The relationship between gravity and time is quite interesting.

Besides both looping around and maintaining the cyclical and balanced nature of the universe and quadverse (and omniverse, for that matter.) Not only is gravity/dark energy responsible for the creation of the third dimension over entropy/time..... the rate of time also responds to the presence of gravitation. During the 1D and 2D phases of the universe, when gravity waves do not exist, time proceeds very slowly (maybe remains static), until the universe cools sufficiently to phase transition to 3D, inflation occurs with the polarity flip at the central black hole / white hole and the dark energy to dark matter ratio increases, parallel time lines are created and gravity emerges. In 3D and 4D time proceeds much more rapidly, since gravity is now present (but separated among the various parallel timelines) and the universe expands ever more quickly in the dark energy era and even faster with explosive expansion (inflation phase 2) during the phase change to 4D space. At this time, to an outside observer, the universe would finally become visible as a 1 dimensional line expanding from the center towards the event horizon of the parent black hole from both ends. Before this happened, it was only a point particle (although, since all times exist together, perhaps it will always appear as a line frozen in the imaginary time dimension of the omniverse-all the parallel timelines will be superimposed upon each other, in the fashion of quantum superposition-- as will the other members of the quadverse be visible as single dimensional lines.) Besides the black hole and superverse properties mentioned in Origin 13 which impact the physical properties of the baby universe/quadverse, the actual size of the parent black hole and thus the width of the Cauchy Horizon, will also impact length of each oscillation. Time proceeds even more quickly when the universe rebounds off the Cauchy Horizon from the parent black hole (the macro version of the strong force), as the gravitational waves become much more concentrated as they bounce off of it and time proceeds rapidly as the universe starts to contract, the polarity at the center black hole / white hole flips, the dark matter to dark energy ratio increases, until finally the phase transition back to 3D occurs as the universe heats up and keeps contracting with more dark matter, the time lines merge and gravity increases even more with deflation until we reach the 1D/2D wall and time slows to a crawl (or stops), gravity disappears and the universe big bounces at 10 planck lengths and the cycle starts all over again. In the mirrorverse, this is synchronized, while it occurs in reverse in the antiverse and the antimirrorverse, where time itself is reversed. Note also, that gravity/time/dark matter/dark energy is conserved in the quadverse (and the omniverse in general) as an increase in rate or quantity in one component results in a decrease in one of the other components of the quadverse (actually it's 2 vs 2) since, after all, the universe and mirrorverse experience time in reverse from the antiverse and the antimirrorverse. The structure of this quadverse in the omniverse isn't actually four lines, it's a double double helix (thus my cosmic DNA reference earlier-- yet another example of fractality!) Gravity and EM create the twists and turns to produce this structure. Consider the four dimensions to each be base pairs of the cosmic DNA (for a total of 8 D, 6+2), connected to each other through the central black hole / white hole which keeps reversing polarity at different phases of the cycle. These wormhole connections are a cosmic fractal representation of the chemical bonds between the base pairs of the DNA double helix..... we actually have two double helixes, with the universe and mirrorverse in sync, as is the antiverse and the antimirrorverse, which all exist within the cosmically fractal 4+1 omniverse (this is exactly why our universe reaches a limit of 4+1 in its own dimensions before starting to contract.) Hey that new science discovery might be technicolor! I love technicolor, so needless to say Im enthusiastic about this if it proves to be correct. I remember mentioning it way back in Origin 1 last year, as I hoped it would replace Higgs.... hopefully, this is the first step towards supplanting the Higgs Boson. well chapter one was written about a year ago and in it I mention a theory called technicolor, from which I theorized that our dimensions and mass emerged from... instead of the Higgs Boson which is what conventional physics has assumed.... I just think technicolor makes much more sense and is a much more elegant theory, and it is a structure of reality based on color theory well basically I analogized the three primary colors to the three spatial dimensions and time as

the background.... and then you can also construct three negative spatial dimensions which are the represented by the complementary primary colors and a similar complementary time dimension Red Green Blue RGB are the additive primaries the complementary subtractive primaries are cyan magenta and yellow black and white represent time and complementary time. The complementary dimensions make up the antiverse and the antimirrorverse. it just occurred to me how three dimensions of space are so similar to the three primary colors and how time could be similar to the background upon which it was built. Note that in QCD, color charge effect becomes nil outside of the particle..... thus, anyone in the superverse would not see our dimensions (they have their own dimensions that arise from their own cosmic color charge), but on the inside, we are subject to them and perceive them as dimensions. well there are two possibilities one is just two dimensions which would be a particle and its complementary if youve seen a color wheel, you know its the color opposite to it on the color wheel the other possibility is 3 particles, in which case you have the primary colors each color represents one third of the charge of the particle the colors correspond to color charge you have to imagine it as a rubber band.... within the rubber band they can move freely but once they reach the edge and start trying to get out, the rubber band becomes tight and pushes them back in it is how I also picture the universe.... with gravity taking the place of this force on a universal scale and the dimensions taking the place of color charge. Once the universe expands to the cauchy horizon, it "bounces back." Notice the fractal representation of quantum lattice and spin networks-- this shows that cosmic DNA replicates itself in the baby universe and thus they are made in the image of the omniverse itself. This also works with Calabi-Yau manifolds, which are six dimensional, as each manifold would be constructed of the three additive primary spatial dimensions plus the three subtractive primary spatial dimensions.

This is the first step towards a gravity-strong force unification, to match electro-weak unification.... so instead of 4 forces, we'd have 2 x 2 (just like the quadverse arrangement..... more fractality!) Universes with additional dimensions can be created based on this framework by adding in resonances or higher and lower energy versions that exist on higher or lower energy levels.... like the electron, muon and tauon, for example. Universes with the same dimensions, like parallel timeverses and mirrorverses can also exist on different energy levels. The renowned Kip Thorne has created a solution to the geometry of two colliding black holes which looks suspiciously like the Hopf Fibration and E8, as well as the toroidal model of the universe. It is therefore theorized that baby universes can be created when two black holes collide and merge, resulting in a warping of space and time that creates the shape of the baby universe that lies within. The physical properties and laws of the universe are determined by the spin, charge, cosmic color charge (aka dimensions, which may also arise from infalling quark gluon plasma and cosmic strings) and other properties of the parent black holes as well as the results of the collision. Both parent black holes provide cosmic DNA which goes into producing

the baby universe. The fractal representation of this also resembles the structure of large galaxies, therefore it is also theorized that these baby universes are produced at the core of these galaxies where the supermassive blackhole exists, during the quasar active stage of its life cycle. As mentioned above, this also shows how quantum lattice and spin networks are replicated throughout the omniverse, as cosmic DNA and gravity mold not only the structures within universes, but the omniverse itself. As a matter of fact, the recently discovered magnetic monopoles represent these fractional cosmic color charges in the early universe. The interesting thing about the quantum mirror analogy is it reminds me of the "Funhouse Mirrors" analogy I used in describing parallel time universes-- basically, they are multiple images of the same thing, distorted by various gravitational effects. But they are really reflections of the same universe in superpositional states with itself. BTW if you'll take a look at this diagram again :

You'll notice a few things--

First of all, there are criss crossing lines.... I believe these to be parallel time lines, and the reason they are criss crossing is because it's the universe and mirrorverse entangled with each other and with each universe's timelines 90 degrees to the other's. They don't actually intersect since the universe and the mirrorverse (and all other universes) exist on different energy levels. Although these may be points where wormholes exist and facilitate matter and energy transfer across the quadverse both in space and in time.

Secondly, you'll notice two large gaps, one between the mobius BB in the middle and the second later on after the first set of criss crossing lines. It's my belief that this diagram represents not just one moment of time, but ALL TIME(S).... that is, to a hypothetical observer from outside our universe, they would "see" all time simultaneously (because all times exist together). If this is the case, the center mobius represents the BB and the first "gap" represents inflation or 1D to 2D (which is what caused time to split into separate time lines). The second gap represents another phase transition, perhaps when the universe went from 2D to 3D and I would call it dark energy assisted inflation or inflation phase 2. Forces selectively deunify at each phase transition, beginning with unification at each BB. Gravity does not exist in 2 dimensions, so you'll notice the timelines are symmetrical. In three dimensions, when gravity and dark energy do appear, you'll note that the timelines are emergent. The timelines are 1D strings separated by imaginary time and since there was only one timeline per universe at the BB, there are four mobius strips at the center. The diagram takes us through both expansion/deunification and contraction/reunification of each member of the quadverse (and inflation and deflation as timelines emerge and converge.) The fifth force represents gravity in the baby universe, just like our gravity is the fifth force of the superverse. Also note that the mobius structure in the middle actually consists of 4 strings-- the universe, antiverse, mirrorverse and antimirrorverse. The universe and mirrorverse are entangled and BB together as do the antiverse and antimirrorverse. These represents the 2x2 entangled strands of cosmic DNA-- the double double helix born from the two colliding black holes (which likely resulted in a huge ripple effect that not only generated the quadverse, but also a large GRB that fractally creates galaxies and superclusters in the superverse which create other baby universes and more GRBs and so on and so forth fractally.) The baby universe is itself a fractal

representation of the two parent black holes colliding (note the inner mobius structure.) Sort of like infinity, kind of like two mobius strips interlocked

Yes, in the quadverse model and Brian Greene's dual CYM model this would work as two universes entangled with each other (a universe and its' mirror.) It also looks suspiciously like a reshaped DNA double helix.

David, do you see how those two "knots" in the middle are entangled.... that could be a center supermassive black hole / white hole from which the universe(s) expanded. Perhaps they switch "polarity" and that determines whether expansion or contraction is taking place.

Maybe the multiverse seesaws back and forth, with all the universe expanding and contracting out an into each other

Yes, the seesawing effect keeps the net energy balance (total energy of the whole system) the same. That knot in the center corresponds to the mobius "twist."

Physicists discover new way to visualize warped space and time April 11th, 2011 in Physics / General Physics Enlarge

Two doughnut-shaped vortexes ejected by a pulsating black hole. Also shown at the center are two red and two blue vortex lines attached to the hole, which will be ejected as a third doughnutshaped vortex in the next pulsation. Credit: The Caltech/Cornell SXS Collaboration ( -- When black holes slam into each other, the surrounding space and time surge and undulate like a heaving sea during a storm. This warping of space and time is so complicated that physicists haven't been able to understand the details of what goes on -- until now. "We've found ways to visualize warped space-time like never before," says Kip Thorne, Feynman Professor of Theoretical Physics, Emeritus, at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech). By combining theory with computer simulations, Thorne and his colleagues at Caltech, Cornell University, and the National Institute for Theoretical Physics in South Africa have developed conceptual tools they've dubbed tendex lines and vortex lines. Using these tools, they have discovered that black-hole collisions can produce vortex lines that form a doughnut-shaped pattern, flying away from the merged black hole like smoke rings. The researchers also found that these bundles of vortex lines—called vortexes—can spiral out of the black hole like water from a rotating sprinkler.

The researchers explain tendex and vortex lines—and their implications for black holes—in a paper that's published online on April 11 in the journal Physical Review Letters.

These are two spiral-shaped vortexes (yellow) of whirling space sticking out of a black hole, and the vortex lines (red curves) that form the vortexes. Credit: The Caltech/Cornell SXS Collaboration Tendex and vortex lines describe the gravitational forces caused by warped space-time. They are analogous to the electric and magnetic field lines that describe electric and magnetic forces. Tendex lines describe the stretching force that warped space-time exerts on everything it encounters. "Tendex lines sticking out of the moon raise the tides on the earth's oceans," says David Nichols, the Caltech graduate student who coined the term "tendex." The stretching force of these lines would rip apart an astronaut who falls into a black hole. Vortex lines, on the other hand, describe the twisting of space. If an astronaut's body is aligned with a vortex line, she gets wrung like a wet towel. When many tendex lines are bunched together, they create a region of strong stretching called a tendex. Similarly, a bundle of vortex lines creates a whirling region of space called a vortex. "Anything that falls into a vortex gets spun around and around," says Dr. Robert Owen of Cornell University, the lead author of the paper. Tendex and vortex lines provide a powerful new way to understand black holes, gravity, and the nature of the universe. "Using these tools, we can now make much better sense of the tremendous amount of data that's produced in our computer simulations," says Dr. Mark Scheel, a senior researcher at Caltech and leader of the team's simulation work. Using computer simulations, the researchers have discovered that two spinning black holes crashing into each other produce several vortexes and several tendexes. If the collision is headon, the merged hole ejects vortexes as doughnut-shaped regions of whirling space, and it ejects tendexes as doughnut-shaped regions of stretching. But if the black holes spiral in toward each other before merging, their vortexes and tendexes spiral out of the merged hole. In either case— doughnut or spiral—the outward-moving vortexes and tendexes become gravitational waves—the kinds of waves that the Caltech-led Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) seeks to detect. "With these tendexes and vortexes, we may be able to much more easily predict the waveforms of the gravitational waves that LIGO is searching for," says Yanbei Chen, associate professor of physics at Caltech and the leader of the team's theoretical efforts. Additionally, tendexes and vortexes have allowed the researchers to solve the mystery behind the gravitational kick of a merged black hole at the center of a galaxy. In 2007, a team at the University of Texas in Brownsville, led by Professor Manuela Campanelli, used computer simulations to discover that colliding black holes can produce a directed burst of gravitational waves that causes the merged black hole to recoil—like a rifle firing a bullet. The recoil is so strong that it can throw the merged hole out of its galaxy. But nobody understood how this directed burst of gravitational waves is produced. Now, equipped with their new tools, Thorne's team has found the answer. On one side of the black hole, the gravitational waves from the spiraling vortexes add together with the waves from the spiraling tendexes. On the other side, the vortex and tendex waves cancel each other out. The result is a burst of waves in one direction, causing the merged hole to recoil.

