First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)

[MTL]

Rad. What does LHC stand for? Lsomething Hadron Collider?

Luscious.

[Pyrrho]

If it's too much either I explained it badly or you're too ambitious
Come on! Post the questions!

Okay.  What questions should we be asking?  And what are the answers to those questions?

Seriously, if you can't come up with good questions, how do you expect non-physicists to come up with good questions?

What is it that we should know that we probably don't know about physics?  And why have you not told us these things before?

[Iroscato]

In regards to quantum entanglement, is there a theoretical application for it in FTL communication, do you think?

[Alex K]

Here's something that kept me awake the other night.

You are no doubt familiar with some of the various experiments with quantum entanglement.  The experiments and their results are strange enough to be sure, but my question isn't really about that.

How are individual entangled (or non-entangled, for that matter) particles observed?  (Think back to the 1998 Caltech experiment where an individual photon was "teleported" about a meter.  What means is used to make the observations?

Often , a particular property of the particle is measured. For example, the polarization of a photon. The photon itself can be measured using a photo multiplier, and the polarization is decided by putting a polarizing surface or something in front of the photomultipliers. E.g. the decay of spin 0 positronium into two photons can be assumed to produce a quantum superposition of two photons with entangled opposite polarizations going off in opposite directions. One then catches them as far apart as possible with detectors set up on opposite sides of the source. Does that answer the question a bit?

[Alex K]

In regards to quantum entanglement, is there a theoretical application for it in FTL communication, do you think?

It doesn't look like it. In quantum field theory, there is a famous three line proof that experiments separated by more than light speed cannot affect each other measurably.

I was somewhat of an expert on the superluminal neutrino thing back in '11 which unsurprisingly turned out to be a loose cable, and we beforehand came up with various ideas to circumvent that by modifying relativity a bit - but they are all problematic theoretically, and there is no evidence that they exist.

[Iroscato]

In regards to quantum entanglement, is there a theoretical application for it in FTL communication, do you think?

It doesn't look like it. In quantum field theory, there is a famous three line proof that experiments separated by more than light speed cannot affect each other measurably.

I was somewhat of an expert on the superluminal neutrino thing back in '11 which unsurprisingly turned out to be a loose cable, and we came up with various ideas to circumvent that by modifying relativity a bit - but they are all problematic theoretically, and there is no evidence that they exist.

Bollocks. Thanks anyway

[ignoramus]

Alex truly is multi skilled!
He cleans up the results after the LHC smashed some atoms out and later on that night cleans up some other matter that his cutsie "baby" smashed out!
I take my hat off to you! (As do we all!)

[Alex K]

If it's too much either I explained it badly or you're too ambitious
Come on! Post the questions!

Okay.  What questions should we be asking?  And what are the answers to those questions?

Seriously, if you can't come up with good questions, how do you expect non-physicists to come up with good questions?

What is it that we should know that we probably don't know about physics?  And why have you not told us these things before?

Although it wasn't clearly marked, I was specifically responding to JuliaL who mentioned that she had some more concrete questions, but after a round of googling didn't dare to ask them any more because they seemed too trivial. I was trying to encourage her to ask them anyway.

But to answer your question...

1. I kinda lost track of what I have mentioned before specifically, but I think what most people are not aware of, or underestimate, is: how well the theory describing the underlying rules for every process in our everyday lives is already known. Calling the scientific discipline "particle physics" is misleading - it actually is the study of the fundamental laws of nature. We have already come scary far, so for all practical intents and purposes, we already have the theory of everything. Everything you observe around you, and everything going on in your body, is based on laws that are well understood and tested to precision. No wiggle room.

This brings me to the second point: people should be more aware of what it means to know the fundamental laws of nature, and what one can do with them and where the limitations of interpretation are. What Effective Theories are and what role they play in our understanding of nature. How the concept can loosely be applied universally beyond particle physics.

2. Then there are more specific questions: I think there are a lot of misconceptions and outdated notions about what the Big Bang is, what the scientific claims about it and evidence for it are, and what it is not. Where speculation begins

[Fidel_Castronaut]

So, Alex, in what way does this confirm Jesus?

[Alex K]

So, Alex, in what way does this confirm Jesus?

It doesn't. Results clearly indicate that there is no God:








That should settle it, no?

And anyone who thinks they still believe in God: disprove the equations!