A&C Reference Library - Astronomy & Cosmology Resources

  • Thread starter Thread starter Phobos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reference
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on sharing valuable resources related to astronomy and cosmology, including links to significant research articles and databases. Key topics include the measurement of cosmological parameters, particularly Omega, which influences the understanding of the universe's shape and size. The conversation highlights various studies on dark matter, neutrino astronomy, and cosmic rays, emphasizing their importance in observational cosmology. Additionally, participants share educational materials and tools for both beginners and advanced learners, such as calculators and lecture notes. Overall, the thread serves as a comprehensive reference for those interested in the latest developments and resources in astronomy and cosmology.
  • #51
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #52
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0406139
A Quantum Approach to Dark Matter
Authors: A. D. Ernest
Comments: To be published in "Progress in Dark Matter Research" Nova Science Inc. New York

"This work develops and explores a quantum-based theory which enables the nature and origin of cold dark matter (CDM) to be understood without need to introduce exotic particles. The quantum approach predicts the existence of certain macroscopic quantum structures that are WIMP-like even when occupied by traditional baryonic particles. These structures function as dark matter candidates for CDM theory on large scales where it has been most successful, and retain the potential to yield observationally compliant predictions on galactic cluster and sub-cluster scales. Relatively pure, high angular momentum, eigenstate solutions obtained from Schrodinger's equation in weak gravity form the structural basis. They have no classical analogue, and properties radically different from those of traditional localised matter (whose eigenstate spectra contain negligible quantities of such states). Salient features include radiative lifetimes that can exceed the age of the universe, energies and 'sizes' consistent with galactic halos, and negligible interaction rates with radiation and macroscopic galactic objects. This facilitates the formation of sparsely populated macroscopic quantum structures that are invisible and stable. Viable structure formation scenarios are based on the seed potential wells of primordial black holes formed at the e+/e- phase transition. The structures can potentially produce suitable internal density distributions and have capacity to accommodate the required amount of halo dark matter. The formation scenarios show that it is possible to incorporate structures into universal evolutionary scenarios without significantly compromising the results of WMAP or the measurements of elemental BBN ratios."
 
  • #53
Grzegorz Wardziñski offers all the abstracts of the latest papers in Astro-ph in Arxiv, all in the same page. The section is called Astro-ph for busy people. Wonderful!
http://www.camk.edu.pl/~gwar/astro-ph.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #54
turbo points out that Aunt Nettie
has an explanation for why grass is green---
it is trying to get a message back to its home planet.
http://www.dearauntnettie.com/archives/archives-0105.htm
(dont believe this! it may be intended as a joke)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #55
Quantum Gravity Phenomenology

http://ws2004.ift.uni.wroc.pl/html.html

WS-2004 symposium, Feb 4-14
notes for all the talks are online, click on "lectures"
for a listing
a number of the talks are also on arxiv. search under author name.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #56
Chronos supplied this link
http://www.astrosociety.org/pubs/mercury/31_02/nothing.html
to a non-technical discussion by Filippenko and Pasachoff of
how the universe can have zero total energy
(positive mass-energy of matter balanced by negative gravitational potential)
 
  • #57
sol2 said:
http://astsun.astro.virginia.edu/~jh8h/Foundations/Friedmann.html

sol put this curvegraphing applet link
which is good

but we somehow don't have a good post about the Friedmann eqns.
on this sticky thread and we should. I will try to get something

but please if anybody has a better discussion of the basic equations of cosmology, showing the Lambda which has become so important, please
post it
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #58
in an earlier post on this thread we had a little bit about the Friedmann eqns. but this is better and also here is a link to a Sean Carroll piece in LivingReviews. the people at Albert Einstein Institute-Potsdam MPI asked Carroll to do the piece on "Cosmological Constant" for LivingReviews

http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-1/node3.html

Sean Carroll is a blogger as well as one of the worlds foremost cosmologists. he's at chicago. check out his blog sometime--it can be entertaining---the name is "preposterousuniverse"
------------------

In what follows I am using the same notation Sean Carroll uses in
LivingReviews which is pretty standard.

