by gluons. The gluons and quarks form protons and neutrons. Leon Lederman says that the Standard Model lacks elegance and simplicity. This model is incomplete because it has nothing to say about gravity and can't explain mass.
external image moz-screenshot.jpg516px-Murray_Gell-Mann.jpg
This is Murray Gell-Mann who found the qurarks.

The Age of the Universe
by Raider Alexis
In order to pull everything together, scientist came up with the superstring theory. This states that all those small things like quarks and leptons that we thought were particles are actually “strings”. These are vibrating strands of energy that oscillate in eleven dimensions, three we already know and seven more unknowable to us. The strings are so small that they can pass for point particles.
String theory has gone as far as something called the “M theory”, which incorporates surfaces known as membranes or “branes”. New York Times, explaining this as simply as possible to a general audience: “The ekpyrotic process begins far in the indefinite past with a pair of flat empty branes sitting parallel to each other in a warped five-dimensional space… The two branes, which form the walls of the fifth dimension, could have popped out of nothingness as a quantum fluctuation in the even more distant past and then drifted apart”. That’s kind of hard to explain but it’s true.

In 2002, two French physicists, twin brothers Igor and Grickha Bogdanov, produced a theory of ambitious density involving concepts like “imaginary time” and the “Kubo-Schwinger-Martin condition”, and purporting to describe the nothingness that the universe was before the Big Bang which was always assumed to be unknowable. Some scientist called it complete nonsense.

While in the middle decades of the twentieth-century physicists were looking perplexedly into the world of small astronomers were finding no incompleteness of understanding in the universe at large. Edwin Hubble told us last time that nearly all the galaxies in our field of view are flying away from us, and the speed and distance of this retreat are neatly proportional: the farther away the galaxy, the faster it is moving. Then he realized that this could be expressed with a simple equation, Ho=v/d (Ho is the constant, v is the recessional velocity of a flying galaxy, and d its distance away from us). Ho has been known as Hubble’s Law. Using this Hubble calculated that the universe was about two billion years old, which a little awkward even in the late 1920s. Many things in the universe was likely older than that. In 1956, astronomers discovered that Cepheid variables were more variable than they had thought: they came in two varieties, which allowed them to rework their calculations and come up with a new age for the universe from 7 to 20 billion years old. Not really precise, but at least old enough to embrace the formation of the Earth.
The Spirial Galaxy
The Spirial Galaxy


Year after there was a long dispute between Allan Sandage, heir to Hubble at Mount Wilson, and Gerard De Vaucouleurs, a French-born astronomer based at the University of Texas. After year of calculations, Sandage arrived at a value for the Hubble constant of 50, which gave the universe an age of 20 billion years. De Vaucouleurs was equally certain that the Hubble constant was 100. This means that the universe was only half the size and age that Sandage believed. In 1994, a team from the Carnegie Observatories in California, using measures from the Hubble space telescope, suggested that the universe could be as little as 8 billion years old., which they consider to still be too young.



A Non-Conclusive Finish.

By: Raider-Sophie
0511-0709-1117-3957_Cartoon_of_an_Astronomer_clipart_image.jpg
Scientist still looking for the answers of the universe

The reason that it is so hard to make a final conclusion to any problem is that there is a very wide margin for interpretation. For example, if you are in the middle of a feild, looking at two lights trying to guess how far away they are apart. You can use plain logis and basic astronomey to get a good estimate,but what about variables such as wattage or exact measurements? With a telescope, similar problems occur. There are variations in the Earth's atmoshere,intergalactic dust, red shifts. Due to these problems, aastronomers tend to base final conclusions on not very solid evidence. Cosmotologist Geoffrey Carr once stated " We have a mountain of theory built on a molehill of evidence" and Martin Rees put it " Our present satisfaction( with our state of understanding) may reflect the paucity (lack) of the data rather than the excellence of theory" Same goes for the measurements of the universe. It is somewhere from 40 million to 90 million light years to the edge. The best guess we have for the age is 12 billion to 13.5 billion years old.One new theory is that the universe is not really as big and the galaxies that we see that are supposedly light years away are actually just rebounded light or reflections of closer galaxies.

Truth be told there is a large amount of fundemental things we don't know. Even when scientist calculate what is needed to hold the universe together, they never get it exactly right. Suppiseldy the universe is made up of anywhere from 90% to 99% " dark matter"-stuff that is invisible to us.Yes it is true there are portions of the universe that we can't even see! There are two possible bases of this matter. W.I.M.Ps( Weakly Interacting Massive Particles) matter left over from the Big Bang, OR M.A.C.H.Os ( Massive Compact Halo Objects) also known as the imfamous, black holes.Particle physicists believe the W.I.M.Ps theory more so. For a while the other thereoy was mosre trusted, but not enough of the black holes where found since they are so very hard to detect because of the interference. Scientist then went underground for there answers. One kilometer underground cosmic bombardments (disruptions) would be one millionth what they are on the surface. Even with this two thirds of th universe is missing from the balance sheet.
Recent evedience shows that galaxies are moving acceleratingly past us. This is counter to all expectations. It seems as though dark matter is not alone, there is also dark energy or (according to scientist). This seems to be the cause to the drrving expansion that nothing else can account for. THe theoreoy suggest that empty space, may in fact, not be that empty. Particles of matter and antimatter are popping out and in existence, therefore pushing the universe outwrd at an accelerating rate. Einstein's cosmological constant, the genral thereoy of realativity that was to stop the universe's prophecided expansion, was also the " blunder of his life", seems to be correct after all. This all concludes to that the universe is filled with scientific and mathmatical mysteries. We cannot tell the age of it, the distance of it, the matter that fills it, or even the physical laws that runs it. So her back on Planet Earth let us be unsettled by this but let us now consider something rather perplexing, though now you probably arn't surprised to hear that we don't understnd everything about even our home planet, and even that in which we do know, we have only known for a very, very short while.