"Though we've developed these tools for black-hole collisions, they can be applied wherever space-time is warped," says Dr. Geoffrey Lovelace, a member of the team from Cornell. "For instance, I expect that people will apply vortex and tendex lines to cosmology, to black holes ripping stars apart, and to the singularities that live inside black holes. They'll become standard tools throughout general relativity." The team is already preparing multiple follow-up papers with new results. "I've never before coauthored a paper where essentially everything is new," says Thorne, who has authored hundreds of articles. "But that's the case here." More information: Physical Review Letters paper: "Frame-dragging vortexes and tidal tendexes attached to colliding black holes: Visualizing the curvature of spacetime" Provided by California Institute of Technology "Physicists discover new way to visualize warped space and time." April 11th, 2011.

Atom and its quantum mirror image April 5, 2011 By Florian Aigner Enlarge Towards the mirror or away from the mirror? Physicists create atoms in quantum superposition states. A team of physicists experimentally produces quantum-superpositions, simply using a mirror. Standing in front of a mirror, we can easily tell apart ourselves from our mirror image. The mirror does not affect our motion in any way. For quantum particles, this is much more complicated. In a spectacular experiment in the labs of the Heidelberg University, a group of physicists from Heidelberg Unversity, together with colleagues at TU Munich and TU Vienna extended a gedanken experiment by Einstein and managed to blur the distinction between a particle and its mirror image. The results of this experiment have now been published in the journal Nature Physics. Emitted Light, Recoiling Atom When an atom emits light (i.e. a photon) into a particular direction, it recoils in the opposite direction. If the photon is measured, the motion of the atom is known too. The scientists placed atoms very closely to a mirror. In this case, there are two possible paths for any photon travelling to the observer: it could have been emitted directly into the direction of the observer, or it could have travelled into the opposite direction and then been reflected in the mirror. If there is no way of distinguishing between these two scenarios, the motion of the atom is not determined, the atom moves in a superposition of both paths. “If the distance between the atom and the mirror is very small, it is physically impossible to distinguish between these two paths,” Jiri Tomkovic, PhD student at Heidelberg explains. The particle and its mirror image cannot be clearly separated any more. The atom moves towards the mirror and away from the mirror at the same time. This may sound paradoxical and it is certainly impossible in classical phyiscs for macroscopic objects, but in quantum physics, such superpositions are a well-known phenomenon. “This uncertainty about the state of the atom does not mean that the measurement lacks precision”, Jörg Schmiedmayer (TU Vienna) emphasizes. “It is a fundamental property of quantum physics: The particle is in both of the two possible states simultaneousely, it is in a superposition.” In the experiment the two motional states of the atom –

one moving towards the mirror and the other moving away from the mirror – are then combined using Bragg diffraction from a grating made of laser light. Observing interference it can be directly shown that the atom has indeed been traveling both paths at once. On Different Paths at the Same Time This is reminiscent of the famous double-slit experiment, in which a particle hits a plate with two slits and passes through both slits simultaneously, due to its wave-like quantum mechanical properties. Einstein already discussed that this can only be possible if there is no way to determine which path the particle actually chose, not even precise measurements of any tiny recoil of the double slit plate itself. As soon as there even a theoretically possible way of determining the path of the particle, the quantum superposition breaks down. “In our case, the photons play a role similar to the double slit”, Markus Oberthaler (Heidelberg University) explains. “If the light can, in principle, tell us about the motion of the atom, then the motion is unambiguously determined. Only when it is fundamentally undecidable, the atom can be in a superposition state, combining both possibilities.” And this fundamental undecidability is guaranteed by the mirror which takes up the photon momentum. Quantum Effect – Using Only a Mirror Probing under which conditions such quantum-superpositions can be created has become very important in quantum physics. Jörg Schmiedmayer and Markus Obertaler came up with the idea for this experiment already a few years ago. “The fascinating thing about this experiment”, the scientists say, “is the possibility of creating a quantum superposition state, using only a mirror, without any external fields.” In a very simple and natural way the distinction between the particle and its mirror image becomes blurred, without complicated operations carried out by the experimenter. Provided by Vienna University of Technology http://www.newscient...true&print=true Home |Physics& Math |Space | News |Back to article Mystery signal at Fermilab hints at 'technicolour' force * 19:46 07 April 2011 by Amanda Gefter * For similar stories, visit the Quantum World and The Large Hadron Collider Topic Guides Hints of new physics at the Tevatron (Image: Fermilab) Hints of new physics at the Tevatron (Image: Fermilab) 1 more image The physics world is buzzing with news of an unexpected sighting at Fermilab's Tevatron collider in Illinois – a glimpse of an unidentified particle that, should it prove to be real, will radically alter physicists' prevailing ideas about how nature works and how particles get their mass. The candidate particle may not belong to the standard model of particle physics, physicists' best theory for how particles and forces interact. Instead, some say it might be the first hint of a new force of nature, called technicolour, which would resolve some problems with the standard model but would leave others unanswered. The observation was made by Fermilab's CDF experiment, which smashes together protons and antiprotons 2 million times every second. The data, collected over a span of eight years, looks at

collisions that produce a W boson, the carrier of the weak nuclear force, and a pair of jets of subatomic particles called quarks. Physicists predicted that the number of these events – producing a W boson and a pair of jets – would fall off as the mass of the jet pair increased. But the CDF data showed something strange (see graph): a bump in the number of events when the mass of the jet pair was about 145 GeV. Just a fluke? That suggests that the additional jet pairs were produced by a new particle weighing about 145 GeV. "We expected to see a smooth shape that decreases for increasing values of the mass," says CDF team member Pierluigi Catastini of Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "Instead we observe an excess of events concentrated in one region, and it seems to be a bump – the typical signature of a particle." Intriguing as it sounds, there is a 1 in 1000 chance that the bump is simply a statistical fluke. Those odds make it a so-called three-sigma result, falling short of the gold standard for a discovery – five sigma, or a 1 in a million chance of error. "I've seen three-sigma effects come and go," says Kenneth Lane of Boston University in Massachusetts. Still, physicists are 99.9 per cent sure it is not a fluke, so they are understandably anxious to pin down the particle's identity. Most agree that the mysterious particle is not the long-sought Higgs boson, believed by many to endow particles with mass. "It's definitely not a Higgs-like object," says Rob Roser, a CDF spokesperson at Fermilab. If it were, the bump in the data would be 300 times smaller. What's more, a Higgs particle should most often decay into bottom quarks, which do not seem to make an appearance in the Fermilab data. Fifth force "There's no version of a Higgs in any model that I know of where the production rate would be this large," says Lane. "It has to be something else." And Lane is confident that he knows exactly what it is. Just over 20 years ago, Lane, along with Fermilab physicist Estia Eichten, predicted that experiments would see just such a signal. Lane and Eichten were working on a theory known as technicolour, which proposes the existence of a fifth fundamental force in addition to the four already known: gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. Technicolour is very similar to the strong force, which binds quarks together in the nuclei of atoms, only it operates at much higher energies. It is also able to give particles their mass – rendering the Higgs boson unnecessary. The new force comes with a zoo of new particles. Lane and Eichten's model predicted that a technicolour particle called a technirho would often decay into a W boson and another particle called a technipion. In a new paper, Lane, Eichten and Fermilab physicist Adam Martin suggest that a technipion with a mass of about 160 GeV could be the mysterious particle producing the two jets. "If this is real, I think people will give up on the idea of looking for the Higgs and begin exploring this rich world of new particles," Lane says. Future tests But if technicolour is correct, it would not be able to resolve all the questions left unanswered by the standard model. For example, physicists believe that at the high energies found in the early universe, the fundamental forces of nature were unified into a single superforce. Supersymmetry, physicists' leading contender for a theory beyond the standard model, paves a way for the forces to unite at high energies, but technicolour does not. Figuring out which theory – if either – is right means combing through more heaps of data to determine if the new signal is real. Budget constraints mean the Tevatron will shut down this year,

but fortunately the CDF team, which made the find, is already "sitting on almost twice the data that went into this analysis", says Roser. "Over the coming months we will redo the analysis with double the data." Meanwhile, DZero, Fermilab's other detector, will analyse its own data to provide independent corroboration or refutation of the bump. And at CERN's Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, Switzerland, physicists will soon collect enough data to perform their own search. In their paper, Lane and his colleagues suggest ways to look for other techniparticles. "I haven't been sleeping very well for the past six months," says Lane, who found out about the bump long before the team went public with the result. "If this is what we think it is, it's a whole new world beyond quarks and leptons. It'll be great! And if it's not, it's not." Journal reference: Invariant Mass Distribution of Jet Pairs Produced in Association with a W boson in ppbar Collisions at sqrt(s) = 1.96 TeV CDF Collaboration, T. Aaltonen, et al (Submitted on 4 Apr 2011) We report a study of the invariant mass distribution of jet pairs produced in association with a W boson using data collected with the CDF detector which correspond to an integrated luminosity of 4.3 fb^-1. The observed distribution has an excess in the 120-160 GeV/c^2 mass range which is not described by current theoretical predictions within the statistical and systematic uncertainties. In this letter we report studies of the properties of this excess. Comments: 8 pages, 2 figures Subjects: High Energy Physics - Experiment (hep-ex) Report number: FERMILAB-PUB-11-164-E Cite as: arXiv:1104.0699v1 [hep-ex] Submission history From: Alberto Annovi [view email] [v1] Mon, 4 Apr 2011 22:08:31 GMT (119kb,D) http://en.wikipedia....icolor_(physics) Technicolor theories are models of physics beyond the standard model that address electroweak symmetry breaking, the mechanism through which elementary particles acquire masses. Early technicolor theories were modelled on quantum chromodynamics (QCD), the "color" theory of the strong nuclear force, which inspired their name. Instead of introducing elementary Higgs bosons, technicolor models hide electroweak symmetry and generate masses for the W and Z bosons through the dynamics of new gauge interactions. Although asymptotically free at very high energies, these interactions must become strong and confining (and hence unobservable) at lower energies that have been experimentally probed. This dynamical approach is natural and avoids the hierarchy problem of the Standard Model.[1] In order to produce quark and lepton masses, technicolor has to be "extended" by additional gauge interactions. Particularly when modelled on QCD, extended technicolor is challenged by experimental constraints on flavor-changing neutral current and precision electroweak measurements. It is not known what is the extended technicolor dynamics. Much technicolor research focuses on exploring strongly-interacting gauge theories other than QCD, in order to evade some of these challenges. A particularly active framework is "walking" technicolor, which exhibits nearly-conformal behavior caused by an infrared fixed point with strength just above that necessary for spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking. Whether walking can occur and lead to agreement with precision electroweak measurements is being studied

through non-perturbative lattice simulations.[2] Experiments at the Large Hadron Collider are expected to discover the mechanism responsible for electroweak symmetry breaking, and will be critical for determining whether the technicolor framework provides the correct description of nature. Contents [hide] 1 Introduction 2 Early technicolor 3 Extended technicolor 4 Walking technicolor 4.1 Top quark mass 5 Minimal Walking Models 6 Technicolor on the lattice 7 Technicolor phenomenology 7.1 Precision electroweak tests 7.2 Hadron collider phenomenology 7.3 Dark matter 8 See also 9 References [edit] Introduction The mechanism for the breaking of electroweak gauge symmetry in the Standard Model of elementary particle interactions remains unknown. The breaking must be spontaneous, meaning that the underlying theory manifests the symmetry exactly (the gauge-boson fields are massless in the equations of motion), but the solutions (the ground state and the excited states) do not. In particular, the physical W and Z gauge bosons become massive. This phenomenon, in which the W and Z bosons also acquire an extra polarization state, is called the "Higgs mechanism". Despite the precise agreement of the electroweak theory with experiment at energies accessible so far, the necessary ingredients for the symmetry breaking remain hidden, yet to be revealed at higher energies. The simplest mechanism of electroweak symmetry breaking introduces a single complex field and predicts the existence of the Higgs boson. Typically, the Higgs boson is "unnatural" in the sense that quantum mechanical fluctuations produce corrections to its mass that lift it to such high values that it cannot play the role for which it was introduced. Unless the Standard Model breaks down at energies less than a few TeV, the Higgs mass can be kept small only by a delicate finetuning of parameters. Technicolor avoids this problem by hypothesizing a new gauge interaction coupled to new massless fermions. This interaction is asymptotically free at very high energies and becomes strong and confining as the energy decreases to the electroweak scale of roughly 250 GeV. These strong forces spontaneously break the massless fermions' chiral symmetries, some of which are weakly gauged as part of the Standard Model. This is the dynamical version of the Higgs mechanism. The electroweak gauge symmetry is thus broken, producing masses for the W and Z bosons. The new strong interaction leads to a host of new composite, short-lived particles at energies accessible at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). This framework is natural because there are no elementary Higgs bosons and, hence, no fine-tuning of parameters. Quark and lepton masses also break the electroweak gauge symmetries, so they, too, must arise spontaneously. A mechanism for incorporating this feature is known as extended technicolor. Technicolor and extended technicolor face a number of phenomenological challenges. Some of them can be