First here is a version of the Friedmann equations which conceals the cosmological constant as "dark energy" added into the rho term as another kind of energy density. So you don't see the Lambda explicitly in this version. This is how a lot of people do it nowadays, and the dark energy fraction is given as 73 percent of total energy density rho.

(\frac{a'}{a})^2 = \frac{8\pi G}{3}\rho - \frac{k}{a^2}

\frac{a''}{a}= -\frac{4\pi G}{3}(\rho + 3p)

Now I'm going to separate the cosmological constant part out as Lamda, an inverse distance squared term. Now rho is all the other stuff, not counting dark energy, and the equations are:

(\frac{a'}{a})^2 = \frac{8\pi G}{3}\rho - \frac{k}{a^2} + \frac{\Lambda}{3}

\frac{a''}{a}= -\frac{4\pi G}{3}(\rho + 3p)+\frac{\Lambda}{3}

EXPLAINING THE NOTATION
this is with c = 1 units, which simplifies things some.
the scale factor of the metric (whose increase is the expansion of the universe) is denoted by the letter a.
k is a spatial curvature parameter used to distinguish three cases
k = -1, 0, +1 for negative curvature, spatially flat, positive curvature

rho is an energy density, and easy to confuse with p pressure

the universe appears to be spatially flat, the critical density rhocrit is that needed for it to be perfectly flat with k = 0

HOW THE HUBBLE PARAMETER COMES IN
the Hubble parameter H is defined to be the time derivative a' of the scale parameter a, divided by a.
H^2 = (\frac{a'}{a})^2
for the time being assume we've included the Lambda term in rho as "dark energy, because this is a convenient way to set things up for calculating stuff, like the critical density. In the case of a spatially flat universe the first Friedmann equation boils down to

H^2 = \frac{8\pi G}{3}\rho_{crit}

algebraically that turns into the formula for the critical density

\rho_{crit} = \frac{3}{8\pi G}H^2

the Hubble parameter has been measured really accurately at 71 km/s per Mpc
and this let's us calculate the critical density at 0.83 joule per cubic km.since the U tests out flat or very nearly so, this is taken to be the
density of all the stuff, stars galaxies, light, dark matter, dust, dark energy etc. It all amounts to 0.83 joule per cubic km.

And the dark energy being 73 percent (from supernova data) means that its share is 0.6 joule per cubic km.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #59
marcus said:
sol put this curvegraphing applet link
which is good

but we somehow don't have a good post about the Friedmann eqns.
on this sticky thread and we should. I will try to get something

but please if anybody has a better discussion of the basic equations of cosmology, showing the Lambda which has become so important, please
post it

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/fried.html

This is a good link Marcus as well, and will lead you to many of the equations.

Marcus, part of this journey for me, was recognizng how the universe could move from our past, to our now, and if we could not look beyond to the hyper geometries, how could we have ever accepted any views in cosmology like Reimann's? :smile:

What comes next? Omega? :smile:
 
  • #60
Pete contributed this to the "Dark Energy" thread. this shows the cosm. const. Lambda in the context of the full GR equation.
I have usually been discussing this in the simplified context of the Friedmann equations, derived from the full Einstein equation. What Pete has taken the trouble to put in LaTex is a useful reference, so I'll just copy it here:
---exerpt from Pete---
The term Dark Energy is given to that matter which is causing the universe to expand at an accelerating rate. This is what some call "anti-gravity" since this is clearly gravity acting in a repulsive manner.
Back in Einstein's day nobody knew of any kind of matter which could produce such an effect. since Einstein assumed that the universe was static he added a term to his field equations to allow for this repulsive effect. Einstein's equations changed from

