syedfaisal

October 24, 2010

Searching for our origin.The journey must go on!

Right from the early days of humanity , curiosity has been a key element in the development of mankind. Either this curiosity is induced in it or it developed on its own is also a question of debate like the existence of mankind itself. Probably the most appealing question for human curiosity is the creation of this universe and what brought us to the point of existence.

If we see the endeavors by humanity, from the invention of wheel and use of fire to landing on moon and aiming to discover the farthest places of the universe , we see the purpose of life as exploring things to satisfy the hunger for knowledge and to discover the unknown.

More on : http://infocrats.org/mag/2010/10/sciencetechnology/searching-for-our-origin-journey-must-go-on/

March 14, 2010

First Time Exhibition of Einstein’s Original Manuscript on Relativity

Filed under: physics — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — syedfaisal @ 3:18 am

Jerusalem- The masterpiece of a true genius in the history of Physics and mankind as a whole will be on display at Israeli Academy of Sciences. The first public exhibit of the complete, original manuscript, The Foundation of General Relativity started on March 7 2010 and will continue till 25th of March 2010.

The research is considered as the founding work of modern age in the study of space, time and their relation in our universe and its existence. The pages were written in 1916 at Einstein’s Home in Berlin. Later Einstein donated them to Hebrew University Jerusalem in 1925 during its inauguration.

First Time Exhibition of Einstein’s Original Manuscript on Relativity.

February 21, 2010

When molecules leave tire tracks:LMU

Here’s some interesting work going on.

If we some how get hold of the molecular patterns then it can also lead to some cutting edge developments in micro level gadgets. I think we are getting closer to a complete nano-era with making current electronics obsolete or making it a legacy.

When molecules leave tire

tracks:LMU

A new approach to optimizing molecular self-organization

Munich-Some classes of molecules are capable of arranging themselves in specific patterns on surfaces. This ability to self-organize is crucial for many technological applications, which are dependend on the assembly of ordered structures on surfaces. However, it has so far been virtually impossible to predict or control the result of such processes. Now a group of researchers led by Dr. Bianca Hermann, a physicist from the Center for Nanoscience (CeNS) at LMU Munich, reports a significant breakthrough: By combining statistical physics and detailed simulations with images obtained by scanning tunnelling microscopy (STM), the team has been able to formulate a simple model that can predict the patterns observed.

Read Complete : http://infocrats.org/mag/2010/02/sciencetechnology/when-molecules-leave-tire-tracks-lmu/

December 17, 2009

TIME

If I say, “I know something that has already happened in the future.” then you may think I am wrong but many philosophers and physicists believe the possibility of such statement being true.

Present, past and future are relative terminologies used with the events occurring in a particular time. Then question arises what is time? This is one of the burning questions with many contradictory answers.

“A successful unification of quantum theory and relativity would necessarily be a theory of the universe as a whole. It would tell us, as Aristotle and Newton did before, what space and time are, what the cosmos is, what things are made of, and what kind of laws those things obey. Such a theory will bring about a radical shift – a revolution – in our und2erstanding of what nature is. It must also have wide repercussions, and will likely bring about, or contribute to, a shift in our understanding of ourselves and our relationship to the rest of the universe” (Lee Smolin)

Physicists define time as what the clock reads. But this is not simple as it looks, this statement it self opens another series of confusing questions like what is the starting point of time? Does time has a start? Is time finite? Is time always real?

Many of the scientists consider time has roots leading to the Big Bang. But on the other hand another argument waits what was Big Bang and also whether there was any Big Bang ?
Time is also considered to be relative with respect to space that’s why we use the term space time coordinate. This can be understood by a simple example:

If I say a point was on x=0, y=0 and z=0 position at t=0 time and then moved to x=1,y=2 and z=2 at t=1 time means in 1 unit of time the point moved 3 position units (using difference formula).

Another question arises is the time same or the clock same for every observer? Einstein’s special theory of relativity did away with the idea that events can be simultaneous if they are in different locations. The difference in time between two events depends on their difference in distance and how fast the observer is moving.

Time is considered by some as linear such as Newton and Bacon who considered time as one way with no coming back but in the twentieth century, Gödel and others discovered solutions to the equations of Einstein’s general theory of relativity that allowed closed loops of proper time. These causal loops or closed curves in space-time allow you to go forward continuously in time until you arrive back into your past. Which means we can go to our past meet our childhood self. On the other hand time dilation concept allows you to see the future.

There are other terminologies we use which are related to time such as duration, occurrence of events, instants. Events occur in a particular duration of time. Time is also defined as the collection of instants and instants are said to be the boundaries of durations. Durations are considered to be an ordered set of instants means instants are not part of duration but a member of duration.

Now at the end of my article I quote Albert Einstein who once said, “The development during the present century is characterized by two theoretical systems essentially independent of each other: the theory of relativity and the quantum theory. The two systems do not directly contradict each other; but they seem little adapted to fusion into one unified theory. For the time being we have to admit that we do not possess any general theoretical basis for physics which can be regarded as its logical foundation.If it is true that the axiomatic basis of theoretical physics cannot be extracted from experience but must be freely invented, can we ever hope to find the right way? I answer without hesitation that there is, in my opinion, a right way, and that we are capable of finding it. I hold it true that pure thought can grasp reality, as the ancients dreamed.”

I hope we will be able to find the right way.

See Also:https://syedfaisal.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/my-articles-and-tutorials-for-ieee-nuces-karachi-e-newsletter-on-different-topics-2/

(This is something I wrote in University days some of you may find it a real basic intro of the topic)

October 14, 2008

Is the big bang theory a way to search for our origin or NOT! –>Dr. Penrose describes his theory about universe and comparison with aeon.