addressed within a class of theories known as walking technicolor. [edit] Early technicolor Technicolor is the name given to the theory of electroweak symmetry breaking by new strong gauge-interactions whose characteristic energy scale ΛTC is the weak scale itself, ΛTC ≅ FEW ≡ 246 GeV. The guiding principle of technicolor is "naturalness": basic physical phenomena should not require fine-tuning of the parameters in the Lagrangian that describes them. What constitutes fine-tuning is to some extent a subjective matter, but a theory with elementary scalar particles typically is very finely tuned (unless it is supersymmetric). The quadratic divergence in the scalar's mass requires adjustments of a part in , where Mbare is the cutoff of the theory, the energy scale at which the theory changes in some essential way. In the standard electroweak model with Mbare ∼ 1015 GeV (the grand-unification mass scale), and with the Higgs boson mass Mphysical = 100–500 GeV, the mass is tuned to at least a part in 1025. By contrast, a natural theory of electroweak symmetry breaking is an asymptoticallyfree gauge theory with fermions as the only matter fields. The technicolor gauge group GTC is often assumed to be SU(NTC). Based on analogy with quantum chromodynamics (QCD), it is assumed that there are one or more doublets of massless Dirac "technifermions" transforming vectorially under the same complex representation of GTC, TiL,R = (Ui,Di)L,R, i = 1,2, … ,Nf/2. Thus, there is a chiral symmetry of these fermions, e.g., SU(Nf)L ⊗ SU(Nf)R, if they all transform according the same complex representation of GTC. Continuing the analogy with QCD, the running gauge coupling αTC(μ) triggers spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking, the technifermions acquire a dynamical mass, and a number of massless Goldstone bosons result. If the technifermions transform under [SU(2) ⊗ U(1)]EW as left-handed doublets and right-handed singlets, three linear combinations of these Goldstone bosons couple to three of the electroweak gauge currents. In 1973 Jackiw and Johnson[3] and Cornwall and Norton[4] studied the possibility that a (non-vectorial) gauge interaction of fermions can break itself; i.e., is strong enough to form a Goldstone boson coupled to the gauge current. Using Abelian gauge models, they showed that, if such a Goldstone boson is formed, it is "eaten" by the Higgs mechanism, becoming the longitudinal component of the now massive gauge boson. Technically, the polarization function Π(p2) appearing in the gauge boson propagator, Δμν = (pμ pν/p2 - gμν)/[p2(1 Ð g2 Π(p2))] develops a pole at p2 = 0 with residue F2, the square of the Goldstone boson's decay constant, and the gauge boson acquires mass M ≅ g F. In 1973, Weinstein[5] showed that composite Goldstone bosons whose constituent fermions transform in the “standard” way under SU(2) ⊗ U(1) generate the weak boson masses

This standard-model relation is achieved with elementary Higgs bosons in electroweak doublets; it is verified experimentally to better than 1%. Here, g and g′ are SU(2) and U(1) gauge couplings and tanθW = g′/g defines the weak mixing angle. The important idea of a new strong gauge interaction of massless fermions at the electroweak scale FEW driving the spontaneous breakdown of its global chiral symmetry, of which an SU(2) ⊗ U(1) subgroup is weakly gauged, was first proposed in 1979 by S. Weinberg[6] and L. Susskind.[7] This "technicolor" mechanism is natural in that no fine-tuning of parameters is necessary. [edit] Extended technicolor

Elementary Higgs bosons perform another important task. In the Standard Model, quarks and leptons are necessarily massless because they transform under SU(2) ⊗ U(1) as left-handed doublets and right-handed singlets. The Higgs doublet couples to these fermions. When it develops its vacuum expectation value, it transmits this electroweak breaking to the quarks and leptons, giving them their observed masses. (In general, electroweak-eigenstate fermions are not mass eigenstates, so this process also induces the mixing matrices observed in charged-current weak interactions.) In technicolor, something else must generate the quark and lepton masses. The only natural possibility, one avoiding the introduction of elementary scalars, is to enlarge GTC to allow technifermions to couple to quarks and leptons. This coupling is induced by gauge bosons of the enlarged group. The picture, then, is that there is a large "extended technicolor" (ETC) gauge group GETC ⊃ GTC in which technifermions, quarks, and leptons live in the same representations. At one or more high scales ΛETC, GETC is broken down to GTC, and quarks and leptons emerge as the TC-singlet fermions. When αTC(μ) becomes strong at scale ΛTC ≅ FEW, the fermionic condensate forms. (The condensate is the vacuum expectation value of the technifermion bilinear . The estimate here is based on naive dimensional analysis of the quark condensate in QCD, expected to be correct as an order of magnitude.) Then, the transitions can proceed through the technifermion's dynamical mass by the emission and reabsorption of ETC bosons whose masses METC ≅ gETC ΛETC are much greater than ΛTC. The quarks and leptons develop masses given approximately by

Here, is the technifermion condensate renormalized at the ETC boson mass scale,

where γm(μ) is the anomalous dimension of the technifermion bilinear at the scale μ. The second estimate in Eq. (2) depends on the assumption that, as happens in QCD, αTC(μ) becomes weak not far above ΛTC, so that the anomalous dimension γm of is small there. Extended technicolor was introduced in 1979 by Dimopoulos and Susskind,[8] and by Eichten and Lane.[9] For a quark of mass mq ≅ 1 GeV, and with ΛTC ≅ 250 GeV, one estimates ΛETC ≅ 15 TeV. Therefore, assuming that , METC will be at least this large. In addition to the ETC proposal for quark and lepton masses, Eichten and Lane observed that the size of the ETC representations required to generate all quark and lepton masses suggests that there will be more than one electroweak doublet of technifermions.[9] If so, there will be more (spontaneously broken) chiral symmetries and therefore more Goldstone bosons than are eaten by the Higgs mechanism. These must acquire mass by virtue of the fact that the extra chiral symmetries are also explicitly broken, by the standard-model interactions and the ETC interactions. These "pseudo-Goldstone bosons" are called technipions, πT. An application of Dashen's theorem[10] gives for the ETC contribution to their mass

The second approximation in Eq. (4) assumes that . For FEW ≅ ΛTC ≅ 250 GeV and ΛETC ≅ 15 TeV, this contribution to MπT is about 50 GeV. Since ETC interactions generate and the coupling of technipions to quark and lepton pairs, one expects the

couplings to be Higgs-like; i.e., roughly proportional to the masses of the quarks and leptons. This means that technipions are expected to decay to the heaviest and pairs allowed. Perhaps the most important restriction on the ETC framework for quark mass generation is that ETC interactions are likely to induce flavor-changing neutral current processes such as μ → e γ, KL → μ e, and |Δ S| = 2 and |Δ B| = 2 interactions that induce and mixing.[9] The reason is that the algebra of the ETC currents involved in generation imply and ETC currents which, when written in terms of fermion mass eigenstates, have no reason to conserve flavor. The strongest constraint comes from requiring that ETC interactions mediating mixing contribute less than the Standard Model. This implies an effective ΛETC greater than 1000 TeV. The actual ΛETC may be reduced somewhat if CKM-like mixing angle factors are present. If these interactions are CP-violating, as they well may be, the constraint from the ε-parameter is that the effective ΛETC > 104 TeV. Such huge ETC mass scales imply tiny quark and lepton masses and ETC contributions to MπT of at most a few GeV, in conflict with LEP searches for πT at the Z0. Extended technicolor is a very ambitious proposal, requiring that quark and lepton masses and mixing angles arise from experimentally accessible interactions. If there exists a successful model, it would not only predict the masses and mixings of quarks and leptons (and technipions), it would explain why there are three families of each: they are the ones that fit into the ETC representations of q, and T. It should not be surprising that the construction of a successful model has proven to be very difficult. [edit] Walking technicolor Since quark and lepton masses are proportional to the bilinear technifermion condensate divided by the ETC mass scale squared, their tiny values can be avoided if the condensate is enhanced above the weak-αTC estimate in Eq. (2), . During the 1980s, several dynamical mechanisms were advanced to do this. In 1981 Holdom suggested that, if the αTC(μ) evolves to a nontrivial fixed point in the ultraviolet, with a large positive anomalous dimension γm for , realistic quark and lepton masses could arise with ΛETC large enough to suppress ETC-induced mixing. [11] However, no example of a nontrivial ultraviolet fixed point in a four-dimensional gauge theory has been constructed. In 1985 Holdom analyzed a technicolor theory in which a “slowly varying” αTC(μ) was envisioned.[12] His focus was to separate the chiral breaking and confinement scales, but he also noted that such a theory could enhance and thus allow the ETC scale to be raised. In 1986 Akiba and Yanagida also considered enhancing quark and lepton masses, by simply assuming that αTC is constant and strong all the way up to the ETC scale.[13] In the same year Yamawaki, Bando and Matumoto again imagined an ultraviolet fixed point in a nonasymptotically free theory to enhance the technifermion condensate.[14] In 1986 Appelquist, Karabali and Wijewardhana discussed the enhancement of fermion masses in an asymptotically free technicolor theory with a slowly running, or “walking”, gauge coupling.[15] The slowness arose from the screening effect of a large number of technifermions, with the analysis carried out through two-loop perturbation theory. In 1987 Appelquist and Wijewardhana explored this walking scenario further.[16] They took the analysis to three loops, noted that the walking can lead to a power law enhancement of the technifermion condensate, and estimated the resultant quark, lepton, and technipion masses. The condensate enhancement arises because the associated technifermion mass decreases slowly, roughly linearly, as a function of its renormalization scale. This corresponds to the

condensate anomalous dimension γm in Eq. (3) approaching unity (see below).[17] In the 1990s, the idea emerged more clearly that walking is naturally described by asymptotically free gauge theories dominated in the infrared by an approximate fixed point. Unlike the speculative proposal of ultraviolet fixed points, fixed points in the infrared are known to exist in asymptotically free theories, arising at two loops in the beta function providing that the fermion count Nf is large enough. This has been known since the first two-loop computation in 1974 by Caswell.[18] If Nf is close to the value at which asymptotic freedom is lost, the resultant infrared fixed point is weak, of parametric order , and reliably accessible in perturbation theory. This weakcoupling limit was explored by Banks and Zaks in 1982.[19] The fixed-point coupling αIR becomes stronger as Nf is reduced from . Below some critical value Nfc the coupling becomes strong enough (> αχ SB) to break spontaneously the massless technifermions' chiral symmetry. Since the analysis must typically go beyond two-loop perturbation theory, the definition of the running coupling αTC(μ), it’s fixed point value αIR, and the strength αχ SB necessary for chiral symmetry breaking depend on the particular renormalization scheme adopted. For ; i.e., for Nf just below Nfc, the evolution of αTC(μ) is governed by the infrared fixed point and it will evolve slowly (walk) for a range of momenta above the breaking scale ΛTC. To overcome the -suppression of the masses of first and second generation quarks involved in mixing, this range must extend almost to their ETC scale, of . Cohen and Georgi argued that γm = 1 is the signal of spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking, i.e., that γm(αχ SB) = 1.[17] Therefore, in the walking-αTC region, γm ≅ 1 and, from Eqs. (2) and (3), the light quark masses are enhanced approximately by METC/ΛTC. The idea that αTC(μ) walks for a large range of momenta when αIR lies just above αχ SB was suggested by Lane and Ramana.[20] They made an explicit model, discussed the walking that ensued, and used it in their discussion of walking technicolor phenomenology at hadron colliders. This idea was developed in some detail by Appelquist, Terning and Wijewardhana.[21] Combining a perturbative computation of the infrared fixed point with an approximation of αχ SB based on the SchwingerDyson equation, they estimated the critical value Nfc and explored the resultant electroweak physics. Since the 1990s, most discussions of walking technicolor are in the framework of theories assumed to be dominated in the infrared by an approximate fixed point. Various models have been explored, some with the technifermions in the fundamental representation of the gauge group and some employing higher representations.[22][23][24] The possibility that the technicolor condensate can be enhanced beyond that discussed in the walking literature, has also been considered recently by Luty and Okui under the name "conformal technicolor".[25] They envision an infrared stable fixed point, but with a very large anomalous dimension for the operator . It remains to be seen whether this can be realized, for example, in the class of theories currently being examined using lattice techniques. [edit] Top quark mass The walking enhancement described above may be insufficient to generate the measured top quark mass, even for an ETC scale as low as a few TeV. However, this problem could be addressed if the effective four-technifermion coupling resulting from ETC gauge boson exchange is strong and tuned just above a critical value.[26] The analysis of this strong-ETC possibility is that of a Nambu–Jona–Lasinio model with an additional (technicolor) gauge interaction. The technifermion masses are small

compared to the ETC scale (the cutoff on the effective theory), but nearly constant out to this scale, leading to a large top quark mass. No fully realistic ETC theory for all quark masses has yet been developed incorporating these ideas. A related study was carried out by Miransky and Yamawaki.[27] A problem with this approach is that it involves some degree of parameter fine-tuning, in conflict with technicolor’s guiding principle of naturalness. Finally, it should be noted that there is a large body of closely related work in which ETC does not generate mt. These are the top quark condensate,[28] topcolor and top-color-assisted technicolor models,[29] in which new strong interactions are ascribed to the top quark and other third-generation fermions. As with the strong-ETC scenario described above, all these proposals involve a considerable degree of finetuning of gauge couplings. [edit] Minimal Walking Models In 2004 Francesco Sannino and Kimmo Tuominen proposed technicolor models with technifermions in higher-dimensional representations of the technicolor gauge group. [23] They argued that these more "minimal" models required fewer flavors of technifermions in order to exhibit walking behavior, making it easier to pass precision electroweak tests. For example, SU(2) and SU(3) gauge theories may exhibit walking with as few as two Dirac flavors of fermions in the adjoint or two-index symmetric representation. In contrast, at least eight flavors of fermions in the fundamental representation of SU(3) (and possibly SU(2) as well) are required to reach the near-conformal regime.[24] These results continue to be investigated by various methods, including lattice simulations discussed below, which have confirmed the near-conformal dynamics of these minimal walking models. The first comprehensive effective Lagrangian for minimal walking models, featuring a light composite Higgs, spin-one states, tree-level unitarity, and consistency with phenomenological constraints was constructed in 2007 by Foadi, Frandsen, Ryttov and Sannino.[30] [edit] Technicolor on the lattice Lattice gauge theory is a non-perturbative method applicable to strongly-interacting technicolor theories, allowing first-principles exploration of walking and conformal dynamics. In 2007, Catterall and Sannino used lattice gauge theory to study SU(2) gauge theories with two flavors of Dirac fermions in the symmetric representation, [31] finding evidence of conformality that has been confirmed by subsequent studies. [32] As of 2010, the situation for SU(3) gauge theory with fermions in the fundamental representation is not as clear-cut. In 2007, Appelquist, Fleming and Neil reported evidence that a non-trivial infrared fixed point develops in such theories when there are twelve flavors, but not when there are eight.[33] While some subsequent studies confirmed these results, others reported different conclusions, depending on the lattice methods used, and there is not yet consensus.[34] Further lattice studies exploring these issues, as well as considering the consequences of these theories for precision electroweak measurements, are underway by several research groups.[35] [edit] Technicolor phenomenology