G^{\alpha\beta} = \frac{8\pi G}{c^4}T^{\alpha\beta}

to

G^{\alpha\beta} + \Lambda g^{\alpha\beta} = \frac{8\pi G}{c^4}T^{\alpha\beta}

\Lambda is called the cosmological constant. In modern terms the cosmological constant is also called "Dark Energy." This is the term which, for normal matter, allows for anti-gravity when \Lambda > 0...
---endquote---
for full post see
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=30180#post301180

some more links for good measure
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/gr/outline1.html
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/einstein/einstein.html
 
Last edited:
  • #61
Correction to previous post (too late to edit)
where one of the links was wrong

Ned Wright's balloon animation
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/balloon0.html
Cartoon strip about the particle horizon being 3X what you naively expect
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/photons_outrun.html
Microlensing by a star
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/microlensing.html
Cluster of galaxies lensing animation
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cluster-lensing.html
Inflation animation
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CMB-MN-03/inflating_bubble.html
Animation of what "Equal Power on All Scales" means---part of
understanding the fluctuations shown by the Microwave Background
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CMB-MN-03/epas.html
 
  • #62
Here's a nice non-technical overview of the state of quantum gravity research, including some basic information about how studying cosmic rays and gamma ray bursts might help probe the structure of spacetime.

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0311037
 
  • #63
Here is an introductions to cosmology, in about 60 pages:

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0409426

An overview of Cosmology
Authors: Julien Lesgourgues
Lecture notes for the Summer Students Programme of CERN (2002-2004). 62 pages, 30 figures.

Very basic conceptual introduction to Cosmology, aimed at undergraduate students with no previous knowledge of General Relativity

---abstract---
While purely philosophical in the early times, and still very speculative at the beginning of the twentieth century, Cosmology has gradually entered into the realm of experimental science over the past eighty years. It has raised some fascinating questions like: is the Universe static or expanding ? How old is it and what will be its future evolution ? Is it flat, open or closed ? Of what type of matter is it composed ? How did structures like galaxies form ? In this course, we will try to give an overview of these questions, and of the partial answers that can be given today. In the first chapter, we will introduce some fundamental concepts, in particular from General Relativity. In the second chapter, we will apply these concepts to the real Universe and deal with concrete results, observations, and testable predictions.
---end quote---
 
  • #64
Helioseismology: the study of the interior of the sun by observing the oscillations on its surface. This is a 60 pages paper that offers an introduction to the subject, also includes an historical review. All that you want to know about f-modes, g-modes, ring-diagram analysis, helioseismic holography,...can be found here. Title of the paper: "Helioseismology"
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0207403
 
  • #65
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #66
Last edited:
  • #67
meyer_lev3 said:
New member, first post :smile:

Streaming video of lectures/talks on current topics by Hawking, Weinberg, others.

Especially good is "Brane New World" (2003) By Steven Hawking.

http://www.phys.cwru.edu/events/cerca_video_archive.php

Enjoy :wink:.

thanks for the link, meyer_lev, and welcome.
Personally, I wasn't aware of this Case Western Reserve archive of public lectures on cosmology topics. Impressive list of speakers and panelists.
 
  • #68
Physical Review

My apologies if this has been posted previously. It is a fascinating overview of Physics papers from the last 110 years or so. You can browse by field, author, decade, etc.

http://fangio.magnet.fsu.edu/~vlad/pr100/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #69
Nice website on atmospheric halos and related...

http://www.sundog.clara.co.uk/halo/halosim.htm

The graphics are not hot-linked, but they are well-labeled, and the menus at the left will link you to further information.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #70
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #71
Titan data

Here is a link with some physical data about Titan
http://library.thinkquest.org/18188/english/planets/saturn/moons/titan.htm
I will try to get some other links, just to confirm the numbers.
they say

mass 1.35E23 kilogram (2.259 percent of earth)
radius 2575 km
density 1.88
distance from Saturn 1,221,850 km
orbital period 15.945 days
surface temperature -178 celsius
surface pressure 1.6 bar (60 percent more pressure than earth)
escape velocity 2.65 km/second

this data is before Huygens and some of it might have already been improved on.
If anybody knows some better please post it. TIA.