Filed under: physics — Tags: , , , , — syedfaisal @ 10:48 pm

Dr. Roger Penrose from Oxford universe in his recent lecture has challanged the theory of the Big Bang. In his lecture he expressed his views on the origin of the universe by saying, “The universe seems to go through cycles of some kind … Our universe is what I call an aeon in an endless sequence of aeons”.

The idea is a clear negation of the theory that our universe started from one origin and is an endless sequence of birth and death (referring it as aeon meaning life for eternity).

http://www.nationalpost.com/most_popular/story.html?id=859062

April 14, 2008

Origin of the Universe(Part 3)…Kun Faya Kun

Filed under: exploration, physics, thoughts — Tags: , , , , , , — syedfaisal @ 6:08 pm

originofuniverse

Though I am in the process of searching for the answer and during the last few days i was thinking on the same old question of origin of the universe (i leave the details for some future post of the series) and that search came up with new sets of questions to answer when I started to look into the words of the Quran ,”Kun Faya Kun”(Be and it is) with a slight different point of view.

Uptill now most of the creationists and evolutionists debates go around the issue whether God created the universe or it happened by chance and then a series of

events happened resulting in the triggering of other events

leading to the

creation of the universe in the current form which is still expanding

means the process is continued.

Research is being going on to discover the initial conditions of the universe so as to complete the scientific

model of the universe based on mathematical proofs

but still after years of research we are

still in the initial stages

(I am saying this because a lot is yet to be discovered).

Remarkable achievements have been made such as development of the detailed map of the universe by scientists with the help of the United Kingdom Infra-Red Telescope(University of Nottingham worked on the project for three years and announced the results recently) and on the other hand some people consider it

a waste of time to think on the topic and say God has made it so it  is

but the problem is how?

and what was the mechanism?

Was the process self triggered or someone was required

to initiate the process?

Was and is the process self running or someone is needed to run it?

After giving some time thinking on the words Kun Faya Kun (Be and it is), it seems to me quiet religious to

think of the origin process as self  triggered and self running (don’t think I am an evolutionist , I am still searching for the answer) because be and it is means the process of origination initiated by itself and so the continuation of the process is still there even today .

(to be continued……………………………………………………….  )

November 19, 2007

Infinity and Emotions……..need of a unit of emotions

The topic might look a bit stupid but that’s how emotions are. I was having a discussion with someone regarding emotions and the level of emotions and then during my way back home from my office I was thinking whether emotions do have some quantified value or not, whether their is something you can call infinite love or hatred etc.

Most of the people say love cannot be quantified cannot be compared or put to some axiomatic statement or love is blind(bla bla bla…) But when you look at your life you find  different levels of affection or hatred for different people like you love A more than B or hate C more than D etc and also if you think  you love something more than any thing and at then you say that your love something is infinite it’s again look illogical because that thing which you love more than any thing is actually your absolute reference  of love(similar is the case with other emotions such as hatred,anger etc) such as light for many physicists is absolute reference(and even speed of light has a value i.e. 3 x 10^8 m/s and now people are talking about FTL phenomenon)  means emotions must have some unit direct or indirect for e.g. love may have some relationship with the your brain cells and in the example if you love A more then B means if your love count for B is X number of brain cells utilized for the love portion then for A it must be X+1 or X+ Y depends on how much you love A more than B and similar is the case with comparing two different emotions about a person for e.g. if you hate someone means your hate units for that person have out-numbered your love units for that person and also if you hate C more than D means you have some love portion for C which is more than your love portion for D.

So from the above argument it is proved that emotions are quantifiable and there is a need to develop a unit for emotions.

And perhaps the concept of “infinite emotions” will become obsolete.

Basically the discussion started when I was having my finance class and there was an issue of amortizing the goodwill of a company and the teacher said “there are few analysts who think we cannot have an accurate measure of the worth of goodwill as is the case with emotions because we don’t have a measurable unit to exchange(and to me it looked unusual)”.

November 2, 2007

Origin of the universe……..search continues

Filed under: physics — Tags: , , , , , , — syedfaisal @ 10:20 pm

Origination from 0/0 singularity to m/0 singularity and then to the big bang and to the expansion of the universe we think of a process self driven in its apparent approach, the possibility of more than one origins is also there means more than one big bang resulting in a situation where one space-time is followed by another and so on……. leading to more than one absolute references of nature.

This leads to a situation where reality in every absolute frame of reference have different meaning like in our universe we talk of dual nature of light,electrons etc…… to be continued

ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE AND 0/0 SINGULARITY

Filed under: physics — Tags: , , , , , , , , — syedfaisal @ 2:19 pm

‘0/0’ to seems to be some value which has no significance in our lives or some may say its absurd to discuss or write something on it.BUT somebody who has some interest in finding the origin of the origins may find it interesting.

According to the most authentic and also most discussed theory the origin of the universe started with a massive explosion big bang and the initial condition which is mostly given is ‘zero volume infinite density’ or (infinite)density=mass/(zero)volume  (another singularity) , this theory is based on an assumption(which is quiet evident in normal life) that something has to originate from something and that something in the big bang case is mass and the fundamental forces associated with the process but the problem comes if this is so obvious then what about the origin of that something and so on…

( courtesy www.dkimages.com)

This leads to a question what if the origin started from nothingness which was present for nothing (0/0).  To understand the 0/0 singularity you can think “about something which is not there and you don’t need it” so it can be said that “no mass or force(in the sense of present physics) was there and it wasn’t required” then at some point in history of origin it originated from the absolute nothingness (0/0) and changed it to (m/0) and so the process of origination started…………..

further more: Origin of the universe ….search continues

(The article is incomplete I will write more on the topic IshaAllah)

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.