Any framework for physics beyond the Standard Model must conform with precision measurements of the electroweak parameters. Its consequences for physics at existing and future high-energy hadron colliders, and for the dark matter of the universe must also be explored. [edit] Precision electroweak tests In 1990, the phenomenological parameters S, T, and U were introduced by Peskin and Takeuchi to quantify contributions to electroweak radiative corrections from physics beyond the Standard Model.[36] They have a simple relation to the parameters of the electroweak chiral Lagrangian.[37][38] The Peskin-Takeuchi analysis was based on the general formalism for weak radiative corrections developed by Kennedy, Lynn, Peskin and Stuart,[39] and alternate formulations also exist.[40] The S, T, and U-parameters describe corrections to the electroweak gauge boson propagators from physics Beyond the Standard Model. They can be written in terms of polarization functions of electroweak currents and their spectral representation as follows:

where only new, beyond-standard-model physics is included. The quantities are calculated relative to a minimal Standard Model with some chosen reference mass of the Higgs boson, taken to range from the experimental lower bound of 117 GeV to 1000 GeV where its width becomes very large.[41] For these parameters to describe the dominant corrections to the Standard Model, the mass scale of the new physics must be much greater than MW and MZ, and the coupling of quarks and leptons to the new particles must be suppressed relative to their coupling to the gauge bosons. This is the case with technicolor, so long as the lightest technivector mesons, ρT and aT, are heavier than 200–300 GeV. The S-parameter is sensitive to all new physics at the TeV scale, while T is a measure of weak-isospin breaking effects. The Uparameter is generally not useful; most new-physics theories, including technicolor theories, give negligible contributions to it. The S and T-parameters are determined by global fit to experimental data including Z-pole data from LEP at CERN, top quark and W-mass measurements at Fermilab, and measured levels of atomic parity violation. The resultant bounds on these parameters are given in the Review of Particle Properties.[41] Assuming U = 0, the S and T parameters are small and, in fact, consistent with zero:

where the central value corresponds to a Higgs mass of 117 GeV and the correction to the central value when the Higgs mass is increased to 300 GeV is given in parentheses. These values place tight restrictions on beyond-standard-model theories—when the relevant corrections can be reliably computed. The S parameter estimated in QCD-like technicolor theories is significantly greater than the experimentally-allowed value.[36][40] The computation was done assuming that the spectral integral for S is dominated by the lightest ρT and aT resonances, or by scaling effective Lagrangian parameters from QCD. In walking technicolor, however, the physics at the TeV scale and beyond must be quite different from that of QCD-like theories. In particular, the vector and axial-vector spectral functions

cannot be dominated by just the lowest-lying resonances.[42] It is unknown whether higher energy contributions to are a tower of identifiable ρT and aT states or a smooth continuum. It has been conjectured that ρT and aT partners could be more nearly degenerate in walking theories (approximate parity doubling), reducing their contribution to S.[43] Lattice calculations are underway or planned to test these ideas and obtain reliable estimates of S in walking theories.[2][44] The restriction on the T-parameter poses a problem for the generation of the topquark mass in the ETC framework. The enhancement from walking can allow the associated ETC scale to be as large as a few TeV,[21] but—since the ETC interactions must be strongly weak-isospin breaking to allow for the large top-bottom mass splitting—the contribution to the T parameter,[45] as well as the rate for the decay , [46] could be too large. [edit] Hadron collider phenomenology Early studies generally assumed the existence of just one electroweak doublet of technifermions, or one techni-family including one doublet each of color-triplet techniquarks and color-singlet technileptons.[47] In the minimal, one-doublet model, three Goldstone bosons (technipions, πT) have decay constant F = FEW = 246 GeV and are eaten by the electroweak gauge bosons. The most accessible collider signal is the production through annihilation in a hadron collider of spin-one , and their subsequent decay into a pair of longitudinally-polarized weak bosons, and . At an expected mass of 1.5–2.0 TeV and width of 300–400 GeV, such ρT's would be difficult to discover at the LHC. A one-family model has a large number of physical technipions, with F = FEW/√4 = 123 GeV.[48] There is a collection of correspondingly lower-mass color-singlet and octet technivectors decaying into technipion pairs. The πT's are expected to decay to the heaviest possible quark and lepton pairs. Despite their lower masses, the ρT's are wider than in the minimal model and the backgrounds to the πT decays are likely to be insurmountable at a hadron collider. This picture changed with the advent of walking technicolor. A walking gauge coupling occurs if αχ SB lies just below the IR fixed point value αIR, which requires either a large number of electroweak doublets in the fundamental representation of the gauge group, e.g., or a few doublets in higher-dimensional TC representations. [22][49] In the latter case, the constraints on ETC representations generally imply other technifermions in the fundamental representation as well.[9][20] In either case, there are technipions πT with decay constant . This implies so that the lightest technivectors accessible at the LHC—ρT, ωT, aT (with IG JPC = 1+ 1−−, 0− 1−−, 1− 1++)—have masses well below a TeV. The class of theories with many technifermions and thus is called low-scale technicolor.[50] A second consequence of walking technicolor concerns the decays of the spin-one technihadrons. Since technipion masses (see Eq. (4)), walking enhances them much more than it does other technihadron masses. Thus, it is very likely that the lightest MρT < 2MπT and that the two and three-πT decay channels of the light technivectors are closed.[22] This further implies that these technivectors are very narrow. Their most probable two-body channels are , WL WL, γ πT and γ WL. The coupling of the lightest technivectors to WL is proportional to F/FEW.[51] Thus, all their decay rates are suppressed by powers of or the fine-structure constant, giving total widths of a few GeV (for ρT) to a few tenths of a GeV (for ωT and T). A more speculative consequence of walking technicolor is motivated by consideration of its contribution to the S-parameter. As noted above, the usual assumptions made to estimate STC are invalid in a walking theory. In particular, the spectral integrals

used to evaluate STC cannot be dominated by just the lowest-lying ρT and aT and, if STC is to be small, the masses and weak-current couplings of the ρT and aT could be more nearly equal than they are in QCD. Low-scale technicolor phenomenology, including the possibility of a more paritydoubled spectrum, has been developed into a set of rules and decay amplitudes.[51] An April 2011 announcement of an excess in jet pairs produced in association with a W boson measured at the Tevatron[52] has been interpreted by Eichten, Lane and Martin as a possible signal of the technipion of low-scale technicolor.[53] The general scheme of low-scale technicolor makes little sense if the limit on is pushed past about 700 GeV. The LHC should be able to discover it or rule it out. Searches there involving decays to technipions and thence to heavy quark jets are hampered by backgrounds from production; its rate is 100 times larger than that at the Tevatron. Consequently, the discovery of low-scale technicolor at the LHC relies on all-leptonic final-state channels with favorable signal-to-background ratios: , and . [54] [edit] Dark matter Technicolor theories naturally contain dark matter candidates. Almost certainly, models can be built in which the lowest-lying technibaryon, a technicolor-singlet bound state of technifermions, is stable enough to survive the evolution of the universe.[41][55] If the technicolor theory is low-scale (), the baryon's mass should be no more than 1–2 TeV. If not, it could be much heavier. The technibaryon must be electrically neutral and satisfy constraints on its abundance. Given the limits on spinindependent dark-matter-nucleon cross sections from dark-matter search experiments ( for the masses of interest[56]), it may have to be electroweak neutral (weak isospin I = 0) as well. These considerations suggest that the "old" technicolor dark matter candidates may be difficult to produce at the LHC. A different class of technicolor dark matter candidates light enough to be accessible at the LHC was introduced by Francesco Sannino and his collaborators.[57] These states are pseudo Goldstone bosons possessing a global charge that makes them stable against decay. Topcolor From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In theoretical physics, Topcolor is a model of dynamical electroweak symmetry breaking in which the top quark and anti-top quark form a top quark condensate and act effectively like the Higgs boson. This is analogous to the phenomenon of superconductivity. Topcolor naturally involves an extension of the standard model color gauge group to a product group SU(3)xSU(3)xSU(3)x... One of the gauge groups contains the top and bottom quarks, and has a sufficiently large coupling constant to cause the condensate to form. The topcolor model thus anticipates the idea of dimensional deconstruction and extra space dimensions, as well as the large mass of the top quark. Topcolor, and its prediction of "topgluons," will be tested in coming experiments at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. Topcolor rescues the Technicolor model from some of its difficulties in a scheme dubbed "Topcolor-assisted Technicolor."

In particle physics, the top quark condensate theory is an alternative to the Standard Model in which a fundamental scalar Higgs field is replaced by a composite field composed of the top quark and its antiquark. These are bound by a four-fermion interaction, analogous to Cooper pairs in a BCS superconductor and nucleons in the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model. The top quark condenses because its measured mass is approximately 173 GeV (comparable to the electroweak scale), and so its Yukawa coupling is of order unity, yielding the possibility of strong coupling dynamics. Color confinement From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The color force favors confinement because at a certain range it is more energetically favorable to create a quark-antiquark pair than to continue to elongate the color flux tube. This is analoguous to the behavior of an elongated rubber-band. Color confinement, often simply called confinement, is the physics phenomenon that color charged particles (such as quarks) cannot be isolated singularly, and therefore cannot be directly observed.[1] Quarks, by default, clump together to form groups, or hadrons. The two types of hadrons are the mesons (one quark, one antiquark) and the baryons (three quarks). The constituent quarks in a group cannot be separated from their parent hadron, and this is why quarks can never be studied or observed in any more direct way than at a hadron level.[2]Contents [hide] 1 Origin 2 Models exhibiting confinement 3 See also 4 References 5 External links [edit] Origin The reasons for quark confinement are somewhat complicated; no analytic proof exists that quantum chromodynamics should be confining, but intuitively, confinement is due to the force-carrying gluons having color charge. As any two electrically-charged particles separate, the electric fields between them diminish quickly, allowing (for example) electrons to become unbound from atomic nuclei. However, as two quarks separate, the gluon fields form narrow tubes (or strings) of color charge, which tend to bring the quarks together as though they were some kind of rubber band. This is quite different in behavior from electrical charge. Because of this behavior, the color force experienced by the quarks in the direction to hold them together, remains constant, regardless of their distance from each other.[3][4] The color force between quarks is large, even on a macroscopic scale, being on the order of 100,000 newtons.[citation needed] As discussed above, it is constant, and does not decrease with increasing distance after a certain point has been passed. When two quarks become separated, as happens in particle accelerator collisions, at some point it is more energetically favorable for a new quark–antiquark pair to spontaneously appear, than to allow the tube to extend further. As a result of this, when quarks are produced in particle accelerators, instead of seeing the individual quarks in detectors, scientists see "jets" of many color-neutral particles (mesons and