Possibly the most reliable source is a JPL site I just found:
http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sat_props.html
http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sat_elem.html

Here is a sample---BTW they don't show mass in kilograms, they show GM (which is what astronomers measure, and then infer mass from it)

Titan
GM (km3/sec2) 8978.0 ± 0.8
Radius (km) 2575.5 ± 2.
Density (g/cm3) 1.880 ± 0.004

this site was updated as recently as November 2004
just for comparison here's what JPL NASA has for 4 jovians

Io
5959.916 ± 0.012
1821.6 ± 0.5
3.528 ± 0.006


Europa
3202.739 ± 0.009
1560.8 ± 0.5
3.013 ± 0.005


Ganymede
9887.834 ± 0.017
2631.2 ± 1.7
1.942 ± 0.005


Callisto
7179.289 ± 0.013
2410.3 ± 1.5
1.834 ± 0.004

Here's the main address
http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #73
http://xyz.lanl.gov/pdf/gr-qc/0501041
The basics of gravitational wave theory
47 pages jan 2005
Please discard this if it is of no use.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #74
Orbital Mechanics Basics

This is a very cool site that explains Orbital Mechanics from the beginning, and explains all the math steps of the equations. (Unlike some other sites I've been to.)

http://www.braeunig.us/space/orbmech.htm
 
  • #75
On-demand streaming video lectures...

I have been plowing through the Vega lectures (including the wonderful Feynman series) and linked resources, and found that this man has linked streaming videos from academic programs all over the world. If you enjoy science, I know what you'll be doing for the next few months. :devil:

http://web.mit.edu/people/cabi/Links/physics_seminar_videos.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #76
Lineweaver and Davis in March SciAm

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147

Popular written feature article "Misconceptions about BigBang"
Here are some sample "sidebars" of the article. Each has one or more visual diagrams with a wrong answer discussed and a right answer explained.


http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p39.gif
What kind of explosion was the big bang?

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p40.gif
Can galaxies recede faster than light?

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p42.gif
Can we see galaxies receding faster than light?

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p43.gif
Why is there a cosmic redshift?

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p44.gif
How large is the observable universe?

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p45.gif
Do objects inside the universe expand, too?
 
Last edited:
  • #77
a NASA resource for teachers called "ask a high energy astronomer"
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/ask_an_astronomer.html

when I sampled it I found a lot dated in the late 1990s, which can be fine.
lot of it was good information. some things I came across seemed questionable or outdated. worth keeping tabs on though

like this NASA page has a link to a list of "known black holes"
which gives some details about each of the one listed
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/011120a.html

http://mintaka.sdsu.edu/faculty/orosz/web/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #78
survey of cosmology by Padmanabhan

I like Thanu Padmanabhan, he is a worldclass relativist and cosmologist and he uses references to lewis carroll hunting of the snark
and generally manages to be deep and witty some of the time
and he also pulled the rug out from under string theory recently with his paper that says it is not enough for a theory to produce gravitons, that does not make it a quantum gravity theory
he had this paper From Gravitons to Gravity: Myths versus Reality

Well padmanabhhan has come out with one of these surveys of cosmology for general audience, that a senior cosmologist may do every now and then.
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0503107
Understanding Our Universe: Current Status and Open Issues
T. Padmanabhan
To appear in "100 Years of Relativity - Space-time Structure: Einstein and Beyond", A.Ashtekar (Editor), World Scientific (Singapore, 2005); 30 pages; 4 figures

"Last couple of decades have been the golden age for cosmology. High quality data confirmed the broad paradigm of standard cosmology but have thrusted upon us a preposterous composition for the universe which defies any simple explanation, thereby posing probably the greatest challenge theoretical physics has ever faced. Several aspects of these developments are critically reviewed, concentrating on conceptual issues and open questions. [Topics discussed include: Cosmological Paradigm, Growth of structures in the universe, Inflation and generation of initial perturbations, Temperature anisotropies of the CMBR, Dark energy, Cosmological Constant, Deeper issues in cosmology.]"
 
