« Extraordinary Commitments of Time and Energy | Main | "You look like Elvis" »



Very interesting! In your first example of pions and kaons in a room, it seems like a stationary particle is decaying into several moving particles. Where does the extra kinetic energy come from?

How did the brownies turn out? It looks like Sonia hasn't bought into the whole "baking" thing yet... she's still young enough to know what brownie batter is *really* for! :)


Remember Einstein's equation of mass being equivalent to energy? (E=mc^2) The mass of the pion or kaon, when it decays, gets turned into the masses of the "daughter particles" that it decays to, and any difference between the mass of the "parent" and the total mass of all the "daughters" goes into the kinetic energy of the daughters. For the case of the pion, it weighs only a little more than the muon plus neutrino mass, so those two particles fly out from where the pion was with not much kinetic energy. But for the kaons, which weigh almost 5 times as much as the muon mass plus the neutrino mass, there's lots of leftover energy, so the muons and neutrinos have lots of kinetic energy when they are created in the room.

The brownies turned out better than I had feared they would--I had to put the kids to bed for the last few minutes of their baking, so by the time I got back downstairs to take the brownies out the edges were burnt. Luckily my mom (with whom I shared the brownies the next day) likes the burnt ones...thanks for asking!


Nice that Sonia makes brownies in designer clothes.

mark jamison

Hi All:

You are wasting your time trying to break down matter into the smallest elements, even at the quantum level you will see everything is working in pairs to give form, and eventually leads to emptiness. You will see that matter and energy are always combining together with other elements to give form. The reason physics is completely wrong, nowadays is because the underlying philosophy is based on seeing the world as objective particles.Both Einstein and the Buddha, especially Nagarjuna have elaborated that sense based reality-experience is totally unreliable. You cannot seperate your mind from matter. Mind really is energy-awareness and beyond that I don't know what it is. That's the great thing about the mystery of the Universe you will never find the god-particle because it's an illusion. God is really having a good laugh.

mark jamison

Hi All:

If I was a betting man I would say the universe is not made up of matter, but is made up of energy-mind and what looks like matter really is the combining of elements to give the illusion of matter. But the really interesting thing is its not even made up of this, because the underlying core that gives matter form is the quantum vacuum field or space itself. If you can solve the quantum vacuum field then you are getting closer to that holy grail.

All the Best


I wouldn't want to think about where society would be today if (starting with the ancient Greeks) scientists didn't want to break things down into smaller and smaller units to understand how matter works. Can you imagine trying to make sense of the similarities and differences between the elements without the periodic table to keep track of (and ultimately point to) how many neutrons and protons make up each element?

I do however want to apologize for using the term "Holy Grail" to describe the goal of looking for neutrino/antineutrino differences. These differences are hugely important to our understanding of why there are so many more particles in the universe than antiparticles, but describing them in such religious terminology is totally inappropriate (and worse, probably very offensive!). I will try to be more careful in the future...I am still pretty new at this blogging stuff.


"I do however want to apologize for using the term "Holy Grail" to describe the goal of looking for neutrino/antineutrino differences... describing them in such religious terminology is totally inappropriate (and worse, probably very offensive!)." - Debbie

Personally, I'm not offended -- discovering why the universe is one way instead of another seems like a very theological goal to me.

"G-d is really having a good laugh." - mark

Especially if G-d is a Monty Python fan. ;)

stacy karr

so where do you get the kaons and pions

i too have my own reasons for sayig it is inane to collide, etc, atoms.

i started may 2004 trying to find exactly how the quantum model was maintaining form and exchanging energy. i tried model after model. with no luck and following the rule ockman's razor regarding simplicity i said to heck with that, i never believed in the quantum model to begin with so i went back to the bohr model and had much better luck. so there i was with a pretty great explanation with neutrons and protons yet th electron was giving me much difficulty. when finally, when i was trying to give an explanation to how exactly flame was produced i ended up taking th electron completely out of th atom and ended up with atoms in a sea of electrons. i ended up finding out there was a model for that called th plum puding model. working with that model was great except then there was th problem ov how exactly th protons and neutrons were staying stable/ maintaining form. i was tring to find an explanation for kolors too, and ended up findin' an explanation for gravity and rainbows and refuting totally what newton said about gravity and prizmz and i thouroghly doubt newton. so i have a totally dif explanation for how prizmz produce rainbowz and how they form atmosferically yet admitedly these theories sorta differ, because th atmosferic rainbow theory cooincides with th how leaves change kolor theory which doez'nt agree with my how an object is th kolor it is theory. so i was trying to find how protons and neutrons were maintaining form and when i finally found it i found complete amazement because it is completely simple yet difficult to believe. so i wound up th wkend ov hallown with a totally different atomic model where both protons and neutrons were exchanging energy with th electrons however, actually in th summer i quit calling them electrons when i found an explanation to how magnets worked exactly and started calling them free magnetic energy par ticklez, however i tossed that model and had to find another for how a magnet works aft i fond how protons and neutrons were maintaining form and found another model for it instead which works great however is only theoretical. and started calling protons and neutrons atomic starz to cooincide with my findingz.

there iz no + or - energy in my model, only energy. yeah, i know, itz wild however i believe totally in my model and i never can get any scientists to say anything to me.

so anyways, if subatomic par tickles are atomic stars then to pull them into smaller components would simply yield more stars, or bits ov stars maintaing some form briefly because of striking of surroundin par tikles against them.

wheras th sizes they are are stable.

and i believe that there are more sizes atomic stars in th elements they have not experimented on when they found the proton because i have a major kolor theory betting on it

so could you please give me some suggestions cuz i have a ton of experiments and things to measure and no funds for equipment and samplez to prove it

and nobody ever sayz anthing to me when i email them

i am willing to acept my model is a joke if it is, yet nobody tells me anything

i would like to know how you can tell th dif betwn + and - energy

and antimatter i find completely doubtful to exist in nature

most matter is dark

only starz are lit and it is all about how th matter is reflecting which results in wether or not it is detectable.

if th rays traveled thru th medium and weren't reflected back then you could'nt know there was anything there

stacy karr

i left a lot out when i told you my model cuz i am still sorta cautious about somebody stealing it. however, i have worked on it alot and i am certain it is viable. it would be great to send me e-mail yerself cuz i hate putting stuff in blogs. thank you.

oh yeah, when they were finding neutrons, not protons. if you do not run th same experiment on each element how can you be certain what you have found actually is in all ov them

Delbert Kroupa

Hi Debbie,

You state, "If you were sitting in a room with billions of these pions and kaons at rest, and watched them decay, the neutrinos would be spraying out in all directions equally."

Your lab has a velocity of about .45 km/s due to the rotation of the Earth, about 29.8 km/s around the sun, and the sun has 17km/s around the galaxy. Therefore, your particles can never be at rest relative to the, umm, ether. Since at least 2 of the neutrino types must have a mass, they cannot travel at light speed, according to Einstein.

Do we have the possibility of a variation of the Michaelson-Morley experiment here? Are the neutrinos more or less energetic depending on whether they are measured at noon or midnight, subtracting or adding to our orbital velocity around the sun? And the same goes for whether we are going in the same direction as the sun around the galaxy, or subtracting our orbital velocity around the sun six months later.

Thak You,

Del Kroupa

The comments to this entry are closed.