baryons), clustered together. This process is called hadronization, fragmentation, or string breaking, and is one of the least understood processes in particle physics. The confining phase is usually defined by the behavior of the action of the Wilson loop, which is simply the path in spacetime traced out by a quark–antiquark pair created at one point and annihilated at another point. In a non-confining theory, the action of such a loop is proportional to its perimeter. However, in a confining theory, the action of the loop is instead proportional to its area. Since the area will be proportional to the separation of the quark–antiquark pair, free quarks are suppressed. Mesons are allowed in such a picture, since a loop containing another loop in the opposite direction will have only a small area between the two loops. [edit] Models exhibiting confinement Besides QCD in 4D, another model which exhibits confinement is the Schwinger model.[citation needed] Compact Abelian gauge theories also exhibit confinement in 2 and 3 spacetime dimensions.[citation needed] Confinement has recently been found in elementary excitations of magnetic systems called spinons.[5] [edit] See also Quantum chromodynamics Asymptotic freedom Deconfining phase Quantum mechanics Particle physics Fundamental force Dual superconducting model In the theory of quantum chromodynamics, dual superconductor models attempt to explain confinement of quarks in terms of an electromagnetic dual theory of superconductivity. In an electromagnetic dual theory the roles of electric and magnetic fields are interchanged. The BCS theory of superconductivity explains superconductivity as the result of the condensation electric chargers to cooper pairs. In a dual superconductor an analogous effect occurs through the condensation of magnetic charges (also called magnetic monopoles). In ordinary electromagnetic theory, no monopoles have been shown to exist. However, in quantum chromodynamics — the theory of colour charge which explains the strong interaction between quarks — the colour charges can be view as (non-abelian) analogues of electric charges and corresponding magnetic monopoles are known to exist. Dual superconductor models posit that condensation of these magnetic monopoles in a superconductive state explains colour confinement — the phenomenon that only neutrally coloured bound states are observed at low energies. Qualitatively, confinement in dual superconductor models can be understood as a result of the dual to the Meissner effect. The Meissner effect says that a superconducting metal will try to expel magnetic field lines from its interior. If a magnetic field is forced to run through the superconductor, the field lines are compressed in magnetic flux tubes. In a dual superconductor the roles of magnetic and electric fields are exchanged and the Meissner effect tries to expel electric field lines. Quarks and antiquarks carry opposite colour charges, and for a quark–antiquark pair 'electric' field lines run from the quark to the antiquark. If the quark–antiquark

pair are immersed in a dual superconductor, then the electric field lines get compressed to a flux tube. The energy associated to the tube is proportional to its length, and the potential energy of the quark–antiquark is proportional to their separation. A quark–antiquark will therefore always bind regardless of their separation, which explains why no unbound quarks are ever found.[note 1] Dual superconductors are described by (a dual to) the Landau–Ginzburg model, which is equivalent to the Abelian Higgs model. The dual superconductor model is motivated by several observations in calculations using lattice gauge theory. The model, however, also has some shortcomings. In particular, although it confines coloured quarks, it fails to confine colour of some gluons, allowing coloured bound states at energies observable in particle colliders. In physics, lattice gauge theory is the study of gauge theories on a spacetime that has been discretized into a lattice. Gauge theories are important in particle physics, and include the prevailing theories of elementary particles: quantum electrodynamics, quantum chromodynamics (QCD) and the Standard Model. Nonperturbative gauge theory calculations in continuous spacetime formally involve evaluating an infinite-dimensional path integral, which is computationally intractable. By working on a discrete spacetime, the path integral becomes finite-dimensional, and can be evaluated by stochastic simulation techniques such as the Monte Carlo method. When the size of the lattice is taken infinitely large and its sites infinitesimally close to each other, the continuum gauge theory is recovered intuitively. A mathematical proof of this fact is lacking.Contents [hide] 1 Basics 2 Yang–Mills action 3 Measurements 4 Other applications 5 See also 6 Further reading 7 External links 8 References [edit] Basics In lattice gauge theory, the spacetime is Wick rotated into Euclidean space and discretized into a lattice with sites separated by distance a and connected by links. In the most commonly-considered cases, such as lattice QCD, fermion fields are defined at lattice sites (which leads to fermion doubling), while the gauge fields are defined on the links. That is, an element U of the compact Lie group G is assigned to each link. Hence to simulate QCD, with Lie group SU(3), there is a 3×3 special unitary matrix defined on each link. The link is assigned an orientation, with the inverse element corresponding to the same link with the opposite orientation. [edit] Yang–Mills action The Yang–Mills action is written on the lattice using Wilson loops (named after Kenneth G. Wilson), so that the limit formally reproduces the original continuum action.[1] Given a faithful irreducible representation ρ of G, the lattice Yang-Mills action is the sum over all lattice sites of the (real component of the) trace over the n links e1, ..., en in the Wilson loop,

Here, χ is the character. If ρ is a real (or pseudoreal) representation, taking the real component is redundant, because even if the orientation of a Wilson loop is flipped, its contribution to the action remains unchanged. There are many possible lattice Yang-Mills actions, depending on which Wilson loops are used in the action. The simplest "Wilson action" uses only the 1×1 Wilson loop, and differs from the continuum action by "lattice artifacts" proportional to the small lattice spacing a. By using more complicated Wilson loops to construct "improved actions", lattice artifacts can be reduced to be proportional to a2, making computations more accurate. [edit] Measurements Quantities such as particle masses are stochastically calculated using techniques such as the Monte Carlo method. Gauge field configurations are generated with probabilities proportional to e − βS, where S is the lattice action and β is related to the lattice spacing a. The quantity of interest is calculated for each configuration, and averaged. Calculations are often repeated at different lattice spacings a so that the result can be extrapolated to the continuum, . Such calculations are often extremely computationally intensive, and can require the use of the largest available supercomputers. To reduce the computational burden, the so-called quenched approximation can be used, in which the fermionic fields are treated as non-dynamic "frozen" variables. While this was common in early lattice QCD calculations, "dynamical" fermions are now standard.[2] These simulations typically utilize algorithms based upon molecular dynamics or microcanonical ensemble algorithms.[3][4] [edit] Other applications Originally, solvable two-dimensional lattice gauge theories had already been introduced in 1971 as models with interesting statistical properties by the theorist Franz Wegner, who worked in the field of phase transitions.[5] Lattice gauge theory has been shown to be exactly dual to spin foam models provided that only 1×1 Wilson loops appear in the action. [edit] See also Hamiltonian lattice gauge theory Lattice field theory Lattice QCD Quantum triviality Lattice QCD is a well-established non-perturbative approach to solving the quantum chromodynamics (QCD) theory of quarks and gluons. It is a lattice gauge theory formulated on a grid or lattice of points in space and time. Analytic or perturbative solutions in low-energy QCD are hard or impossible due to the highly nonlinear nature of the strong force. This formulation of QCD in discrete rather than continuous spacetime naturally introduces a momentum cut off at the order 1/a, where a is the lattice spacing, which regularizes the theory. As a result lattice QCD is mathematically well-defined. Most importantly, lattice QCD provides a framework for investigation of non-perturbative

phenomena such as confinement and quark-gluon plasma formation, which are intractable by means of analytic field theories. In lattice QCD, fields representing quarks are defined at lattice sites (which leads to fermion doubling), while the gluon fields are defined on the links connecting neighboring sites. This approximation approaches continuum QCD as the spacing between lattice sites is reduced to zero. Because the computational cost of numerical simulations can increase dramatically as the lattice spacing decreases, results are often extrapolated to a = 0 by repeated calculations at different lattice spacings a that are large enough to be tractable. Numerical lattice QCD calculations using Monte Carlo methods can be extremely computationally intensive, requiring the use of the largest available supercomputers. To reduce the computational burden, the so-called quenched approximation can be used, in which the quark fields are treated as non-dynamic "frozen" variables. While this was common in early lattice QCD calculations, "dynamical" fermions are now standard.[1] These simulations typically utilize algorithms based upon molecular dynamics or microcanonical ensemble algorithms.[2][3] At present, lattice QCD is primarily applicable at low densities where the numerical sign problem does not interfere with calculations. Lattice QCD predicts that confined quarks will become released to quark-gluon plasma around energies of 170 MeV. Monte Carlo methods are free from the sign problem when applied to the case of QCD with gauge group SU(2) (QC2D). Lattice QCD has already made successful contact with many experiments. For example the mass of the proton has been determined theoretically with an error of less than 2 percent.[4] Lattice QCD has also been used as a benchmark for high-performance computing, an approach originally developed in the context of the IBM Blue Gene supercomputer.Contents [hide] 1 Techniques 1.1 Monte-Carlo simulations 1.2 Fermions on the lattice 1.3 Lattice perturbation theory 2 See also 3 Notes 4 Further reading 5 External links [edit] Techniques [edit] Monte-Carlo simulations A frame from a Monte-Carlo simulation illustrating the typical four-dimensional structure of gluonfield configurations used in describing the vacuum properties of QCD. Monte-Carlo is a method to pseudo-randomly sample a large space of variables. The importance sampling technique used to select the gauge configurations in the Monte-Carlo simulation imposes the use of Euclidean time, by a Wick rotation of space-time. In lattice Monte-Carlo simulations the aim is to calculate correlation functions. This is done by explicitly calculating the action, using field configurations which are chosen according to the distribution function, which depends on the action and the fields. Usually one starts with the gauge bosons part and gauge-fermion interaction part of the action to calculate the gauge configurations, and then uses the simulated gauge configurations to calculate hadronic propagators and correlation functions. [edit] Fermions on the lattice

Lattice QCD is a way to solve the theory exactly from first principles, without any assumptions, to the desired precision. However, in practice the calculation power is limited, which requires a smart use of the available resources. One needs to choose an action which gives the best physical description of the system, with minimum errors, using the available computational power. The limited computer resources force one to use physical constants which are different from their true physical values: The lattice discretization means a finite lattice spacing and size, which do not exist in the continuous and infinite space-time. In addition to the automatic error introduced by this, the limited resources force the use of smaller physical lattices and larger lattice spacing than wanted in order to minimize errors. Another unphysical quantity is the quark masses. Quark masses are steadily going down, but todate (2010) they are typically too high with respect to the real value. In order to compensate for the errors one improves the lattice action in various ways, to minimize mainly finite spacing errors. [edit] Lattice perturbation theory The lattice was initially introduced by Wilson as a framework for studying strongly coupled theories, such as QCD, non-perturbatively. it was found to be a regularization also suitable for perturbative calculations. Perturbation theory involves an expansion in the coupling constant, and is well-justified in high-energy QCD where the coupling constant is small, while it fails completely when the coupling is large and higher order corrections are larger than lower orders in the perturbative series. In this region non-perturbative methods, such as Monte-Carlo sampling of the correlation function, are necessary. Lattice perturbation theory can also provide results for condensed matter theory. One can use the lattice to represent the real atomic crystal. In this case the lattice spacing is a real physical value, and not an artifact of the calculation which has to be removed, and a quantum field theory can be formulated and solved on the physical lattice. [edit] See also Lattice field theory Lattice gauge theory QCD matter QCD sum rules In physics, Hamiltonian lattice gauge theory is a calculational approach to gauge theory and a special case of lattice gauge theory in which the space is discretized but time is not. The Hamiltonian is then re-expressed as a function of degrees of freedom defined on a d-dimensional lattice. Following Wilson, the spatial components of the vector potential are replaced with Wilson lines over the edges, but the time component is associated with the vertices. However, the temporal gauge is often employed, setting the electric potential to zero. The eigenvalues of the Wilson line operators U(e) (where e is the (oriented) edge in question) take on values on the Lie group G. It is assumed that G is compact, otherwise we run into many problems. The conjugate operator to U(e) is the electric field E(e) whose eigenvalues take on values in the Lie algebra . The Hamiltonian receives contributions coming from the plaquettes (the magnetic contribution) and contributions coming from the edges (the electric contribution). Hamiltonian lattice gauge theory is exactly dual to a theory of spin networks. This involves using the Peter-Weyl theorem. In the spin network basis, the spin network states are eigenstates of the

operator Tr[E(e)2]. In physics, asymptotic freedom is a property of some gauge theories that causes interactions between particles to become arbitrarily weak at energy scales that become arbitrarily large, or, equivalently, at length scales that become arbitrarily small (at the shortest distances). Asymptotic freedom is a feature of quantum chromodynamics (QCD), the quantum field theory of the nuclear interaction between quarks and gluons, the fundamental constituents of nuclear matter. Quarks interact weakly at high energies, allowing perturbative calculations by DGLAP of cross sections in deep inelastic processes of particle physics; and strongly at low energies, preventing the unbinding of baryons (like protons or neutrons with three quarks) or mesons (like pions with two quarks), the composite particles of nuclear matter. Asymptotic freedom was discovered by Frank Wilczek, David Gross, and David Politzer who in 2004 shared the Nobel Prize in physics.Contents [hide] 1 Discovery 2 Screening and antiscreening 3 Calculating asymptotic freedom 4 See also 5 References [edit] Discovery Asymptotic freedom was discovered in 1973 by David Gross and Frank Wilczek, and by David Politzer. Although these authors were the first to understand the physical relevance to the strong interactions, in 1969 Iosif Khriplovich discovered asymptotic freedom in the SU(2) gauge theory as a mathematical curiosity, and Gerardus 't Hooft in 1972 also noted the effect but did not publish. For their discovery, Gross, Wilczek and Politzer were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2004. The discovery was instrumental in rehabilitating quantum field theory. Prior to 1973, many theorists suspected that field theory was fundamentally inconsistent because the interactions become infinitely strong at short-distances. This phenomenon is usually called a Landau pole, and it defines the smallest length scale that a theory can describe. This problem was discovered in field theories of interacting scalars and spinors, including quantum electrodynamics, and Lehman positivity led many to suspect that it is unavoidable. Asymptotically free theories become weak at short distances, there is no Landau pole, and these quantum field theories are believed to be completely consistent down to any length scale. While the Standard Model is not entirely asymptotically free, in practice the Landau pole can only be a problem when thinking about the strong interactions. The other interactions are so weak that any inconsistency can only arise at distances shorter than the Planck length, where a field theory description is inadequate anyway. [edit] Screening and antiscreening Charge screening in QED The variation in a physical coupling constant under changes of scale can be understood qualitatively as coming from the action of the field on virtual particles carrying the relevant charge. The Landau pole behavior of quantum electrodynamics (QED, related to quantum triviality) is a consequence of screening by virtual charged particle-antiparticle pairs, such as electron-positron pairs, in the vacuum. In the vicinity of a charge, the vacuum becomes polarized: virtual particles