  • #79
WGBH forum with streaming video lectures on LOTS of subjects, including astronomy (under the science subject heading).

http://forum.wgbh.org/wgbh/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #80
basic reference on neutron stars

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0503245
Neutron Stars
Gordon Baym, Frederick K. Lamb
Comments: Encyclopedia of Physics 3rd ed., R.G. Lerner and G.L. Trigg, eds., Wiley-VCH, Berlin

Abstract: "This short encyclopedia article, reviewing current information on neutron stars, is intended for a broad scientific audience."

Only 3 pages, but has a lot of interesting facts about the topic


Also turbo supplied a link to a Feynman lecture audio on conservation of energy

http://home.hockaday.org/HockadayNet/academic/physics/SciTeach/FeynEng.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #81
hi,
I woould like to suggest the following:

Review articles
1. Large scale structure of the universe and cosmological
perturbation theory (Bernardeau et al)
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0112551
2. Cosmological Constant - the Weight of the Vacuum
( T. Padmanabhan)
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0212290
3. Lagrangian Perturbation and Other Approximations to Nolinear Gravitational Evolution
http://www.columbia.edu/~fms5/w161.html


Books
1.Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology
(Andrei Linde)
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0503203
 
  • #82
  • #83
A FAQ is what does it mean that the old classical model of BH fails to compute at a certain point (has a "singularity") and gives non-physical answers or no answers at all.

What it means is a fault or limitation of the old classical Gen Rel theory. So now people are studying improved models of BH which don't have that failing. here are some people:

Abhay Ashtekar, Viqar Husain, Oliver Winkler, Leonardo Modesto, Martin Bojowald, Roy Maartens, Rituparno Goswami, Parampreet Singh.

Here are some recent research papers that they have written:

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504029
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0503041
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504043
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411032
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0407097
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0412039
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0410125
 
  • #84
http://www.psychcentral.com/psypsych/Milky_Way

The Milky-way lots of links and info on our backyard.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #85
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #86
http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2002/0192/BH_merge_sm.mov

This an animation of the collision and merger of two galaxies followed by the merger of their central supermassive black holes. the black holes spiral in towards each other ever faster as they loose energy by radiating away gravity waves.

Here is an update of something posted a few times back: a FAQ is what does it mean that the old classical model of BH fails to compute at a certain point (has a "singularity") and gives non-physical answers or no answers at all.

What it means is a fault or limitation of the old classical Gen Rel theory. So now people are studying improved models of BH which don't have that failing. here are some people:

Abhay Ashtekar, Viqar Husain, Oliver Winkler, Leonardo Modesto, Martin Bojowald, Roy Maartens, Rituparno Goswami, Parampreet Singh.

Here are some recent research papers that they have written:
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0509075 (Ashtekar and Bojowald latest)
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0509078 (Modesto latests)
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504029
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0503041
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504043
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411032
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0407097
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0412039
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0410125
 
  • #87
H. Rosewater has pointed out that this reference thread has no discussion of what it means to assume the universe is spatially homogeneous and isotropic.
Hellfire gave a pointer to this PF thread:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=730619#post730619
where hellfire and SpaceTiger supply definitions and some examples are discussed.

I think these are symmetry assumptions-----one knows that the universe is spatially NOT symmetric but is instead fascinatingly different everywhere one looks, but that averaged out at large scale it has approximate symmetry. So for simplicity and convenience one decides to assume perfect translational and rotational symmetry.