of opposing charge are attracted to the charge, and virtual particles of like charge are repelled. The net effect is to partially cancel out the field at any finite distance. Getting closer and closer to the central charge, one sees less and less of the effect of the vacuum, and the effective charge increases. In QCD the same thing happens with virtual quark-antiquark pairs; they tend to screen the color charge. However, QCD has an additional wrinkle: its force-carrying particles, the gluons, themselves carry color charge, and in a different manner. Each gluon carries both a color charge and an anti-color magnetic moment. The net effect of polarization of virtual gluons in the vacuum is not to screen the field, but to augment it and affect its color. This is sometimes called antiscreening. Getting closer to a quark diminishes the antiscreening effect of the surrounding virtual gluons, so the contribution of this effect would be to weaken the effective charge with decreasing distance. Since the virtual quarks and the virtual gluons contribute opposite effects, which effect wins out depends on the number of different kinds, or flavors, of quark. For standard QCD with three colors, as long as there are no more than 16 flavors of quark (not counting the antiquarks separately), antiscreening prevails and the theory is asymptotically free. In fact, there are only 6 known quark flavors. [edit] Calculating asymptotic freedom Asymptotic freedom can be derived by calculating the beta-function describing the variation of the theory's coupling constant under the renormalization group. For sufficiently short distances or large exchanges of momentum (which probe short-distance behavior, roughly because of the inverse relation between a quantum's momentum and De Broglie wavelength), an asymptotically free theory is amenable to perturbation theory calculations using Feynman diagrams. Such situations are therefore more theoretically tractable than the long-distance, strong-coupling behavior also often present in such theories, which is thought to produce confinement. Calculating the beta-function is a matter of evaluating Feynman diagrams contributing to the interaction of a quark emitting or absorbing a gluon. In non-abelian gauge theories such as QCD, the existence of asymptotic freedom depends on the gauge group and number of flavors of interacting particles. To lowest nontrivial order, the beta-function in an SU(N) gauge theory with nf kinds of quark-like particle is where α is the theory's equivalent of the fine-structure constant, g2 / (4π) in the units favored by particle physicists. If this function is negative, the theory is asymptotically free. For SU(3), the color charge gauge group of QCD, the theory is therefore asymptotically free if there are 16 or fewer flavors of quarks. For SU(3) N = 3, and β1 < 0 gives In theoretical physics, by anomaly one usually means that the symmetry remains broken when the symmetry-breaking factor goes to zero. When the symmetry which is broken is scale invariance, then true power laws usually cannot be found from dimensional reasoning like in turbulence or quantum field theory. In the latter, the anomalous scaling dimension of an operator is the contribution of quantum mechanics to the classical scaling dimension of that operator. The classical scaling dimension of an operator O is determined by dimensional analysis from the Lagrangian (in 4 spacetime dimensions this means dimension 1 for elementary bosonic fields including the vector potentials, 3/2 for elementary

fermionic fields etc.). However if one computes the correlator of two operators of this type, one often finds logarithmic divergences arising from one-loop Feynman diagrams. The expansion in the coupling constant has the schematic form where g is a coupling constant, Δ0 is the classical dimension, and Λ is an ultraviolet cutoff (the maximal allowed energy in the loop integrals). A is a constant that appears in the loop diagrams. The expression above may be viewed as a Taylor expansion of the full quantum dimension. The term g2A is the anomalous scaling dimension while Δ is the full dimension. Conformal field theories are typically strongly coupled and the full dimension cannot be easily calculated by Taylor expansions. The full dimensions in this case are often called critical exponents. These operators describe conformal bound states with a continuous mass spectrum. In particular, 2Δ = d − 2 + η for the critical exponent η for a scalar operator. We have an anomalous scaling dimension when η ≠ 0. An anomalous scaling dimension indicates a scale dependent wavefunction renormalization. Anomalous scaling appears also in classical physics. The Amazing Disappearing Antineutrino A revised calculation suggests that around 3% of particles have gone missing from nuclear reactor experiments. | April 1, 2011 | 10 * By Eugenie Samuel Reich of Nature magazine Neutrinos have long perplexed physicists with their uncanny ability to evade detection, with as many as two-thirds of the ghostly particles apparently going missing en route from the Sun to Earth. Now a refined version of an old calculation is causing a stir by suggesting that researchers have also systematically underestimated the number of the particles' antimatter partners-antineutrinos--produced by nuclear reactor experiments. The deficit could be caused by the antineutrinos turning into so-called 'sterile antineutrinos', which can't be directly detected, and which would be clear evidence for effects beyond the standard model of particle physics. In the 1960s, physicist Ray Davis, working deep underground in the Homestake gold mine in South Dakota, found that the flux of solar neutrinos hitting Earth was a third of that predicted by calculations of the nuclear reactions in the Sun by theorist John Bahcall. Davis later received a Nobel prize for his contributions to neutrino astrophysics. That puzzle was considered solved in 2001, when the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) in Canada found the missing two-thirds through an alternative means of detection. The SNO's results were taken as evidence that

neutrinos have a mass, which allows them to oscillate between three flavors: electron, muon and tau. Davis had only detected the electron neutrinos. Experiments that measure the rate of antineutrino production from the decay of uranium and plutonium isotopes have so far produced results roughly consistent with this theory. But the revised calculation accepted this week by Physical Review D suggests that it's not the whole story. While waiting for the Double Chooz neutrino experiment in France to become fully operational, Thierry Lasserre and his colleagues at the French atomic energy commission(CEA) in Saclay set out to check predictions of the rate of antineutrino production by nuclear reactors. They repeated a calculation first done in the 1980s by Klaus Schreckenbach at the Technical University of Munich, using more modern techniques that allowed them to be much more precise. Their new estimate of the rate of production is around 3% more than previously predicted. This means that several generations of neutrino and antineutrino experiments have unknowingly missed a small fraction of the particles. "It was completely a surprise for us," says Lasserre. Double Chooz consists of two detectors measuring the flux of antineutrinos produced by the Chooz nuclear power plant in the French Ardennes, one detector about 400 meters away from the plant and the other 1 kilometer away. The far detector became operational this year. Stefan Schönert, a neutrino physicist at the Technical University of Munich, says the calculation is solid, and has been checked with Schreckenbach. "They can reproduce each other's results. There's no way around this result. It's very solid." Art McDonald of Queen's University in Kingston, Canada and the SNO says that people have to look carefully at the calculation, which may itself have a systematic error. But, he adds, "there's no doubt it would have significance as a physics result if it can be shown with more accuracy." The result may be pointing to evidence of neutrinos and antineutrinos oscillating into a fourth kind of neutrino or antineutrino, a so-called 'sterile' version that doesn't interact with ordinary matter, says Carlo Giunti, a physicist at the University of Turin in Italy. Other experiments have previously seen evidence for sterile particles, including the Liquid Scintillator Neutrino Detector at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and the Mini Booster Neutrino Experiment, or MiniBooNE, at Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois, and the search to confirm their existence is a hot area of physics. Giunti says that the magnitude of the anomaly uncovered by Lasserre is not statistically significant on its own, but that it points promisingly in the same direction as another anomaly found by the SAGE collaboration, which studied neutrinos from a radioactive source at the Baksan Neutrino Observatory in the Caucasus in 2005. "Before this, there used to be a contradiction between [reactor and radioactive source] experiments but now they are in agreement," says Giunti. Schönert says that one key experiment everyone is waiting for is a measurement showing that the rate of disappearance of antineutrinos from a source increases with the distance from it. "This would be the smoking gun," he says. This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on April 1, 2011. A Map of the Universe J. Richard Gott III, Mario Jurić, David Schlegel, Fiona Hoyle, Michael Vogeley, Max Tegmark, Neta Bahcall, Jon Brinkmann (Submitted on 20 Oct 2003 (v1), last revised 17 Oct 2005 (this version, v2))

We have produced a new conformal map of the universe illustrating recent discoveries, ranging from Kuiper belt objects in the Solar system, to the galaxies and quasars from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. This map projection, based on the logarithm map of the complex plane, preserves shapes locally, and yet is able to display the entire range of astronomical scales from the Earth's neighborhood to the cosmic microwave background. The conformal nature of the projection, preserving shapes locally, may be of particular use for analyzing large scale structure. Prominent in the map is a Sloan Great Wall of galaxies 1.37 billion light years long, 80% longer than the Great Wall discovered by Geller and Huchra and therefore the largest observed structure in the universe. Comments: Figure 8, and additional material accessible on the web at: this http URL Subjects: Astrophysics (astro-ph) Journal reference: Astrophys.J.624:463,2005 DOI: 10.1086/428890 Cite as: arXiv:astro-ph/0310571v2 Logarithmic Maps of the Universe This website contains figures from "Map of the Universe" e-print, by Gott, Juric et al. The paper has been published in the Astrophysical Journal (Gott et al., 2005, ApJ, 624, 463), and you can also find the manuscript here (note: Figure 8. of the manuscript has been published as an inset poster, and has to be downloaded separately (see below)).

The Great Walls -- Largest Structures in the Universe

“Just as a fish may be barely aware of the medium in which it lives and swims, so the microstructure of empty space could be far too complex for unaided human brains." Sir Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal, physicist, Cambridge University Our known Hubble length universe contains hundreds of millions of galaxies that have clumped together, forming super clusters and a series of massive walls of galaxies separated by vast voids of empty space. Great Wall: The most vast structure ever is a collection of superclusters a billion light years away extending for 5% the length of the entire observable universe. It is theorized that such structures as the Great Wall form along and follow web-like strings of dark matter that dictates the structure of the Universe on the grandest of scales. Dark matter gravitationally attracts baryonic matter, and it is this normal matter that astronomers see forming long, thin walls of super-galactic clusters. If it took God one week to make the Earth, going by mass it would take him two quintillion years to build this thing -- far longer than science says the universe has existed, and it's kind of fun to have those two the other way around for a change.

Though He could always omnipotently cheat and say "Let there be a Sloan Great Wall." The Great Wall is a massive array of astronomical objects named after the observations which revealed them, the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. An eight year project scanned over a quarter of the sky to generate full 3-D maps of almost a million galaxies. Analysis of these images revealed a huge panel of galaxies 1.37 billion light years long, and even the pedantic-sounding .07 is six hundred and sixty billion trillion kilometers. This is science precisely measuring made-up sounding numbers. Sloane_9: This isn't the only wall out there -- others exist, all with far greater lengths than width or depth, actual sheets of galaxies forming some of the most impressive anythings there are. And these walls are only a special class of galactic filaments, long strings of matter stretched between mind-breaking expanses of emptiness. Some of these elongated super clusters have formed a series of walls, one after another, spaced from 500 million to 800 million light years apart, such that in one direction alone, 13 Great Walls have formed with the inner and outer walls separated by less than seven billion light years. Recently, cosmologists have estimated that some of these galactic walls may have taken from 80 billion to 100 billion, to 150 billion years to form in a direct challenge to current age estimates of the age of the Universe following the Big Bang. The huge Sloan Great Wall spans over one billion light years. The Coma cluster (image above) is one of the largest observed structures in the Universe, containing over 10,000 galaxies and extending more than 1.37 billion light years in length. Current theories of "dark energy" and "great attractors" have been developed to explain why a created universe did not spread out uniformly at the same speed and in the same spoke-like directions as predicted by theory. But as Sean Carroll of the Moore Center for Theoretical Cosmology and Physics at Cal Tech is fond of saying, "We don't have a clue." Britain’s Astronomer Royal, Lord Rees, says some of the cosmos’s biggest mysteries, like the Big Bang and even the nature of our own self awareness, might never be resolved. Rees, who is also President of the Royal Society, says that a correct basic theory of the universe might be present, but may be just too tough for human beings’ brains to comprehend.

Images from NASA's Swift satellite were combined in this UV/optical/X-ray view of the explosion, which is known as GRB 110328A. The blast was detected in X-rays, which were collected on March 28. CREDIT: NASA/Swift/Stefan Immler View full size image A huge, powerful star explosion detonated in deep space last week — an ultra-bright conflagaration that has astronomers scratching their heads over exactly how it happened.

The explosion may be the death cry of a star as it was ripped apart by a black hole, scientists said. High-energy radiation continues to brighten and fade from the March 28 blast's location, about 3.8 billion light-years from Earth in the constellation Draco. [Image of the space explosion] Astronomers say they've never witnessed an explosion so bright, long-lasting and variable before, according to NASA officials.