That being decided, thereafter whatever functions one uses to describe the universe at some moment in time must have translational symmetry (be unchanged by shifting the origin) and rotational symmetry (be unchanged by rotating the coordinates)

Feel free to expand or clarify. If anyone comes up with a link to some particularly good definition please post it. otherwise, for more discussion see what hellfire and SpaceTiger had to say
 
Last edited:
  • #88
this might turn out to be a handy reference, it reviews why one usually accepts that things that look like black holes really are that---even though one wants to keep on testing and checking

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0511217
Trust but verify: The case for astrophysical black holes
Scott A. Hughes
Based on invited lectures at the 2005 SLAC Summer Institute (SSI05-L006). 22 pages, 5 eps figures
"This article is based on a pair of lectures given at the 2005 SLAC Summer Institute. Our goal is to motivate why most physicists and astrophysicists accept the hypothesis that the most massive, compact objects seen in many astrophysical systems are described by the black hole solutions of general relativity. We describe the nature of the most important black hole solutions, the Schwarzschild and the Kerr solutions. We discuss gravitational collapse and stability in order to motivate why such objects are the most likely outcome of realistic astrophysical collapse processes. Finally, we discuss some of the observations which -- so far at least -- are totally consistent with this viewpoint, and describe planned tests and observations which have the potential to falsify the black hole hypothesis, or sharpen still further the consistency of data with theory."
 
  • #89
Cosmic neutrino background, why the temperature is less by a factor of 1.401

this is from the Georgia State University knowledge base called "hyperphysics" run by their physics and astronomy department
http://www.phy-astr.gsu.edu/new_web/newmain.html

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/neutemp.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #90
Some ideas for future tests of General Relativity.
I was intrigued and wanted to keep tabs on this short (4 page) paper:

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0610047
Testing General Relativity with Atom Interferometry
Authors: Savas Dimopoulos, Peter W. Graham, Jason M. Hogan, Mark A. Kasevich
4 pages, 1 figure

"The unprecedented precision of atom interferometry will soon lead to laboratory tests of general relativity to levels that will rival or exceed those reached by astrophysical observations. We propose such an experiment that will initially test the equivalence principle to 1 part in 10^15 (300 times better than the current limit), and 1 part in 10^17 in the future. It will also probe general relativistic effects--such as the non-linear three-graviton coupling, the gravity of an atom's kinetic energy, and the falling of light--to several decimals. Further, in contrast to astrophysical observations, laboratory tests can isolate these effects via their different functional dependence on experimental variables."

the authors are all at the Stanford physics department
 
  • #91
marcus said:
Some ideas for future tests of General Relativity.
I was intrigued and wanted to keep tabs on this short (4 page) paper:

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0610047
Testing General Relativity with Atom Interferometry
Authors: Savas Dimopoulos, Peter W. Graham, Jason M. Hogan, Mark A. Kasevich
4 pages, 1 figure

"The unprecedented precision of atom interferometry will soon lead to laboratory tests of general relativity to levels that will rival or exceed those reached by astrophysical observations. We propose such an experiment that will initially test the equivalence principle to 1 part in 10^15 (300 times better than the current limit), and 1 part in 10^17 in the future. It will also probe general relativistic effects--such as the non-linear three-graviton coupling, the gravity of an atom's kinetic energy, and the falling of light--to several decimals. Further, in contrast to astrophysical observations, laboratory tests can isolate these effects via their different functional dependence on experimental variables."

the authors are all at the Stanford physics department
I was interested in this paper too. A test of the EEP to one part in 1017 would be able to falsify the "Self Creation Cosmology" gravitational theory - but then hopefully GP-B (also Stanford University) will do that anyway before too long! (April 07?)

Garth
 
  • #92
NASA's Astrophysics Science Division Colloquium Series

http://www.universe.nasa.gov/seminars/EUDcolloq/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #93
This collection may be of interest -

Supernovae and Gamma Ray Bursts
June 21, 2004 - August 27, 2004
http://www.int.washington.edu/talks/WorkShops/int_04_2/

There are a lot more -

http://www.int.washington.edu/talk_list.html

http://www.int.washington.edu/PROGRAMS/programs_all.html

http://www.int.washington.edu/PROGRAMS/past_programs.html

Stellar Abundances & Nucleosynthesis Conference
http://www.int.washington.edu/talks/WorkShops/Stellar/
 
Last edited:
  • #94
Siobhan Morgan's redshift calculator has a new URL

http://www.uni.edu/morgans/ajjar/Cosmology/cosmos.html

when you start with it, put in three standard parameters
matter density 0.27
Lambda density 0.73
Hubble parameter 71

then it is ready and you can put some redshift like 3 into the "z box"
and it will give you data on light coming to us with that redshift
like travel time
and recession speed when and where the light was emitted
and recession speed of the emitter object now, etc.
 
  • #95
Astronuc said:
This collection may be of interest -

Supernovae and Gamma Ray Bursts
June 21, 2004 - August 27, 2004
http://www.int.washington.edu/talks/WorkShops/int_04_2/

...

Wow ... great!... i suggest everybody to see this ..:!)

thanks ...
 
  • #96
Good talk given by Roger Penrose at Cambridge on 7 November 2005

http://www.Newton.cam.ac.uk/webseminars/pg+ws/2005/gmr/gmrw04/1107/penrose/

topic was "Before the Big Bang"
and he said that only a couple of months earlier if someone had asked him he would have given the conventional answer that the question didn't make sense and there wasn't any "before"

if we can believe that, which could involve some striving for effect, then as recently as September 2005, Penrose would have said nothing before big bang, undefined.

but apparently now he has changed his mind----likes to talk about ideas of what was before the start of our universe expansion.
I heard him give the same talk in 2006, same slides, at MSRI Berkeley in 2006, and he also gave the talk at Perimeter in 2006.

great thing about this talk is his handdrawn pictures. good cartoonist. helps you understand both cosmology and thermodynamics in a more visual intuitive way
incredible what some people can do with just 3 or 4 different colors of felt-tip pen
 
Last edited:
  • #97
Look for the complete series 'UA: Space University' beginning this Sunday, July 29, both online and in the print edition of the Arizona Daily Star.

http://regulus2.azstarnet.com/mediaskins/main.php?id=1823

Series Preview - UA: Space University
Observers at the University of Arizona's Steward Observatory telescope on Mt. Lemmon search the sky for objects that could collide into Earth. First part is an interview with Stephen Larson.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #98
This might be of interest to students

ASTC22 Galactic and Extragalactic Astrophysics
http://planets.utsc.utoronto.ca/~pawel/ASTC22/
 
  • #99
Structure and dynamics of the solar chromosphere
Johannes Mattheus Krijger

http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2003-0321-121547/inhoud.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #100
The Carnegie-Irvine Nearby Galaxies Survey

Also referenced in some older papers as Carnegie Nearby Galaxy Survey

from http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0508/0508338v1.pdf
[10] Mathewson D. S., Ford V. L., Buchhorn M., 1992, ApJS, 81, 413
[11] Persic M., Salucci P., 1995, ApJS, 99, 501

http://www.ociw.edu/%7Elho/projects/CINGS/CINGS.html

http://www.ociw.edu/~lho/projects/CINGS/Survey/index.html

http://www.ociw.edu/~lho/projects/CINGS/Survey/survey.html

Doesn't seem to have been updated in the last 2 years.

But it has photometric properties -
http://www.ociw.edu/~lho/projects/CINGS/Survey/leda2.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

B Looking for a list of astronomy collaborations
Replies
2
Views
1K
B Need your advice how to start learning astronomy
Replies
17
Views
3K
B Where Can I Find Accurate Planetary Event Data for an Astronomy Course?
Replies
5
Views
2K
What Level of Math is Best Before Taking Physics?
Replies
6
Views
855
B What’s more “important": GR or QM?
Replies
7
Views
2K
Stargazing Understanding the Formula for Sunrise and Sunset Calculation
Replies
11
Views
3K
The dereference between; astrophysics, astronomy, cosmology and space science
Replies
2
Views
5K
What sparked my interest in astronomy and cosmology?
Replies
1
Views
299
Admissions Comments on my Physics grad school list?
Replies
8
Views
2K
Major in Physics or Physics/Astronomy for Grad School Cosmology?
Replies
9
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top