The explosion looks like a gamma-ray burst — the most powerful type of explosion in the universe, which usually mark the destruction of a massive star — but the flaring emissions from these dramatic events never last more than a few hours, researchers said. "We know of objects in our own galaxy that can produce repeated bursts, but they are thousands to millions of times less powerful than the bursts we are seeing now," said Andrew Fruchter, of the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, in a statement today (April 7). "This is truly extraordinary." This is a visible-light image of GRB 110328A's host galaxy (arrow) taken on April 4 by the Hubble Space Telescope's Wide Field Camera 3. The galaxy is 3.8 billion lightyears away. CREDIT: NASA/ESA/A. Fruchter (STScI) View full size image Massive explosion in space Scientists are using several NASA space observatories, working in concert, to study the massive blast. The space explosion was detected on March 28 when an instrument on NASA's Swift satellite detected an X-ray eruption, the first in a series of powerful blasts. The Swift observatory determined a rough position for the explosion, which scientists are now calling the gamma-ray burst (GRB) 110328A. [Video: What Makes the Brightest Flash in the Universe?] After Swift's discovery, an image taken by the Hubble Space Telescope on Monday (April 4) pinpointed the exact source of the blast — the center of a small galaxy in the Draco constellation. That same day, astronomers used the Chandra X-ray Observatory to make a four-hour exposure of the puzzling source. Although research is ongoing, astronomers say that the unusual explosion likely arose when a star wandered too close to its galaxy's central black hole. Intense tidal forces probably tore the star apart, and the infalling gas continues to stream toward the black hole. According to this model, the spinning black hole formed an outflowing jet, which is blasting powerful X-rays and gamma rays in our direction, researchers said. "The fact that the explosion occurred in the center of a galaxy tells us it is most likely associated with a massive black hole," said Neil Gehrels, the lead scientist for Swift at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, in a statement. "This solves a key question about the mysterious event." [Photos: Black Holes of the Universe]

Looking down the barrel of the jet Most galaxies, including our own, contain central black holes with millions of times the mass of our sun. The disrupted star probably succumbed to a black hole less massive than the one at the heart of our Milky Way galaxy. The Milky Way's central black hole has a mass that is about 4 million times that of the sun, researchers said. GRB 110328A has repeatedly flared in the days following its discovery by Swift. This plot shows the brightness changes recorded by Swift's X-ray Telescope. CREDIT: NASA/Swift/Penn State/J. Kennea View full size image Astronomers have detected stars disrupted by supermassive black holes before, but none have shown the X-ray brightness and variability seen in GRB 110328A, which has flared repeatedly. Since April 3, for example, it has brightened by more than five times. Scientists think that the X-rays may be coming from matter moving near the speed of light in a particle jet that forms as the star's gas falls toward the black hole. "The best explanation at the moment is that we happen to be looking down the barrel of this jet," said Andrew Levan at the University of Warwick in the United Kingdom, who led the Chandra observations. "When we look straight down these jets, a brightness boost lets us view details we might otherwise miss." Astronomers plan additional Hubble observations to see if the galaxy's core changes brightness.

NASA Telescopes Join Forces To Observe Unprecedented Explosion WASHINGTON -- NASA's Swift satellite, Hubble Space Telescope and Chandra X-ray Observatory have teamed up to study one of the most puzzling cosmic blasts ever observed. More than a week later, high-energy radiation continues to brighten and fade from its location. Astronomers say they have never seen such a bright, variable, high-energy, longlasting burst before. Usually, gamma-ray bursts mark the destruction of a massive star, and flaring emission from these events never lasts more than a few hours. Although research is ongoing, astronomers feel the unusual blast likely arose when a star wandered too close to its galaxy's central black hole. Intense tidal forces probably tore the star apart, and the infalling gas continues to stream toward the hole. According to this model, the spinning black hole formed an outflowing jet along its rotational axis. A powerful blast of X- and gamma rays is seen when the jet is pointed in our direction. On March 28, Swift's Burst Alert Telescope discovered the source in the constellation Draco when it erupted with the first in a series of powerful blasts. "We know of objects in our own galaxy that can produce repeated bursts, but they

are thousands to millions of times less powerful than the bursts we are seeing. This is truly extraordinary," said Andrew Fruchter at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore. Swift determined a position for the explosion, which now is cataloged as gamma-ray burst (GRB) 110328A, and informed astronomers worldwide. As dozens of telescopes turned to study the spot, astronomers quickly noticed a small, distant galaxy very near the Swift position. A deep image taken by Hubble on Monday, April 4, pinpointed the source of the explosion at the center of this galaxy, which lies 3.8 billion light-years away from Earth. That same day, astronomers used NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory to make a four-hour-long exposure of the puzzling source. The image, which locates the X-ray object 10 times more precisely than Swift, shows it lies at the center of the galaxy Hubble imaged. "We have been eagerly awaiting the Hubble observation," said Neil Gehrels, the lead scientist for Swift at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. "The fact that the explosion occurred in the center of a galaxy tells us it is most likely associated with a massive black hole. This solves a key question about the mysterious event." Most galaxies, including our own, contain central black holes with millions of times the sun's mass; those in the largest galaxies can be a thousand times larger. The disrupted star probably succumbed to a black hole less massive than the Milky Way's, which has a mass four million times that of our sun. Astronomers previously have detected stars disrupted by supermassive black holes, but none have shown the X-ray brightness and variability seen in GRB 110328A. The source has undergone numerous flares. Since Sunday, April 3, for example, it has brightened by more than five times. Scientists think the X-rays may be coming from matter moving near the speed of light in a particle jet that forms along the rotation axis of the spinning black hole as the star's gas falls into a disk around the black hole. "The best explanation at the moment is we happen to be looking down the barrel of this jet," said Andrew Levan at the University of Warwick in the United Kingdom, who led the Chandra observations. "When we look straight down these jets, a brightness boost lets us view details we might otherwise miss." This brightness increase, which is called relativistic beaming, occurs when matter moving close to the speed of light is viewed nearly head on. Astronomers plan additional Hubble observations to see if the galaxy's core changes brightness. Goddard manages Swift and Hubble. NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., manages Chandra. Hubble was built and is operated in partnership with the European Space Agency. Science operations for all three missions include contributions from many national and international partners. For more information and images associated with these observations, visit: Im particularly fascinated by spinning black holes and how they cause extreme frame dragging of space-time in their environment. Even the earth has a bit of a frame

dragging effect, but nothing like what spinning black holes can do.

Breakthrough Study Confirms Cause Of Short Gamma-Ray Bursts WASHINGTON -- A new supercomputer simulation shows the collision of two neutron stars can naturally produce the magnetic structures thought to power the high-speed particle jets associated with short gamma-ray bursts (GRBs). The study provides the most detailed glimpse of the forces driving some of the universe's most energetic explosions. The state-of-the-art simulation ran for nearly seven weeks on the Damiana computer cluster at the Albert Einstein Institute (AEI) in Potsdam, Germany. It traces events that unfold over 35 milliseconds -- about three times faster than the blink of an eye. GRBs are among the brightest events known, emitting as much energy in a few seconds as our entire galaxy does in a year. Most of this emission comes in the form of gamma rays, the highest-energy form of light. "For the first time, we've managed to run the simulation well past the merger and the formation of the black hole," said Chryssa Kouveliotou, a co-author of the study at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. "This is by far the longest simulation of this process, and only on sufficiently long timescales does the magnetic field grow and reorganize itself from a chaotic structure into something resembling a jet." GRBs longer than two seconds are the most common type and are widely thought to be triggered by the collapse of a massive star into a black hole. As matter falls toward the black hole, some of it forms jets in the opposite direction that move near the speed of light. These jets bore through the collapsing star along its rotational axis and produce a blast of gamma rays after they emerge. Understanding short GRBs, which fade quickly, proved more elusive. Astronomers had difficulty obtaining precise positions for follow-up studies. That began to change in 2004, when NASA's Swift satellite began rapidly locating bursts and alerting astronomers where to look. "For more than two decades, the leading model of short GRBs was the merger of two neutron stars," said co-author Bruno Giacomazzo at the University of Maryland and NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. "Only now can we show that the merger of neutron stars actually produces an ultrastrong magnetic field structured like the jets needed for a GRB." A neutron star is the compressed core left behind when a star weighing less than about 30 times the sun's mass explodes as a supernova. Its matter reaches densities that cannot be reproduced on Earth -- a single spoonful outweighs the Himalayan Mountains. The simulation began with a pair of magnetized neutron stars orbiting just 11 miles apart. Each star packed 1.5 times the mass of the sun into a sphere just 17 miles across and generated a magnetic field about a trillion times stronger than the sun's.

In 15 milliseconds, the two neutron stars crashed, merged and transformed into a rapidly spinning black hole weighing 2.9 suns. The edge of the black hole, known as its event horizon, spanned less than six miles. A swirling chaos of superdense matter with temperatures exceeding 18 billion degrees Fahrenheit surrounded the newborn black hole. The merger amplified the strength of the combined magnetic field, but it also scrambled it into disarray. Over the next 11 milliseconds, gas swirling close to the speed of light continued to amplify the magnetic field, which ultimately became a thousand times stronger than the neutron stars' original fields. At the same time, the field became more organized and gradually formed a pair of outwardly directed funnels along the black hole's rotational axis. This is exactly the configuration needed to power the jets of ultrafast particles that produce a short gamma-ray burst. Neither of the magnetic funnels was filled with high-speed matter when the simulation ended, but earlier studies have shown that jet formation can occur under these conditions. "By solving Einstein's relativity equations as never before and letting nature take its course, we've lifted the veil on short GRBs and revealed what could be their central engine," said Luciano Rezzolla, the study's lead author at AEI. "This is a long-awaited result. Now it appears that neutron star mergers inevitably produce aligned jet-like structures in an ultrastrong magnetic field." The study is available online and will appear in the May 1 edition of The Astrophysical Journal Letters. The authors note the ultimate proof of the merger model will have to await the detection of gravitational waves -- ripples in the fabric of space-time predicted by relativity. Merging neutron stars are expected to be prominent sources, so the researchers also computed what the model's gravitational-wave signal would look like. Observatories around the world are searching for gravitational waves, so far without success because the signals are so faint.

This illustration shows a gas disk orbiting a black hole, with X-rays pouring out of the inner, white-shaded region. For the non-spinning black hole (left), this inner radius is large. For the fast-spinning black hole (right), the gas can orbit very near the event horizon, so the radius is much smaller. CREDIT: NASA / NASA / CXC / M.Weiss View full size image X-ray vision has brought astronomers closer than ever to completely characterizing a black hole, a place where strange things happen. Astronomers measured the spinning speed of three black holes, finding that one

rotates at a breakneck 950 times per second, nearing its theoretical rotation limit of 1,150 spins a second. The black hole lies within the constellation Aquila (the Eagle) about 35,000 light-years from Earth. The finding represents an important step toward understanding these invisible objects.

Mass and spin When any mass, such as a star, becomes more compact than a certain limit, its own gravity becomes so strong that the object collapses to a singular point, a black hole. The spin of a star is thought to translate into spin of a black hole that forms from the star's collapse. With its mass much more compact, the spin rate ought to be phenomenal, much like a skater pulls in his arms to increase speed when performing a pirouette. While astronomers have calculated the masses of more than a dozen black holes, spin-speed measurements have remained elusive. Until now, the spin rate of only one other black hole has been accurately measured, according to the researchers. "Ever since the community figured out many years ago how to measure black hole mass, measuring spin has been the holy grail in this field," said Jeffrey McClintock of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) in Cambridge, Mass. Powerful tug A black hole's gravity, at a distance, behaves like that of a star of the same mass. If the Sun were to suddenly become a black hole, for example, its gravitational effect on Earth would not change. "When you take a black hole and you try putting an object into orbit around it, you have no trouble if you're doing it at a large distance," said CfA's Ramesh Narayan. But as swirling matter gets closer to a black hole, it starts orbiting faster and faster until it reaches the jaws of the dark behemoth. Just before the gas and dust get devoured, the matter heats up to millions of degrees, unleashing jets of X-rays. The scientists, led by McClintock and Narayan, used NASA's Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer satellite data to measure this radiation and calculate the area of this disk of radiation (seen in images as a bright-white ring around the black center). "Before, [the matter] was swirling around, happily, very slowly just spiraling in, and then it reaches this radius and then bang, it just freefalls into the black hole," Narayan told Inside this radius, the gas is falling in so quickly it doesn't send out much radiation. Spin speed The faster a black hole spins, the smaller its critical radius. That's because when a black hole is spinning, it drags space-time around with it. So if surrounding matter is spinning in the same direction as the black hole, it gets tugged along due to this so-

called frame-dragging effect. "The space is being pulled, so it's helping the particle go around, so it's able to hang on much closer to the black hole," Narayan explained. "If a particle is going around a black hole in the same direction as the spin of the black hole, then it turns out that it can be comfortable. It's able to find a circular orbit even at much smaller radii," Narayan explained. They found two of the black holes spin at less than 50 percent of their maximum rates, while the black hole called GRS1915+105, which has 14 times the mass of the Sun, rotates between 82 and 100 percent of its maximum spin speed. Each black hole is part of what's called an X-ray binary system, in which two objects orbit each other with gas from one-a normal star like the Sun-getting pulled toward the black hole. The results are published in today's issue of the Astrophysical Journal. The backward spin of a number of black holes could create mysterious jets of plasma that control the fate of galaxies, scientists now suggest. At the heart of galaxies, astronomers have routinely detected what seem to be supermassive black holes millions to billions of times the mass of our sun. Roughly a hundredth of these giants spew out jets of plasma that extend out in opposite directions. These jets control how stars and other bodies form by injecting huge amounts of energy into the universe, playing a crucial role in the evolution of clusters of galaxies, the largest structures in the universe. However, it remains a mystery as to how these jets form.

To investigate the origin of these powerful jets, scientists compared several dozen galaxies whose super-massive black holes spit jets to other galaxies whose black holes don't. All these black holes featured accretion disks ? clumps of gas and dust whirling into the maws of these dark objects. Scientists have long known that black holes spin. Relying on data collected by a Japanese space telescope dubbed Suzaku, researchers found that jets might form right outside black holes that spin in the opposite direction from their accretion disks. Such retrograde spin could warp space-time in a way that forces the innermost portions of accretion disks outward, leading to "a piling of magnetic fields that provides the force to fuel a jet," said researcher Dan Evans at MIT?s Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research. The scientists looked at light from the super-hot coronas of accretion disks, made of plasma heated by magnetic fields that lies above and below the disks, sandwiching them. These coronas generate copious amounts of X-rays that Suzaku can detect. A fraction of light from the coronas reflects off the accretion disks, resulting in a distinct pattern called the Compton reflection hump. The majority of a corona's X-ray

emissions should come from near the black hole, where matter from the accretion disk is falling into the black hole fastest and hottest. As such, the Compton reflection hump should also be most prominent there. However, jet-emitting black holes didn't have the Compton reflection hump. This suggests their accretion disks had no inner regions near the black holes to reflect light from the corona. This gap in that black hole's accretion disk could result from a backward whirl. Supercomputer models suggest that when galaxies collide, the merging of supermassive black holes can give the resulting giants a decent amount of spin, and depending on the dynamics of that merger ? for instance, if galaxies of different sizes collide ?a retrograde black hole could result. Spinning black holes drag space-time around them, and a retrograde spin would push out the orbit of the innermost portion of a black hole's accretion disk. "David Garofalo, a general relativity specialist in our collaboration, has a way to describe this," Evans said. "Picture trying to get as close to the edge of a ceiling fan with a pencil in your hand without hitting the fan. It's much easier to get close if you're co-rotating with the fan, moving the same direction as it, as the fan creates a sucking effect. If you're moving in the opposite direction, counter-rotating with the spin of that fan, the air is effectively pushed out at you, generating an opposing force, and you get much further from that fan. The same thing happens with spinning black holes, where the force you feel is roughly analogous to the wind." In the future, Evans said NASA's Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array (NuSTAR), a satellite planned for launch in 2011, may help astronomers solve this black hole mystery, being 10 to 50 times more sensitive that current technology. The scientists detailed their findings in the Feb. 10 issue of the Astrophysical Journal.

The center of this image contains an extraordinary gamma-ray burst (GRB) called GRB 110328A, observed with NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory. This Chandra observation confirms the association of GRB 110328A with the core of a distant galaxy and shows that it was an exceptionally long lived and luminous event compared to other GRBs. The red cross (roll your mouse over the image above) shows the position of a faint galaxy -- located about 3.8 billion light years from Earth -- observed with NASA's Hubble Space Telescope and the Gemini-North telescope on the ground. Allowing for experimental errors, the position of the galaxy is indistinguishable from that of the Xray source, showing that the source is located close to the middle of the galaxy. This is consistent with the idea, suggested by some astronomers, that a star was torn apart by a supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy. This idea differs from the usual interpretation for a GRB, involving the production of a jet when a black hole or neutron star forms after the collapse of a massive star or a merger between two neutron stars.

Remarkably, this "tidal disruption" event may have been caught in real time, rather than detected later from analyzing archival observations. However, this X-ray source is about a hundred times brighter than previously observed tidal disruptions. One possible explanation for this very bright radiation is that debris from the disrupted star fell towards the black hole in a disk and the swirling, magnetized matter generated intense electromagnetic fields that created a powerful jet of particles. If this jet is pointed toward Earth it would boost the observed brightness of the source. This scenario has already been suggested by observers to explain the bright and variable X-ray emission observed by NASA's Swift telescope. This observation was part of a so-called target of opportunity, or TOO, led by Andrew Levan from the University of Warwick in the UK. A TOO allows the telescope to react quickly to unpredictable cosmic events, within 24 hours in some situations. Chandra scientists and engineers can decide to alter the scheduled observations and instead point the telescope to another target if the circumstances warrant it. This process was put into place once the discovery of GRB 110328A with Swift was announced on March 28th, 2011. The Chandra team was able to reset the telescope's schedule to observe GRB 110328A early in the morning of Monday, April 4th for a period of just over four hours. Credits: NASA/CXC/Warwick/A.Levan et al. Cosmic burst in distant galaxy puzzles NASA By Agence France-Presse Thursday, April 7th, 2011 -- 6:50 pm WASHINGTON – NASA is studying a surprising cosmic burst at the center of distant galaxy that has burned for more than a week, longer than astronomers have ever seen before, the US space agency said Thursday. Calling it "one of the most puzzling cosmic blasts ever observed," NASA said it has mobilized the Hubble Space Telescope along with its Swift satellite and Chandra Xray Observatory to study the phenomenon. "More than a week later, high-energy radiation continues to brighten and fade from its location," NASA said in a statement. "Astronomers say they have never seen such a bright, variable, high-energy, longlasting burst before. Usually, gamma-ray bursts mark the destruction of a massive star, and flaring emission from these events never lasts more than a few hours." The first in a series of explosions was detected by a NASA telescope on March 28 in the constellation Draco. Astronomers think the the blast occurred "when a star wandered too close to its galaxy's central black hole," NASA said. "Intense tidal forces probably tore the star apart, and the infalling gas continues to stream toward the hole. According to this model, the spinning black hole formed an outflowing jet along its rotational axis. A powerful blast of X- and gamma rays is seen when the jet is pointed in our direction." On April 4, the Hubble telescope spotted the source of the explosion at the center of a galaxy 3.8 billion light-years away from Earth.

"We have been eagerly awaiting the Hubble observation," said Neil Gehrels, the lead scientist for Swift at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. "The fact that the explosion occurred in the center of a galaxy tells us it is most likely associated with a massive black hole. This solves a key question about the mysterious event." The Swift telescope has catalogued the event as gamma-ray burst (GRB) 110328A, alerting worldwide astronomers to its existence for further study. http://www.rawstory....y-puzzles-nasa/ Baffling blowup in distant galaxy High-energy blast has gone on for 11 days By Ron Cowen Web edition : Thursday, April 7th, 2011 Enlarge COSMIC FIREWORKSThis view of a puzzling cosmic explosion combines images from the Swift satellite's ultraviolet/optical telescope (white and purple) and its X-ray telescope (yellow and red), recorded over a 3.4-hour period on March 28, 2011.Stefan Immler/NASA GSFC, NASA, Swift Astronomers have witnessed a cosmic explosion so strange they don’t even know what to call it. Although the blowup, discovered with NASA’s Swift satellite on March 28, emits high-energy radiation like a gamma-ray burst would, the event has now lasted for 11 days. Gamma-ray bursts last for an average of about 30 seconds. Also unlike a gamma-ray burst, the explosion has faded and brightened, emitting staccato pulses of energetic radiation lasting for hundreds of seconds. Enlarge DISTANT EXPLOSIONThe Hubble Space Telescope was able to pinpoint the location of a recently observed cosmic explosion, showing that it took place in the center of a galaxy that lies 3.8 billion light-years from Earth. This image may support the idea that the fireworks come from a star that fell into a supermassive black hole at the core of the galaxy. A. Fruchter/STScI, NASA, ESA “It’s either a phenomenon we’ve never seen before or a familiar event that we’ve never viewed in this way before,” says Andrew Fruchter of the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore. The outburst might have been generated by a star torn to shreds when it ventured too close to a black hole in its host galaxy, he suggests. Gas from the star falling into the black hole could have triggered the gravitational monster to emit a jet of X-rays and gamma rays that by chance happens to point directly at Earth. A radio-wavelength image taken May 29 along with a Hubble Space Telescope image taken in visible light on April 4 supports that model. The images show that the explosion took place 3.8 billion light-years from Earth, at the center of a galaxy where a supermassive black hole would lie. It’s also possible that the star might have been ripped apart by a smaller black hole, Fruchter notes. “Tidal disruption of a star by a black hole seems very plausible,” says Andrew MacFadyen of New York University. The blast’s duration “is much longer than anything we'd naturally expect from [explosive] collapse of a single star,” which is

the traditional model for producing a gamma-ray burst, he says. But Stan Woosley of the University of California, Santa Cruz says the event might be explained by the gravitational collapse of a giant star into a black hole, a scaled-up version of the process that usually produces a gamma-ray burst. In Woosley’s scenario, the core of the giant star collapses to form a black hole but it takes days for the outer layers to fall in and emit radiation, accounting for the unusually long duration of the observed explosion.

http://www.sciencene..._distant_galaxy http://www.physorg.c...-gamma-ray.html The engine that powers short gamma-ray bursts April 8th, 2011 in Space& Earth / Astronomy The engine that powers short gamma-ray burstsTwo neutron stars merge within milliseconds to form a black hole. A strong magnetic field is formed along the rotational axis, which creates a jet that shoots ultra-hot matter out into space. Gamma-ray bursts can occur in the jet. © L. Rezzolla (AEI)& M. Koppitz (AEI& Zuse Institute Berlin) ( -- These explosions have been puzzling scientists for years: those brief flashes of gamma light can in fact release more energy in a fraction of a second than what our entire galaxy releases in one year – even with its 200 billion stars. What causes those explosions? Scientists working with Luciano Rezzolla at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics are now one step closer to solving the riddle. In six-week-long computations they carried out on the Institute’s supercomputer, the researchers simulated the merger of two neutron stars which have a small magnetic field and which, when merge, form a black hole surrounded by a hot torus. In this process, an ultra-strong magnetic field with a jet-like structure is formed along the rotational axis. And it was this magnetic field that could lie behind the generation of short gamma-ray bursts: out of the chaos that resulted from the collision, an ordered structure was formed – a jet in which short gamma-ray bursts can occur. The first astrophysical gamma-ray explosion was observed by pure coincidence: in the late 1960s, an American spy satellite looking for evidence of above ground atomic bomb tests detected the first gamma-ray burst (GBR). It came not from Earth, but from outer space. Between 1991 and the date it crashed in June 2000, America’s Compton satellite registered about one GBR per day – yet the cause of these massive explosions in the universe remained a mystery. [Video on web page http://www.physorg.c...gamma-ray.html] State-of-the-art supercomputer models show that merging neutron stars can power a short gamma-ray burst. Coalescing neutron stars were believed to be the most likely culprits. However, the scientists did not understand how the chaos that resulted from the merger of these 20-kilometer wide, extremely dense spheres could produce a stream of gas – a jet – orientated along the rotational axis. Yet the jet is an essential ingredient in the

occurrence of gamma-ray bursts. So how can the driving force behind the process create this order and release such enormous amounts of energy? Luciano Rezzolla, leader of the Numerical Relativity Group at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics (Albert Einstein Institute/AEI), has been working with fellow scientists in an international collaboration, and they have now found an explanation for the short gamma-ray bursts that can last up to three seconds. The team solved the Einstein equations and the magnetohydrodynamic equations for two neutron stars coalescing into a black hole and let the simulation run on much longer timescales after they merged. What they found is that the resulting rapidly rotating black hole is initially surrounded by a ring of hot matter with a relatively weak and chaotic magnetic field. The rotating movement of this unstable system generates an extremely strong, vertically orientated magnetic field of 1015 Gauss along the rotational axis. As a comparison, this magnetic field is 1016 (10,000,000,000,000,000) times stronger than the Earth’s magnetic field. This highlights the importance of this new result: for the first time it has been shown that a magnetic jet-like structure can be formed in which the ultrahot matter shoots out into space two collimated outflows which can then lead to the brief flashes in the gamma wavelength. “This is the first time we have studied the entire process from the merger of the neutron stars to the formation of the jets,” says Luciano Rezzolla. “This marks a breakthrough, because we previously did not know how the order that was needed for the jets to form and the gamma-ray bursts to occur was created out of the chaos.” Through a considerable computational effort, the scientists run the simulation for twice as long as normal. The supercomputer Damiana performed its calculations for a whole six weeks. The complete simulation shows what happens in just 35 milliseconds. “We have now lifted an important veil, which was hiding the central engine of short GRBs and provided a link between the theoretical modelling and the observations, by showing that a jet-like structure is indeed produced through the self-organization of the magnetic field in a neutron star merger,” adds Chryssa Kouveliotou from the American space agency, NASA. In addition to huge amounts of gamma radiation, a process of this type also produces gravitational waves in space whose waveform the scientists have simulated. These tiny ripples in spacetime were predicted by Albert Einstein in his General Theory of Relativity, but they have never been measured directly. It is hoped that the simulated gravitational-wave signals will help the scientists discover real gravitational waves in the data jungle from the detectors. That’s why having a very precise picture of what they look like increases the likelihood of the researchers actually identifying the fingerprints of gravitational waves in the detector data. There are currently five interferometric gravitational wave detectors throughout the world: the German/British GEO600 project near Hanover, Germany, the three LIGO detectors in the US states of Louisiana and Washington, and the Franco/Italian Virgo project in Pisa, Italy. A new space-based detector by the name of LISA (Laser Interferometer Space Antenna) is also planned by the European Space Agency (ESA) and NASA, with the launch scheduled to take place in 2020. Scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics are playing a leading role in the GEO600 and LISA projects and are working closely with fellow scientists on the other projects within the framework of the LIGO-Virgo Collaboration.

More information: Luciano Rezzolla, Bruno Giacomazzo, Luca Baiotti, Jonathan Granot, Chryssa Kouveliotou, Miguel A. Aloy, The Missing Link: Merging Neutron Stars naturally produce Jet-like Structures and can power short Gamma-Ray Bursts, Astrophysical Journal Letters, 732:L6, 2011. http://iopscience. … 205/732/1/L6 Provided by Max-Planck-Gesellschaft "The engine that powers short gamma-ray bursts." April 8th, 2011. http://www.physorg.c...-gamma-ray.html

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful